How Did the Ancients Know About Dinosaurs?

[Hollie]

I'm going assume Taz 's head exploded from having to use his pea brain, so will move on to larger things. Once we know how rocks are formed through chemistry, bonding due to curing or the hydration process, and rapid hardening we take what we know and apply it to larger objects. I realize that in humans' case, we can only use synthetic rock because we aren't God who can move sediment and enough water to where he wants. However, the process is the same. If one does not do the hydration correctly, then one gets cracks and the bonding isn't complete. We want to cure rapidly and mold the synthetic rock to bend, curve, twist into whatever shape we design it for when it is sedimentary materials and can absorb water.



Next, is using the process we just learned and using Portland cement to build roads, highways, and other large transportation projects. I think you may know where I am going with this and that these roads twist and turn and are curved. They get a lot pressure applied to them by millions of cars traveling on them over the years.



Anyway, here are the different forces that affect the concrete. You notice that the concrete can be made flexible, but does break under different type of pressure. Thus, it cannot be bent once it has hardened. This is the same for sedimentary layer rock.



Now, if you want to see a Bill Nye type explain how his science works, then look at this video . This fits what Taz types have been brought up on.

A truly ,embarrasingly stupid comparison on every level.

You're talking about that Bill Nye clone that evos believe. How many times have we heard rocks bend over millions of years under pressure? Your hero Bill Nye believes rocks are made this way .

It’s actually funny to see the results of your cutting / pasting / plagiarizing of various sources and then assembling that into a disjointed, incoherent mess.

 

[james bond]

You really have to ask yourself why secular scientists do not admit that fossilization in sedimentary layers happens rapidly. We find fossils in the sedimentary layers at Mt. St. Helens volcano explosion and it's still tens of years old. It just means that's where the poor creature died as I, and creation scientists, have been saying.. It does not mean our geology is millions of years old. Today, Mt. St. Helens is forbidden science because it goes against evolution and millions and billions of years old geology. The Earth being shaped by catastrophism and Noah's global flood is true. The Earth isn't billions of years old. This is all evidence for God, but atheist scientists still cling to their fairy tales and worldview. After all, no one can observe millions and billions of years. Thus, I think the atheist scientists will be punished the most severe in the next life. Only pain and suffering can change their minds. Don't be one of these people! Have an open mind, a little faith in God, and he will reveal a new world to you. You'll see dinosaurs in a new "light." Guaranteed.

 

[Hollie]

You really have to ask yourself why secular scientists do not admit that fossilization in sedimentary layers happens rapidly. We find fossils in the sedimentary layers at Mt. St. Helens volcano explosion and it's still tens of years old. It just means that's where the poor creature died as I, and creation scientists, have been saying.. It does not mean our geology is millions of years old. Today, Mt. St. Helens is forbidden science because it goes against evolution and millions and billions of years old geology. The Earth being shaped by catastrophism and Noah's global flood is true. The Earth isn't billions of years old. This is all evidence for God, but atheist scientists still cling to their fairy tales and worldview. After all, no one can observe millions and billions of years. Thus, I think the atheist scientists will be punished the most severe in the next life. Only pain and suffering can change their minds. Don't be one of these people! Have an open mind, a little faith in God, and he will reveal a new world to you. You'll see dinosaurs in a new "light." Guaranteed.

Acually, you really have to ask yourself why anyone would take seriously YouTube vidos by ID'iot creationist hacks.

 

[Taz]

View attachment 266683

Sorry, not what real scientists say. You have no degree, so stfu.

Haha. You lost again. You cannot backup your claim. It is because you use fake science.

Let's review. You provided a link for dinosaurs and how they determine its age using how stuff works wiki web page. That isn't very scientific, but it will do for a forum. You could not explain in your own words, so I used that to my advantage. I have the research of soft tissue and blood cell evidence from the fossils. Second, there is the research of radiocarbon dating done on it. I shows thousands of years and not millions. All of the findings should be kept since we do not know what the C-14 rates were in the past. Secular scientists assume it was the same. Thus, the radiometric dating, including radiocarbon dating, could be off. This is valid science.

Moreover, we have the evidence of sedimentary layers forming with the Mt. St. Helens EQ. We know those are tens of years old, but radiometric dating provides about 350,000 years. Thus, radiometric dating isn't as accurate as we think because the conditions could have been different in the past, there was contamination in the sample, or our assumptions are wrong. No on actually knows what the ratio of parent-daughter isotopes were in the past. It's a best guess.

