Is There Scientific Evidence Supporting the Floor of Noah?

Are secular scientists prone to exaggeration in support of accepted theories?

  • Yes, at least on occasion.

    Votes: 5 83.3%
  • No, never. They are highly respected and above tweaking data... They are above suspicion.

    Votes: 1 16.7%

  • Total voters
    6
I am not surprised that you believe the tracks are real. You want them to be real. And any evidence that is contrary to your beliefs, you label as "opinion".

Such scientific hypocrisy. Your side believes that the Laetoli footprints meant chimps started walking bipedal. Those prints look like fully modern human footprints. They were found in a layer too old to be humans.

In the Paluxy Tracks they look, superficially, like human footprints. But there are problems with them, as I posted links to explain.

from: The Paluxy River ‘footprints’ - Bad Archaeology
"Since the 1930s, dinosaur tracks have been known from the bed of the Paluxy River, near Glen Rose, Texas. What makes these tracks so controversial are claims that as well as the footprints of dinosaurs, there are unmistakably human footprints in the same strata. Even creationists admit that some of them are fakes. In some of the ‘man tracks’, it is possible to make out traces of toes to the side of the ‘foot’, which suggests that they are nothing more mysterious than highly eroded three-toed dinosaur tracks. Some also show claw marks at the ‘heel’ of the print, which is another feature typical of a dinosaur footprint but not of a human footprint. In at least one footprint sequence, there is the inexplicable coincidence that dinosaur tracks and ‘human footprints’ alternate.

The Paluxy River ‘man prints’ may resemble human footprints superficially, but they lack the anatomy of real human footprints. Furthermore, dinosaurs and humans are of very different size and weight, but in the Paluxy River, tracks made by some undisputed dinosaurs and supposed humans are sunk to the same depth in the rock, which suggests that both types were made by creatures of the same general weight; there are tracks, made by different dinosaur species sunk to different depths. In the same way, the distances between footfalls of those tracks made to the same depth are spaced the same distance apart, showing that they were made by creatures with similar stride lengths."

This site examines the tracks more closely: Paluxy Dinosaur/"Man Track" controversy
your first link wont let me read it unless I give it access to my computer which I wont do, the other was written by a computer programmer


nice try but no cigar,,,
I will stick with the evidence,,,

Evidence? Photos with little or no research? I've seen pics of Bigfoot online too. Is that evidence?

Well, lucky for you I quoted 2 paragraphs from the website. I'll quote them again for you.

""Since the 1930s, dinosaur tracks have been known from the bed of the Paluxy River, near Glen Rose, Texas. What makes these tracks so controversial are claims that as well as the footprints of dinosaurs, there are unmistakably human footprints in the same strata. Even creationists admit that some of them are fakes. In some of the ‘man tracks’, it is possible to make out traces of toes to the side of the ‘foot’, which suggests that they are nothing more mysterious than highly eroded three-toed dinosaur tracks. Some also show claw marks at the ‘heel’ of the print, which is another feature typical of a dinosaur footprint but not of a human footprint. In at least one footprint sequence, there is the inexplicable coincidence that dinosaur tracks and ‘human footprints’ alternate.

The Paluxy River ‘man prints’ may resemble human footprints superficially, but they lack the anatomy of real human footprints. Furthermore, dinosaurs and humans are of very different size and weight, but in the Paluxy River, tracks made by some undisputed dinosaurs and supposed humans are sunk to the same depth in the rock, which suggests that both types were made by creatures of the same general weight; there are tracks, made by different dinosaur species sunk to different depths. In the same way, the distances between footfalls of those tracks made to the same depth are spaced the same distance apart, showing that they were made by creatures with similar stride lengths."

The fact that Glen J. Kuban is a computer programmer does nothing to change his findings. He is an independent researcher and his research is well documented.
who said no research was done???

if you took the time to research it you would know how much was done,,,

I did research it. YOu are the one who claims that research is opinion. Only pictures are evidence.
 
Such scientific hypocrisy. Your side believes that the Laetoli footprints meant chimps started walking bipedal. Those prints look like fully modern human footprints. They were found in a layer too old to be humans.

