Evidence for the Co-Existence of Humans and Dinosaurs

originally posted by: SR1TX

All of your examples of counter are fail. They are caricatures used in medieval times to describe life. Has nothing to do with anything.

The examples I used were over the top examples for humorous effect. The point remains the same - which clearly went way over your head.

The paintings and sculptures were made for actual reasons and historic documentation, especially the ones in the caves.

Really? And what possible proof do you have of what purpose a 4,000 year old carving had? Or 30,000 year old cave paintings?
People can't even agree on the facts of something that happened a year ago, and you know for a fact what happened 10,000 years ago.

Right.

Please explain the Voynich manuscript (one of the examples I used), because historians and experts have failed to do so.

a reply to: Gemwolf

Please explain the Voynich manuscript

Amanita Muscaria

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: Gemwolf

Please explain the Voynich manuscript

Amanita Muscaria

Wash your mouth with soap!

originally posted by: Raggedyman
a reply to: Gemwolf

The giant snails and rabbits are a very legitimate political analogy from that time
Beyond your education obviously, thats sad
The meaning is lost to you
All you have done is shown your ignorance

No. The point was lost to you.

My ignorance? My education? Really? Hahaha!
I've been reading and writing on this topic for many, many years. For example I made a thread on the Cambodian Stegosaurus used in the the OP, almost exactly 11 years ago. I think it's safe to say that this is "old news" to me.

Here's a suggestion: Before you attack someone, ask yourself if you've actually listened to what they had to say. Why did they say that? Should I just attack and insult them because their opinion differ from mine?

Have you contributed anything to the thread or subject matter thus far, or are you just here to attack and insult people you don't agree with?

a reply to: Gemwolf

Evidently the point was lost on me, so what

The snails are a political analogy, not lost on us today, rabbits as well ( the little umbrella people I don't know?). Relating them to Angkor wat is a little ridiculous in my opinion

Here is a suggestion, like it or not, you don't get the final say as to my opinion or others if it's a big lizard or a little lizard

Write your posts clearer and you won't make the same mistake again

My contribution, I think this topic has been done to death, nothing more I can add, outside others opinions are not the be all and end all, expert or not

a reply to: cooperton

The best thread I've seen in a long time here on ATS. Very interesting subject matter.

a reply to: Raggedyman

You are quite right - you are very much entitled to your opinion. However, you don't have to right to stroll through a thread pointing at members saying "what do you know supposed 'expert'?" or "you are uneducated and ignorant". You can't expect people to respect your opinion, if you cannot show others the same respect for theirs.

Take a brush to your shoulder. There's something on it.

And by the way, stating that "snails are a political analogy, not lost on us today" just proves exactly my point. You assume you know the answer, yet historians cannot agree what the meaning of knights vs. snails sketches are (which are quite common in ancient texts aka drollery).
Further reading
Even more
Yet even more

Funny enough not one of the theories include actual giant snails.

You are willing to admit that giant snails and rabbits were used symbolically in ancient text. Yet dinosaur-like carvings and illustrations most definitely were used to portray actual living beings from that time?
Your logic is infallible.

a reply to: Butterfinger

Thats Aghor Wat in cambodia, not Gobekli Tepe.

True.

Conclusion based on that, no remains and probability say that it is more likely: 

Bollocks. A chameleon, seriously?

Talk about reaching...

Lol still are consider the chicken...

Which came first? The egg as the nest could have been, water, mud, land, and well the tree period later... looking at venus hot and volcanic then of course Mars atmosphere blew away.

Think of Earth as the best of both those worlds placed in time as J.R.R. Tolkien called it Middle Earth.

As collisions occur in that suspension of space such things happen... Jupiter could be a Sol 2.0... as things could change under that "bleach" for better or for worse; the atmosphere like the red spot being similar to the red mound on Australia.

There is the mythical Vulcan closer to the solar body than Mercury...

Many more planetoids being seen than the classic 9 +/- 1; as keeping with the same pattern of knowledge based on science fiction class M planets are the earth like, the plus or minus one is of course the Pluto designation still in argument last I checked; as being a dwarf planet... so pardon my ignorance for not keeping up on that debate for however long.

Many more than the classic 9 planets though since that designation... maybe perhaps they are just moons over a larger unseen system as they slowly settle in mass with the green line suspension; having been in collision with another Sol system for a very long time; that of Centari of course we have so much noise from projection out into space using red and blue shift waves the green goes straight to the point on the plane.

The silly thing about old space shows was like ships always meeting nose to nose on a vast sea; I suppose that could be thought of as a neutral zone or diplomatic spot. As space a any point can be at any vector in true space.

Our "earthly" waves have easily traveled to that Sol body of course the education of those waves depends on the tuning or "reach" attenuation of such "noise" becomes a filter; of course different sizes of those. Like one forgetting about the life at one's feet the older and larger they get.

Why signal triangulation? Depth as mentioned... think of a colloidal solution like mayo two things blended in a container without any of those things in mind; uncertainty principle cuts Occam and says there must be one out there somewhere; simply by knowing if not looking directly at said object... thusly it is known as memory in either or situation. The out of sight out of mind occurs in many situations.

The philosophical cannot see the forest for all of the trees? Maybe someone is one and cannot recognise themselves; speaking of ring worlds... many branches as life goes flows rolls over and builds over time.





