Maybe you should do some research as to how many fully intact dinosaur skeletons have been found. Moreover you should do a bit of research as to how one gets from a skeleton to an accurate representation of a living dinosaur. Afterwards you can tell me if you like the odds.
Could you please source all these photos? Or did you just type "dinosaur sculptures" into google images? It's hard to believe the claim you give in the description of the video when you don't source.
This is not a video about the bible, it simply contains evidence that dinosaurs may have lived in the same era as man. You are playing the Association Fallacy here.
@TracyKrauss and what about the artifacts the don't look like any known dinosaurs that also can't be coincidence D: gassssspppp! I want you to feel that sacasim and let it even sink in a little
So dinosaurs and man lived together like the creationists state, if so then why aren't there any fossils of man and dinosaur in the same layer. Here is my response, maybe they are there, but we have not found then yet, or maybe they were found, but we are not being told about it.
@identifymenot why do you say that, how can you prove that there are no fossils of man and dinosaur together. only like not even a half of a percent of the land has been dugged up for fossils. That means 99 and a half percent has not, to say that there are no such fossils out there is really unwise to make.
yes it is stupid to assume dinosaurs and man lived together even though there is a 10 million year gap between them (carbon dating) and why would they hide it from us maybe its because they haven't found any because they didn't live together and your a total jackass
@identifymenot is there proof that they didn't. Millions of years difference is not proof. Many animals though to be extincted the coelacanth is an example.
@identifymenot how can you know that for sure, when not even close to half of the land has been dug up for fossils. What makes you radioactive dating is so reliable.
@DerektheDuctTape because humans evolved 10 million years after dinosaurs and i think carbon dating is more reliable than a dusty old kids story book (yes i mean the bible)
@identifymenot Radioactive dating is nothing but based on assumptions, it assumes the rate never changed, it assumes that there were no daughter elements present when the rock or fossil was created, it assumes that it was totally a closed system. It also assumes the rock never broken off. None of such can be proven, so it is nothing but assumptions.
@DerektheDuctTape no carbon dating is measuring the amount of carbon absorbed by the bone tissue and then cross referanced with the geological time period (i.e. triassic 200 million years ago) so that we can tell how old the creature/plant is nothing to do with radiation
Carbon dating is only reliable up to 50-60 thousand years, and if you watched the entire video, you would have seen the footprints of both man and dinosaur fossilized in the same layer. If dinosaurs and man evolved 10 million years apart, then why was a 40 million year old coelacanth found in 1937? I would not be surprised at all if scientists discovered a living dinosaur today, as it would only be another of the many hundreds of living fossils that defy evolution.
@u3190 wheres your real evidence a dusty old fairy tale book, sorry but go back to school dinosaurs 10 million years ago humans 2.5 million years ago you do the maths.
the earth is constantly shifting due to convection currents in the earth's mantle which can make the layers shift.
or dumb people like you mistook the footprints for humans to back up your stupid theories
@DerektheDuctTape no i'm saying DUMB jackass's like you could easily mistake a dinosaur footprint for a human footprint and shifting earth layers is basic geography now read a n encyclopedia and you'll find out when dinosaurs lived
@identifymenot how has that been observed, that dinosaurs and man never lived togehter was anyone there? How do you explain how every culture have either legends, drawing, artifacts, of creatures that resemble dinosaurs. How did they all come up with coincidentally the same creatures. Only logical explanation is that have seen them. These things were dinosaurs that they saw. I want to hear your explanation Mr. Scientist.
@DerektheDuctTape no there wasn't anybody there and not every culture has artifacts of them they are nearly all from the same culture aztects didn't nor did the ancient egyptains and greeks and if we did live together why are there no bones with the artifacts its human nature to kill for food, defence or just glory and there were plenty of dinosaurs to defend from, no skulls no tales of battles with them answer that mr. preacher
@identifymenot there are accounts of people battling Dragons. Remember the word dinosaur was not invented until just before the civil war, so they called it something else, the word is Dragon. The Modern description of dragon was not put together until the late 1800's. The earlier descriptions of dragons do resemble dinosaurs. So there are even accounts of many dinosaurs being alive today.
@DerektheDuctTape thw word dinosaur is ancient greek so probably invented before your god was even thought of and do you seriously believe anyone who claims t have seen a dinosaur and the battles where are the trophies of battle or dinosaur skeletons by human civilisations
Go back to school? You are verbally abusing me like a child and yet you claim to be the mature one? I laughed at your efforts to blame earthquakes on conflicting scientific discoveries. What ever happened to taking the evidence in a non-bias mindset? This is almost as good as Hubble admitting his atheism caused him to invent the cosmological theory. And you also ignored everything I said about the coelacanth. Would you please reply to this living fossil topic?
@u3190 wait your the mature one yet you believe dinosaurs and man lived together and i laugh at your efforts to convince people dinosaurs and man lived together by showing a few stone carvings of what seem to be dinosaurs come on the greeks had statues of all their gods and their mythology doesn't meaan they exist, plus we found the bones and carbon dated them to way before our time (over 300 million years ago)
... May I ask a third time. Would you please reply to the living fossil topic. Scientists believed that the coelacanth lived approximately 400 million years ago. They found one in 1937. Yet you insist that it would be impossible for a dinosaur to live with man. Also, may I remind you a second time that carbon dating is only valid up to the 50-60 thousand year range. I noticed you didn't verbally abuse me that time, you are learning, well done :)
@u3190 coelacanth is a species not a spesific creature so the re-discovered one wasn't the same as the ancient ones like sharks who have been around for billions of years not the same sharks but the same species, and being up to 50-60 thousand year range proves the age of the earth to be above 6000.
i'm going to take a wild stab and guess your from USA, and i think i've learnt enough when i know just when dinosaurs existed
It says on my profile that I'm Australian, and you still didn't explain why the species did not evolve into a different species. Some species today micro-evolve more in 100 years than the coelacanth did in 400 billion years. I never claimed to know the age of the earth but dating is done by running the clock backwards. It is assumed that the clock has never sped up, slowed down, lost time, and the clock started at 0. There is no "proof" with the age of the earth, only speculation.
My view is that people SAW these creatures...you don't have simutanious fantasy without origin of truth...personally glad that were wiped out..don't want one of those running around any neighborhood....
wooow guess what! those "artifact" was discovered by guy who keept it by himself and he newer gave theme in public to be examed ofc he have it in his home but look funny part:
he discover theme
he keep theme in his "private collection"
he never let scientists exame theme he keep theme for himself
now you tell me do you realy believe in this shit?
How old we don't know but we know enough that they occurred in ancient history where they would have needed an animal they saw to produce this..I at first was sceptical but now convinced somehow and somehwere people saw these creatures in order to make their pottery , motiffs etc...could all these seperated societies have had the same "myth"...any objective person...without a predisposed view would accept many socieities saw dragons..IE dinosaurs.
@u3190 Good question...also lots of fish we now can see on the deep ocean floor look like something out of a prehistoric nightmare....Glad we're all on the surface of the earth....also good the dragon/dinos were killed off...wouldn't want any of those chasing anyone while we are walking our dog. :)
@u3190 The coelacanth is a good example but its not a dinosaur its a fish that did live even before dinosaurs humans however did not come into existence until much later there are other animals or ancestors of certain animals and plants and insects that did live in the dinosaurs time but there werent many mamals. The cyclops idea came from mammoth bones and of course the chinese who were grounding up iguanadon bones thought they were making dragon powder. these 'monster' bones were always found
@warangel87 people historically have saw thebones of ancient creatures and they came up with all kinds of ideas uses and works of arts fossils have been being discovered since we existed but there is no documentation by any human of a living dinosaur and don't bring up Job because there is to this day still theological debate on if it was real or just a parable and the frikkin leviathan and behomoth are comparable to modern day animals. to use the bible as you would a text book is allout wrong
you know whats funny, the guy claiming these are thousands of years old said that he sent all of these in to be radiocarbon dated and the lab confirmed his beliefs. and if you know litterally anything about carbon dating, is that you cant carbon date something that isnt living or was living at somepoint, pottery has no carbon 14 therefore carbon dating would have been impossible
Some of those drawings can be explained but some of them are also explicitly look like Dinosaurs! I suppose the arguement against this would be perhaps some people dug up bones of these ancient animals and portrayed them as art.....though that is a little week considering how accurate some of these drawings are!