In the Paluxy Tracks they look, superficially, like human footprints. But there are problems with them, as I posted links to explain.

from: The Paluxy River ‘footprints’ - Bad Archaeology
"Since the 1930s, dinosaur tracks have been known from the bed of the Paluxy River, near Glen Rose, Texas. What makes these tracks so controversial are claims that as well as the footprints of dinosaurs, there are unmistakably human footprints in the same strata. Even creationists admit that some of them are fakes. In some of the ‘man tracks’, it is possible to make out traces of toes to the side of the ‘foot’, which suggests that they are nothing more mysterious than highly eroded three-toed dinosaur tracks. Some also show claw marks at the ‘heel’ of the print, which is another feature typical of a dinosaur footprint but not of a human footprint. In at least one footprint sequence, there is the inexplicable coincidence that dinosaur tracks and ‘human footprints’ alternate.

The Paluxy River ‘man prints’ may resemble human footprints superficially, but they lack the anatomy of real human footprints. Furthermore, dinosaurs and humans are of very different size and weight, but in the Paluxy River, tracks made by some undisputed dinosaurs and supposed humans are sunk to the same depth in the rock, which suggests that both types were made by creatures of the same general weight; there are tracks, made by different dinosaur species sunk to different depths. In the same way, the distances between footfalls of those tracks made to the same depth are spaced the same distance apart, showing that they were made by creatures with similar stride lengths."

This site examines the tracks more closely: Paluxy Dinosaur/"Man Track" controversy
your first link wont let me read it unless I give it access to my computer which I wont do, the other was written by a computer programmer


nice try but no cigar,,,
I will stick with the evidence,,,

Evidence? Photos with little or no research? I've seen pics of Bigfoot online too. Is that evidence?

Well, lucky for you I quoted 2 paragraphs from the website. I'll quote them again for you.

""Since the 1930s, dinosaur tracks have been known from the bed of the Paluxy River, near Glen Rose, Texas. What makes these tracks so controversial are claims that as well as the footprints of dinosaurs, there are unmistakably human footprints in the same strata. Even creationists admit that some of them are fakes. In some of the ‘man tracks’, it is possible to make out traces of toes to the side of the ‘foot’, which suggests that they are nothing more mysterious than highly eroded three-toed dinosaur tracks. Some also show claw marks at the ‘heel’ of the print, which is another feature typical of a dinosaur footprint but not of a human footprint. In at least one footprint sequence, there is the inexplicable coincidence that dinosaur tracks and ‘human footprints’ alternate.

The Paluxy River ‘man prints’ may resemble human footprints superficially, but they lack the anatomy of real human footprints. Furthermore, dinosaurs and humans are of very different size and weight, but in the Paluxy River, tracks made by some undisputed dinosaurs and supposed humans are sunk to the same depth in the rock, which suggests that both types were made by creatures of the same general weight; there are tracks, made by different dinosaur species sunk to different depths. In the same way, the distances between footfalls of those tracks made to the same depth are spaced the same distance apart, showing that they were made by creatures with similar stride lengths."

The fact that Glen J. Kuban is a computer programmer does nothing to change his findings. He is an independent researcher and his research is well documented.
who said no research was done???

if you took the time to research it you would know how much was done,,,

I did research it. YOu are the one who claims that research is opinion. Only pictures are evidence.


when did I say pictures???

physical evidence is what it is and opinion is what it is,,,


you sure like misquoting me,,,
 
Such scientific hypocrisy. Your side believes that the Laetoli footprints meant chimps started walking bipedal. Those prints look like fully modern human footprints. They were found in a layer too old to be humans.

In the Paluxy Tracks they look, superficially, like human footprints. But there are problems with them, as I posted links to explain.

from: The Paluxy River ‘footprints’ - Bad Archaeology
"Since the 1930s, dinosaur tracks have been known from the bed of the Paluxy River, near Glen Rose, Texas. What makes these tracks so controversial are claims that as well as the footprints of dinosaurs, there are unmistakably human footprints in the same strata. Even creationists admit that some of them are fakes. In some of the ‘man tracks’, it is possible to make out traces of toes to the side of the ‘foot’, which suggests that they are nothing more mysterious than highly eroded three-toed dinosaur tracks. Some also show claw marks at the ‘heel’ of the print, which is another feature typical of a dinosaur footprint but not of a human footprint. In at least one footprint sequence, there is the inexplicable coincidence that dinosaur tracks and ‘human footprints’ alternate.

The Paluxy River ‘man prints’ may resemble human footprints superficially, but they lack the anatomy of real human footprints. Furthermore, dinosaurs and humans are of very different size and weight, but in the Paluxy River, tracks made by some undisputed dinosaurs and supposed humans are sunk to the same depth in the rock, which suggests that both types were made by creatures of the same general weight; there are tracks, made by different dinosaur species sunk to different depths. In the same way, the distances between footfalls of those tracks made to the same depth are spaced the same distance apart, showing that they were made by creatures with similar stride lengths."

This site examines the tracks more closely: Paluxy Dinosaur/"Man Track" controversy
your first link wont let me read it unless I give it access to my computer which I wont do, the other was written by a computer programmer


nice try but no cigar,,,
I will stick with the evidence,,,

Evidence? Photos with little or no research? I've seen pics of Bigfoot online too. Is that evidence?

Well, lucky for you I quoted 2 paragraphs from the website. I'll quote them again for you.

""Since the 1930s, dinosaur tracks have been known from the bed of the Paluxy River, near Glen Rose, Texas. What makes these tracks so controversial are claims that as well as the footprints of dinosaurs, there are unmistakably human footprints in the same strata. Even creationists admit that some of them are fakes. In some of the ‘man tracks’, it is possible to make out traces of toes to the side of the ‘foot’, which suggests that they are nothing more mysterious than highly eroded three-toed dinosaur tracks. Some also show claw marks at the ‘heel’ of the print, which is another feature typical of a dinosaur footprint but not of a human footprint. In at least one footprint sequence, there is the inexplicable coincidence that dinosaur tracks and ‘human footprints’ alternate.

The Paluxy River ‘man prints’ may resemble human footprints superficially, but they lack the anatomy of real human footprints. Furthermore, dinosaurs and humans are of very different size and weight, but in the Paluxy River, tracks made by some undisputed dinosaurs and supposed humans are sunk to the same depth in the rock, which suggests that both types were made by creatures of the same general weight; there are tracks, made by different dinosaur species sunk to different depths. In the same way, the distances between footfalls of those tracks made to the same depth are spaced the same distance apart, showing that they were made by creatures with similar stride lengths."

The fact that Glen J. Kuban is a computer programmer does nothing to change his findings. He is an independent researcher and his research is well documented.
who said no research was done???

if you took the time to research it you would know how much was done,,,

I did research it. YOu are the one who claims that research is opinion. Only pictures are evidence.
if you researched it you would know it had a long list of tests and research done in proving its authenticity,,,
 
I guarantee, no one who understans anything about human evolution would ever believe that the Laetoli footprints meant chimps started walking bipedal. Ancestors of human, yes, but chimps are not ancestors of humans. Also, their age of 3.6 mya is far younger than the oldest human ancestors the Australopithecus who likely walked upright.

So wrong again. "The famous Laetoli footprints attributed to Australopithecus afarensis are bipedal, but they are still relatively splayed compared to the tracks of living humans."

The emergence of humans

Where we differ is Lucy was a chimp versus whatever. The AA fossil are likely parts of different species as believed by Richard Leakey.

My argument to WinterBorn holds because the footprint conclusions are based on our differing worldviews.

'"The prints were discovered and defended by the recently deceased Mary Leakey (died December 9, 1996, at the age of 83), Matriarch of the famous fossil hunting Leakey family, whose finds were extensively publicized and funded by National Geographic Magazine. Mary Leakey was a tireless worker, whose careful research stands as some of the least controversial in a vicious, ego-laden, funding-driven, field of "one-upmanship."

As far as the footprints go, her data are not questioned, but the interpretation of the data illustrates the lengths to which evolutionists will go to avoid questioning man's supposedly evolutionary ancestry.

The prints themselves are quite human-like "indistinguishable from those of modem humans" (Anderson, New Scientist 98:373, 1983). Following extensive research it was concluded that the footprints "resemble those of habitually unshod modem humans.... (If the) footprints were not known to be so old, we would readily conclude that they were made by a member of our genus" (Tuttle, Natural History March 1990).

Because of the dates, the prints have been assigned to Australopithecus afarensis, i.e., Lucy's kind. But is this valid? Lucy was essentially a chimp. Even discoverer Donald Johansson only claims that Lucy was a chimp that walked somewhat more erect than other chimps. The Australopithecus foot was an ape's foot, with an opposing thumb, and long curved toes just right for climbing in trees, but most unlike a human's foot. According to researcher Dr. Charles Oxnard in a 1996 interview: "If you examine (Australopithecus foot bones) more closely, and especially if you examine it using the computer multivariate statistical analyses that allows you to assess parts that the eye doesn't easily see, it turns out that big toe was divergent."'

Who Or What Made The Laetoli Footprints?

If they were human, then evolution has got some "splainin' to do" as Ricky would say to Lucy (a different Lucy). There goes your "guarantee."
 
I am not surprised that you believe the tracks are real. You want them to be real. And any evidence that is contrary to your beliefs, you label as "opinion".

Such scientific hypocrisy. Your side believes that the Laetoli footprints meant chimps started walking bipedal. Those prints look like fully modern human footprints. They were found in a layer too old to be humans.

In the Paluxy Tracks they look, superficially, like human footprints. But there are problems with them, as I posted links to explain.

from: The Paluxy River ‘footprints’ - Bad Archaeology
"Since the 1930s, dinosaur tracks have been known from the bed of the Paluxy River, near Glen Rose, Texas. What makes these tracks so controversial are claims that as well as the footprints of dinosaurs, there are unmistakably human footprints in the same strata. Even creationists admit that some of them are fakes. In some of the ‘man tracks’, it is possible to make out traces of toes to the side of the ‘foot’, which suggests that they are nothing more mysterious than highly eroded three-toed dinosaur tracks. Some also show claw marks at the ‘heel’ of the print, which is another feature typical of a dinosaur footprint but not of a human footprint. In at least one footprint sequence, there is the inexplicable coincidence that dinosaur tracks and ‘human footprints’ alternate.

The Paluxy River ‘man prints’ may resemble human footprints superficially, but they lack the anatomy of real human footprints. Furthermore, dinosaurs and humans are of very different size and weight, but in the Paluxy River, tracks made by some undisputed dinosaurs and supposed humans are sunk to the same depth in the rock, which suggests that both types were made by creatures of the same general weight; there are tracks, made by different dinosaur species sunk to different depths. In the same way, the distances between footfalls of those tracks made to the same depth are spaced the same distance apart, showing that they were made by creatures with similar stride lengths."

This site examines the tracks more closely: Paluxy Dinosaur/"Man Track" controversy
your first link wont let me read it unless I give it access to my computer which I wont do, the other was written by a computer programmer


nice try but no cigar,,,
I will stick with the evidence,,,

Evidence? Photos with little or no research? I've seen pics of Bigfoot online too. Is that evidence?

Well, lucky for you I quoted 2 paragraphs from the website. I'll quote them again for you.

""Since the 1930s, dinosaur tracks have been known from the bed of the Paluxy River, near Glen Rose, Texas. What makes these tracks so controversial are claims that as well as the footprints of dinosaurs, there are unmistakably human footprints in the same strata. Even creationists admit that some of them are fakes. In some of the ‘man tracks’, it is possible to make out traces of toes to the side of the ‘foot’, which suggests that they are nothing more mysterious than highly eroded three-toed dinosaur tracks. Some also show claw marks at the ‘heel’ of the print, which is another feature typical of a dinosaur footprint but not of a human footprint. In at least one footprint sequence, there is the inexplicable coincidence that dinosaur tracks and ‘human footprints’ alternate.

The Paluxy River ‘man prints’ may resemble human footprints superficially, but they lack the anatomy of real human footprints. Furthermore, dinosaurs and humans are of very different size and weight, but in the Paluxy River, tracks made by some undisputed dinosaurs and supposed humans are sunk to the same depth in the rock, which suggests that both types were made by creatures of the same general weight; there are tracks, made by different dinosaur species sunk to different depths. In the same way, the distances between footfalls of those tracks made to the same depth are spaced the same distance apart, showing that they were made by creatures with similar stride lengths."

The fact that Glen J. Kuban is a computer programmer does nothing to change his findings. He is an independent researcher and his research is well documented.
who said no research was done???

if you took the time to research it you would know how much was done,,,

Charlatans such as Carl Baugh and Don Patton did no research.
 
I guarantee, no one who understans anything about human evolution would ever believe that the Laetoli footprints meant chimps started walking bipedal. Ancestors of human, yes, but chimps are not ancestors of humans. Also, their age of 3.6 mya is far younger than the oldest human ancestors the Australopithecus who likely walked upright.

So wrong again. "The famous Laetoli footprints attributed to Australopithecus afarensis are bipedal, but they are still relatively splayed compared to the tracks of living humans."

The emergence of humans

Where we differ is Lucy was a chimp versus whatever. The AA fossil are likely parts of different species as believed by Richard Leakey.