The dinosaur didn't cross the road; except by fuel... and the chicken however, grew a second eyelid.

a reply to: Gemwolf

As infallible as you saying every drawing that you don't understand is a "snail or rabbit"?
I don't know if what we see in Cambodia is a carving of a dinosaur or not but you saying it is a symbol, well you don't have that right
You only have an opinion

As for me strolling through threads, yes I will, pointing out the arrogance of people who say they know what the drawings are, that it has been debunked, that the drawings are cartoons of ancient civilizations, children, or whatever opinion they try to force on others. Why? Because it's obvious nobody really knows what these drawings are about, nobody was there when they were drawn or carved, nobody can make a definitive statement and if they do, then they should be called out

Do you want to study the evidence of living dinosaurs, try s8int.com

a reply to: cooperton



There you go.

a reply to: andy06shake

Elephant and Hedge trimmers... was an interesting vocation on that show.

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: Gemwolf

Please explain the Voynich manuscript

Amanita Muscaria

Which is a very fine medicine. It'll knock out a cold and cure warts.
Don't eat it raw. It will make you sick.
Dehydrate it or cook it before ingesting.

a reply to: cooperton

Thank you mate, really good read.

If you really want to get into weird possibilities: suppose there really are parallel dimensions. And suppose creatures can sometimes enter and leave through tears in the fabric.

Perhaps in a parallel dimension dinosaurs are still alive and well. Thriving, in fact.

Maybe every once in a while, one of them stumbles into our dimension. Not often, but sometimes.

originally posted by: toms54

originally posted by: Raggedyman
a reply to: Astrocyte

Awesome.
Can you show me the rate of c14 has been in constant throughout history, not the rate of decay but the rate it has been in supply, scientific evidence please
You say common sense is science, sorry, science is repetable observable and testable.
Many things in the natural world defy common sense, hence some very strange theories
You sound like you know what you are talking about but you clearly don't

But I digress, prove c14 has been in a steady state with scientific evidence, simple
Outside evidence and common sense won't cut it, you rely on faith and show your hypocrisy

He did seem to completely misunderstand that point. It bears upon the many things tested with C14 to date.

However with dinosaurs the issue is different altogether. The reason no one has dated them until now because they are supposed to be millions of years old. Carbon 14 is only good to measure things up to 60,000 years. After millions of years, all C14 should be decayed and give no reading at all. The same goes for claims of soft tissue like collagen. After millions of years it should not be there.

This leaves out the possibility that even if all dinosaur fossils found to date really are millions of years old, that doesn't tell us when they stopped being around.

It just means we haven't found any recent ones.

a reply to: toms54

maybe you are familiar with the ideas of Fomenko.

Thanks Tom...I will look into it

originally posted by: Raggedyman
a reply to: Gemwolf

As infallible as you saying every drawing that you don't understand is a "snail or rabbit"?

What on earth are you talking about? I never said anything even remotely close to that.

I don't know if what we see in Cambodia is a carving of a dinosaur or not but you saying it is a symbol, well you don't have that right
You only have an opinion

No, I didn't say it is a symbol. I said it may be symbolic and not necessarily a carving of an actual animal. We don't know. I.e. it's not evidence of anything. Yes, it's my opinion. Yes, I have that right. I even have the right to say it's symbolic - I wouldn't have been right without proof, but I still have the right to say it.

As for me strolling through threads, yes I will, pointing out the arrogance of people who say they know what the drawings are, that it has been debunked, that the drawings are cartoons of ancient civilizations, children, or whatever opinion they try to force on others.

So you're an expert telling other people they're not experts. OK. Got it.

Why? Because it's obvious nobody really knows what these drawings are about, nobody was there when they were drawn or carved, nobody can make a definitive statement and if they do, then they should be called out

You see, now I know you're just arguing for the sake of arguing, aka trolling. What you just said is exactly what I said - I just used other words and illustrations as examples. My actual words were "We just don't know the background of the images used as 'evidence'." If you bothered to actually read and not get stuck on giant snails, you might have understood. See also obtuse.

Nobody discovered there were dinosaurs for thousands of years, until the late 1800's. Suddenly, they began to find dinosaur bones all over the world.

Rockefeller realized, at that moment, dinosaurs created all the world's oil, and termed it 'fossil fuels'. A very scarce, limited supply of oil, so don't forget about that!!

Good thing that all those dinosaurs popped up everywhere, around the world, so Rockefeller could find out that oil is a very scarce, and limited, resource!!

There are many extinct species, which may include some 'dinosaur' species, as well.

But many are outright fakes, we know that too.

Add in perfect timing, out of nowhere, and it starts to smell fishy as hell.

originally posted by: turbonium1
Nobody discovered there were dinosaurs for thousands of years, until the late 1800's. Suddenly, they began to find dinosaur bones all over the world.

They probably discovered fossils. Just didn't put it together to realize what they had found, exactly.

For example, there are many interesting parallels between the legends of "Griffons" and the occurrence of fossils for a triceratops-like dinosaur in the region those legends began in. There's a good chance the bones gave rise to the story.

en.wikipedia.org...

Rockefeller realized, at that moment, dinosaurs created all the world's oil, and termed it 'fossil fuels'. A very scarce, limited supply of oil, so don't forget about that!!

Good thing that all those dinosaurs popped up everywhere, around the world, so Rockefeller could find out that oil is a very scarce, and limited, resource!!

There is no danger of truly running out, because we can make synthetic oil using just CO2, water, and electricity.

The trouble is that it requires so much electricity that pumping it from the ground costs less than half the price of the electricity. So no serious effort will ever be put into synthesizing it in mass quantities unless the price doubles.

But when it does finally double, we can then finally move to a sustainable energy infrastructure.