Okay, this is just funny. Man has imagined monsters since time immemorial and scrawled them on walls. (He still does, they're called movies) Ancient maps showed dragons at the edges of the earth. Science proved there was no edge and therefore no dragons.Ancient gods used to be depicted as changing into animals. These 'artifacts' are no different. It used to be that those who believed in 'dinosaurs' like the Loch Ness monster was proof you were a nut. Times have changed, now science is the liar
In a previous video the man asked how it was possible for dinosaur drawings, carvings, etc. to have been made unless the people actually witnessed these creatures for themselves? I'll answer that question with another question:
"How was it possible for Moses to have written the book of Genesis if he was not alive at the time to have been an eyewitness to any of those events, either?"
@odinata im gonna tell it like it is... bitch please do some research before speaking your closed mind.. your mind is not even capable of realizing the possibility's reality.. that being said their are ancient paintings and artifacts depicting dinosaurs.. they must of seen them otherwise how in the world would they know about them and how they look.. and pls pls don't say because they found skeleton remains or im gonna really let it all lose lol..
whats the point of spending your effort if all you do is whine and call each other bitches? Your entitled to your opinions but don't spout diarrhea and expect to change lives. Besides, even if the ica stones and all the paintings are somehow fake, what would be the difference between finding a dinosaur and finding the coelacanth? There would be none, so there is no point of this video other than to generate discussion,which you both lack the skills to do so.
Evo-atheists love to say all the Ica stones are fakes,but they forget you can't fake the patina.Man and Dinos certainly lived together,no doubt about it.
what's with the noise in the ending? But do they live today as well? Ahh yesm the big flood, killed everyone except a happy family on an ark. So Noah told his children to reproduce. Them brothers and sisters were all fucking each other?? Wow, we are some product. We are fucking inbreeds??? what the fuck man?
@u3190 yah but after that it would be cusens fucking cusens if not there oun siblings aunts uncals and or grand parents. lisen to the song "i'm my own grandpa" and ull get how fucked up it can all get
If your talking about inbreeding directly after the first humans, then yes that would be the case. There would be little or no genetic disorders though, as the first humans were genetically perfect, and genetics would have little or no effect on their children. Today however, approx 100-200 generations later, inbreeding causes large genetic problems in the children due to genetic degeneration. The law forbidding marriage between close relatives was not given until the time of Moses.
@u3190 but if they were geneticly purfect every 1 would be identical and no mater who bred with who thered be no mutations in the geens. im starting to see how some many of my christon friends didnt know how evolution truly works
2>) I know exactly how evolution works, but I can see where your coming from and it's because you are ignorant to some of Christianity's beliefs. The first humans were perfect, then they chose to leave God and entered a world of sin. They were no longer perfect and genetic degeneration set in. Today genetic disorders are becoming increasingly common. To put it simply, we were and are on a landslide from perfect to deformed.
The type of Evolution which increases genetic complexity with a positive outcome has never been recorded in history (this is necessary for the origin of species via evolution to occur) We have only seen the loss of genetic information with both positive and negative consequences. If you simply Google: "genetic degeneration" you will find out what I'm talking about.
@u3190 yes it has. evolution is nearly identical to breeding and if u look at all the dogs that we forsed wolves to evolve into ull see that positive genetic diversafication hapones. more over humans r degrading coss we breed willy nilly and nothing is killing off the weeker members of our speshes. in nacher the week and sikly die and thuse dont get to pass on there flaws. this puts us in a moral dalema. equolity and health cair r great but its also slowly killing us
Its almost as if you ignored half of what I wrote! Ill type it again for you. The TYPE of Evolution which increases genetic complexity with a positive outcome has never been recorded in history. Positive genetic degeneration happens (micro-evolution), I said that in my last comment.
Every species on earth is degenerating, with both positive and negative outcomes. Its true that natural selection doesn't apply to us in the western world, but natural selection is not evolution.
You need to understand that I'm debating the origins of species via evolution, not micro-evolution. Micro-evolution is what you have given an example of, and the only form of micro-evolution observed have been losses of genetic information, also known as genetic degeneration, which is what I have been talking about. Theres no point in trying to explain this to you when its already out there. Check your private inbox for the link im sending you
@u3190 darwinean evolution IS natral salection. many people in the riliges comunity dont get that fack. if u reed Daerwins books u see that small changes (micro evolution) bilds up over generations and thus speshes r born. i see know that we had a little miss understanding do to samantics. yes it hasent been recorded activly. but there is strong evedance to saport genetike diversifacation. praticulerly in the cambrean peariad were life began. the degradation might be do to botalnecking.
@u3190 oh im sorry! i just like having conversations. i dont trole promis. im not even arguing. i thout of it more like a debate. we can stop if u like.
Basically all the info you need is in that link i gave you, so there's no point trying to explain it. Just read the page and you'll understand. Im not debating genetic diversification either by the way, Im debating the increase in complexity required by macro-evolution, and the constant decrease of complexity we see all the time today. Its basically the law of entropy. Well im busy developing a website right now, so well talk later.
@u3190 Which form of rock dating is claimed to be the most accurate, and what are your comments on that process? How are they wrong? You can send me links or videos if you wish.
You don't think I can detect a troll when I see one? You're obviously a troll. I won't continue the conversation because, well... I feel that you're coming on to me. Just the way you... say and describe things. You're just some sort of hypersexual freak. It's as if you can't wait to whip out your dick. It's disturbing me. This is why I feel I shouldn't respond.
Take it easy, bud. Just make sure you don't carry out your uncontrollable urges in public.
You MUST know a lot about trolling if you have a video suggesting dinosaurs and man coexisted. Either that or you're some insane nigger. If the most important rule isn't to compromise yourself, why DID YOU JUST DO IT? You have absolutely no idea how good of a troll I am. The majority of the time if someone even knows what a troll is, they don't notice my name. You're fake and gay.
I am not a troll, and you are proving my point by using the term "fake and gay". A nice day it is. And by the way, maybe you should check out ED's article on trolling. That might help your future failures to possibly come close to success.
I wasn't even trolling on this video. You're either a troll or some fag who thinks the earth is 6,000 years-old. I KNOW you're a troll. There's no way that you read Encyclopedia Dramatica and are like this. The only time where you saw me speak was on your video, so how can you judge if I've failed and will continue to fail?
Ugh, I don't feel like retyping all of this faggotry. Examine yourself and the conversation. You will find some fail, I'm sure. Even in the most seemingly perfect person, on a different note.
there is a major flaw with your theory, mankind has been recording history since around the last ice age, if mankind saw dinosaurs, where did they go? They couldnt have drastically evolved because that would take millions of years and if with man, why isnt there ONE fossil that shows any dinosaurs lived after 60 millions years ago
"this video is gay" without giving a reason.'' REASON>>
Dinosaurs were the dominant terrestrial vertebrates for over 160 million years, from the late Triassic period (about 230 million years ago) until the end of the Cretaceous period (about 65 million years ago), when the Cretaceous–Tertiary extinction event caused the extinction of most dinosaur species, except for some birds.
I seen that horned monkey with cats legs on that wall in Thailand next to the "Stegosaurus" So is that proof horned cat legged horned monkeys once ruled the world? Creationism is pokemon on steroids
I have been through this type of discussion already. There is no skeleton of a horned monkey with cat legs in a museum. Your logic is not thought through.
