Dinosaurs are a children's fairy tale

Agility_Dude

"Strange, but not conclusive. You're assuming life on Earth has always existed as it does today. In some creationism theories, life was a LOT different than it is today. See my debate: "What is devil's tower?""

I didn't look at the debate, but I have heard of the theory that says that life began north and went south from there. We can remain agnostic on this one then.

"This is not a dinosaur. See above rebuttal."

This does prove evolution though. Again, nothing today similar to that grows to that size. And there are tons of other ammonite fossils way more diverse than the nautilus family that we see today. That's evolution.

"We don't seem to be on the same page. I'm not saying fossils are all fake. My position is that dinosaurs never existed. Limestone fossils I'm ok with. Large animals no doubt existed, due to pre flood conditions, and an abundance of oxygen back then. For example, this is a fossil of a creature that probably existed pre flood:"

Sorry first of all, I don't see the fossil. Could you tell me what it is when you respond to this then? Now, let me get into an example of a dinosaur in limestone. This is a fossil of Scipionyx:



And this is limestone without any fossils:



That is undeniable evidence by your standards that dinosaurs existed. Case closed.

"Are they "designated dinosaur fossil sites"??? Strange."

They're not designated. They are always in areas with lots of sedimentary rocks because sedimentary rocks, according to how fossils are formed, preserve fossils and create fossils. This seems very consistent with itself. Strange indeed.

"I wouldn't say randomly mutated, or evolved, I'd say that their growth was stunted, from lack of oxygen in the air, due to an abrupt ending to life pre-flood. Maybe you're starting to get it?"

Then we can remain agnostic on this one too. That's fair.

Erfisflat

I didn't look at the debate, but I have heard of the theory that says that life began north and went south from there. We can remain agnostic on this one then."

Oh it's much more than that. I'm not even sure that's entirely relevant. Read the introduction, it may catch you up on this whole conversation.

https://www.debateisland.com/discussion/958/what-is-devils-tower

Erfisflat

@Agility_Dude you put it together yet?

Nathaniel_B

Erfisflat said:

When you go to a museum and see a dinosaur, you're looking at reshaped elephant bones and plaster. Try to touch one next time. A brontosaurus would've had to eat 90 hours a day. Not a typo. Not a single dinosaur bone has been accidentally found.

Is you really serious? Elephant bones??? I got to get my popcorn! 

Agility_Dude

@Erfisflat:

Your arguments in that debate are flawed. The In the example that devils tower can't be made by magma you continue and show a picture of magma cooling to show an uneven surface. You defeat your own argument.

Then you assume that intelligent design is real without giving any evidence. I have given lots of evidence in the debate "God doesn't exist - Change My Mind" for evolution.

Now I don't know how tree stump shaped hills prove god or intelligent design, but you would have to agree that these would actually be likely to happen out of all of the hills and mountains in the world.

Now the trees chopping themselves up, if that's actually what scientists say, is crap. But the forming of fossils isn't. Could you give me some source that says that the chopping of trees happened i'm curious. Based on the trillions and trillions of lifeforms that have existed before us it would actually be likely that some fossils would appear here and there.

Erfisflat

"Your arguments in that debate are flawed. The In the example that devils tower can't be made by magma you continue and show a picture of magma cooling to show an uneven surface. You defeat your own argument."

This is a non-sequitor. I showed how magma cools, and what devil's tower looks like, they are not even remotely similar, so how is my argument defeated exactly?

"Then you assume that intelligent design is real without giving any evidence. I have given lots of evidence in the debate "God doesn't exist - Change My Mind" for evolution."

I've actually given a lot of evidence for ID. Two that you've actually agreed with. (The earth is flat and covered with a dome) another would be the fibonacci sequence...

https://www.debateisland.com/discussion/2540/lets-make-the-right-decision-now

"Now I don't know how tree stump shaped hills prove god or intelligent design, but you would have to agree that these would actually be likely to happen out of all of the hills and mountains in the world."

Not like this, no. And the initial point was that large animals existed, as did larger trees. 

