Jump to content




Welcome to Unexplained Mysteries! Please sign in or create an account to start posting and to access a host of extra features.


- - - - -

Dinosaur & Human Interaction in Our Times


  • Please log in to reply
22 replies to this topic

#1    teri107

teri107

    Alien Embryo

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 18 posts
  • Joined:20 Jun 2009

Posted 07 June 2011 - 06:48 PM

Dinosaur & Human Interaction in Our Times (the New York Times, LA Times, Chicago Sun Times etc.)
http://article
Posted Image


Charles Darwin’s book; “The Origin of the Species; was written back in 1859. The word “dinosaur” had been coined a few years earlier, in 1841 by Sir Richard Owen.

I began a review of the dinosaur and man controversy in the press after that time thinking that perhaps the world of science and news reporting would have still been rather naive and innocent for a time and still willing to report things as they were discovered-without the filter and hold that Darwinism currently holds over both.

Actually, the Darwin free “honeymoon period” proved to be remarkably short, however, scientists did make reports during this period that would ruin the reputation of anyone making such “scientific” claims today.

Some say that you can’t prove a negative; what is true is that when you make a negative proposition, i.e. “blue fairies don’t exist”, the breadth of that statement is universal, while the positive (opposing) side of that argument, i.e. “blue fairies do exist” only has to be shown to exist in one place in the universe to be correct and to simultaneously prove the “negative proposition” incorrect.

Another example of this type is the proposition that man and dinosaur never interacted.


http://s8int.com/WordPress/?p=2821

Edited by teri107, 07 June 2011 - 06:49 PM.


#2    Ravinar

Ravinar

    Psychic Spy

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,102 posts
  • Joined:28 Jan 2005
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:some where between the majesty of creation and the void of oblivion

  • A truly powerful being needs not destroy.

Posted 07 June 2011 - 07:13 PM

humans of the past did find dinosaur fossils to and where just as capable of putting the pieces together and then imagining what the creature might have looked like. only difference being that we call them dinosaurs and they called them dragons.

the human race is at an end and and my soul grows weary. the one thing that could revive it is almost gone and is in no condition to heal me. yet i shall not despair for the light of hope shines even in the greatest darkness. i shall continue to hope.... hope for the days of green and ever lasting love of all things. for those whom think them selfs better shall realize they are not all that is. nor are they in any way better for all life is equal.

#3    Goodnite

Goodnite

    Proven over time

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,423 posts
  • Joined:07 Apr 2011
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Pennsylvania, USA

  • Before I refuse to take your questions, I have an opening statement.

Posted 07 June 2011 - 07:25 PM

I don't think that finding a few likenesses of dinos in ancient art qualifies as proving this theory. It be like 50,000 years from now finding footage of "I, Robot" to prove we had robots abounding in our society. :wacko:

Edited by Goodnite, 07 June 2011 - 07:25 PM.

The King of the Beasts

#4    DieChecker

DieChecker

    I'm a Rogue Scholar

  • Member
  • 23,875 posts
  • Joined:21 Nov 2005
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Portland, Oregon, USA

  • Hey, I'm not wrong. I'm just not completely right.

Posted 07 June 2011 - 07:28 PM

Most of the things in this article have been discussed many times on these forums. Dinosaurs do exist in modern times, but only in the form of Birds. Every single point that has been called out as possibly being a dinosaur in historical art and archeology has turned out to have a much better historic explaination other then dinosaurs. The Ica Stones for instance might have started off as a real cache of objects, but before too long the natives were mass producing them to sell to stupid adventurers who came looking for them. Same goes with most South American dinosaur artifacts. Carbon dating and scratch dating on the pottery and stones has shown them to, for the most part, be modern fakes.

In the early 20th century newspaper sensationalism was still big and thus newspapers would print outrageous claims to sell papers and increase circulation. Little, if any, evidence of any of the earliest stores still exist.

The footprints in stone are simply wear patterns that suggest a human foot.

Edited by DieChecker, 07 June 2011 - 07:28 PM.

Here at Intel we make processors on 12 inch wafers. And, the individual processors on the wafers are called die. And, I am employed to check these die. That is why I am the DieChecker.

