Did humans coexist with Dinosaurs? any evidence suggesting, maybe?

reply to post by kegs


No, but it is often trotted out (or is that swum out? Never mind, pointless question.) To provide the possibility of the existences of dinosaurs or marine reptiles still in existence.

reply to post by Lucid Lunacy


What I meant was, sure there are still things being found, but I don't think we'll find ancient marine reptiles. Though the possibility of new species, or bizarre mutations of known animals, or even just oversize versions of known animals is something to encourage anyone to explore the ocean.

I think so... Even the bible makes mention of man living with "dinosaurs."

I do not believe the world is as old as the scientific community thinks it is... They rely on obsolete calculations that just do not add up..

The hammer found in "67 million year old sedimentary" comes to mind first, and is the nail in the coffin for carbon dating...

[edit on 22-3-2008 by West Coast]

Originally posted by West Coast
I think so... Even the bible makes mention of man living with "dinosaurs."

Oh yeah? Post those passages here and let us decide

I do not believe the world is as old as the scientific community thinks it is... They rely on obsolete calculations that just do not add up..

Clearly you're coming from a creationist viewpoint, which I don't subscribe personally, but still I agree with that notion. We are making new discoveries all the time that pushes the dates back it seems.

The hammer found in "67 million year old sedimentary" comes to mind first, and is the nail in the coffin for carbon dating...

Is there an ATS thread on that you can link? I tried google'in it for a bit to no avail.

Also, maybe I am just tired here, but how is finding a hammer 'a nail in the coffin for carbon dating'? Admittedly this is not my forte.

[edit on 063131p://22u10 by Lucid Lunacy]

I think it's ludacris and more than a little telling about the ego of mankind that such an idea is even accepted by fact by some.

Mammals didn't get much bigger than a possum according to the all the fossil record that we have so far found.
Yet people want to believe us.
Who are ALSO mammals and bigger than a possum were able to be around then?????

Originally posted by Lucid Lunacy
Oh yeah? Post those passages here and let us decide

I am not saying the bible is right, but it does have some interesting "perspectives" in it.

In regards to the bible passages of dinos, Google the "behemoth," and "leviathan."

Clearly you're coming from a creationist viewpoint, which I don't subscribe personally, but still I agree with that notion. We are making new discoveries all the time that pushes the dates back it seems.

I don't necessarily subscribe to the bible, but I do believe in intelligent design, though that is a whole different discussion for a separate thread.

Is there an ATS thread on that you can link? I tried google'in it for a bit to no avail.

Actually it was estimated to be nearly 140 million years old...
I just clicked on the first thing that popped up, I'm sure you can find a lot more on it with a thorough Google search.

Some years ago I read of the well documented archaeological find of a hammer head and part of a shaft found embedded in Cretaceous sandstone near London Texas. It was found in stone not clay or soil. The sandstone in which the hammer was found contained Lower Cretaceous fossils of the kind that would be dated by old earth evolutionists at roughly 140 million years old. Yet it is impossible for a hammer or any human artifact to be that old.
ezinearticles.com...

Also, maybe I am just tired here, but how is finding a hammer 'a nail in the coffin for carbon dating'? Admittedly this is not my forte.

Because, carbon dating uses sedimentary layers to calculate how old things are. A t-rex fossil is commonly found in what is known as "cretaceous sediment", which is estimated to be some 200- 60 odd million years ago. Now man wasn't around 140 million years ago, correct? That would go against the scientific community's belief in our evolutionary path.

Originally posted by West Coast
In regards to the bible passages of dinos, Google the "behemoth," and "leviathan."

I was already read on those passages hehe. I was just wanting you to post it here to see if other ATS members would agree with you that The Bible was talking about dinosaurs.

Interesting indeed! I don't think the connection is strong enough to say The Bible was actually talking about the dinos though.

I don't necessarily subscribe to the bible, but I do believe in intelligent design, though that is a whole different discussion for a separate thread.

I believe in God. I don't believe in the creationist veiwpoint. I thought you said you were a Catholic in another thread? Must have gotten you confused with anotha. But yeah, you're right, OT.

Because, carbon dating uses sedimentary layers to calculate how old things are. A t-rex fossil is commonly found in what is known as "cretaceous sediment", which is estimated to be some 200- 60 odd million years ago. Now man wasn't around 140 million years ago, correct? That would go against the scientific community's belief in our evolutionary path.

So this you're saying is a hit against the conventional evolutionary perspective?

But you said before it was a 'nail in the coffin' against carbon dating itself.

Or am I confused?

reply to post by West Coast


Ok, that is totally not how carbon dating works. Carbon dating uses the isotope Carbon 14, and based on it's state of decay, are able to extrapolate the age of the organic compound. It's not perfect, to be sure, but it's much better than ballpark. Elements decay over a fairly set period of time, and once it's established that amount of time, it can be used to determine the age of the object in question. In fact, they use similar extrapolations to determine the age of the earth.
en.wikipedia.org...

Here's a link about it.

Though I don't know the technical name for it, sedimentary dating is formed on the basis of artifacts found in the layer itself, and is used to determine whether or not artifacts relate to each other, or at least that's what I recall off hand.

As for the hammer, I've been reading up on it, and there are discrepancies surrounding it. I'm going to point you at this forum here,
www.evcforum.net...
and let you look through it yourself, as this is both the first I've heard of the hammer, and the first time I've stumbled across that particular site, and it's to late right now for me to stay up and read it.
EDIT: Remember folks, Google is your friend, found a thread on ATS about the hammer as well.
www.abovetopsecret.com...

Aside from that, why is it the only apparent possible references in the Bible about Dinosaurs are the Behemoth and the Leviathan. There were hundreds of the buggers, and if Creationists are right, they were all running around at the same time. Aside from that, it mentions THE Leviathan and THE Behemoth, meaning there were only one, or a very few of them. As a point of fact, it seems most scholar tend to believe that the two critters ere most likely crocodiles, whales, or elephants and hippos.
Again, wiki has some pretty good info here.
en.wikipedia.org...
en.wikipedia.org...

Little here seems to show that evolution is made up, or that it is entirely false. or for that matter that the beliefs of contemporary science are also flawed.
That said, it doesn't necessarily disprove Creationism either, no one seems quite sure how long the seven days lasted.

I would also like to add that I have trouble believing anything coming from Creationism these days, mostly due to the amount of hoaxing that goes on. I know it's happened in evolution as well, but generally these are debunked fairly quickly. However, even when evidence of creationism is debunked, or shown to be invalid for whatever reason, it stays around for years, gathering momentum as it does, and leads to general rumors and misunderstandings as it does.
I want to make it clear that, though believing in evolution, I am not an atheist. I also do not believe that creationists are idiots, I just have a hard time after seeing many hoaxes and belligerent people claiming to be scientist going to all lengths trying to prove their theory by ignoring evidence to the contrary, and then claiming foul when their evidence is proved false.
These people detract from both sides. I personaly applaud creationist paleontologists, they have chosen a field that's harsh, and do not deserve the stigma that comes from having to be associated with the many hoaxes and hoaxers out there.



[edit on 23-3-2008 by RuneSpider]

reply to post by jimmy1200

Hi jimmy,
This is a subject close to my heart and I believe humans and dinosaurs did coexist. I remember being very excited the first time I came across the work of Mary Leakey and Stan Taylor because it certainly gave some substance to the theories I'd been nurturing for a considerable time ... made me think I wasn't such a weirdo afterall. Although I think the jury may still be out on that one !

I just found a couple of links on the subjet that you might find interesting because they have photos included;

Mary Leakey - She spent much of her life trying to find the origins of Man and whilst in Laetoli, Tanzania (1978), she found a collection of huminid footprints in fossilized volcanic ash ... that varied in size, leading her to believe they could have belonged to a family group. These footprints were dated at 3.6 million years old ... so certainly within the timeline of dinosaurs.



Stanley Taylor - Also discovered fossilized huminid footprints, in a stretc of the Paluxy River, Glen Rose, Texas. Some of these were overlaid or underlaid by the fossilized footprints of dinosaurs;

reply to post by jimmy1200


Ok, I'm not quite sure what happened there but my computer appears to have had a bit of a 'brain-fart' switched itself off, then wouldn't let me edit my previous post to add the links.

Sorry about that ... here they are;







Link to the site;

www.bible.ca...

Hey jimmy,
Heres a link to one of many Mary Leakey sites;

www.utexas.edu... manp.html

Woody

reply to post by woodwytch

Fake pictures. Ludicrously fake, I'm afraid. Someone has lied to you.

For the record, Mary Leakey found hominid footprints in 3.6 million-year-old volcanic ash. They looked nothing like the modern human footprints in the pictures you posted. A hominid is a manlike ape, which may be an ancestor of modern humans (Homo Sapiens) but not necessarily. Chimps and gorillas are hominids, but they are not our ancestors. Orang-utan may be hominids or not, depending on how you're feeling this morning, but they're not our ancestors either. Homo habilis, Homo erectus and Australopithecus are our ancestors... probably.