"Now the trees chopping themselves up, if that's actually what scientists say, is crap. But the forming of fossils isn't. Could you give me some source that says that the chopping of trees happened i'm curious. "

No, from the image it was obviously apparent.

"Based on the trillions and trillions of lifeforms that have existed before us it would actually be likely that some fossils would appear here and there."

This does not prove that dinosaurs existed.

Agility_Dude

"This is a non-sequitor. I showed how magma cools, and what devil's tower looks like, they are not even remotely similar, so how is my argument defeated exactly?"

Falling lava is very slow and can cool into any shape, demonstrated in the pictures you showed. This means that the lava can cool into the shape described.

"I've actually given a lot of evidence for ID. Two that you've actually agreed with. (The earth is flat and covered with a dome) another would be the fibonacci sequence..."

I don't see how the earth being flat proves intelligent design. Besides, I have found that the sun is the huge problem with flat earth theory and that when you measure the angles posted on the round earth calculator you realize that they are false. Take a look at this picture:

https://dizzib.github.io/earth/curve-calc/?d0=48.28032000002595&h0=3.0480370641306997&unit=metric

The three meters is shown in the visual reference even though it should in reality be miniscule compared to the radius. The radius should be over 15,984 times longer than the height described. The chart is false.

Let's look at the Chicago skyline again:

https://joshuanowicki.smugmug.com/Looking-toward-Chicago-from-Mi/

In the first picture we can see the second from the left is the willis tower. Here's what it actually looks like in pictures next to it:



Not everything is shown in the first picture so it shows that the earth is actually round, regardless of what the earth curve calculator says.


Now onto the Fibonacci sequence. Why is this intelligent design? If this benefits the animals like intelligent design would suggest, then couldn't evolution do the same?

"Not like this, no. And the initial point was that large animals existed, as did larger trees. "

I disagree that these are trees I agree with you on that. And what's intelligent about this?

"No, from the image it was obviously apparent."

Give me a source that says that scientists say that these trees chopped themselves up instead of them chopping  it and I can find some common ground with you. This sounds like a strawman.

"This does not prove that dinosaurs existed."

It shows the likelihood of fossils occurring. See the first post on this page for undeniable evidence that fossils existed by comparing limestone fossils to actual limestone, showing that this can't be carved even close to as well as it is shown.


I have one question for you: If evolution is false, and Adam and Eve were the first humans, how did four different races develop with different IQs, athletic abilities, appearences, skin color, etc.?

Erfisflat

"Falling lava is very slow and can cool into any shape, demonstrated in the pictures you showed. This means that the lava can cool into the shape described."

That's a stretch, it really sounds like grasping at straws. Maybe if there were some molds this size and shape. Besides, that isn't what science claims. They claim that the magma was essentially one solid piece, then it cooled and cracked into these beautiful shapes. All of them almost perfectly the same dimensions. Impossible in reality. 

"I don't see how the earth being flat proves intelligent design.

Yes, I recall having this conversation with you before. How a flat, geocentric dome dome covered earth, as described in the Bible, does not logically prove a Creator to you is beyond my understanding.

" Besides, I have found that the sun is the huge problem with flat earth theory"

You kinda left that hanging there, an explanation as to why the sun poses a problem on the flat earth would be a more valid argument.

" and that when you measure the angles posted on the round earth calculator you realize that they are false. Take a look at this picture:"

The calculator was made by a globe earth proponent, and involves a complex mathematical formula that has been validated by even the tools at metabunk.

https://www.metabunk.org/problem-with-earth-curvature-calculator-hope-for-revised-version.t8720/

""In the first picture we can see the second from the left is the willis tower. Here's what it actually looks like in pictures next to it:



Not everything is shown in the first picture so it shows that the earth is actually round, regardless of what the earth curve calculator says."

I'm guessing the above was the picture you were referring to. And I think I follow your point. You're saying that since we can't see all of Chicago, then there must exist a hump in lake Michigan. This is jumping to conclusions as you are ignoring refraction and it's effects on light. This was all explained pretty well in a great many debates here, but I'll go over it again. 

