Re: World's Largest Creationist Museum opening in KENTUCKY 5/28!

[njs811271]

dinosaurs were not all that big. especially when they are babies. It was possible for noah to bring babies or even eggs on the ark. Not to mention the ark was HUGE! 450 feet long, 75 feet wide and 45 feet high. trust me there was plenty of room for the animals. evolution is a fact though. its just been exagerated. the truth is that God alowed the creation of animals to adapt to surroundings. birds are dinosaurs too

[hellshade2]

@njs811271 the thing is the ark could not have been big enough to carry all the animal species without the dinosaurs being included. there is no way to make a boat big enough from wood. many other things don't jibe either. dino fossils have been shown to be millions of years old whereas creationists claim earth is 6-10,000 years old. and they offer no proof except the bible

[njs811271]

I believe the Earth is only about 6,000 years old. The first scientist to suggest the Earth being older than that could have said anything he wanted. He picks up a rock, says it looks old then looks at the carbon emmision from that rock and says "it must be so." The fact is that if you didn't have one scientist start and experiment 1 million years ago its not possible to have enough data to suggest anything over

[hellshade2]

@njs811271 your answer is is disingenuous at best,you claim a scientist can say whatever he wants about the age of the earth yet it is science and scientists that have brought us all these things we use today so why would you claim they are wrong about the age of the earth?

[njs811271]

But what you must remember is that scientist are human just like you and I are. That means they are entitled to mistakes. In todays society don't you suppose it's possible for them to make a mistake? Yet we praise everything they say as fact. If you make one tiny mistake in science that can offset the whole system. I'm not saying all science is wrong. I'm just saying some things are mistaken.

[hellshade2]

@njs811271 ok look at what you posted. can scientists be wrong? yes absolutely. this is why all things are peer reviewed and vigorously tested. now the reverse for you if a scientist can be wrong and many scientists are indeed smarter than many people what makes believing in religion right? before you bring up the whole faith argument i understand that. this is part of what i mean by being disingenuous

[hellshade2]

@hellshade2 if scientists can be wrong then so can you yet religion provides no mechanism to correct it's mistakes science does.

also there are many different ways to check the age of rocks not just carbon dating,

[njs811271]

I can be wrong. Your right about that. And I do believe it's possible i'm not 100% correct on everything I know. But if I get to Heaven and I find out I made a few mistakes, so what? I'm in Heaven. I believe that hope is far more important than being right. You can put your hope in God, or you can put your hope in a man not much different than you. I pick the one who said he would love me no matter what and would never lie to me. I have never gotten that kind of promise from another person.

[njs811271]

dinosaurs were not all that big. especially when they are babies. It was possible for noah to bring babies or even eggs on the ark. Not to mention the ark was HUGE! 450 feet long, 75 feet wide and 45 feet high. trust me there was plenty of room for the animals. evolution is a fact though. its just been exagerated. the truth is that God alowed the creation of animals to adapt to surroundings. birds are dinosaurs too

[jdquarg]

Google Ken Ham, Answers in Genesis there you will find out how dinosaurs fit on the ark.

I am not supporting this web site or creationist views, but this site is very good in explaining their position.

[Timstuff]

Baby dinosaurs are tiny.

[flyingscience]

Watch My 2 New Videos -

Fossil Seashells Below Creation Museum Confirm Noah Deluge ?

........................

Creation Museum debunked by fossil reef below it?

[evilpill]

Good vid! I met one of the people from this 'museum' at xmas. Being an industrial designer I obviously had a few questions about The Ark. She said it took 120 years to build which was ok as Noah was 900 odd years old...I thought it was just him and his wife but they had 6 other helpers, all this old. Apparently. Oh and she says 'dinosaur babies' were on the Ark. Yeah. She's the only American I've met but I know you sane guys are around too :)

[hellshade2]

fossil records prove that dinosaurs died long before the emergence of homo sapiens. some people are just plain crazy in thier beliefs.

and again if there were dinosaur babies on the ark then where are the dinosaurs today?

[evilpill]

First thing Noah did when we found land was sacrifice a goat so he had a few to spare. The secret to feeding the animals (inc. dinos) was 'condensed hay'. Meat-eaters loved it. 'Just because they had sharp teeth doesn't mean they just ate flesh,' I was told. Wasn't sure how 900 y/o Noah could catch say, two cheetahs and get different genders too.'Bugger, I got two males...'She said god ordered the animals to The Ark. They just turned up in pairs which was nice. Probably brought their own towels.

[followwaytruthlife]

Part 3 of 6 Hemoglobin, complete blood vessels, and soft tissues have been found intact in an unearted t-rex: these would have decayed over millions of years. This points out that some of these dinosaurs have just recently died off. An idea is that the rich pre-flood vegetation had been destroyed with the flood and the result was that the few dinosaurs that had been on the ark could not survive just anywhere. Also fossilized footprints have been found right next to dinosaur fossils.

[agentorange20]

the t-rew blood vessels were not found soft, but after underoing desalinization a fluid process to remove minerals, the vessels responded. those puluxy fossilized footprints have long been discredited as forgeries.

[KasparHauser4]

"Hemoglobin, complete blood vessels, and soft tissues have been found intact in an unearted t-rex: these would have decayed over millions of years"..Where? When? Who? Why isn't it in National Geographic?

[hellshade2]

it is totally impossible for any soft tissures and such for a trex to survive. i don't know if these people are just plain stupid or menatlly impaired.possibly both.

[Timstuff]

It was reported in Science, Vol. 307, pp. 1952-1955, March 25, 2005. The connective tissues, blood vessels, and even some red blood cells were in tact.

The paleontologists who made the discovery say that it's probably a naturally occurring preservation process that they will one day have an explanation for. However, if you're open minded to dinosaurs being recently extinct, the answer is a bit more obvious.

[followwaytruthlife]

Part 2 of 6 Also, there have been recent eyewitness accounts but people won't believe it easily, as they could never fathom that there could be such a thing in this age. Some species of birds, animals and ocean life that are thought to have gone extinct are being found alive and well.

[agentorange20]

"recent eyewitness accounts"

eyewitness accounts are meaningless and hold no water as substantial evidence, they are hersay and nothing more. physical, observable, tangible evidence is required, not eyewitness testimony.

[KasparHauser4]

what eye witness accounts? From the same people who see UFOs perhaps?

[followwaytruthlife]

Part 1 of 6 One piece of evidence I find compelling is the communication that people left through their artwork and eyewitness accounts (including Job's story and other ancient myths of dragons and behemoths). People carved out of rock, painted, made pottery, representing images of dinosaurs or dragons. Modern discoveries have only just pieced together the existence of dinosaurs in the past 200 years so how did people 2000+ years ago know to create this art.

[jorgmartin3]

watch this interesting documentaries in you tube and see what happened to these (evolutionist) cientifics.

Unlocking the Mystery of Life - Part 1 of 7

The Privileged Planet - Part 1 of 6

you wont't be dessapointed

i have other interesting in my favorites.

Good bye and don't harden your heart just relax and enjoy the docu. it will give you peace from evolution or creationism point of view

[jorgmartin3]

plz, just give it a go, many have to read the bible to know if there are some scientifc truths "empirical" in there. but everybody knows just one point of view since long time and that's evolution that even with our modern technology still is dark and incertain if i want to critice evolution i have to know what is that about, the same with creationism. check this. check what they say not who say it.

Creation VS Evolution facts truth exposed (1) saintbirgitta.

[jorgmartin3]

1)Tyrannosaurus rex would have simply been too heavy to run fast - Biomechanics

Fossil trackways indicate that bipedal dinosaurs weighing up to 4,000 pounds could sprint, while larger dinosaurs could move no faster than a swift walk. Recent research suggests why no one has found any tracks of big running dinosaurs: the largest species just didn't have the muscle power required to run fast.

[jorgmartin3]

2)Evolutionist Scientifics John Hutchinson and Mariano Garcia, of the University of California, Berkeley did this investigation. So, how quickly could a huge carnivorous dinosaur move? The model designed by Hutchinson and Garcia uses equations from physics and biology to calculate the amount of leg muscle an animal needs to remain balanced during fast two-legged running.