My argument to WinterBorn holds because the footprint conclusions are based on our differing worldviews.

'"The prints were discovered and defended by the recently deceased Mary Leakey (died December 9, 1996, at the age of 83), Matriarch of the famous fossil hunting Leakey family, whose finds were extensively publicized and funded by National Geographic Magazine. Mary Leakey was a tireless worker, whose careful research stands as some of the least controversial in a vicious, ego-laden, funding-driven, field of "one-upmanship."

As far as the footprints go, her data are not questioned, but the interpretation of the data illustrates the lengths to which evolutionists will go to avoid questioning man's supposedly evolutionary ancestry.

The prints themselves are quite human-like "indistinguishable from those of modem humans" (Anderson, New Scientist 98:373, 1983). Following extensive research it was concluded that the footprints "resemble those of habitually unshod modem humans.... (If the) footprints were not known to be so old, we would readily conclude that they were made by a member of our genus" (Tuttle, Natural History March 1990).

Because of the dates, the prints have been assigned to Australopithecus afarensis, i.e., Lucy's kind. But is this valid? Lucy was essentially a chimp. Even discoverer Donald Johansson only claims that Lucy was a chimp that walked somewhat more erect than other chimps. The Australopithecus foot was an ape's foot, with an opposing thumb, and long curved toes just right for climbing in trees, but most unlike a human's foot. According to researcher Dr. Charles Oxnard in a 1996 interview: "If you examine (Australopithecus foot bones) more closely, and especially if you examine it using the computer multivariate statistical analyses that allows you to assess parts that the eye doesn't easily see, it turns out that big toe was divergent."'

Who Or What Made The Laetoli Footprints?

If they were human, then evolution has got some "splainin' to do" as Ricky would say to Lucy (a different Lucy). There goes your "guarantee."

When you cut and paste links to religious extremists at the ICR, you should also include the link to their statement of faith so you acknowledge they are hacks with a prederined conclusion.
 
in comment 548 you implied the whole site was faked,,and what about the other hundreds of prints around the world???

In that post I was referring to the Delk Tracks. The first footprint pic you showed. In the second I was referring to the Paluxy Prints.
When my son was small, we got very excited going to visit Dinosaur State Park in Connecticut, where they said they had REAL DINOSAUR FOOTPRINTS!!!!
They didn't look like much--more like bird tracks, so it was a bit of a let down. But the creature was big -- just had little feet. I was expecting footprints you could lay down in and do snow angels.
We had fun on the nature trails, though. Still joke about the sign saying "rotting log." LOL
well isnt that special,,,

Yes, it probably was very special to her family. Don't be an ass.
I'm not here for family stories,,,especially when they have nothing to do with the topic,,,

Then skip it. Being an asshole to someone is unnecessary. In fact, it is easier to skip it than to reply to it.
 
I guess. It just seems God didn't think much of his early work: ignoring most events and people and not telling His people almost anything they didn't already know, only talking about himself and their relationship.
you are aware god didnt write it???
But he created pen and ink..Try and beat that !
got any proof of that???
Neither of us can provide proof, this isn't math class. All I have is evidence. Evidence I consider overwhelming compared to any other theory.


theres a difference between evidence and physical evidence,,,

one is based on opinion and the other is based on a physical thing we can see and touch,,

evo uses the former as evidence,,,
Completely untrue. Evidence is evidence but it is evo that uses physical evidence: fossils, stratigraphy, radioactive decay, comparative anatomy etc. There is a competing theory that relies on eyewitness accounts of the history of life on Earth.
 
in comment 548 you implied the whole site was faked,,and what about the other hundreds of prints around the world???

In that post I was referring to the Delk Tracks. The first footprint pic you showed. In the second I was referring to the Paluxy Prints.
When my son was small, we got very excited going to visit Dinosaur State Park in Connecticut, where they said they had REAL DINOSAUR FOOTPRINTS!!!!
They didn't look like much--more like bird tracks, so it was a bit of a let down. But the creature was big -- just had little feet. I was expecting footprints you could lay down in and do snow angels.
We had fun on the nature trails, though. Still joke about the sign saying "rotting log." LOL
well isnt that special,,,

Yes, it probably was very special to her family. Don't be an ass.
I'm not here for family stories,,,especially when they have nothing to do with the topic,,,
I was bored reading a jerk like you arguing about something so patently stupid. And it is mildly interesting that big old honkin' dinosaurs had such little tiny feet. Kinda like deer shit, which is about the size of raisins. Then goose shit is the size of a small dog's.

I don't know why Winterborn bothers with you; there is certainly no hope of getting through.
 
I am not surprised that you believe the tracks are real. You want them to be real. And any evidence that is contrary to your beliefs, you label as "opinion".

Such scientific hypocrisy. Your side believes that the Laetoli footprints meant chimps started walking bipedal. Those prints look like fully modern human footprints. They were found in a layer too old to be humans.

In the Paluxy Tracks they look, superficially, like human footprints. But there are problems with them, as I posted links to explain.

from: The Paluxy River ‘footprints’ - Bad Archaeology
"Since the 1930s, dinosaur tracks have been known from the bed of the Paluxy River, near Glen Rose, Texas. What makes these tracks so controversial are claims that as well as the footprints of dinosaurs, there are unmistakably human footprints in the same strata. Even creationists admit that some of them are fakes. In some of the ‘man tracks’, it is possible to make out traces of toes to the side of the ‘foot’, which suggests that they are nothing more mysterious than highly eroded three-toed dinosaur tracks. Some also show claw marks at the ‘heel’ of the print, which is another feature typical of a dinosaur footprint but not of a human footprint. In at least one footprint sequence, there is the inexplicable coincidence that dinosaur tracks and ‘human footprints’ alternate.

The Paluxy River ‘man prints’ may resemble human footprints superficially, but they lack the anatomy of real human footprints. Furthermore, dinosaurs and humans are of very different size and weight, but in the Paluxy River, tracks made by some undisputed dinosaurs and supposed humans are sunk to the same depth in the rock, which suggests that both types were made by creatures of the same general weight; there are tracks, made by different dinosaur species sunk to different depths. In the same way, the distances between footfalls of those tracks made to the same depth are spaced the same distance apart, showing that they were made by creatures with similar stride lengths."

This site examines the tracks more closely: Paluxy Dinosaur/"Man Track" controversy
your first link wont let me read it unless I give it access to my computer which I wont do, the other was written by a computer programmer


nice try but no cigar,,,
I will stick with the evidence,,,

Evidence? Photos with little or no research? I've seen pics of Bigfoot online too. Is that evidence?

Well, lucky for you I quoted 2 paragraphs from the website. I'll quote them again for you.

""Since the 1930s, dinosaur tracks have been known from the bed of the Paluxy River, near Glen Rose, Texas. What makes these tracks so controversial are claims that as well as the footprints of dinosaurs, there are unmistakably human footprints in the same strata. Even creationists admit that some of them are fakes. In some of the ‘man tracks’, it is possible to make out traces of toes to the side of the ‘foot’, which suggests that they are nothing more mysterious than highly eroded three-toed dinosaur tracks. Some also show claw marks at the ‘heel’ of the print, which is another feature typical of a dinosaur footprint but not of a human footprint. In at least one footprint sequence, there is the inexplicable coincidence that dinosaur tracks and ‘human footprints’ alternate.

The Paluxy River ‘man prints’ may resemble human footprints superficially, but they lack the anatomy of real human footprints. Furthermore, dinosaurs and humans are of very different size and weight, but in the Paluxy River, tracks made by some undisputed dinosaurs and supposed humans are sunk to the same depth in the rock, which suggests that both types were made by creatures of the same general weight; there are tracks, made by different dinosaur species sunk to different depths. In the same way, the distances between footfalls of those tracks made to the same depth are spaced the same distance apart, showing that they were made by creatures with similar stride lengths."

The fact that Glen J. Kuban is a computer programmer does nothing to change his findings. He is an independent researcher and his research is well documented.
who said no research was done???

if you took the time to research it you would know how much was done,,,

He took color pictures of the tracks. These showed differences that are inconsistent with human tracks.

Also, the Paluxy Tracks don't help the Great Flood story.
 
th


There are a lot of flood legends around the world that suggest that sometime in the ancient past a catastrophe occurred that was worldwide.

The best option is that around the end of the last ice age is when it occurred and sea levels raised as much as 120 meters. That's a lot of water and would change land masses a lot geographically as they settle or raise due to weight displacement. In some instances this change may have happened slowly and some rapidly. Yet it would still have affected people worldwide as migrations occurred and the tales of their coastal cities sinking beneath the sea spread.

