Genesis Week: Episode 1 (pilot) Paluxy tracks Part 1

http://genesisweek.com
This was the pilot show of Genesis Week, a weekly, Canadian creation science show. I am shooting all of the shows in hi-definition now, so this one is obsolete - enjoy!

Category:

Film & Animation

Tags:

• Genesis
• Week
• Ian
• Juby
• creation
• Science
• Evolution
• theistic
• paluxy
• fossil
• footprints
• documentary
• 777quip
• darwin
• creationism
• debate

[relcychoho]

footprints do not imprint on rocks - those rocks had to be soft like mud at one time to have footprints available for us people to see...the mountains we see around the Earth today - those rocks, or most of them, were at one time below the Earths ' surface, soft and pliable - the accumulated waters that turned into oceans caused pressure else where and rose up the mountains...look at exposed sheer faces thousands of feet of bare rock - twisted and curved - they were soft at one time

[relcychoho]

How did all those trees get up on the steep sheer cliffs of mountains? Trees have roots - roots need soil/ nutrients to survive...how did the SOIL get up there? one lady told me birds carried the seeds for pines/ evergreens up to the cliffs... what about the soil? The only answer is that the mountains speared up through the crust, carrying up the soil with it, and those trees dropped their seeds where they now stood...all around the Earth

[ganados0]

Why is this still going on? they are fakes sculpted by the person who discovered them, that was proven years ago.

[ATPaseone]

Thank You for posting this video. I was watching an old creation debate where the Neo Darwinist kept re-itterating about some hoax that was a successful attempt on casting doubt on the original Paluxy tracks, I remember thinking "Too bad the character assinations and tiring quibbiling red-herring arguments often ends up neutralizing the creationist argument". I didn't realize how effective this strategy was untill today when I saw your Video. I lost valuable time. Thanks again for sharing.

[hertzlaw1]

@harrycarayhere It seems like "scientists" can't really be relied on to analyze this evidence because of the evolution bent. Perhaps the confession is by an evolutionist who wants to discredit the discovery. Is there evidence of chisel marks? Has anyone examined the confessor to determine if his "confession" credible? Is there really a video? Why don't you post it so we can see it?

[hertzlaw1]

They should have said these were from out space, then the evolutionists would not have a problem with their authenticity.

[hertzlaw1]

They should have said the footprints were from visitors from outer space, Mars maybe, then evolutionists would argue for their credibility.

[harrycarayhere]

Check out Glen Kuban's website, which provides detailed information on Baugh's Munchhausenry. 

[harrycarayhere]

Additionally, nothing Baugh says in this video, his shows, or his publications is accurate. The technical terminology he uses is gibberish. His "analysis" is nonsense. Nothing he says has ever been or is ever documented. To top it off, he excavates illegally and has destroyed specimens (as him about the acrocanthosaurus skeleton he destroyed while illegally excavating). No print he possesses is authentic. Every "man track" he has is comically/ cartoonishly fake and with no source documented.

[harrycarayhere]

No insitu "man tracks" exist or have ever been found. The so-called man tracks that exist (at a location called the Taylor site) are dinosaur tracks and nothing more. Carl Baugh has no authentic credentials in anything, much less archaeology and his self-proclaimed "paleo-archaeology." He and his entourage have attacked the credibility of knowledgeable, honest paleontologists and independent researchers by making accusations that the tracks have been manipulated to down play the "human" features