These proto-humans split from the rest of the hominid line (chimps and gorillas) roughly five million years ago. At the time, they were apes, not even remotely resembling men and women.

And the dinosaurs died out 65 million years ago.

[edit on 23-3-2008 by Astyanax]

reply to post by Astyanax

Hi there, I'm not replying to your post to get into a flame-war ... just to point out that the photo's in my post were from the Taylor Trail (sorry I obviously didn't make that clear enough ... as is the link in that post), I never said they were of the fossilized footprints found by Mary Leakey in 1978 ... totally different continent !

Can you provide any links where it says either set of prints were debunked / proven to be fake please ... would hate to think I'm carrying crap info around in my head ... worse still recomending it to other people as the real deal.

Woody

reply to post by woodwytch

No flame intended; it's just that the superimposition of modern H. Sap footprints on those indentations is humourously amateurish. Not your work, I know. I accept that you believed in this and that you posted those pictures in good faith.

Taylor trail debunked here. In more depth and in more detail than you, I or anyone else really needs.

However, if you're a Christian, you may find this a little more pertinent.

Same with Paluxy, and all the other sites commonly, er, cited. Go here.

The hammer embedded in stone someone talked about earlier is a hoax too, though I really can't be bothered to find the references.

The fossil record, in spite of all these rather childish attempts to muddy it, remains clean. There are controversies aplenty, but not the sort that give creationists real ammunition because the issues are too specialized and limited in scope to cast any shadow on the whole picture. As for this stuff -- hammers in stones, men's footprints overlaid with dinosaurs'... what can I say? Kindergarten hoaxes.

reply to post by Astyanax

Phew! Glad to hear you weren't flaming me.
Thanks for the links I shall read with interest ... ahem! do you think with a name like 'woodwytch' I might be a Christian.

Anyhoo, whilst it's my natural inclination to seek-out potential extentions/alternative explanations to some of the archaeological science we have data for ... that doesn't mean I bury my head in the sand and dogedly rebuke the idea that I might be wrong (occasionally !!!) so thanks again for the links.

Woody

Originally posted by Astyanax
And the dinosaurs died out 65 million years ago.

Dinosaurs are still around... again... 4th grade knowledge.

Originally posted by NewWorldOver

Originally posted by Astyanax
And the dinosaurs died out 65 million years ago.

Dinosaurs are still around... again... 4th grade knowledge.

Prove it.

If you're talking about birds, we've been through that already.

If you're talking about modern reptiles, we've been through that, too, already.

Come on, then, share your fourth-grade knowledge with us.

reply to post by NewWorldOver


Birds don't count considering when you say dinosaurs you think of 20 foot tall animals.

reply to post by jimmy1200


Did humans coexists with dinosaurs? You have to consider many factors before ever considering this.

Look at how dinosaurs look. Look at their overall appearance. Look at their teeth, their claws, their size, and etc.

With all these features, they are designed to be vicious and violent. Look at their body armor and sharp tails. They won't have any of these features if they are living in a peaceful environment. The dinosaurs physical appearance are made for battle and defense against hostile dinosaurs. They are made to attack and devour their prey. If they are the prey, their body armor and sharp tails are for them to defend themselves successfully.

If ever, a human being, made of soft flesh were to co-exist with dinosaurs, I'm afraid, they will not last long. I mean what does a soft flesh doing in a heavily armored and violent world of the dinosaurs? Unless you invented a tank, you'll be safe.

Humans and dinosaurs lived in a totally different world.

I guess, if humans were to be found with the dinosaurs, the dinosaurs number will have to be very small in order for men to survive. Perhaps, some of them survived during their calamity and during their transitional period mingled among men until they were extinct. Because food sources will be so scarce, those carnivorous dinosaurs will not survive in the new world.

Those that managed to survive are those omnivorous, plant eating dinos until such time they were extinct as well.

reply to post by woodwytch


That footprint looks off.
I can't exactly put my finger on it but something looks real fishy with it.
But looks fake.
The alleged human footprint looks different somehow other than just shape then the dinoprint.

reply to post by WraothAscendant


Well, the general shape isn't all bad,b ut it only has three smaller toes, and each of them is almost completely circular. Ever make a footprint like that yourself? It looks chiseled in the rock.