At times one remains faithful to a cause only because its opponents do not cease to be insipid. - Friedrich Nietzsche

Qualifications? This is cryptozoology, dammit! All that is required is the spirit of adventure. - Night Walker

#5    thewatchman7

thewatchman7

    Astral Projection

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 744 posts
  • Joined:17 Nov 2010
  • Gender:Male

  • like joseph stalin, and ghandi,
    im the cult of personality!

Posted 08 June 2011 - 12:27 PM

those statuetes in the article were proven as a fraud were they not?


#6    ali smack

ali smack

    Conspiracy Theorist

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 884 posts
  • Joined:28 Jul 2010
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Wertham

  • If something's hard to do, then it's not worth doing

Posted 08 June 2011 - 12:33 PM

how do you dinosaurs don't exist anymore?I don't think they do but how do we know


#7    thewatchman7

thewatchman7

    Astral Projection

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 744 posts
  • Joined:17 Nov 2010
  • Gender:Male

  • like joseph stalin, and ghandi,
    im the cult of personality!

Posted 08 June 2011 - 12:35 PM

View Postali smack, on 08 June 2011 - 12:33 PM, said:

how do you dinosaurs don't exist anymore?I don't think they do but how do we know

you would need a breeding population.
this would need at least 2-300 at a minimum, and a stable food source.
and with mans spread across the globe im sure we would come across some at one point if they were still about.
good question though.


#8    aquatus1

aquatus1

    Forum Divinity

  • 21,226 posts
  • Joined:05 Mar 2004
  • Gender:Not Selected

Posted 08 June 2011 - 01:09 PM

View Postthewatchman7, on 08 June 2011 - 12:27 PM, said:

those statuetes in the article were proven as a fraud were they not?

Indeed they were, and they are still being sold today to tourists, along with their sister hoax, the Ica stones.

The most amusing factor of these dinosaurs is that they do not resembles the dinosaurs as we know them to be today, after a half-century of study and learning.  Instead, they resemble the dinosaurs that can be found in that era's comic books, including several "dinosaurs" more closely resembling medieval dragons than anything else.


#9    Rafterman

Rafterman

    Telekinetic

  • Member
  • 7,409 posts
  • Joined:27 Sep 2010
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Upstate

Posted 08 June 2011 - 01:51 PM

View Postteri107, on 07 June 2011 - 06:48 PM, said:

Dinosaur & Human Interaction in Our Times (the New York Times, LA Times, Chicago Sun Times etc.)
http://article
Posted Image


Charles Darwin’s book; “The Origin of the Species; was written back in 1859. The word “dinosaur” had been coined a few years earlier, in 1841 by Sir Richard Owen.

I began a review of the dinosaur and man controversy in the press after that time thinking that perhaps the world of science and news reporting would have still been rather naive and innocent for a time and still willing to report things as they were discovered-without the filter and hold that Darwinism currently holds over both.

Actually, the Darwin free “honeymoon period” proved to be remarkably short, however, scientists did make reports during this period that would ruin the reputation of anyone making such “scientific” claims today.

Some say that you can’t prove a negative; what is true is that when you make a negative proposition, i.e. “blue fairies don’t exist”, the breadth of that statement is universal, while the positive (opposing) side of that argument, i.e. “blue fairies do exist” only has to be shown to exist in one place in the universe to be correct and to simultaneously prove the “negative proposition” incorrect.

Another example of this type is the proposition that man and dinosaur never interacted.


http://s8int.com/WordPress/?p=2821

I would think that the fact that this article is from a young earth creationist blog would answer your question right there.  The blogger has a defined agenda, but instead of being able to point to scientific evidence, he has to rely on 100 year old newspaper articles.  As bad as journalists are today about sensationalizing stories, they come nowhere near the journalism of the late 19th and early 20th centuries.

Personally I wouldn't saddle up my Jesus Horse just yet.

Edited by Rafterman, 08 June 2011 - 01:51 PM.

"For me, it is better to grasp the Universe as it really is than to persist in delusion, however satisfying and reassuring."
                                                                                                                                           - Carl Sagan, The Demon-Haunted World:  Science as a Candle in the Dark

#10    Wookietim

Wookietim

    Alien Abducter

  • Member
  • 4,908 posts
  • Joined:16 Apr 2007
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Kirkland, WA

  • Search on the Android App Store for "Mothras Unexplained Mysteries" for the app I am very proud of...