Finally, we have the bent rocks evidence. We can actually see that as it happened with Mt. St. Helens.

This is all evidence that backs up Noah's Flood and catastrophism. Bent rocks only happen when rock is molten or when sedimentary layers cause a chemical reaction with water to harden the sediment.

You have a link to back up all this fartsmoke?

Instead of my explaining, how about looking at how difficult bending rock is without breaking. Even when it is malleable, sedimentary layers would have to form rapidly or else it would crack and break. Part of it is the curing process. Notice how he speeds up the curing process or else you get properties of rock that are not mixed well.

It’s a concrete table, not made out of rock.

Stop being ignorant. It's an example of a gorgeous bent rock table. What I am getting at is the science. The forming of rock is via chemical bonding of the molecules in the sediment. It is similar to how concrete is cured under water through hydration. In the anhydrous (without water) state, four main types of minerals are normally present: alite, belite, aluminate (C3A), and a ferrite phase (C4AF). The reaction with water is called "hydration". It involves many different reactions, often occurring at the same time. As the reactions proceed, the products of the hydration process gradually bond together the individual sand and gravel particles, and other components of the concrete, to form a solid mass. We see this molecule bonding of the hydration process is best when it is rapid and when we keep the water there. That's what the man in the vid did. Thus, you do not want millions of years, but a day or days. The bending of rock isn't the norm for sedimentary layers, but it does happen. Sedimentary layers are relatively flat. That's why it's a big deal when we see it and how beautiful it is. Once you understand the science behind it, then we can take it elsewhere and on to bigger and better things.



If you want an example of ignorant, try this. This guy is a comedian.

Do you have a link to what you claim? I'd be interested to read what real scientists say about this.

 

[progressive hunter]

They found human and dinosaur footprints together a few years ago and determined they had to be left about the same time. What we know of our world changes with new evidence. I'm no expert, not even really interested in it much but I thought this was cool.

Dinosaur Tracks

FYI,

I got a warning when I clicked on your link.

View attachment 266795

it worked fine for me,,,

 

[progressive hunter]

They found human and dinosaur footprints together a few years ago and determined they had to be left about the same time. What we know of our world changes with new evidence. I'm no expert, not even really interested in it much but I thought this was cool.

Dinosaur Tracks

It was not true. Read this.

FOSSILS OF 'MAN TRACKS' SHOWN TO BE DINOSAURIAN

your article gives no scientific proof they are not human,,,

it amounts to nothing but a hit piece,,,

 

[Hollie]

You really have to ask yourself why secular scientists do not admit that fossilization in sedimentary layers happens rapidly. We find fossils in the sedimentary layers at Mt. St. Helens volcano explosion and it's still tens of years old. It just means that's where the poor creature died as I, and creation scientists, have been saying.. It does not mean our geology is millions of years old. Today, Mt. St. Helens is forbidden science because it goes against evolution and millions and billions of years old geology. The Earth being shaped by catastrophism and Noah's global flood is true. The Earth isn't billions of years old. This is all evidence for God, but atheist scientists still cling to their fairy tales and worldview. After all, no one can observe millions and billions of years. Thus, I think the atheist scientists will be punished the most severe in the next life. Only pain and suffering can change their minds. Don't be one of these people! Have an open mind, a little faith in God, and he will reveal a new world to you. You'll see dinosaurs in a new "light." Guaranteed.

Encyclopedia of American Loons: #476: Carl Baugh

Carl Edward Baugh is a young earth creationist who is most infamous for claiming to have “discovered human alongside dinosaur footprints near the Paluxy River in Texas”. Yes, Baugh is the big promoter of the infamous (fake) Paluxy footprints, and he still believes they’re genuine.

Apart from that he is familiar as a national television host who purports to present “science” supporting creationism on the program Creation in the 21st Century (Trinity Broadcasting Network). Pure pseudoscience, of course, and Baugh’s mistakes (which are plentiful) aren’t always honest mistakes. His educational credentials are … somewhat shaky as well – even his theology degree seems to be an honorary degree from an unaccredited institution, his “Ph.D”s are perhaps even more ramshackle than Kent Hovind’s, and the institutions (if possible) perhaps even shadier.