@u3190 I've been through hundreds of these types of credulous comments. and there is on that wall that creationists claim there is a stegosaurus a horned monkey with cats legs You're obviously ashamed what creationists believe I never said it was in a museum I said it was in a temple in Thailand watch?v=9tvJRtGRtFc
Again, taking your logic to be true, that must also mean that monkeys, deer, water buffalo, parrots, etc... must also be made up creatures. And please answer me this, If a real dinosaur was found alive today... how would that be any different to the Coelacanth which is thought to predate dinosaurs?
@u3190 "Again, taking your logic to be true, that must also mean that / etc"
I'm not the one making the claim that drawings are proof. We not only have fossils of deer, monkeys, etc but we have living examples and not just pictures.
" today... how would that be any different to the Coelacanth"
You don't understand evolution. A life form that is well adapted to its surroundings will not evolve into another form since its adaptations will actually be maladaptive
Don't take me as an ignorant when you don't even know me. I have heard that answer many times before but it has no foundation. It works in a textbook but not in reality. An environment cannot stay exactly the same for 410 million years. That is asking for the impossible. And can you please answer my question:
Since you don't understand evolution I can only say that without the genes of the original fossils we can only look at morphological similarities. It would be foolish to state that they didn't evolve in some way, but there is no way to tell without the genes. Now when we see animals and insects trapped in amber we can tell for a fact that they have evolved in many different ways other than morphology alone even though they look similar.
honestly, I would rather end this discussion as you are arrogant, but I am going to reply to you to see how this ends. Just because I disagree with your opinion does not mean I am ignorant. Can you please comprehend that, however hard that is for you. Of course any species would genetically evolve to adapt in a short period of time (such as the Galapagos Finches) but there is an enormous difference between lets say... 50 years and 400,000,000 years.
"Just because I disagree with your opinion does not mean I am ignorant."
No the fact that you don't know how evolution works makes you ignorant. "Ignorant" actually means something it's not a curse word.
"but there is an enormous difference between lets say... 50 years and 400,000,000 years."
So you can walk ten feet but not a mile? Organisms have been shown to evolve over short term processes It's severely dishonest to say they cannot evolve over longer spans of time.
The fact is that in that time period, it SHOULD have morphologically evolved into something drastically different, such as an elephant, but it didn't. Physically, the coelacanth looks almost identical to its distant relative which supposedly lived approximately 400 million years ago. Its environment would have changed as new predators evolved, ice-ages passed by, etc. And the Coelacanth is just the start. Why don't you research other living fossils and explain them all for me?
@wisefreethinker242 Yes this is real, discoveries like this have been made all over the world like Peru and there Inca stones that show depictions of what looks like a man being attacked by a dinosaur. To much evidence in to many places around the world to say people saw a skeleton and drew pictures. Do dismiss this as fake is ignorant and borderline stupid.
@gregrutz "HA HA HA." Makes me think you are in some dark underground layer rubbing your hands together saying yes, yes. These discoveries could have been true or fake. But if true, which according to you you are not, might be the biggest discoveries known to man. And no, I don't believe there was a global flood. I am in no religion. I'm betting your an atheist, most of which are as ignorant as their religious counterparts. And if you are so smart, give me your opinion on the big idea.
@crest2598 Dinosaurs were the dominant terrestrial vertebrates for over 160 million years, from the late Triassic period (about 230 million years ago) until the end of the Cretaceous period (about 65 million years ago), when the Cretaceous–Tertiary extinction event caused the extinction of most dinosaur species, except for some birds.
Give logic to your comment. I hate it when people post something like "this video is gay" without giving a reason. If your serious and not trolling you will do this.
@u3190 because a pretty sculpture of a dragon does not make a scientific proof.
in england about 1000 years ago, we found a mixture of different fossils (amonites and the like) and proclaimed them to be parts of demons.
we also found large fossilised bones and said they must belong to giants or dragons
if you're an anciant civilisation and you find a fossil dino, you're going realise it belonged to somthing frightening and the imagination will run wild. hence the fire breathing and flying
What about all the proof that dinosaurs DIDN'T live with man. Such as fossils that date millions of years back. Such as there being no human remains from millions of years back. Surely this out-weighs some random persons video on youtube that probably isn't even legitimate.
Moist tissue found in dinosaur bones(seems like it might've dried out after 65 million years?), dragons in every culture, human footprints next to dinosaur prints, a large amount of pottery and figurines in central and South America, the carved stone dinosaur on a temple in Cambodia.
Still not enough evidence?
Yikes! The public schools have some powerful brainwashing techniques if people still do not believe in a young Earth.
And Ehud reached with his left hand, took the sword from his right thigh, and thrust it into his belly. And the hilt also went in after the blade, and the fat closed over the blade, for he did not pull the sword out of his belly; and the dung came out
Yes, they sound stupid when you read the individual verses. I wish verses were never invented. I could those two verses together and make a doctrine where it is holy to have fat horse sex. There is no point in reading an individual verse unless your going to read at least a chapter and research it in its context. The Bible is a historical book, so do you think a historian would just read small parts and take it literally in modern terms?
u3190-- The Bible is a historical book-- The Old Testament is a concoction of the most bizarre, cruel, childish,immoral stories. Anyone, who reads it like any other book certainly will be agnostic or atheist.
Exactly, unfortunately people like to be told what to do by liars and don't research truth on their own. they just like to debunk like mindless idiots.
@u3190 Did god ever say or even suggest that you have to study his word, to find the correct meaning ? What about those who don`t have the mental capacities to study ? As our pastor said in his homily about a year ago. The bible is no science book, no history book, but a book of faith.
Yet she increased her prostitution, remembering the days of her youth when she engaged in prostitution in the land of Egypt. She lusted after their genitals as large as those of donkeys, and their seminal emission was as strong as that of stallions
Creation should be taught the way it really happened. God blew his bad breath(no toothpaste yet) over a clump of mud and it came alive and upright. All was good. Question remains, did Adam have a penis ? Because Eve was only created when Adam felt lonely and complained about it. This is a problem for theologians. What if god had given Adam a computer, and he never had felt lonely, what would have happened ?
wauft Fake, and even should it be right(which it is not) you draw impossible conclusions from it. How does that prove that at one point ALL the different animals and man lived together.
Evolution: the most wonderful, simple, effcient process of man`s ascend. Evolution is all around us. Imagine being created perfect and remain static for all genreations.
liz: not fake and does prove it true. shows that there was a simulateous creation event in which all the different kinds of animals were created in a period of time which allowed evidence that man and dinosaurs lived together
It kinda takes the basis off from your claim that all pictures are "ancient artifact. None of these are fake." when for example the ica stones (around 0:52-1:05) have been proven as forgeries. After that it's useless to believe that any one of them are legit just because you say they are. I would argue that you haven't bothered to check the authenticity of these "artifacts" yourself thus your claim loses all validity.
Using fake evidence is very typical of the Young Earth creationist. there is nothing they won't stoop to in order to provide evidence to their fraudulent pseudoscience
did you know that a carbon-dating was done on a live mussel which was 2 years old...and the result came back that it was over 23,000 (give or take) thousand years old?
so you cant say that Creationists use fake evidence, because the very method used by evolutionists is wrong!
I read that in a Christian book when I was 15. They said the mussel was dipped in carbon 13. There is no liquid called carbon 13, it's a dating method , not a liquid. That proves they didn't know what they were talking about. It's funny the church is still spewing out the same ol tired lies.
watch?v=QbvMB57evy4 Watch this and come back after you understand something LitTeyla09. Besides the quotemine you are using states that they were 2,300 years, Not 23,000 years old and if you would have bothered using google or even youtube search, you would have found out why it was so and how it doesn't qualify as an argument. And my guess is that next time you will still use the same mollusk shell argument again. Creationist arguments: Strawmen, lies, quotemining, scripture and flawed logic.
