Dinosaurs?

Believe in Dinosaurs?

  • yes, they are very real.

    Votes: 25 89.3%

  • no, myth as tooth fairy tale.

    Votes: 1 3.6%

  • maybe, I don't know

    Votes: 2 7.1%
  • Total voters
    28
From what I've read they seem more bird like based on their bone structure.
 
Miss*Pinocchio said:
Okay I believe there were dinosaurs...

My conclusion is I don't think dinosaurs live billions or millions years ago...
I think they live during Biblical times, Chinese dynasty, and during Knighthood times because why did these people draw dragons that resemble dinosaurs?
Darwin may have discovered the dinosaurs' bones and fossil, the people during Biblical times may have saw live dinosaurs.
And I believe humans hunt them down and killing them all.
Remember the phrase, "the last dragon".
That is when all the dinosaurs died.

That is my opinion.
Click to expand...
If they saw dinosaurs, why wasn't it mentioned in the Bible?
 
Maybe because dinosaurs were living in places where people don't live.

I think the Bible said "there were giants".
I think it meant dinosaurs.
 
From what I read, the bible monsters could simply be giant animals that are known to be contemporaneous and large compared with people, like hippopotamuses and crocodilians. Nile crocodiles can be 5 meters long.
 
Miss*Pinocchio said:
Maybe because dinosaurs were living in places where people don't live.

I think the Bible said "there were giants".
I think it meant dinosaurs.
Click to expand...
http://www.greatdreams.com/reptlan/giants.htm
joegiant2.jpg
 
RedFox said:
From what I read, the bible monsters could simply be giant animals that are known to be contemporaneous and large compared with people, like hippopotamuses and crocodilians. Nile crocodiles can be 5 meters long.
Click to expand...
Yeah, the Bible mentioned monsters with multiple heads... in Revelations. Perhaps, the person who write that Book saw dinosaurs and thought they were demons! ;)
 
Both Dinosaurs and their bones were very real that we cannot fool the bones. Didn't you realize that scientists couldn't make a bone replica yet? Bones are rock-fact. Those, who weren't sure about the dinosaurs and the Bible, weren't reading the Bible and the stuff about dinosaurs at all. That's why they kept saying as long they don't know, they just say they don't believe in them.

The giant leg bone as shown above was real. The Bible talked about the real-life giants that were bred by the fallen angels and women (human beings) in the pre-flood age. They were avergaed in 12' to 15' feet tall and were very big. It was a real shock for me at first and later I realized that they did exist. wow! Not many people realize that they were in fact existed .. that's for sure.

To add. Yes, the Bible talked about a leviathan and dragons. In the Book of Job and few others like Book of Genesis. They who said the Bible didn't talk about it, they in fact didn't read it.
 
Strongly recommend you guys who wants to know about the Bible and Dinos and also creation vs evolution stuff online at: Answers in Genesis

Fabulous resources and stuff!
 
Here is a simple definition of the term "evolution" - it is used in several ways in science:

"The series of changes over time, some gradual and some sporadic, that account for the present form and function of objects organisms, and natural and designed systems. The term may refer to biological changes, geological changes, and/or technological changes. In the context of biological changes, "evolution" refers to the theory explaining the history and present characteristics of life on Earth in terms of natural processes including natural selection."

There are two things to remember. Science has proven that evolutions DOES occur, and we see it in simple, everyday things like the way that viruses change over time. The "THEORY" part of evolution is that we do not yet know all the ways every organism evolved - it is too complicated, and we are still learning.

There is no indication that people and dinosaurs lived on the earth at the same time, which is why it would not be mentioned in the Bible - the people who wrote the Bible would not have known about them, just as they did not know about all kinds of geographic locations on the Earth. (How many times does the Bible mention The Phillipine Islands - but we all know they exist, don't we?)

MANY Christians believe in the Bible -AND- believe that there is evolution. The Bible is a document limited to the specific time and place in which it was written (keep in mind it was written down centuries after the Bible stories began to circulate between people.)
 
I'm not so sure there were dinosaurs way back when, I wasn't there!!! We all weren't there. Most of the people who took the poll believe in science. Who is to say science doesn't lie?
 
Bluerobin said:
I'm not so sure there were dinosaurs way back when, I wasn't there!!! We all weren't there. Most of the people who took the poll believe in science. Who is to say science doesn't lie?
Click to expand...

True that we all weren't there to witness them back in the distant past .. BUT these dino bones discovered are the rock-hard facts that we all cannot deny, however. They weren't invented and created by scientists, ofc. Bones has its unique characteristics so there is no way we can replicate it exactly except wax or plastic or whatever you know of.

Only the debates remain on the creation and evolution since late 1800s. I believe the Bible at the fullest. Only I knew that the scientists, the ones who claimed that the dino bones were some million years old, depended on the carbon acid tests as the proofs which later we discovered weren't dependable.