In 1984 Baugh instigated the Creation Evidence Museum, a forerunner for Answer in Genesis’s Creation Museum in Kentucky (nicely reviewed here), in a double-wide trailer in Glen Rose near Dinosaur Valley State Park, to promote creationism (he has later updated the architecture; there is a hilarious account of a visit here). All the exhibits are junk, of course, and pride of place goes to the forgeries – the most famous being the Paluxy footprints (also here), though other forgeries have been identified as well, such as purported dinosaur claws that turned out to be crocodile teeth. Now, just to emphasize; Baugh actually really does make fake fossils and present the fakes as the real deal. As for the mantracks, when scientists attempted to investigate his claims he couldn’t even get the story about their discovery straight, and it has been reported that when Baugh bought his Moab skeleton (oh, yes – he’s got those as well) he knew that the bones had already been dated at 200–300 years. Didn’t prevent Baugh from claiming that the bones were found in Cretaceous deposits (guess Jesus looked another way when he made that claim). And then there is the Ordovicean hammer (or “London Hammer”), and this footprint.

Among an assortment of other claims, Baugh has also argued that “hexagonal water”, called “Creation water”, is capable of healing. Sort of to close the circle of lunacy, I guess.

Even archcreationist loonie Ken Ham has been critical of Baugh’s footprints, but Kenneth Copeland appears to be a fan – as is the National Council on Bible Curriculum in Public Schools, an organization lobbying for getting creationism into education, which is more worrisome than Copeland’s endorsement since the organization seems to be somewhat successful.

 

[Hollie]

They found human and dinosaur footprints together a few years ago and determined they had to be left about the same time. What we know of our world changes with new evidence. I'm no expert, not even really interested in it much but I thought this was cool.

Dinosaur Tracks

It was not true. Read this.

FOSSILS OF 'MAN TRACKS' SHOWN TO BE DINOSAURIAN

your article gives no scientific proof they are not human,,,

it amounts to nothing but a hit piece,,,

There is scientific proof they are not human. You have not disproved that disproof.

 

[Asclepias]

They found human and dinosaur footprints together a few years ago and determined they had to be left about the same time. What we know of our world changes with new evidence. I'm no expert, not even really interested in it much but I thought this was cool.

Dinosaur Tracks

FYI,

I got a warning when I clicked on your link.

View attachment 266795

it worked fine for me,,,

I'm sure it did. It would have worked for me too but I was smart enough not to go to the page since it was categorized as a risky site. I never said it didnt work.

 

[Asclepias]

They found human and dinosaur footprints together a few years ago and determined they had to be left about the same time. What we know of our world changes with new evidence. I'm no expert, not even really interested in it much but I thought this was cool.

Dinosaur Tracks

It was not true. Read this.

FOSSILS OF 'MAN TRACKS' SHOWN TO BE DINOSAURIAN

your article gives no scientific proof they are not human,,,

it amounts to nothing but a hit piece,,,

If you say so. You keep believing those are human footprints.

 

[progressive hunter]

They found human and dinosaur footprints together a few years ago and determined they had to be left about the same time. What we know of our world changes with new evidence. I'm no expert, not even really interested in it much but I thought this was cool.

Dinosaur Tracks

FYI,

I got a warning when I clicked on your link.

View attachment 266795

it worked fine for me,,,

I'm sure it did. It would have worked for me too but I was smart enough not to go to the page since it was categorized as a risky site. I never said it didnt work.

so you lied,,,

figures,,,

 

[progressive hunter]

They found human and dinosaur footprints together a few years ago and determined they had to be left about the same time. What we know of our world changes with new evidence. I'm no expert, not even really interested in it much but I thought this was cool.

Dinosaur Tracks

It was not true. Read this.

FOSSILS OF 'MAN TRACKS' SHOWN TO BE DINOSAURIAN

your article gives no scientific proof they are not human,,,

it amounts to nothing but a hit piece,,,

If you say so. You keep believing those are human footprints.

not only does the writer not have a degree but has never studied or done research in the field,,,

so under your criteria why do you use him as a source???


the source I used has over 30 yrs in the field

 

[Asclepias]

They found human and dinosaur footprints together a few years ago and determined they had to be left about the same time. What we know of our world changes with new evidence. I'm no expert, not even really interested in it much but I thought this was cool.

Dinosaur Tracks

FYI,

I got a warning when I clicked on your link.

View attachment 266795

it worked fine for me,,,

I'm sure it did. It would have worked for me too but I was smart enough not to go to the page since it was categorized as a risky site. I never said it didnt work.

so you lied,,,

figures,,,

No dummy I didnt lie. I even posted a pic of the warning.