Using FAKE idea like theory of evolution is typical for young DUMB kid like you...There is nothing they wont stop to in order to provide evidence to fraud to make money...And make us believe qwe came from MONKEYS HAHAHAHHAH
@emsing2001 -science reasons and doesnt make up excuses for everything the way Christians do. The thoery of evolution is sound. All the other sciences back it up. Geology, astromy, genetics all back up evolution. Theres a mountan of evidence for evolution.
You just said science back it up...Back it up with what? How? Thats the thing.. I can become a doctor without studying theory of evolution which has nothing to do with science...IM asking you HOW? well, it has never ever been proven..Maybe a long time ago people are to impressed of theory of evolution but, now people study and analyze it and found nothing to connect theory of evolution absolutely nothing... SORRY
@emsing2001 pick up a book Sherlock. There tons of evidence . Evolution isnt a real theory anymore it's acepted fact in the scientific community. Evolution has nothing to do with sciecne? It is a science.
This video is absurd. If dinosuars lived with man why do we find dinosuar bones in layers that are way under the layers we find modern man in? Also what are those fossils that we find which are neither man or ape? What are they? Creationists are the only ones saying there is no evolution.
I am not a member of the creationist society..But, I am a christian and I study medicine also architecture...When I was 13 years old school teaches us theory of evolution whcih now as I grow up it has nothing to do with science anymore its a fairy tale monkeys turned in man a pure bullshit...The thing that bothers me why learn theory that doesnt even prove a thing and my family paid for my tuition...also others pay ther taxes becasue of thta fairy tale theory..I want my money back!
Evolution can be science if it is proven.....Hell where are the proof? the FOSSILS? OFCOURSE they are proof of FLOOD they drowned and turned to FOSSILS hellow! HAHAHAHH... Prove evolution using science if you can..OH you cant can you?
well the layer which you state about the time of the dinosaur people found temple and a hammer, a gold bell and a pottry..So are you saying DINOSAURS used hammer? that is the most dumbest theory I ever heard... They also found a wheel of a chariot...So are you saying DINOSAURS ride CHARIOTS?
i see a bible word...
i just want to be specific...
dinosaur and man walking together isnt
a contradictory to God...
deathc0rR3 1 week ago
i believe it. it kinda reminds me of that game primal rage :))
JeriDro 1 month ago
athiests are fools
mdebbiec1 2 months ago
@mdebbiec1 ?
Mee551able 3 weeks ago
@mdebbiec1 Ok... 'The hell does this have to do with God?
SnippyDoughnut 1 week ago
so why couldnt these old civilisation have dug up some dinosaur bones and then drew some pictures
maccaaccam99 4 months ago
@maccaaccam99
Maybe you should do some research as to how many fully intact dinosaur skeletons have been found. Moreover you should do a bit of research as to how one gets from a skeleton to an accurate representation of a living dinosaur. Afterwards you can tell me if you like the odds.
u3190 4 months ago
Could you please source all these photos? Or did you just type "dinosaur sculptures" into google images? It's hard to believe the claim you give in the description of the video when you don't source.
gradonCHEESE 5 months ago
Everything with bumps on it must be a dinosaur !!!!!
Look at the dinosaur at 50 seconds, it has bumps on it's neck front.
NOT A DINOSAUR> LOL
gregrutz 5 months ago
I want a pet triceratops.
Erika445566 6 months ago
Have the creationists come to this .......old pots with animal etchings proving the veracity of the bible
jontibloom 6 months ago
@jontibloom
This is not a video about the bible, it simply contains evidence that dinosaurs may have lived in the same era as man. You are playing the Association Fallacy here.
u3190 6 months ago
The existence of so many artifacts that look so much like dinosaurs can't be coincidence ...
TracyKrauss 6 months ago
@TracyKrauss Most Don't look like dinosaurs. Just art, proves nothing.
gregrutz 6 months ago
@TracyKrauss and what about the artifacts the don't look like any known dinosaurs that also can't be coincidence D: gassssspppp! I want you to feel that sacasim and let it even sink in a little
warangel87 4 months ago
Yea they was painting tottaly imagine creatures that somehow looks EXACLY the same such as animals that existed in past.......verry unlikely
Swiati 6 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@LycaonsBane can you prove it.
DerektheDuctTape 7 months ago
So dinosaurs and man lived together like the creationists state, if so then why aren't there any fossils of man and dinosaur in the same layer. Here is my response, maybe they are there, but we have not found then yet, or maybe they were found, but we are not being told about it.
DerektheDuctTape 7 months ago
@DerektheDuctTape your a fucking idiot
identifymenot 7 months ago
Comment removed
DerektheDuctTape 7 months ago
@identifymenot why do you say that, how can you prove that there are no fossils of man and dinosaur together. only like not even a half of a percent of the land has been dugged up for fossils. That means 99 and a half percent has not, to say that there are no such fossils out there is really unwise to make.
DerektheDuctTape 7 months ago
@DerektheDuctTape dugged up?
yes it is stupid to assume dinosaurs and man lived together even though there is a 10 million year gap between them (carbon dating) and why would they hide it from us maybe its because they haven't found any because they didn't live together and your a total jackass
identifymenot 7 months ago
@identifymenot is there proof that they didn't. Millions of years difference is not proof. Many animals though to be extincted the coelacanth is an example.
DerektheDuctTape 7 months ago
@identifymenot how can you know that for sure, when not even close to half of the land has been dug up for fossils. What makes you radioactive dating is so reliable.
DerektheDuctTape 7 months ago
@DerektheDuctTape because humans evolved 10 million years after dinosaurs and i think carbon dating is more reliable than a dusty old kids story book (yes i mean the bible)
identifymenot 7 months ago
@identifymenot Radioactive dating is nothing but based on assumptions, it assumes the rate never changed, it assumes that there were no daughter elements present when the rock or fossil was created, it assumes that it was totally a closed system. It also assumes the rock never broken off. None of such can be proven, so it is nothing but assumptions.
DerektheDuctTape 7 months ago
@DerektheDuctTape no carbon dating is measuring the amount of carbon absorbed by the bone tissue and then cross referanced with the geological time period (i.e. triassic 200 million years ago) so that we can tell how old the creature/plant is nothing to do with radiation
identifymenot 7 months ago
@identifymenot Carbon dating and carbon 14 dating is the same thing.
DerektheDuctTape 7 months ago
@DerektheDuctTape besides why can't dinosaurs be alive today, if they are alive today,then dinosaurs never died out millions of years ago.
DerektheDuctTape 7 months ago
@identifymenot
Carbon dating is only reliable up to 50-60 thousand years, and if you watched the entire video, you would have seen the footprints of both man and dinosaur fossilized in the same layer. If dinosaurs and man evolved 10 million years apart, then why was a 40 million year old coelacanth found in 1937? I would not be surprised at all if scientists discovered a living dinosaur today, as it would only be another of the many hundreds of living fossils that defy evolution.
u3190 7 months ago
@u3190 wheres your real evidence a dusty old fairy tale book, sorry but go back to school dinosaurs 10 million years ago humans 2.5 million years ago you do the maths.
the earth is constantly shifting due to convection currents in the earth's mantle which can make the layers shift.
or dumb people like you mistook the footprints for humans to back up your stupid theories
identifymenot 7 months ago
@identifymenot what a minute, you are saying that earthquakes can change a dinosaur footprint to a human footprint?
DerektheDuctTape 7 months ago
@DerektheDuctTape no i'm saying DUMB jackass's like you could easily mistake a dinosaur footprint for a human footprint and shifting earth layers is basic geography now read a n encyclopedia and you'll find out when dinosaurs lived
identifymenot 7 months ago
@identifymenot you are not making any sense.
DerektheDuctTape 7 months ago
@DerektheDuctTape i'm making perfect sense dinosaurs and man did not live together its basic science
go back to school you dumb fuck
identifymenot 7 months ago
@identifymenot
Obvious troll is obvious.
u3190 7 months ago
@identifymenot how has that been observed, that dinosaurs and man never lived togehter was anyone there? How do you explain how every culture have either legends, drawing, artifacts, of creatures that resemble dinosaurs. How did they all come up with coincidentally the same creatures. Only logical explanation is that have seen them. These things were dinosaurs that they saw. I want to hear your explanation Mr. Scientist.
