New evidence disproving the evolutionary timeline.

[Sunstone]

There haven't been any dinosaur fossils found in strata younger than about 65 million years.

 

[Draka]

There haven't been any dinosaur fossils found in strata younger than about 65 million years.

But that's impossible! Because we all KNOW the Earth is ONLY about 6000 years old :areyoucra

 

[Sunstone]

But that's impossible! Because we all KNOW the Earth is ONLY about 6000 years old :areyoucra

Of course you're right. Silly me. I stand corrected.

 

[SoyLeche]

Victor, Halcyon said likely explanations, not unlikely explanations.If humans lived with dinosaurs, why do we have no fossils of humans from that era, or, indeed, any large mammal?

Well, duh.... the dinosaurs ate them.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

Three likely explainations. ...

or:

4. Humans did in fact live with dinosaurs.

And what allows you to claim this as a "likely explanation" is a pathetic contempt for science.

 

[Quiddity]

And what allows you to claim this as a "likely explanation" is a pathetic contempt for science.

Why is it pathethic?

PS-Did you read my following post?

~Victor

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

maybe we were, but were wiped out with them, than our species descended down from whatever ape was left, to our present time. This is such a reasonable explanation isn't it?

No, it is not. In fact, as explanations go, it is an absurdly ignorant one.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

Why is it pathethic?

What renders is "likely"?

 

[Quiddity]

What renders is "likely"?

I'll take this as a "no".

~Victor

 

[The Black Whirlwind]

No, it is not. In fact, as explanations go, it is an absurdly ignorant one.

I know it might be a bit too much of an abstract concept for you, but i was being sarcastic. Learn to recognize these things.

 

[Scuba Pete]

Science does not deal in "what if's" and "maybe's";

I wholly disagree! These are the genesis of scientific investigation. Especially when it comes to paleontology, where suppositions are the fuel of discoveries.

As for the "time-line", I think that bogus stones do little more than cast doubt on any religion that uses them to support an unsupportable concept. It still amuses me that Christians spend time trying to debunk the "truth" of evolution, when they should spend their time feeding the poor and helping the sick. If this were that insidious of a perversion, Jesus would have addressed that in his ministry. "Blessed are those who revile evolution: for their's is..." The fact is, as far as the validity of Christianity is concerned, evolution is nothing but a red herring. Those who have predicated their beliefs on evolution being false have built their house on shifting sands: your faith cannot be solid! Instead, build your faith on the rock and don't worry about trying to prove something that is true to be false.

 

[Ceridwen018]

I wholly disagree!

And I wholly agree with your disagreement!

 

[Shadow Wolf]

Science does not deal in "what if's" and "maybe's"; that's the realm of science fiction.

Well, look at the many things that were science fiction until recently. Clones, spaceships, lasers, and robots were all one time exclusive to a science fantasy. Now they are all real.

 

[Flappycat]

Might have been a large bird, actually. I guess they're technically dinosaurs of a sort.

 

[Druidus]

I wholly disagree! These are the genesis of scientific investigation. Especially when it comes to paleontology, where suppositions are the fuel of discoveries.

And I wholly agree with your disagreement!

Well, look at the many things that were science fiction until recently. Clones, spaceships, lasers, and robots were all one time exclusive to a science fantasy. Now they are all real.

? You all misinterpret what I mean. The realm of science is based on fact, logic, reason, and intelligent inquiry. "What if's" and "maybe's" are nothing without a basis in science. If they have no empirical basis, then they are science fiction. Of course exploration into the unknown is necessary, but any theory should be based on science, not science fiction.

 

[Scuba Pete]

I understood what you said. We are quick to discount the very impetus of progress: thinking outside of the box. We are uncomfortable with not knowing and yet we know far less that what there is to know.

(Dear Mods: the report this post was sent in error. I hit the wrong button)

 

[Faint]

I don't understand why people still bother with this guy's threads. He's started quite a few, given some very vague "evidence" of one thing or another, and then fled when people started to question him. No point really in responding.

Actually yes, I haven't seen any further comments on this thread by the one who started it.

Where O where have you been gtrsgrls?
Where O where can you be?
It's been so long, since the moon has gone.
and 0 what a wreck you've made me.

 

[Druidus]

NetDoc, thinking outside the box is great, but baseless theories are useless. By baseless, I mean suggesting that man existed with dinosaurs. There's no evidence for it; at least, not yet. Until there is some base, it is not science. Great science fiction though.

 

[Malus 12:9]

maybe we were, but were wiped out with them, than our species descended down from whatever ape was left,

FKM, if your statement would be correct, are you saying that God created human lives, then
wiped out dinosaurs and humans, and started the evolution of humans again? So if we descended from ape, alligators and iguanas descended from dinosaurs also? Uh, ok.

 

[drekmed]

perhaps the humans that lived before were telepathic, made things that were completely biodegradable, incinerated their remains, and only left a few crewd carvings on rocks in central americas:biglaugh: