Looking for reasonable explanations for the Paluxy River footprints.

Theowl32

Diamond Member
Dec 8, 2013
22,534
16,693
2,415
I do believe in evolution. Personally, not sure how both cannot be true. Never have understood. Could evolution and intelligent design be the same thing? Who knows? There has been more than enough evidence to show that species have evolved.

The Paluxy footprints have always fascinated me.

Delk.jpg


The notion of dinosaur footprints side by side with human footprints. I have heard the notion from scientists that those are not human footprints but a dinosaur?

PSCF9-88HastingsFig2.jpg
zapata-thm.jpg


I think there needs to be a more reasonable explanation. Those footprints are clearly human or a humanoid.

Close to where these footprints are found are these drawings on walls from ancient people.

dino.jpg


Are these interesting to you?
 
the majority of animals that are on the Earth at one time or the other have gone extinct, what does that say about evolution? What does that say about intelligent design?

Macro evolution is easy to see. A bird adapts to environment is easily found but in the end the bird is still a bird. I would be hard pressed to name on transitional animal alive today. As I would have a hard time explaining how any animal went from NO eyes to fully functional eyes. As far as I know there are no fossils that show an animal with 1/2 an eye.

In my opinion, DNA changes are just not something that changes with the environment. Maybe some tweaking within the specie but not a changing of the specie, from one type of animal to another, not so much.
 
the majority of animals that are on the Earth at one time or the other have gone extinct, what does that say about evolution? What does that say about intelligent design?

Macro evolution is easy to see. A bird adapts to environment is easily found but in the end the bird is still a bird. I would be hard pressed to name on transitional animal alive today. As I would have a hard time explaining how any animal went from NO eyes to fully functional eyes. As far as I know there are no fossils that show an animal with 1/2 an eye.

In my opinion, DNA changes are just not something that changes with the environment. Maybe some tweaking within the specie but not a changing of the specie, from one type of animal to another, not so much.
Well, the cambrian explosion happened like 600M years ago. Pretty sure the fossil record from that time, and before, is pretty limited..
 
Or how soft tissue was found in dinosaur bones.
Yeah, I have seen that. A person at my club is really a fundamentalist. I mean he is a good guy. We see eye to eye about a lot of stuff, but I am sorry. The earth is more than 6,000 or 10,000 years old. To believe that it is only that old, imo is a bit childish.

For years I have asked this of many preachers. From Rabbis to evangelical ministers. That is this. I have to say this before the question. There are two stories of creation. First chapter and second chapter of Genesis. The first chapter it is pretty basic. 7 days the earth was created. Of course the night and day was not separated till the 5th day....but that is another issue. The second chapter refers to the SIXTH DAY. It really does not stop referring to the SIXTH DAY.

The question:

At what point does the bible stop referring to the SIXTH DAY? It describes man and the fall of man. It describes "the tree." Of course that was a tree of KNOWLEDGE of GOOD and EVIL. Not an apple tree, like we like to see in countless paintings. I wonder what a tree knowledge of good and evil would look like.

Anyway, the bible does NOT STOP referring to the SIXTH DAY. Oh, the first chapter goes into the 7th day being the day of rest. Rather quick and then it really goes into the SIXTH DAY and it never stops referring to the 6th day. From the story of Adam and Eve, to Abraham, to Moses, to Jesus, and all the way through to revelation.

It does say something in some places where WE SHALL enter into the Spirits rest.

Leads me to the next questions.

Are we still within the 6th day? Has the day of rest come yet? Is that judgement day?

I know I am trying to be all logical with my human pea brain here. I do know many religious notions have been proven absurdly wrong over the years. We can do the easy thing and blame the "Catholic Church" which is rather easy. Of course that is more of a temptation than anything else. Rather a cop out.

The point is fundamentalist thinking has been quite damaging, no matter what religion. Actually, no matter what system of beliefs, which includes atheism.

I guess these questions have perplexed me over the years.
 
Or how soft tissue was found in dinosaur bones.
They solved that mystery a few years ago. They found the iron in the dino had preserved the tissue before decay.
As a matter of fact, i believe they started going back and found soft tissue was found in thousands of fino fossils. They never looked because tissue wouldnt have survived that long.. But they were iron rich, apparently.
 