DerektheDuctTape 7 months ago
@DerektheDuctTape no there wasn't anybody there and not every culture has artifacts of them they are nearly all from the same culture aztects didn't nor did the ancient egyptains and greeks and if we did live together why are there no bones with the artifacts its human nature to kill for food, defence or just glory and there were plenty of dinosaurs to defend from, no skulls no tales of battles with them answer that mr. preacher
identifymenot 7 months ago
@identifymenot Maybe you need to do more research.
DerektheDuctTape 7 months ago
@identifymenot there are accounts of people battling Dragons. Remember the word dinosaur was not invented until just before the civil war, so they called it something else, the word is Dragon. The Modern description of dragon was not put together until the late 1800's. The earlier descriptions of dragons do resemble dinosaurs. So there are even accounts of many dinosaurs being alive today.
DerektheDuctTape 7 months ago
@DerektheDuctTape thw word dinosaur is ancient greek so probably invented before your god was even thought of and do you seriously believe anyone who claims t have seen a dinosaur and the battles where are the trophies of battle or dinosaur skeletons by human civilisations
identifymenot 7 months ago
@identifymenot
Go back to school? You are verbally abusing me like a child and yet you claim to be the mature one? I laughed at your efforts to blame earthquakes on conflicting scientific discoveries. What ever happened to taking the evidence in a non-bias mindset? This is almost as good as Hubble admitting his atheism caused him to invent the cosmological theory. And you also ignored everything I said about the coelacanth. Would you please reply to this living fossil topic?
u3190 7 months ago
@u3190 wait your the mature one yet you believe dinosaurs and man lived together and i laugh at your efforts to convince people dinosaurs and man lived together by showing a few stone carvings of what seem to be dinosaurs come on the greeks had statues of all their gods and their mythology doesn't meaan they exist, plus we found the bones and carbon dated them to way before our time (over 300 million years ago)
identifymenot 7 months ago
@identifymenot
... May I ask a third time. Would you please reply to the living fossil topic. Scientists believed that the coelacanth lived approximately 400 million years ago. They found one in 1937. Yet you insist that it would be impossible for a dinosaur to live with man. Also, may I remind you a second time that carbon dating is only valid up to the 50-60 thousand year range. I noticed you didn't verbally abuse me that time, you are learning, well done :)
u3190 7 months ago
@u3190 coelacanth is a species not a spesific creature so the re-discovered one wasn't the same as the ancient ones like sharks who have been around for billions of years not the same sharks but the same species, and being up to 50-60 thousand year range proves the age of the earth to be above 6000.
i'm going to take a wild stab and guess your from USA, and i think i've learnt enough when i know just when dinosaurs existed
identifymenot 7 months ago
@identifymenot
It says on my profile that I'm Australian, and you still didn't explain why the species did not evolve into a different species. Some species today micro-evolve more in 100 years than the coelacanth did in 400 billion years. I never claimed to know the age of the earth but dating is done by running the clock backwards. It is assumed that the clock has never sped up, slowed down, lost time, and the clock started at 0. There is no "proof" with the age of the earth, only speculation.
u3190 7 months ago
AMAZING!!!
Nictrain123 7 months ago
My view is that people SAW these creatures...you don't have simutanious fantasy without origin of truth...personally glad that were wiped out..don't want one of those running around any neighborhood....
1927Norma 8 months ago
wooow guess what! those "artifact" was discovered by guy who keept it by himself and he newer gave theme in public to be examed ofc he have it in his home but look funny part:
he discover theme
he keep theme in his "private collection"
he never let scientists exame theme he keep theme for himself
now you tell me do you realy believe in this shit?
JurassicPark1993Unix 9 months ago
@JurassicPark1993Unix there are alot of stuff that the evoluionist scientist are also keeping secret from the public as well.
DerektheDuctTape 7 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Did dinosaurs and humans coexist? No: happystatemachine.blogspot.com/2011/04/did-dinosaurs-and-humans-coexist.html
happystatemachine 9 months ago
doesn't explain the god is real god without the origins that the question you should ask
ripper269 9 months ago
How old we don't know but we know enough that they occurred in ancient history where they would have needed an animal they saw to produce this..I at first was sceptical but now convinced somehow and somehwere people saw these creatures in order to make their pottery , motiffs etc...could all these seperated societies have had the same "myth"...any objective person...without a predisposed view would accept many socieities saw dragons..IE dinosaurs.
1927Norma 9 months ago
@1927Norma
And the main question I ask skeptics, is even if these were somehow fake, how would a living dinosaur be any different to a coelacanth?
u3190 9 months ago
@u3190 Good question...also lots of fish we now can see on the deep ocean floor look like something out of a prehistoric nightmare....Glad we're all on the surface of the earth....also good the dragon/dinos were killed off...wouldn't want any of those chasing anyone while we are walking our dog. :)
1927Norma 9 months ago
@u3190 The coelacanth is a good example but its not a dinosaur its a fish that did live even before dinosaurs humans however did not come into existence until much later there are other animals or ancestors of certain animals and plants and insects that did live in the dinosaurs time but there werent many mamals. The cyclops idea came from mammoth bones and of course the chinese who were grounding up iguanadon bones thought they were making dragon powder. these 'monster' bones were always found
warangel87 7 months ago
@warangel87 people historically have saw thebones of ancient creatures and they came up with all kinds of ideas uses and works of arts fossils have been being discovered since we existed but there is no documentation by any human of a living dinosaur and don't bring up Job because there is to this day still theological debate on if it was real or just a parable and the frikkin leviathan and behomoth are comparable to modern day animals. to use the bible as you would a text book is allout wrong
warangel87 7 months ago
@warangel87 how were they able to find the bones, I don't believe that people at that time did fossil digging.
DerektheDuctTape 7 months ago
you know whats funny, the guy claiming these are thousands of years old said that he sent all of these in to be radiocarbon dated and the lab confirmed his beliefs. and if you know litterally anything about carbon dating, is that you cant carbon date something that isnt living or was living at somepoint, pottery has no carbon 14 therefore carbon dating would have been impossible
illfightyou4money 9 months ago
Interesting...I am open but perplexed by the present view. Would all these cultures see the same things if they weren't real???
1927Norma 9 months ago
The one @1:02 proves that man rode dinosarus and smoked dope ! PROOF !!!!!!
gregrutz 10 months ago
Some of those drawings can be explained but some of them are also explicitly look like Dinosaurs! I suppose the arguement against this would be perhaps some people dug up bones of these ancient animals and portrayed them as art.....though that is a little week considering how accurate some of these drawings are!
Very interesting!
Albertanator 11 months ago
Everybody google "acambaro hoax" to see why this video is BS lol.
MoonKittenJD 1 year ago 2
Okay, this is just funny. Man has imagined monsters since time immemorial and scrawled them on walls. (He still does, they're called movies) Ancient maps showed dragons at the edges of the earth. Science proved there was no edge and therefore no dragons.Ancient gods used to be depicted as changing into animals. These 'artifacts' are no different. It used to be that those who believed in 'dinosaurs' like the Loch Ness monster was proof you were a nut. Times have changed, now science is the liar
Baycat57 1 year ago
Thanks for providing the link to that article. It just made my point..
enigmoxical 1 year ago
In a previous video the man asked how it was possible for dinosaur drawings, carvings, etc. to have been made unless the people actually witnessed these creatures for themselves? I'll answer that question with another question:
"How was it possible for Moses to have written the book of Genesis if he was not alive at the time to have been an eyewitness to any of those events, either?"
Hmm...
enigmoxical 1 year ago
@enigmoxical
I'm not even going to answer that one. Just Google: "Who wrote genesis" 2nd one down.