 

[Asclepias]

They found human and dinosaur footprints together a few years ago and determined they had to be left about the same time. What we know of our world changes with new evidence. I'm no expert, not even really interested in it much but I thought this was cool.

Dinosaur Tracks

It was not true. Read this.

FOSSILS OF 'MAN TRACKS' SHOWN TO BE DINOSAURIAN

your article gives no scientific proof they are not human,,,

it amounts to nothing but a hit piece,,,

If you say so. You keep believing those are human footprints.

not only does the writer not have a degree but has never studied or done research in the field,,,

so under your criteria why do you use him as a source???


the source I used has over 30 yrs in the field

Your source has been soundly debunked by the scientific community. Nothing he says is legit. Even that crackpot John Morrison has admitted those arent human footprints. Isnt he one of your leaders?

Tracking Those Incredible Creationists—The Trail Goes On

 

[progressive hunter]

They found human and dinosaur footprints together a few years ago and determined they had to be left about the same time. What we know of our world changes with new evidence. I'm no expert, not even really interested in it much but I thought this was cool.

Dinosaur Tracks

FYI,

I got a warning when I clicked on your link.

View attachment 266795

it worked fine for me,,,

I'm sure it did. It would have worked for me too but I was smart enough not to go to the page since it was categorized as a risky site. I never said it didnt work.

so you lied,,,

figures,,,

No dummy I didnt lie. I even posted a pic of the warning.

View attachment 266900

so you did try to go to the page,,,

 

[progressive hunter]

They found human and dinosaur footprints together a few years ago and determined they had to be left about the same time. What we know of our world changes with new evidence. I'm no expert, not even really interested in it much but I thought this was cool.

Dinosaur Tracks

It was not true. Read this.

FOSSILS OF 'MAN TRACKS' SHOWN TO BE DINOSAURIAN

your article gives no scientific proof they are not human,,,

it amounts to nothing but a hit piece,,,

If you say so. You keep believing those are human footprints.

not only does the writer not have a degree but has never studied or done research in the field,,,

so under your criteria why do you use him as a source???


the source I used has over 30 yrs in the field

Your source has been soundly debunked by the scientific community. Nothing he says is legit.

no it hasnt,,,all they do is personal attacks and no science proof,,,

 

[Asclepias]

FYI,

I got a warning when I clicked on your link.

View attachment 266795

it worked fine for me,,,

I'm sure it did. It would have worked for me too but I was smart enough not to go to the page since it was categorized as a risky site. I never said it didnt work.

so you lied,,,

figures,,,

No dummy I didnt lie. I even posted a pic of the warning.

View attachment 266900

so you did try to go to the page,,,

No dummy. If my system tells me a site is risky I dont go.

 

[Asclepias]

It was not true. Read this.

FOSSILS OF 'MAN TRACKS' SHOWN TO BE DINOSAURIAN

your article gives no scientific proof they are not human,,,

it amounts to nothing but a hit piece,,,

If you say so. You keep believing those are human footprints.

not only does the writer not have a degree but has never studied or done research in the field,,,

so under your criteria why do you use him as a source???


the source I used has over 30 yrs in the field

Your source has been soundly debunked by the scientific community. Nothing he says is legit.

no it hasnt,,,all they do is personal attacks and no science proof,,,

Your source has no scientific proof.

 

[progressive hunter]

it worked fine for me,,,

I'm sure it did. It would have worked for me too but I was smart enough not to go to the page since it was categorized as a risky site. I never said it didnt work.

so you lied,,,

figures,,,

No dummy I didnt lie. I even posted a pic of the warning.

View attachment 266900

so you did try to go to the page,,,

No dummy. If my system tells me a site is risky I dont go.

but you tried,,,

 

[progressive hunter]

your article gives no scientific proof they are not human,,,

it amounts to nothing but a hit piece,,,

If you say so. You keep believing those are human footprints.

not only does the writer not have a degree but has never studied or done research in the field,,,

so under your criteria why do you use him as a source???


the source I used has over 30 yrs in the field

Your source has been soundly debunked by the scientific community. Nothing he says is legit.

no it hasnt,,,all they do is personal attacks and no science proof,,,

Your source has no scientific proof.

youre either an ignorant fool or a bold faced liar,,,


maybe you should check his research and testing he did on it before you shoot off your mouth,,,