.Dinosaurs Never Existed.

Originally posted by warlok
Why would you believe in Adam and Eve (no proof, only a story) and not in dinosaurs (lots of proof)? Just doesn't make that much sense IMO.

That it is the problem the two do not match.

reply to post by diamondsmith



Come on dude.

How long did it take you to come up with this ? I love a good theory/conspiracy but this is way out there.

This is mushroom stuff best kept to ones self in a closed room

Originally posted by diamondsmith

Originally posted by humphreysjim
Your opinion is wrong I'm afraid.

Could be,could be not.The time is relative to new discoveries.

So you are ignoring all the discoveries already made by paleontology? Empirical science cast aside so you can bury your intellect in moronic 'theories'?

Good luck!

reply to post by Glass
The whole idea is so insane, I just enjoy playing along with them now for a laugh.....
2nd line...........

Originally posted by underduck
What if Adam and Eve were dinosaurs?!?!?!?!?!

He was a T-rex with a heart of gold and she was a stegasaurus with an appitite for forbidden fruit.

edit on 27-2-2012 by underduck because: (no reason given)

I don't think so,I try to look at this as serious matter.

reply to post by seabhac-rua

So you are ignoring all the discoveries already made by paleontology

No I am not,just asking some questions about how the two can coexist.

Originally posted by diamondsmith

Originally posted by warlok
Why would you believe in Adam and Eve (no proof, only a story) and not in dinosaurs (lots of proof)? Just doesn't make that much sense IMO.

That it is the problem the two do not match.

They do not match because Adam and Eve is a story to be taken on faith with no evidence whatsoever and the other has boatloads of evidence to support the existence.

To each his own. This thread was entertaining, but now has become redundant in ridiculusness.

Good Lord, and I thought Jehovah's Witnesses were the only people who believe that Satan planted false evidence to discredit "God's Word".......

reply to post by diamondsmith


Adam and Even mark the fourth epoch of mankind.. Three more epochs existed before that time.........

Originally posted by diamondsmith
reply to post by seabhac-rua

 

So you are ignoring all the discoveries already made by paleontology

No I am not,just asking some questions about how the two can coexist.

They can only coexist in the minds of people. Whether mankind (and everything we dream up or create, like silly stories about how we got here) existed or not, the fossil record would still be there, an immutable and undeniable history of this planet's biodiversity.

reply to post by diamondsmith

The simplest explanation is usually the correct one.

I agree with that.

And the explanation of the planted evidence is the most simple one.

Okay.... first off, The presumption that the simplest solution is the correct one is a misunderstanding of Occams Razor.

Occam's razor, also known as Ockham's razor, and sometimes expressed in Latin as lex parsimoniae (the law of parsimony, economy or succinctness), is a principle that generally recommends that, from among competing hypotheses, selecting the one that makes the fewest new assumptions usually provides the correct one, and that the simplest explanation will be the most plausible until evidence is presented to prove it false.

Occams razor is about the theory making the least new assumptions, being more likely to be the correct one.

This is what "Simple" means in this context.


So, now back to the topic at hand...

Dinosaurs Vs Adam and Eve.


On the one hand, the Evidence for the existence of dinosaurs does not require any new assumptions, because we have the evidence of the dinosaur fossils that fit perfectly into the fossil record, genetic record, and morphological evidence that we have about various species of life on the planet.

We already KNOW that bones, when buried may turn into fossils due to chemical processes, so the existence of fossils does not make any new assumptions.

On the other hand, the Adam and Eve theory asks us to disregard the existence of dinosaur fossils as hoaxes and deliberately planted to trick us, it asks us to assume that hundreds of thousands of fossils from all over the world have been "Planted" there for the specific purpose of getting us to not believe in a story that is merely thousands of years old, written by people who did not know about dinosaurs, fossils, and what have you.

Now, of those two competing ideas, which one makes the least assumptions?

Diamondsmith,

You seem to take the bible and especially the creation story litterally, so i ask you this very simple question:

Did Adam have a belly button?
Did Eve have a belly button?
think carefully and let me know.


also : Bring us one fossil bone of Adam or Eve, and we'll start taking your theory into consideration, but unless you can provide us with some fossil records, your claim is a wild, and yes, a somewhat "trollish" one.

Originally posted by XyZeR
Diamondsmith,

You seem to take the bible and especially the creation story litterally, so i ask you this very simple question:

Did Adam have a belly button?
Did Eve have a belly button?
think carefully and let me know.


also : Bring us one fossil bone of Adam or Eve, and we'll start taking your theory into consideration, but unless you can provide us with some fossil records, your claim is a wild, and yes, a somewhat "trollish" one.

I'll add to that. If God created man in his own image.....does God have nipples? And why?

reply to post by davethebear
I didn't read to much ...only about 2000 all that I have in my collection.

Ok i will be serious for a minute....Take a read of this material, for your own sake OP.
en.wikipedia.org...Burgess Shale
en.wikipedia.org...KT impact event.
en.wikipedia.org...Evolution of birds..
en.wikipedia.org...Big bang..
en.wikipedia.org...Formation and evolution of the Solar System
en.wikipedia.org...Paleontology.
en.wikipedia.org...Geology.
en.wikipedia.org...Dinosaur.
en.wikipedia.org...Charles Darwin.
en.wikipedia.org...DNA.
en.wikipedia.org...Plate tectonics.
en.wikipedia.org...(science)Gaia hypothesis.
These should give you a decent introduction to the real world, goodluck with it

Theory:
"Dinosaur" bones were left by giant alien picnickers.

Theory:
"Dinosaur" bones were left by the Evil Genius.

Fact:
This is cutting edge science. Besides all the great weight of fossilized bones, soft tissue is now being discovered within them, given the advances in scientific technique. Yes, tissue still elastic, and intact cells after "65,000,000" years. A bit of a stretch, methinks.

There is historical and even current evidence for their existence. How else did we get our ideas/myths/legends of dragons? In Africa, people in certain remote areas recognize pictures of dinos as identical to large animals sometimes seen in the area. I could add many pages of such evidence.

We were all there in the beginning.

Originally posted by seabhac-rua

Originally posted by XyZeR
Diamondsmith,

You seem to take the bible and especially the creation story litterally, so i ask you this very simple question:

Did Adam have a belly button?
Did Eve have a belly button?
think carefully and let me know.


also : Bring us one fossil bone of Adam or Eve, and we'll start taking your theory into consideration, but unless you can provide us with some fossil records, your claim is a wild, and yes, a somewhat "trollish" one.

I'll add to that. If God created man in his own image.....does God have nipples? And why?

Tuning into the radio?.
Tweaks his nips to tune into prayers?.

Originally posted by purplemer
reply to post by diamondsmith

 

Adam and Even mark the fourth epoch of mankind.. Three more epochs existed before that time.........

I never doubt that only I think we know a tiny part of the history.

reply to post by XyZeR

Bring us one fossil bone of Adam or Eve

I'd try a guess they were only two and fossils by millions...hard to say.