Start finding your own answers instead of problems and maybe you'll get somewhere.
u3190 1 year ago
Bullsh!t year.
makemap 1 year ago
No doubt about it?
Not even close to reality.
odinata 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@odinata what is reality to you?
Detoxhurb 1 year ago
@odinata im gonna tell it like it is... bitch please do some research before speaking your closed mind.. your mind is not even capable of realizing the possibility's reality.. that being said their are ancient paintings and artifacts depicting dinosaurs.. they must of seen them otherwise how in the world would they know about them and how they look.. and pls pls don't say because they found skeleton remains or im gonna really let it all lose lol..
Detoxhurb 1 year ago
@Detoxhurb
Bitch please...
Your assertions of OPINION don't come close to making a "MUST".
odinata 1 year ago
@odinata Bitch please..
your foolish mind no longer deserves a reply from me good day.
Detoxhurb 1 year ago
@Detoxhurb Bitch please
Lay off the dope.
Idiot.
odinata 1 year ago
@odinata
@Detoxhurb
Bitches, please!
whats the point of spending your effort if all you do is whine and call each other bitches? Your entitled to your opinions but don't spout diarrhea and expect to change lives. Besides, even if the ica stones and all the paintings are somehow fake, what would be the difference between finding a dinosaur and finding the coelacanth? There would be none, so there is no point of this video other than to generate discussion,which you both lack the skills to do so.
u3190 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@u3190
The Earth isn't 6000 years old.
That's a fact.
odinata 1 year ago
@u3190 THANK YOU! finaly some 1 gets it.
Shard18 1 year ago
Evo-atheists love to say all the Ica stones are fakes,but they forget you can't fake the patina.Man and Dinos certainly lived together,no doubt about it.
CBALLEN 1 year ago
what's with the noise in the ending? But do they live today as well? Ahh yesm the big flood, killed everyone except a happy family on an ark. So Noah told his children to reproduce. Them brothers and sisters were all fucking each other?? Wow, we are some product. We are fucking inbreeds??? what the fuck man?
limsniff 1 year ago
@limsniff
No the inbred part would be Adam and Eve's children. Noah's sons had wives.
u3190 1 year ago
@u3190 yah but after that it would be cusens fucking cusens if not there oun siblings aunts uncals and or grand parents. lisen to the song "i'm my own grandpa" and ull get how fucked up it can all get
Shard18 1 year ago
@Shard18
If your talking about inbreeding directly after the first humans, then yes that would be the case. There would be little or no genetic disorders though, as the first humans were genetically perfect, and genetics would have little or no effect on their children. Today however, approx 100-200 generations later, inbreeding causes large genetic problems in the children due to genetic degeneration. The law forbidding marriage between close relatives was not given until the time of Moses.
u3190 1 year ago
@u3190 but if they were geneticly purfect every 1 would be identical and no mater who bred with who thered be no mutations in the geens. im starting to see how some many of my christon friends didnt know how evolution truly works
Shard18 1 year ago
@Shard18
1>) Since when does perfect mean identical?
2>) I know exactly how evolution works, but I can see where your coming from and it's because you are ignorant to some of Christianity's beliefs. The first humans were perfect, then they chose to leave God and entered a world of sin. They were no longer perfect and genetic degeneration set in. Today genetic disorders are becoming increasingly common. To put it simply, we were and are on a landslide from perfect to deformed.
u3190 1 year ago
@Shard18
The type of Evolution which increases genetic complexity with a positive outcome has never been recorded in history (this is necessary for the origin of species via evolution to occur) We have only seen the loss of genetic information with both positive and negative consequences. If you simply Google: "genetic degeneration" you will find out what I'm talking about.
u3190 1 year ago
@u3190 yes it has. evolution is nearly identical to breeding and if u look at all the dogs that we forsed wolves to evolve into ull see that positive genetic diversafication hapones. more over humans r degrading coss we breed willy nilly and nothing is killing off the weeker members of our speshes. in nacher the week and sikly die and thuse dont get to pass on there flaws. this puts us in a moral dalema. equolity and health cair r great but its also slowly killing us
Shard18 1 year ago
@Shard18
Its almost as if you ignored half of what I wrote! Ill type it again for you. The TYPE of Evolution which increases genetic complexity with a positive outcome has never been recorded in history. Positive genetic degeneration happens (micro-evolution), I said that in my last comment.
Every species on earth is degenerating, with both positive and negative outcomes. Its true that natural selection doesn't apply to us in the western world, but natural selection is not evolution.
u3190 1 year ago
@Shard18
You need to understand that I'm debating the origins of species via evolution, not micro-evolution. Micro-evolution is what you have given an example of, and the only form of micro-evolution observed have been losses of genetic information, also known as genetic degeneration, which is what I have been talking about. Theres no point in trying to explain this to you when its already out there. Check your private inbox for the link im sending you
u3190 1 year ago
@u3190 darwinean evolution IS natral salection. many people in the riliges comunity dont get that fack. if u reed Daerwins books u see that small changes (micro evolution) bilds up over generations and thus speshes r born. i see know that we had a little miss understanding do to samantics. yes it hasent been recorded activly. but there is strong evedance to saport genetike diversifacation. praticulerly in the cambrean peariad were life began. the degradation might be do to botalnecking.
Shard18 1 year ago
@Shard18
Your argument is about as strong as your grammar skills... I think your trolling me.
u3190 1 year ago
@u3190 oh im sorry! i just like having conversations. i dont trole promis. im not even arguing. i thout of it more like a debate. we can stop if u like.
Shard18 1 year ago
@Shard18
Basically all the info you need is in that link i gave you, so there's no point trying to explain it. Just read the page and you'll understand. Im not debating genetic diversification either by the way, Im debating the increase in complexity required by macro-evolution, and the constant decrease of complexity we see all the time today. Its basically the law of entropy. Well im busy developing a website right now, so well talk later.
u3190 1 year ago
@Shard18
Ok im back, so did you read the summary of the site i sent you? If so, what's your viewpoint of it?
u3190 1 year ago
@u3190 Which form of rock dating is claimed to be the most accurate, and what are your comments on that process? How are they wrong? You can send me links or videos if you wish.
JAKEHARRIS281 1 year ago
@u3190
You don't think I can detect a troll when I see one? You're obviously a troll. I won't continue the conversation because, well... I feel that you're coming on to me. Just the way you... say and describe things. You're just some sort of hypersexual freak. It's as if you can't wait to whip out your dick. It's disturbing me. This is why I feel I shouldn't respond.
Take it easy, bud. Just make sure you don't carry out your uncontrollable urges in public.
FanaticTroll 1 year ago
You. Are. So. Batshit. Insane.
FanaticTroll 1 year ago
@FanaticTroll
You. Are. A. Nub. Troll. - most important rule is not to compromise yourself. You failed with your name idiot.
u3190 1 year ago
@u3190
You MUST know a lot about trolling if you have a video suggesting dinosaurs and man coexisted. Either that or you're some insane nigger. If the most important rule isn't to compromise yourself, why DID YOU JUST DO IT? You have absolutely no idea how good of a troll I am. The majority of the time if someone even knows what a troll is, they don't notice my name. You're fake and gay.
Have a nice day.
FanaticTroll 1 year ago
@FanaticTroll
I am not a troll, and you are proving my point by using the term "fake and gay". A nice day it is. And by the way, maybe you should check out ED's article on trolling. That might help your future failures to possibly come close to success.
u3190 1 year ago
@u3190
I wasn't even trolling on this video. You're either a troll or some fag who thinks the earth is 6,000 years-old. I KNOW you're a troll. There's no way that you read Encyclopedia Dramatica and are like this. The only time where you saw me speak was on your video, so how can you judge if I've failed and will continue to fail?
You fail.
FanaticTroll 1 year ago
@FanaticTroll
Tell me why I am a failure?
u3190 1 year ago
@u3190
Ugh, I don't feel like retyping all of this faggotry. Examine yourself and the conversation. You will find some fail, I'm sure. Even in the most seemingly perfect person, on a different note.