Last edited:
I do believe in evolution. Personally, not sure how both cannot be true. Never have understood. Could evolution and intelligent design be the same thing? Who knows? There has been more than enough evidence to show that species have evolved.

The Paluxy footprints have always fascinated me.

Delk.jpg


The notion of dinosaur footprints side by side with human footprints. I have heard the notion from scientists that those are not human footprints but a dinosaur?

PSCF9-88HastingsFig2.jpg
zapata-thm.jpg


I think there needs to be a more reasonable explanation. Those footprints are clearly human or a humanoid.

Close to where these footprints are found are these drawings on walls from ancient people.

dino.jpg


Are these interesting to you?

Time travelers. Future beachgoers making a pet of Dino.

:2up:
 
Or how soft tissue was found in dinosaur bones.
Yeah, I have seen that. A person at my club is really a fundamentalist. I mean he is a good guy. We see eye to eye about a lot of stuff, but I am sorry. The earth is more than 6,000 or 10,000 years old. To believe that it is only that old, imo is a bit childish.

For years I have asked this of many preachers. From Rabbis to evangelical ministers. That is this. I have to say this before the question. There are two stories of creation. First chapter and second chapter of Genesis. The first chapter it is pretty basic. 7 days the earth was created. Of course the night and day was not separated till the 5th day....but that is another issue. The second chapter refers to the SIXTH DAY. It really does not stop referring to the SIXTH DAY.

The question:

At what point does the bible stop referring to the SIXTH DAY? It describes man and the fall of man. It describes "the tree." Of course that was a tree of KNOWLEDGE of GOOD and EVIL. Not an apple tree, like we like to see in countless paintings. I wonder what a tree knowledge of good and evil would look like.

Anyway, the bible does NOT STOP referring to the SIXTH DAY. Oh, the first chapter goes into the 7th day being the day of rest. Rather quick and then it really goes into the SIXTH DAY and it never stops referring to the 6th day. From the story of Adam and Eve, to Abraham, to Moses, to Jesus, and all the way through to revelation.

It does say something in some places where WE SHALL enter into the Spirits rest.

Leads me to the next questions.

Are we still within the 6th day? Has the day of rest come yet? Is that judgement day?

I know I am trying to be all logical with my human pea brain here. I do know many religious notions have been proven absurdly wrong over the years. We can do the easy thing and blame the "Catholic Church" which is rather easy. Of course that is more of a temptation than anything else. Rather a cop out.

The point is fundamentalist thinking has been quite damaging, no matter what religion. Actually, no matter what system of beliefs, which includes atheism.

I guess these questions have perplexed me over the years.
I have no idea how old the earth is. I just try to keep an open mind. Like the OP. How, why?

But we do know that time is not a constant like once believed. And there is a ton of evidence of the flood.
 
If humans and dinos lived together, why is there not historical documentation of it? The cambodian temple was built like 800-1000 years ago... I mean.. come on...
Why no recent fossils? Animals today couldnt have evolved from dinos in thousands of years. I believe the fastest change in evolution is melanin. And that still takes a couple thousand years..
That carving could just as easily been carved recently. It doesnt even look like any dino that we know of.
 
The only thing I know beyond the shadow of all doubt is if there is a hell.....

Well let me just say I am worse than anything Judas did. That is for sure. Besides, Hebrews 6:4-6 seals my fate.
 
Or how soft tissue was found in dinosaur bones.
They solved that mystery a few years ago. They found the iron in the dino had preserved the tissue before decay.
That's the story they give. Maybe a decade. Maybe a century. But 700 million years? Pffft.
I think they found soft tissue from 70-200M years ago.
I believe people make up stuff to fit a preconceived notion that it must be 200 million years without questioning is that timeline really true or not.
 
the majority of animals that are on the Earth at one time or the other have gone extinct, what does that say about evolution? What does that say about intelligent design?

Macro evolution is easy to see. A bird adapts to environment is easily found but in the end the bird is still a bird. I would be hard pressed to name on transitional animal alive today. As I would have a hard time explaining how any animal went from NO eyes to fully functional eyes. As far as I know there are no fossils that show an animal with 1/2 an eye.