Experiments show that refraction, due to the atmosphere, causes objects to appear lower, when viewed at eye level. You can read and see more about atmospheric refraction and Snell's law here:

https://www.debateisland.com/discussion/comment/21540/#Comment_21540

"Now onto the Fibonacci sequence. Why is this intelligent design? If this benefits the animals like intelligent design would suggest, then couldn't evolution do the same?"

I didn't say the Fibonacci Sequence benefits the animals, it is merely a common mathematical trait in their design, and couldn't be caused by deformations as evolution suggests.

"I disagree that these are trees I agree with you on that. And what's intelligent about this?"

This is a contradictory statement that I can't make heads or tails of what it means. But it is evidence that dinosaurs weren't at all as we were told.

"Give me a source that says that scientists say that these trees chopped themselves up instead of them chopping  it and I can find some common ground with you. This sounds like a strawman."

No scientists say this. It is just obviously apparent. The petrified Forest, as geologists claim are 225 MILLION years old. Who could have chopped them up like that back then? I have no idea what science is claiming about them appearing to be chopped up and placed there purposely. If you can find a plausible explanation, that'd be great.

"It shows the likelihood of fossils occurring. See the first post on this page for undeniable evidence that fossils existed by comparing limestone fossils to actual limestone, showing that this can't be carved even close to as well as it is shown."

Once again, I do not doubt that some fossils are real, though they were not formed the way we were told, and they are not exactly what we are told.

"I have one question for you: If evolution is false, and Adam and Eve were the first humans, how did four different races develop with different IQs, athletic abilities, appearences, skin color, etc.?"

I have no idea. I'm more of a scientist, not a historian. But the same question could be posed of you and the fairy tale that is evolution.

Evidence

@Agility_Dude to @Erfisflat - I have one question for you: If evolution is false, and Adam and Eve were the first humans, how did four different races develop with different IQs, athletic abilities, appearences, skin color, etc.?

Genesis 11:1 Now the whole world had one language and a common speech. 2 As people moved eastward, they found a plain in Shinar and settled there.
3 They said to each other, “Come, let’s make bricks and bake them thoroughly.” They used brick instead of stone, and tar for mortar. 4 Then they said, “Come, let us build ourselves a city, with a tower that reaches to the heavens, so that we may make a name for ourselves; otherwise we will be scattered over the face of the whole earth.”

5 But the Lord came down to see the city and the tower the people were building. 6 The Lord said, “If as one people speaking the same language they have begun to do this, then nothing they plan to do will be impossible for them. 7 Come, let us go down and confuse their language so they will not understand each other.”

8 So the Lord scattered them from there over all the earth, and they stopped building the city. 9 That is why it was called Babel—because there the Lord confused the language of the whole world. From there the Lord scattered them over the face of the whole earth.

Obviously God did more than "confuse their language", .. added a little melanin in this group, and a little more in that group, and the rest, .. over the weeks, months and years they adapted to their environment wherever they ended up at as they scattered over the face of the earth.

Just as I have many years ago when I just had to get away from it all. Single,  working 12 hour days in a noisy machine shop, so I took a long drive and a longer hike, and camped out in the AZ mountains for many months, where from being white as snow (from working all them hours getting no sun) in a few months I became an Indian.




I ate fish, and drank from the stream. many times I hiked in 115F heat from early morning to late at night in the desert mountains, no water or food all day, only cactus fruit, just as we read the stories of the Indians that used to live there.

So I don't see any problems in The Tower of Babel incident for God creating all the different races.

Agility_Dude

@Evidence:

"Obviously God did more than "confuse their language", .. added a little melanin in this group, and a little more in that group, and the rest, .. over the weeks, months and years they adapted to their environment wherever they ended up at as they scattered over the face of the earth."

Melanin won't pass on if its added on by god. Only if a person is born with melanin then they will pass on their genes. That's why this theory doesn't work. If you can give me any evidence that melanin added onto a person will pass on genetically then I would be convinced otherwise. Secondly, saying that they adapted to their environment is evolution. If they changed their iqs, appearences, athletic abilities, etc. this would be evolution. Case closed.

