Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 2
Harsh86_Patel

Did man and dinosaur co-exist?

478 posts in this topic

Even if, radiocarbon dating is unreliable with samples over 62,000 years, by then dinos were fossil already.

Says who?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If modern humans had lived at the same time as the dinosaurs, humans would have gone the way of the dinosaurs.

And we would have found more than just same vague human-looking tracks crossing dinosaur tracks, we would have found fossilized human remains in the same layers as where the dinosaur bones were found.

And if humans lived back then, so did all the present mammals and other animals. Elephants and hippos would soon have been whiped out by T-Rex and his family.

.

who says we didn't find human remains located in the same time period?Our mainstreamers just tried to rationalize it by calling it burials or hoaxs. Who says T-rex was so efficient? Mammals did exist along with dinos no challenging that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Creationism has far more

only whole creationism has if you can consider it a whole is 'who?'........

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry but creationist websites are highly unreliable where impartiality and critical thinking are concerned IMO.

So are Dogma throwing, Gospel quoting, evolutionists but you don't seem to have a problem with that..........check the references and read the information provided and evaluate it using your native intelligence............if alchemist can also be scientists (Newton) why can't valid information be found on creationist sites?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If I am correct, birds are the evolved form of the original feathered dinosaurs a.k.a. the theropod dinosaurs. Hence, man and dinos co-exist even today!

What proof you have that birds are evolved from dinos? Archeopetryx is no more accepted as the link.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Says who?

What do you mean says who, are you going to try to preach to us about something you evidently cannot bring arguable arguments for?

We get enough of that at church, thank you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What do you mean says who, are you going to try to preach to us about something you evidently cannot bring arguable arguments for?

We get enough of that at church, thank you.

If you still go you should probably listen to a few aspects

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What proof you have that birds are evolved from dinos? Archeopetryx is no more accepted as the link.

Ah, that's true, more or less.

Check "China" & "Bird evolution".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What proof you have that birds are evolved from dinos? Archeopetryx is no more accepted as the link.

I believe birds are the only animals on Earth that have feathers.

Here is a list of dinosaur species preserved with evidence of feathers. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Feathered_dinosaur

  1. Archaeopteryx lithographica (1861; possibly avialan)[12][13]
  2. Avimimus portentosus (inferred 1987: quill knobs)[14][15]
  3. Wellnhoferia grandis (1988; possibly avialan)[13][16]
  4. Pelecanimimus polydon? (1994)[17]
  5. Sinosauropteryx prima (1996)[18]
  6. Protarchaeopteryx robusta (1997)[19]
  7. GMV 2124 (1997)[20]
  8. Caudipteryx zoui (1998)[21]
  9. Rahonavis ostromi (inferred 1998: quill knobs; possibly avialan[22])[23]
  10. Shuvuuia deserti (1999)[1]
  11. Sinornithosaurus millenii (1999)[24]
  12. Beipiaosaurus inexpectus (1999)[25]
  13. Caudipteryx dongi (2000)[26]
  14. Caudipteryx sp. (2000)[27]
  15. Microraptor zhaoianus (2000)[28]
  16. Nomingia gobiensis (inferred 2000: pygostyle)[29]
  17. NGMC 91 (2001)[30]
  18. Psittacosaurus sp.? (2002)[31]
  19. Yixianosaurus longimanus (2003)[32]
  20. Dilong paradoxus (2004)[33]
  21. Sinornithosaurus haoiana (2004)[34]
  22. Pedopenna daohugouensis (2005; possibly avialan[35])[36]
  23. Jinfengopteryx elegans (2005)[37][38]
  24. Juravenator starki (2006)[39][40]
  25. Sinocalliopteryx gigas (2007)[41]
  26. Velociraptor mongoliensis (inferred 2007: quill knobs)[5]
  27. Similicaudipteryx yixianensis (inferred 2008: pygostyle; confirmed 2010)[42][43]
  28. Anchiornis huxleyi (2009)[44]
  29. Tianyulong confuciusi? (2009)[45]
  30. Concavenator corcovatus? (inferred 2010: quill knobs?)[46]
  31. Xiaotingia zhengi (2011)[13]
  32. Yutyrannus huali (2012)[47]
  33. Microraptor hanqingi (2012)[48]
  34. Sciurumimus albersdoerferi (2012)[49]

What do you think the reason dinosaurs would have feathers if they weren't in the process of evolving into birds?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you still go you should probably listen to a few aspects

Yep, like there is a saddle that Adam used to ride a Dino.