FanaticTroll 1 year ago
@FanaticTroll
No really, please do tell me. So far your point is nothing.
u3190 1 year ago
@u3190
What.
FanaticTroll 1 year ago
there is a major flaw with your theory, mankind has been recording history since around the last ice age, if mankind saw dinosaurs, where did they go? They couldnt have drastically evolved because that would take millions of years and if with man, why isnt there ONE fossil that shows any dinosaurs lived after 60 millions years ago
paulzer22 1 year ago
"this video is gay" without giving a reason.'' REASON>>
Dinosaurs were the dominant terrestrial vertebrates for over 160 million years, from the late Triassic period (about 230 million years ago) until the end of the Cretaceous period (about 65 million years ago), when the Cretaceous–Tertiary extinction event caused the extinction of most dinosaur species, except for some birds.
gregrutz 1 year ago
I seen that horned monkey with cats legs on that wall in Thailand next to the "Stegosaurus" So is that proof horned cat legged horned monkeys once ruled the world? Creationism is pokemon on steroids
GodKillerAtheist 1 year ago
@GodKillerAtheist
I have been through this type of discussion already. There is no skeleton of a horned monkey with cat legs in a museum. Your logic is not thought through.
u3190 1 year ago
@u3190 I've been through hundreds of these types of credulous comments. and there is on that wall that creationists claim there is a stegosaurus a horned monkey with cats legs You're obviously ashamed what creationists believe I never said it was in a museum I said it was in a temple in Thailand watch?v=9tvJRtGRtFc
GodKillerAtheist 1 year ago
@GodKillerAtheist
Again, taking your logic to be true, that must also mean that monkeys, deer, water buffalo, parrots, etc... must also be made up creatures. And please answer me this, If a real dinosaur was found alive today... how would that be any different to the Coelacanth which is thought to predate dinosaurs?
u3190 1 year ago
@u3190 "Again, taking your logic to be true, that must also mean that / etc"
I'm not the one making the claim that drawings are proof. We not only have fossils of deer, monkeys, etc but we have living examples and not just pictures.
" today... how would that be any different to the Coelacanth"
You don't understand evolution. A life form that is well adapted to its surroundings will not evolve into another form since its adaptations will actually be maladaptive
GodKillerAtheist 1 year ago
@GodKillerAtheist
Don't take me as an ignorant when you don't even know me. I have heard that answer many times before but it has no foundation. It works in a textbook but not in reality. An environment cannot stay exactly the same for 410 million years. That is asking for the impossible. And can you please answer my question:
...how would that be any different...
u3190 1 year ago
@u3190 "how would that be any different"
Since you don't understand evolution I can only say that without the genes of the original fossils we can only look at morphological similarities. It would be foolish to state that they didn't evolve in some way, but there is no way to tell without the genes. Now when we see animals and insects trapped in amber we can tell for a fact that they have evolved in many different ways other than morphology alone even though they look similar.
GodKillerAtheist 1 year ago
@GodKillerAtheist
honestly, I would rather end this discussion as you are arrogant, but I am going to reply to you to see how this ends. Just because I disagree with your opinion does not mean I am ignorant. Can you please comprehend that, however hard that is for you. Of course any species would genetically evolve to adapt in a short period of time (such as the Galapagos Finches) but there is an enormous difference between lets say... 50 years and 400,000,000 years.
u3190 1 year ago
@u3190
"Just because I disagree with your opinion does not mean I am ignorant."
No the fact that you don't know how evolution works makes you ignorant. "Ignorant" actually means something it's not a curse word.
"but there is an enormous difference between lets say... 50 years and 400,000,000 years."
So you can walk ten feet but not a mile? Organisms have been shown to evolve over short term processes It's severely dishonest to say they cannot evolve over longer spans of time.
GodKillerAtheist 1 year ago
@GodKillerAtheist
""No the fact that you don't know how evolution works makes you ignorant. "Ignorant" actually means something it's not a curse word.""
If you would prefer to end this inconsequential discussion, then that is fine by me. Thank you for your time.
u3190 1 year ago
@u3190 I see you can't keep up with the topic. I guess all I can do is wave at you as you run away. Take care =)
GodKillerAtheist 1 year ago
@GodKillerAtheist
The fact is that in that time period, it SHOULD have morphologically evolved into something drastically different, such as an elephant, but it didn't. Physically, the coelacanth looks almost identical to its distant relative which supposedly lived approximately 400 million years ago. Its environment would have changed as new predators evolved, ice-ages passed by, etc. And the Coelacanth is just the start. Why don't you research other living fossils and explain them all for me?
u3190 1 year ago
is this a joke or serious, because this only disprove evolution.
wisefreethinker242 1 year ago
@wisefreethinker242 Yes this is real, discoveries like this have been made all over the world like Peru and there Inca stones that show depictions of what looks like a man being attacked by a dinosaur. To much evidence in to many places around the world to say people saw a skeleton and drew pictures. Do dismiss this as fake is ignorant and borderline stupid.
crest2598 1 year ago
@crest2598 Yes, of course man rode dinosaurs. LOL Next you will try and tell us there was a global flood 4400 years ago. HA HA HA.
gregrutz 1 year ago
@gregrutz "HA HA HA." Makes me think you are in some dark underground layer rubbing your hands together saying yes, yes. These discoveries could have been true or fake. But if true, which according to you you are not, might be the biggest discoveries known to man. And no, I don't believe there was a global flood. I am in no religion. I'm betting your an atheist, most of which are as ignorant as their religious counterparts. And if you are so smart, give me your opinion on the big idea.
crest2598 1 year ago
@crest2598 Dinosaurs were the dominant terrestrial vertebrates for over 160 million years, from the late Triassic period (about 230 million years ago) until the end of the Cretaceous period (about 65 million years ago), when the Cretaceous–Tertiary extinction event caused the extinction of most dinosaur species, except for some birds.
gregrutz 1 year ago
religious people are idiots and never cease to amaze me with their retarded opinions.
RBGTHUG 1 year ago
@RBGTHUG
Just letting you know that comments like that do nothing :)
don't waste your effort.
u3190 1 year ago
dragons breh.......
newtowndon 1 year ago
Mowgli lost.
BrickSteiner 1 year ago
hahahaha
oh wait this video was serious.
let me laugh even harder
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAH
foxmcloud555 1 year ago
@foxmcloud555
Give logic to your comment. I hate it when people post something like "this video is gay" without giving a reason. If your serious and not trolling you will do this.
u3190 1 year ago
@u3190 because a pretty sculpture of a dragon does not make a scientific proof.
in england about 1000 years ago, we found a mixture of different fossils (amonites and the like) and proclaimed them to be parts of demons.
we also found large fossilised bones and said they must belong to giants or dragons
if you're an anciant civilisation and you find a fossil dino, you're going realise it belonged to somthing frightening and the imagination will run wild. hence the fire breathing and flying
foxmcloud555 1 year ago
What about all the proof that dinosaurs DIDN'T live with man. Such as fossils that date millions of years back. Such as there being no human remains from millions of years back. Surely this out-weighs some random persons video on youtube that probably isn't even legitimate.
OTSTRETFORD 1 year ago
Moist tissue found in dinosaur bones(seems like it might've dried out after 65 million years?), dragons in every culture, human footprints next to dinosaur prints, a large amount of pottery and figurines in central and South America, the carved stone dinosaur on a temple in Cambodia.
Still not enough evidence?