"Just as I have many years ago when I just had to get away from it all. Single,  working 12 hour days in a noisy machine shop, so I took a long drive and a longer hike, and camped out in the AZ mountains for many months, where from being white as snow (from working all them hours getting no sun) in a few months I became an Indian."

Again won't pass through genetically. the fact that you had melanin in your skin changed didn't change your genetic code.

Erfisflat

Agility_Dude said:

@Evidence:

"Obviously God did more than "confuse their language", .. added a little melanin in this group, and a little more in that group, and the rest, .. over the weeks, months and years they adapted to their environment wherever they ended up at as they scattered over the face of the earth."

Melanin won't pass on if its added on by god. Only if a person is born with melanin then they will pass on their genes. That's why this theory doesn't work. If you can give me any evidence that melanin added onto a person will pass on genetically then I would be convinced otherwise. Secondly, saying that they adapted to their environment is evolution. If they changed their iqs, appearences, athletic abilities, etc. this would be evolution. Case closed.

"Just as I have many years ago when I just had to get away from it all. Single,  working 12 hour days in a noisy machine shop, so I took a long drive and a longer hike, and camped out in the AZ mountains for many months, where from being white as snow (from working all them hours getting no sun) in a few months I became an Indian."

Again won't pass through genetically. the fact that you had melanin in your skin changed didn't change your genetic code.

Adaptation, or microevolution does nothing for speciation or macroevolution.

Evidence

Agility_Dude said:

@Evidence:

"Obviously God did more than "confuse their language", .. added a little melanin in this group, and a little more in that group, and the rest, .. over the weeks, months and years they adapted to their environment wherever they ended up at as they scattered over the face of the earth."

Melanin won't pass on if its added on by god. Only if a person is born with melanin then they will pass on their genes. That's why this theory doesn't work. If you can give me any evidence that melanin added onto a person will pass on genetically then I would be convinced otherwise. Secondly, saying that they adapted to their environment is evolution. If they changed their iqs, appearences, athletic abilities, etc. this would be evolution. Case closed.

"Just as I have many years ago when I just had to get away from it all. Single,  working 12 hour days in a noisy machine shop, so I took a long drive and a longer hike, and camped out in the AZ mountains for many months, where from being white as snow (from working all them hours getting no sun) in a few months I became an Indian."

Again won't pass through genetically. the fact that you had melanin in your skin changed didn't change your genetic code.

Everything was added by God; one nose, two eyes up in front, two legs (not like evolution would have done it, grow extremities like tree branches, because all started from amoeba, and it's 'surviv) .. and yes, they pass on. But like @Erfisflat said: "Adaptation, or microevolution does nothing for speciation or macroevolution."
So unless you have scientific evidence contrary, you didn't refute anything I said.

Oh, and we see Gods creation adapt to their environment all the time, . I gave you myself as one example, and I can show you others, like tropical fruit trees adapt from 90% humidity, to 17& humidity and thrive.



Wait, are you saying that there is an IQ difference between races? No wonder you believe in Darwinian and Richard Dawkins type Evolution, so did Hitler! It helped convince the Germans they were superior to all, .. yes "ALL other races", which includes all "other white races" too.

Athletic abilities? That's just like breeding race horses. The white slave owners bread the biggest and strongest black men with the strongest black women, what would you expect? As far as any IQ differences, that too was bred by whites, simply by keeping education from the slaves.
I experienced similar also, .. where I (out of 7 siblings) was kept locked up, starved, beaten, out of school, .. so after I survived all that, when I reached adulthood, I just accepted that I was dumb, an , etc. Until my atheist friend at work made me prove to myself otherwise.

You see, when I respond to posts in a positive, .. kind of an: "I know this"  manner, it's because "I really and truly know this", .. it's like that cliché saying: "Been there and done that".

On the contrary, please tell me this;  which biologist, or evolutionist has ever observed one species of anything evolve/speciate into another distinctly different species? Even evolutionists admit that "speciation/evolution never happens".

Erfisflat

K