If I go it is because somebody I respect values my going to a function. For me they could close the things as popular-dumbing-down institutions.

Edited by questionmark

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

potassium argon dating is highly erroneous and inaccurate and stupid.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/K%E2%80%93Ar_dating

Can you give as a link to a scientific paper (not funded by a Creationist organisation) about that?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A question, Hash, since you appear not to accept evolution theory:

Can you explain to me why ceteceans (whales and dolphins) have rudimentairy hip bones and hind-limb bones?

http://etb-whales.bl...hales_1221.html

.

Edited by Abramelin
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry but creationist websites are highly unreliable where impartiality and critical thinking are concerned IMO.

So are Dogma throwing, Gospel quoting, evolutionists but you don't seem to have a problem with that..........check the references and read the information provided and evaluate it using your native intelligence............if alchemist can also be scientists (Newton) why can't valid information be found on creationist sites?

I'm looking real hard but can't seem to see where I said valid information couldn't be found. Perhaps you can quote and highlight the text I seem to be missing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If modern humans had lived at the same time as the dinosaurs, humans would have gone the way of the dinosaurs.

And we would have found more than just same vague human-looking tracks crossing dinosaur tracks, we would have found fossilized human remains in the same layers as where the dinosaur bones were found.

And if humans lived back then, so did all the present mammals and other animals. Elephants and hippos would soon have been whiped out by T-Rex and his family.

There is scientific proof the dinosaurs died off after an impact of an asteroid in Yucatan, maybe in combination with the climatic changes and poisonous gasses caused by the volcanic eruptions and lava flows of/in the Deccan Traps.

They have found layers of ash (impact) that form a boundary: below it they found dinosaur fossils, above it no dinosaur fossils (and yes, I know, some dinosaurs lingered on for thousands of years after the impact before they went extinct).

If you believe we humans lived then, why are we still here?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SbXDRJtL3d8

.

Edited by Abramelin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What proof you have that birds are evolved from dinos? Archeopetryx is no more accepted as the link.

Whoa! Did I actually make any claims about birds being dinosaurs? What I said was, and I quote, "If I am correct, birds are the evolved form of the original feathered dinosaurs a.k.a. the theropod dinosaurs. Hence, man and dinos co-exist even today!". I also did say that I was a real wolf in an earlier post. Dude, asking people to prove everything they say, whether it's an individual view according to one's understanding and knowledge for the sake of a conversation or just something said for the sake of humor, could be pretty dull and boring. Don't you think? Okay, so what, even if I was right or wrong in that birds aren't dinosaurs? Who cares? Oh, wait... you do! Haha.

BTW, just so you know, (and I am no expert), but having feathers is said to be, in itself, a distinctive feature of some of the dinosaurs of some (blah, blah) period. But that's just what I had read somewhere at some point of my life, and I do not desire nor intend to contest it in any way. I sincerely suggest you visit a museum. I wish you good luck with that... :tu:

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You know Martin Mystere? Im impressed. Yes it was great comic. Nostalgic avatar to me. I remember careless childhood.

Where are you from?

Java was from Mongolia. Thats why I like him even more.

Let me guess you are Mongolian? I loved the ancient war between Mu and Atlantis that shaped our world into existence. Martin that keep stumbling on thise ancient remains and technology and sometimes they are still active. You have no idea how much that made me dream in my teens. Anyways we can continue with PM's. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Whoa! Did I actually make any claims about birds being dinosaurs? What I said was, and I quote, "If I am correct, birds are the evolved form of the original feathered dinosaurs a.k.a. the theropod dinosaurs. Hence, man and dinos co-exist even today!". I also did say that I was a real wolf in an earlier post. Dude, asking people to prove everything they say, whether it's an individual view according to one's understanding and knowledge for the sake of a conversation or just something said for the sake of humor, could be pretty dull and boring. Don't you think? Okay, so what, even if I was right or wrong in that birds aren't dinosaurs? Who cares? Oh, wait... you do! Haha.