One of best example on these carbon tests:

Back in 1995 a science team went to the Mount Helen where the volcano erupted in 1980. They took a ash rock from the volcano mount and sent to the scientists where they do carbon tests there. They didn't tell them where they took it but just asked them to test how old the ash rock was.

Guess what? The result from the carbon test was 230,000 years old. But it was only 15 years old! In fact, it wasn't the only proof that contradicted with their carbon tests (long story). We shouldn't just lay our beliefs on these scientists in some certain cases like that as like you said generally. Aye
 
Since they are big, bigger than trees...
They wouldn't run around the tree to catch their prey, they would knock every trees down.

Maybe there are many dinosaur bones in deep ocean.

Maybe there weren't any Phillipines or Hawaii islands because volcano didn't develop those lands yet.

Maybe dinosaurs lived in different lands and humans didn't really think it was a big deal to write about dinosaurs.
 
Why does every thread around here have to be about the bible? Let's please just talk about the dinosaurs!!! If dinosaurs are real, then it's a strong possiblity that dragons are real too!!! Dragons could be another species of dinosaur-right? That would be cool. If we have to accept the possiblity of the T-Rex, then my open mind is going to accept that a creature closely resembling a dragon could have lived back then too. The scentist just haven't found their plastic bones yet!!! :fruit:
 
web730 said:
Only the debates remain on the creation and evolution since late 1800s. I believe the Bible at the fullest. Only I knew that the scientists, the ones who claimed that the dino bones were some million years old, depended on the carbon acid tests as the proofs which later we discovered weren't dependable.

One of best example on these carbon tests:

Back in 1995 a science team went to the Mount Helen where the volcano erupted in 1980. They took a ash rock from the volcano mount and sent to the scientists where they do carbon tests there. They didn't tell them where they took it but just asked them to test how old the ash rock was.

Guess what? The result from the carbon test was 230,000 years old. But it was only 15 years old! In fact, it wasn't the only proof that contradicted with their carbon tests (long story). We shouldn't just lay our beliefs on these scientists in some certain cases like that as like you said generally. Aye
Click to expand...

I would love to see you cite your source for this information. My bet is, you can't prove that this event occured at all - yous just "heard" about it, but can't find a reliable source.

Radiocarbon dating is based on the known characteristics of Carbon and how it degrades over time:

Radiocarbon dating is a radiometric dating method that uses the naturally occurring isotope carbon-14 to determine the age of carbonaceous materials up to ca 60,000 years. Within archaeology it is considered an absolute dating technique. The technique was discovered by Willard Frank Libby and his colleagues in 1949. In 1960, Libby was awarded the Nobel Prize in chemistry for radiocarbon dating.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carbon_dating

It is easy to convince us that the science is bad when we don't understand the science to begin with.

I love God, and I love the moral lessons of the Old and New Testaments. I also accept that science has begun to explain some things that were unknowable mysteries in Biblical times. I prefer to think of this as our evolving relationship with God, and the way he cares for his creation, rather than clinging to specific "facts" of a fallable document - much of which predates written language.
 
Miss*Pinocchio said:
Maybe there weren't any Phillipines or Hawaii islands because volcano didn't develop those lands yet.
Click to expand...

"The basic land structure of the Philippines was defined probably during the Tertiary, or even as early as the Jurassic (middle Mesozoic) age. The underlying framework of the archipelago when it emerged was the same as today, with slight changes as island forms readjusted in the process of geologic evolution."

http://www.iraia.net/history/history_geological.htm

I am sorry, but the exitence of these Islands pre-dates Biblical history. The point is that just because the Bible doesn't mention something doesn't mean it didn't exist.

The Bible, especially the Penateuch, is a document written for a very specific group of people at a very specific time in history, limited to a very specific geographic area. While it's lessons are timeless, looking to it to prove the existence or non-existence of people, places or things is a foolhardy endeavor.
 
MorriganTait said:
I would love to see you cite your source for this information. My bet is, you can't prove that this event occured at all - yous just "heard" about it, but can't find a reliable source.

Radiocarbon dating is based on the known characteristics of Carbon and how it degrades over time:

Radiocarbon dating is a radiometric dating method that uses the naturally occurring isotope carbon-14 to determine the age of carbonaceous materials up to ca 60,000 years. Within archaeology it is considered an absolute dating technique. The technique was discovered by Willard Frank Libby and his colleagues in 1949. In 1960, Libby was awarded the Nobel Prize in chemistry for radiocarbon dating.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carbon_dating

It is easy to convince us that the science is bad when we don't understand the science to begin with.

I love God, and I love the moral lessons of the Old and New Testaments. I also accept that science has begun to explain some things that were unknowable mysteries in Biblical times. I prefer to think of this as our evolving relationship with God, and the way he cares for his creation, rather than clinging to specific "facts" of a fallable document - much of which predates written language.
Click to expand...

I have to say I thoroughly respect your optimism and integration of perspectives on the matter.

Also, another one of my favorite dating techniques is Potassium-Argon.
 
Back
Top