Yikes! The public schools have some powerful brainwashing techniques if people still do not believe in a young Earth.
co2isgoodal 1 year ago
2. Judges 3:19-25 ESV
And Ehud reached with his left hand, took the sword from his right thigh, and thrust it into his belly. And the hilt also went in after the blade, and the fat closed over the blade, for he did not pull the sword out of his belly; and the dung came out
lizazoon 1 year ago
Just telling you how wonderfully stupid some bible verses are. Makes no sense in a holy book.
lizazoon 1 year ago
Yes, they sound stupid when you read the individual verses. I wish verses were never invented. I could those two verses together and make a doctrine where it is holy to have fat horse sex. There is no point in reading an individual verse unless your going to read at least a chapter and research it in its context. The Bible is a historical book, so do you think a historian would just read small parts and take it literally in modern terms?
u3190 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
u3190-- The Bible is a historical book-- The Old Testament is a concoction of the most bizarre, cruel, childish,immoral stories. Anyone, who reads it like any other book certainly will be agnostic or atheist.
lizazoon 1 year ago
Comment removed
gween 1 year ago
@u3190
Exactly, unfortunately people like to be told what to do by liars and don't research truth on their own. they just like to debunk like mindless idiots.
gween 1 year ago
@u3190 Did god ever say or even suggest that you have to study his word, to find the correct meaning ? What about those who don`t have the mental capacities to study ? As our pastor said in his homily about a year ago. The bible is no science book, no history book, but a book of faith.
lizazoon 1 year ago
"Did god ever say or even suggest that you have to study his word"
Jesus wasn't alive when the bible existed. What was Jesus named by the public back then?
"Teacher".
Seems like your pastor is ironic. He doesn't have enough faith to trust the bible to be true, and instead trusts the world and not god.
u3190 1 year ago
@u3190 how exactly is liza's pastor 'ironic'? moron.
DarwinISmyHOMEboy 1 year ago
@DarwinISmyHOMEboy
it's not, but this moron thinks that the bible was written by god.
foxmcloud555 1 year ago
Comment removed
gween 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@lizazoon they are only stupid to a stupid mind
gween 1 year ago
Ezekiel 23:19-20
NET
Yet she increased her prostitution, remembering the days of her youth when she engaged in prostitution in the land of Egypt. She lusted after their genitals as large as those of donkeys, and their seminal emission was as strong as that of stallions
lizazoon 1 year ago
Are you saying that your lusting after horselike Egyptian genitals?
u3190 1 year ago
Creation should be taught the way it really happened. God blew his bad breath(no toothpaste yet) over a clump of mud and it came alive and upright. All was good. Question remains, did Adam have a penis ? Because Eve was only created when Adam felt lonely and complained about it. This is a problem for theologians. What if god had given Adam a computer, and he never had felt lonely, what would have happened ?
lizazoon 1 year ago
Adam (means 'man') was a 'man', therefore he had a penis. And You tube wasn't invented back then so it would be pretty boring.
u3190 1 year ago
wauft Fake, and even should it be right(which it is not) you draw impossible conclusions from it. How does that prove that at one point ALL the different animals and man lived together.
lizazoon 1 year ago
Evolution: the most wonderful, simple, effcient process of man`s ascend. Evolution is all around us. Imagine being created perfect and remain static for all genreations.
lizazoon 1 year ago
evolution is retarded. here we have historical proof that man and dinosaurs lived together
wauft 1 year ago
wauft: Fake And even should it be true( it has been proven false ) how does that prove the creation story ? NUTS
lizazoon 1 year ago
liz: not fake and does prove it true. shows that there was a simulateous creation event in which all the different kinds of animals were created in a period of time which allowed evidence that man and dinosaurs lived together
wauft 1 year ago
Breaking News! "God: Hidden Science" - Google it!
byScrooby 1 year ago
Man rode dinosaurs, that's proof enough for me.
Not.
gregrutz 2 years ago
It kinda takes the basis off from your claim that all pictures are "ancient artifact. None of these are fake." when for example the ica stones (around 0:52-1:05) have been proven as forgeries. After that it's useless to believe that any one of them are legit just because you say they are. I would argue that you haven't bothered to check the authenticity of these "artifacts" yourself thus your claim loses all validity.
Pharmaecopia1 2 years ago
Using fake evidence is very typical of the Young Earth creationist. there is nothing they won't stoop to in order to provide evidence to their fraudulent pseudoscience
TheEarthFirst 2 years ago
@TheEarthFirst
did you know that a carbon-dating was done on a live mussel which was 2 years old...and the result came back that it was over 23,000 (give or take) thousand years old?
so you cant say that Creationists use fake evidence, because the very method used by evolutionists is wrong!
LitTeyla09 2 years ago
I read that in a Christian book when I was 15. They said the mussel was dipped in carbon 13. There is no liquid called carbon 13, it's a dating method , not a liquid. That proves they didn't know what they were talking about. It's funny the church is still spewing out the same ol tired lies.
TheEarthFirst 2 years ago
the article I read said nothing of liquid.
it simply said Carbon 13 dating
its funny how evolutions walk such thin ice
LitTeyla09 2 years ago
I'm just telling you what they said 30 some years ago, I guess after 30 years Christians figured out it wasn't liquid
TheEarthFirst 2 years ago
@TheEarthFirst
you know...elements can be made into liquids!
LitTeyla09 2 years ago
watch?v=QbvMB57evy4 Watch this and come back after you understand something LitTeyla09. Besides the quotemine you are using states that they were 2,300 years, Not 23,000 years old and if you would have bothered using google or even youtube search, you would have found out why it was so and how it doesn't qualify as an argument. And my guess is that next time you will still use the same mollusk shell argument again. Creationist arguments: Strawmen, lies, quotemining, scripture and flawed logic.
Pharmaecopia1 2 years ago
Using FAKE idea like theory of evolution is typical for young DUMB kid like you...There is nothing they wont stop to in order to provide evidence to fraud to make money...And make us believe qwe came from MONKEYS HAHAHAHHAH
emsing2001 2 years ago
@emsing2001 -science reasons and doesnt make up excuses for everything the way Christians do. The thoery of evolution is sound. All the other sciences back it up. Geology, astromy, genetics all back up evolution. Theres a mountan of evidence for evolution.
TheEarthFirst 2 years ago
You just said science back it up...Back it up with what? How? Thats the thing.. I can become a doctor without studying theory of evolution which has nothing to do with science...IM asking you HOW? well, it has never ever been proven..Maybe a long time ago people are to impressed of theory of evolution but, now people study and analyze it and found nothing to connect theory of evolution absolutely nothing... SORRY
emsing2001 2 years ago
@emsing2001 pick up a book Sherlock. There tons of evidence . Evolution isnt a real theory anymore it's acepted fact in the scientific community. Evolution has nothing to do with sciecne? It is a science.
This video is absurd. If dinosuars lived with man why do we find dinosuar bones in layers that are way under the layers we find modern man in? Also what are those fossils that we find which are neither man or ape? What are they? Creationists are the only ones saying there is no evolution.
TheEarthFirst 2 years ago
I am not a member of the creationist society..But, I am a christian and I study medicine also architecture...When I was 13 years old school teaches us theory of evolution whcih now as I grow up it has nothing to do with science anymore its a fairy tale monkeys turned in man a pure bullshit...The thing that bothers me why learn theory that doesnt even prove a thing and my family paid for my tuition...also others pay ther taxes becasue of thta fairy tale theory..I want my money back!
emsing2001 2 years ago
@emsing2001 your Bible is the real BS. Evolution is science
TheEarthFirst 2 years ago
Evolution can be science if it is proven.....Hell where are the proof? the FOSSILS? OFCOURSE they are proof of FLOOD they drowned and turned to FOSSILS hellow! HAHAHAHH... Prove evolution using science if you can..OH you cant can you?
emsing2001 2 years ago
@emsing2001 fossils are proof of the flood? How crazy is that. If that happened they would all be in the same sedimentary layer. They aren't.
TheEarthFirst 2 years ago
well the layer which you state about the time of the dinosaur people found temple and a hammer, a gold bell and a pottry..So are you saying DINOSAURS used hammer? that is the most dumbest theory I ever heard... They also found a wheel of a chariot...So are you saying DINOSAURS ride CHARIOTS?
emsing2001 2 years ago