In my opinion, DNA changes are just not something that changes with the environment. Maybe some tweaking within the specie but not a changing of the specie, from one type of animal to another, not so much.
Well, the cambrian explosion happened like 600M years ago. Pretty sure the fossil record from that time, and before, is pretty limited..
That is why we talk evidence and not just time. In other words anything can be explained if time is the only answer. Such as the eye. How could it develop, the answer is always, given enough time it could evolve. So if the evidence is limited because of time that does not prove munch, it just proves that there isn't evidence.
 
Or how soft tissue was found in dinosaur bones.
Yeah, I have seen that. A person at my club is really a fundamentalist. I mean he is a good guy. We see eye to eye about a lot of stuff, but I am sorry. The earth is more than 6,000 or 10,000 years old. To believe that it is only that old, imo is a bit childish.

For years I have asked this of many preachers. From Rabbis to evangelical ministers. That is this. I have to say this before the question. There are two stories of creation. First chapter and second chapter of Genesis. The first chapter it is pretty basic. 7 days the earth was created. Of course the night and day was not separated till the 5th day....but that is another issue. The second chapter refers to the SIXTH DAY. It really does not stop referring to the SIXTH DAY.

The question:

At what point does the bible stop referring to the SIXTH DAY? It describes man and the fall of man. It describes "the tree." Of course that was a tree of KNOWLEDGE of GOOD and EVIL. Not an apple tree, like we like to see in countless paintings. I wonder what a tree knowledge of good and evil would look like.

Anyway, the bible does NOT STOP referring to the SIXTH DAY. Oh, the first chapter goes into the 7th day being the day of rest. Rather quick and then it really goes into the SIXTH DAY and it never stops referring to the 6th day. From the story of Adam and Eve, to Abraham, to Moses, to Jesus, and all the way through to revelation.

It does say something in some places where WE SHALL enter into the Spirits rest.

Leads me to the next questions.

Are we still within the 6th day? Has the day of rest come yet? Is that judgement day?

I know I am trying to be all logical with my human pea brain here. I do know many religious notions have been proven absurdly wrong over the years. We can do the easy thing and blame the "Catholic Church" which is rather easy. Of course that is more of a temptation than anything else. Rather a cop out.

The point is fundamentalist thinking has been quite damaging, no matter what religion. Actually, no matter what system of beliefs, which includes atheism.

I guess these questions have perplexed me over the years.
I have no idea how old the earth is. I just try to keep an open mind. Like the OP. How, why?

But we do know that time is not a constant like once believed. And there is a ton of evidence of the flood.
link to that?
 
If humans and dinos lived together, why is there not historical documentation of it? The cambodian temple was built like 800-1000 years ago... I mean.. come on...
Why no recent fossils? Animals today couldnt have evolved from dinos in thousands of years. I believe the fastest change in evolution is melanin. And that still takes a couple thousand years..
That carving could just as easily been carved recently. It doesnt even look like any dino that we know of.
I tend to agree, but those footprints. There has to be something better than the notion that they are not human footprints. That is what is being said, and to me that is really not all that reasonable. Those are clear humans....or humanoid beings making those prints. Along with clear dino prints.

Is there anything that you know of that explains those? Just curious.
 
the majority of animals that are on the Earth at one time or the other have gone extinct, what does that say about evolution? What does that say about intelligent design?

Macro evolution is easy to see. A bird adapts to environment is easily found but in the end the bird is still a bird. I would be hard pressed to name on transitional animal alive today. As I would have a hard time explaining how any animal went from NO eyes to fully functional eyes. As far as I know there are no fossils that show an animal with 1/2 an eye.

In my opinion, DNA changes are just not something that changes with the environment. Maybe some tweaking within the specie but not a changing of the specie, from one type of animal to another, not so much.
Well, the cambrian explosion happened like 600M years ago. Pretty sure the fossil record from that time, and before, is pretty limited..
That is why we talk evidence and not just time. In other words anything can be explained if time is the only answer. Such as the eye. How could it develop, the answer is always, given enough time it could evolve. So if the evidence is limited because of time that does not prove munch, it just proves that there isn't evidence.
Well, i think its not so much "time" as it is their size and location of the fossil.
We found a 550M trilobyte a couple years ago only because of erosion.
 

New Topics

Forum List

Back
Top