*****SMILE*****



:)
 
I guarantee, no one who understans anything about human evolution would ever believe that the Laetoli footprints meant chimps started walking bipedal. Ancestors of human, yes, but chimps are not ancestors of humans. Also, their age of 3.6 mya is far younger than the oldest human ancestors the Australopithecus who likely walked upright.

So wrong again. "The famous Laetoli footprints attributed to Australopithecus afarensis are bipedal, but they are still relatively splayed compared to the tracks of living humans."

The emergence of humans

Where we differ is Lucy was a chimp versus whatever. The AA fossil are likely parts of different species as believed by Richard Leakey.

My argument to WinterBorn holds because the footprint conclusions are based on our differing worldviews.

'"The prints were discovered and defended by the recently deceased Mary Leakey (died December 9, 1996, at the age of 83), Matriarch of the famous fossil hunting Leakey family, whose finds were extensively publicized and funded by National Geographic Magazine. Mary Leakey was a tireless worker, whose careful research stands as some of the least controversial in a vicious, ego-laden, funding-driven, field of "one-upmanship."

As far as the footprints go, her data are not questioned, but the interpretation of the data illustrates the lengths to which evolutionists will go to avoid questioning man's supposedly evolutionary ancestry.

The prints themselves are quite human-like "indistinguishable from those of modem humans" (Anderson, New Scientist 98:373, 1983). Following extensive research it was concluded that the footprints "resemble those of habitually unshod modem humans.... (If the) footprints were not known to be so old, we would readily conclude that they were made by a member of our genus" (Tuttle, Natural History March 1990).

Because of the dates, the prints have been assigned to Australopithecus afarensis, i.e., Lucy's kind. But is this valid? Lucy was essentially a chimp. Even discoverer Donald Johansson only claims that Lucy was a chimp that walked somewhat more erect than other chimps. The Australopithecus foot was an ape's foot, with an opposing thumb, and long curved toes just right for climbing in trees, but most unlike a human's foot. According to researcher Dr. Charles Oxnard in a 1996 interview: "If you examine (Australopithecus foot bones) more closely, and especially if you examine it using the computer multivariate statistical analyses that allows you to assess parts that the eye doesn't easily see, it turns out that big toe was divergent."'

Who Or What Made The Laetoli Footprints?

If they were human, then evolution has got some "splainin' to do" as Ricky would say to Lucy (a different Lucy). There goes your "guarantee."
"Lucy was essentially a chimp." Thanks for proving my point. Chimps can walk semi-erect for short periods but Australopithecus were made by fully erect walkers. There are never any hand impressions that a knuckle walker would leave. There are numerous skeletal differences but since you think of Lucy as a chimp I doubt you would understand those either.
 
I guarantee, no one who understans anything about human evolution would ever believe that the Laetoli footprints meant chimps started walking bipedal.

Wrong haha. "The famous Laetoli footprints attributed to Australopithecus afarensis are bipedal, but they are still relatively splayed compared to the tracks of living humans."

The emergence of humans
Do you know of any bipedal chimps? Dogs can walk on two legs, are they bipedal?
 
There are a lot of flood legends around the world that suggest that sometime in the ancient past a catastrophe occurred that was worldwide.
So what? There are also legends of dragons, mermaids, flaming chariots in the sky, and all manner of goofy, magical nonsense.
 
There are a lot of flood legends around the world that suggest that sometime in the ancient past a catastrophe occurred that was worldwide.
So what? There are also legends of dragons, mermaids, flaming chariots in the sky, and all manner of goofy, magical nonsense.

th


When confronted by a unknown superior technology many primative people would consider your goofy nonsense magic and the beings that manipulate that magic gods.

*****SMILE*****



:)
 
15th post
th


There were dragons in those days that flew on painted wings, with painted scales covering it's body, and they ravished the cities and countrysides...

*****CHUCKLE*****



:)
 
Last edited:
th


A chariot of fire appeared in the heavens drawn by horses of fire.

*****CHUCKLE*****



:)

...Imagine the ballon having flaming horses embroidered or painted on it.
 
When confronted by a unknown superior technology many primative people would consider your goofy nonsense magic and the beings that manipulate that magic gods
How is that relevant? I don't know what you are getting at.
 
Last edited:
When confronted by a unknown superior technology many primative people would consider your goofy nonsense magic and the beings that manipulate that magic gods
How is that relevant? I don't know what you are getting at.
th


I'm sure you don't understand any more than you understood your own opening comment to me.

*****CHUCKLE*****



:)
 

New Topics

Back
Top Bottom