posted on Apr, 1 2009 @ 01:59 AM
Bro, there aren't many differences between the newer and older drawings. Not enough to support your claim that it's a cover up, anyway.
Having said that, let me make sure that I understand the rest of what you're saying. You'll ignore the overwhelming evidence that tells us that
dinosaurs were around millions of years before man, yet you'll accept ONE small carving of an animal that somewhat resembles a stegosaur, as well as
a number of other animals, as absolute proof that man walked with dinosaurs? I don't get it! Where are all of the other carvings and drawings? Plenty
of drawings of horses, antelope, elephants, etc., but no T-rex. I wonder why...
You say that there's a cover up. A cover up of what? Do you think that scientists actually believe that man walked with dinosaurs, but lie to the
world in some conspiracy against God? You question their dating techniques, but do you actually have any idea how its done? Do you understand the
science involved? I think you'd actually need an understanding of it before you can discount it. Doing otherwise means that you're relying solely on
your faith, which begs the question: If your faith is so strong, why do you feel the need for 'proof' that man walked with dinosaurs? Why does the
Creationist machine constantly seek evidence to confirm the creation story of the Bible, and why do they constantly seek to disprove accepted science?
Are they seeking validation? Shouldn't their faith be enough? Let me ask you this: If evolution were true, would it disprove that the universe had a
creator, or would it just disprove your idea of who that creator is?
Please know that I'm not knocking you for your beliefs; I honestly admire your convictions. However, I think that if you're trying to convince those
who don't share your beliefs, you're going to need more proof than a tiny stone carving...
Have a nice day.