Posted 08 June 2011 - 02:11 PM

View Postteri107, on 07 June 2011 - 06:48 PM, said:

Dinosaur & Human Interaction in Our Times (the New York Times, LA Times, Chicago Sun Times etc.)
http://article
Posted Image


Charles Darwin’s book; “The Origin of the Species; was written back in 1859. The word “dinosaur” had been coined a few years earlier, in 1841 by Sir Richard Owen.

I began a review of the dinosaur and man controversy in the press after that time thinking that perhaps the world of science and news reporting would have still been rather naive and innocent for a time and still willing to report things as they were discovered-without the filter and hold that Darwinism currently holds over both.

Actually, the Darwin free “honeymoon period” proved to be remarkably short, however, scientists did make reports during this period that would ruin the reputation of anyone making such “scientific” claims today.

Some say that you can’t prove a negative; what is true is that when you make a negative proposition, i.e. “blue fairies don’t exist”, the breadth of that statement is universal, while the positive (opposing) side of that argument, i.e. “blue fairies do exist” only has to be shown to exist in one place in the universe to be correct and to simultaneously prove the “negative proposition” incorrect.

Another example of this type is the proposition that man and dinosaur never interacted.


http://s8int.com/WordPress/?p=2821

Let's count the ways that this is flawed :

1. Little dolls do not equal proof that living dinosaurs and humans co-existed.
2. Complaining about "Darwinism" is a dead giveaway for a less than intelligent piece of writing.
3. Including that the dolls are believed to come from "South Atlantis" adds in an extra level of fantasy to the article.

Shall I continue?


#11    Pax Unum

Pax Unum

    < 420 Conspirator >

  • Member
  • 18,862 posts
  • Joined:06 Feb 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Suburbia

  • "It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it." - Aristotle

Posted 08 June 2011 - 02:26 PM

A creationist blog, sources from the 30's, debunked/explainable 'evidence'... How could anyone have doubts?  :innocent:


#12    Soul Kitchen

Soul Kitchen

    El Lobo

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,990 posts
  • Joined:27 Dec 2010
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:California

Posted 08 June 2011 - 07:24 PM

View PostGoodnite, on 07 June 2011 - 07:25 PM, said:

I don't think that finding a few likenesses of dinos in ancient art qualifies as proving this theory. It be like 50,000 years from now finding footage of "I, Robot" to prove we had robots abounding in our society. :wacko:
But it's different making up something that coincidentally existed in the past, rather than something that is foreseeable in the future.

Life is too short to waste on responsibilities. :)

#13    Soul Kitchen

Soul Kitchen

    El Lobo

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,990 posts
  • Joined:27 Dec 2010
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:California

Posted 08 June 2011 - 07:26 PM

View PostWookietim, on 08 June 2011 - 02:11 PM, said:

3. Including that the dolls are believed to come from "South Atlantis" adds in an extra level of fantasy to the article.
LOL
I missed that part

Life is too short to waste on responsibilities. :)

#14    Wookietim

Wookietim

    Alien Abducter

  • Member
  • 4,908 posts
  • Joined:16 Apr 2007
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Kirkland, WA

  • Search on the Android App Store for "Mothras Unexplained Mysteries" for the app I am very proud of...

Posted 08 June 2011 - 07:28 PM

View PostSoul Kitchen, on 08 June 2011 - 07:26 PM, said:

LOL
I missed that part

Well, you know, it's best of get artifacts from South Atlantis rather than the lower rent North Atlantis...


#15    Soul Kitchen

Soul Kitchen

    El Lobo

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,990 posts
  • Joined:27 Dec 2010
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:California

Posted 08 June 2011 - 07:33 PM

View PostWookietim, on 08 June 2011 - 07:28 PM, said:

Well, you know, it's best of get artifacts from South Atlantis rather than the lower rent North Atlantis...
Yeah. North Atlantis has never been that appealing.
My friend got mugged there once.

Life is too short to waste on responsibilities. :)




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users