[jorgmartin3]

3)search in google: Tyrannosaurus Rex Was a Slowpoke. that was the headline in national geography and everybody know that magazin support evolution but in this case it fits for creationims. one reason why man could have lived with dinos

[nikred]

i really dont get it. what has a slow moving dinosaur got to do with creationism and how its against evolution. i know t-rex was slow and a scavenger so what. there were other swift carnivorous dinos what about them? yabadabadoo

[agentorange20]

nonconclusive evidence about a t-rex's running speed doesn't support evolution no more than creationism. it's a non factor. consider the gaping stride of a 40 ft long t-rex and matter's less if it was agile and it's longer strides would be suffucient for stalking prey.

[hellshade2]

yet there are skeletons to prove it existed. show me jesus' bones sometime....oh yeah right. they don't exist.

[agentorange20]

"run fast"

for the T-rex running fast, can you elaborate and put a MPH to it? I've read reports that with their gaping stride they could of been upwards of 30 mph, which would kill all but today's olympic atheletes. they could have hunted in packs as well, in which individual speed isn't as critical.

[hellshade2]

sorry but i've seen plenty of creationist videos and the bible was written thousands of years ago by barbarians in a desert.they had no idea of what the world is really like.mainstream scince says dinos were dead before manm evolved. and the bible is bunk,fiction.

[jorgmartin3]

science: systematic knowledge of the physical or material world gained through observation and experimentation. if a theory is not empirically verifiable then it is not a scientific theory but a philosophical theory. it is just speculation so don't call it science. Evolutionism assumes, guess origins, there is no records, no witness about that. Datation methods are not reliable, search for this

[jorgmartin3]

watch this in you tube:

The Great Dinosaur Deception Exposed - Part 1

Dinos could have been barely carrion but they were hervibores. teeth size say nothing. panda has pointed and canines teeth but is vegetraian. bear's food ss 98% plants, when starving eat rodents, most species of monkys are vegetarian like orangutan, etc

[hellshade2]

sorry jorgemartin but whens the last time you went to a meuseum? a real museum that its not one of the creations bullshit places. ever see a dinaosaur skeleton?they can also tell what the animals ate by the type of teeth they had.many many were carnivores.who made the video? ken ham?

[hellshade2]

hey jorgemartin i went and took a look at that video you recommended and stopped it after about three minutes when the speaker said that the bible is a book of science. sorry that bullshit stops right there. the bible is not science it is science fiction a myth. sorry to say so but your deluded friend.

[healthyaddict]

Crazy creationists *sigh*

[donotthink4me]

The total cubic volume would have been around 1,518,000 cubic feet, I think Noah could have managed.

[flyingscience]

AIG Creation Museum refuted by fossils below museum pt.2 Paste that in the search engine box to see my new video . Part 1 is on many science news sites and religous forums.

[hellshade2]

good vids thxs. puts a bit of a kibosh on the creationists....

[quedorf]

On even a simpler base, how did a desert living man build a ship with no naval architecture background, that naval architects could not build today...300 feet is approximately the limit for a purely wooden ship to be seaworthy. Wood just doesn't have the strength to allow a 450 foot ship. Any wooden ship longer than 300 feet is strengthened with steel.

[hellshade2]

good point quedorf had not even considered that, but then i'm not a shipwright either :)

thxs for the post

[cvjucla3]

Yeah, Noah's Ark had to have been at least as big as an aircraft carrier! Can you imagine sticking two brontosauruses, a couple of mammoths etc. How do you reconcile the dinosaur question w/ creationism & the story of the Bible? I hope that this museum will include that little event known as the Ice Age. Since I have not looked into this yet, I will give it a well deserved inquiry into what it has to offer.

[hellshade2]

hey and consider that dinosaurs like t rex would have considered everything on the ark food. including noah and family :P

[cvjucla3]

Yep! I thought about that, too! You know, the conflict btwn predator & its prey. From what I remember, w/ respect to the story in the Bible, it was part of the miracle that the animals temporarily ceased their traditional instinctive roles to allow the proceeding to take place. Logically, it makes no sense.