BTW, just so you know, (and I am no expert), but having feathers is said to be, in itself, a distinctive feature of some of the dinosaurs of some (blah, blah) period. But that's just what I had read somewhere at some point of my life, and I do not desire nor intend to contest it in any way. I sincerely suggest you visit a museum. I wish you good luck with that... :tu:

After a century of hypotheses without conclusive evidence, well-preserved fossils of feathered dinosaurs were discovered during the 1990s, and more continue to be found. The fossils were preserved in a Lagerstätte — a sedimentary deposit exhibiting remarkable richness and completeness in its fossils — in Liaoning, China. The area had repeatedly been smothered in volcanic ash produced by eruptions in Inner Mongolia 124 million years ago, during the Early Cretaceous Period. The fine-grained ash preserved the living organisms that it buried in fine detail. The area was teeming with life, with millions of leaves, angiosperms (the oldest known), insects, fish, frogs, salamanders, mammals, turtles, and lizards discovered to date.

The most important discoveries at Liaoning have been a host of feathered dinosaur fossils, with a steady stream of new finds filling in the picture of the dinosaur-bird connection and adding more to theories of the evolutionary development of feathers and flight. Norell et al. (2007) reported quill knobs from an ulna of Velociraptor mongoliensis, and these are strongly correlated with large and well-developed secondary feathers.

A nesting Citipati osmolskae specimen, at the AMNH.Behavioural evidence, in the form of an oviraptorosaur on its nest, showed another link with birds. Its forearms were folded, like those of a bird. Although no feathers were preserved, it is likely that these would have been present to insulate eggs and juveniles.

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

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks Abramelin... You saved my lazy a$$ of the trouble! lol.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks Abramelin... You saved my lazy a$$ of the trouble! lol.

Birds... they are my thing. Well, corvids, actually.

No problems here, I didn't 'correct ' you, I only added.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There is so much logic in the evolution theory, that it never fails to amaze me that there are still people around who think some 4000 years old religious book knows better.

If that was true, we would still be cursing/fearing the 'gods' for thunder and lightning instead of inventing electrical machines.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There is so much logic in the evolution theory, that it never fails to amaze me that there are still people around who think some 4000 years old religious book knows better.

If that was true, we would still be cursing/fearing the 'gods' for thunder and lightning instead of inventing electrical machines.

Doubt it is 4000 years old, more like 3-3500, and then in a completely different version.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Doubt it is 4000 years old, more like 3-3500, and then in a completely different version.

Heh, then I am only 500 years off, and that without radio-carbon dating.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There is so much logic in the evolution theory, that it never fails to amaze me that there are still people around who think some 4000 years old religious book knows better.

If that was true, we would still be cursing/fearing the 'gods' for thunder and lightning instead of inventing electrical machines.

The theory of evolution is itself 150 years old and all it's surface appeal is replaced by glaring questions as biology has progressed leaps and bounds.The theory of evolution has to fight for it's life with every new discovery in modern biology.

http://www.ridgenet....sage/v5i10f.htm

http://scienceagains...info/topics.htm

http://www.newgeolog...entation32.html

Also ask any evolutionist to point out any instance where life has been created from non-living objects under any laboratory conditions.'Spontaneous and random creation of life' is a concept on which the whole theory is built........it states that the first life came into existence randomly under natural circumstances and then evolved.All of this has no proof at all.Until life is created artificially i will reserve my doubts about evolution.

Edited by Harsh86_Patel

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Evolution has nothing to do with how life came into being,

It's, like the word says, about 'evolving'.

So you can ask an evolutionist about it, and you will get an educated guess. That's all.

Anyway, evolution theory is a theory based on finds and science, it's an ongoing discovery, and no doubt the theory will be refined, get some adaptations.

That's far different from using an old book that is at most 3500 or 4000 years old.

.

Edited by Abramelin
2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 2

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.