Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Here's something that should heat up the subject about the dinos. A shocking carving of a stegosaur was found on a stone column at the ruins of the Angkor Wat Temple complex in Cambodia. I'm not sure how old the carving is, but it's very old. The complex itself is over 900 years old. The carving is real and depicts a real creature. How would anyone that long ago know what a stegosaur looked like? Was it from bones they found? Nope, because as you'll see, the creature fleshed out. What do you think?
Although I'm no expert about Cambodia, I do have family and friends in neighboring Thailand and I'm quite aware of the carving. You'll need to scroll down the page to see closeup photos of it. I'll leave it for you to wonder about for now.
The leading French dinosaur paleontologist Eric Buffetaut, does fieldwork in Cambodia and Thailand.
Here are Buffetaut’s comments about this alleged Stegosaurus on the Cambodian temple.
“I think this carving is a recent fake. It seems to be a different color from the other blocks, which suggests a recent addition, which had no time to weather to the same dark color as the rest. This block appeared while the temple was being restored. People in SE Asia are now perfectly familiar with dinosaurs and what they may have looked like, so I can easily imagine a local sculptor deciding to add a dinosaur carving to a Khmer temple (in a place like Cambodia, restoration of remote ancient buildings is likely to be done locally with not much supervision by trained archeologists). I have seen many sandstone carvings of dinosaurs in Thailand, made by local people as decorations.
Relax. Who cares if it's a religious tract site or not? You're not that insecure, are you? LOL! Isn't this thread suppose to be a religious view about dinosaurs? The page provides an eye-opening insight into how some people come to such mistaken views.
Yeah, I know the link is for the religious-minded, but the author claims to have "studied" the carving and attempts to make his case proving it. It's worth a look because it demonstrates how people who are determined to put dinos along side of man are so intent with their belief that they lose sight of everything else.
No disrespect meant to Eric Buffettaut, but while he may be a paleontologist, he's not a specialist in the field of ancient art and architecture. I'm not meaning to toot my own horn, but I've been familiar with the region for decades. While I suppose it's possible the carving is fake, I have my doubts. Yes, the color looks different because the grime has been cleaned off. After all, the carving has become quite a tourist attraction. For Pete's sake, sounds like even Eric has bought into the dino idea whether fake or not! I think the carving is genuine. I'll explain why. The real question is whether the carving actually represents a stegosaurus. Maybe not.
The author mentions a couple of books about the site that state, "...a very convincing representation of a stegosaur" and, "an animal which bears a striking resemblance to a stegosaurus." Evidently, those seeds of thought made a striking impression on the author, who I presume knows little or nothing about the region. For all I know, he may have been there on a tourist visa.
If you look at the other carvings above and below, you'll find each contain elements in common. For example each is encircled by stylized fish and serpents. You'll also see that surrounding that are what look like flower petals. They aren't. They are stylized flames radiating outward.
Another common element is that each carving features a different animal, but animals that are commonly found in the region. A monkey, a bird, a lizard. If you look at the photo where the author is standing next to the column, at the bottom is a character with a raised sword. Around its head are more of the stylized radiating flames.
People might know about dinosaurs today, but in the distant past, a stegosaur would have been completely unknown. Even if bones of one had been found, they'd have no idea what the animal looked like. That leaves one other choice, the "stegosaur" is not a stegosaur at all, but some other animal common to the region.
The things above the animal are more stylized radiating flames, but clearly there isn't enough room to go completely around the animal. If you block them out you begin to see something else. It is either a stylized gaur, which is a type of wild cattle - not very common in the region these days. Or it's a stylized water buffalo - which are very common in Southeast Asia.
What amazes me is how easy it is for some people, who are determined to put dinos and people as co-existing together, to see what they want to see instead of seeing what it really is.
Relax. Who cares if it's a religious tract site or not? You're not that insecure, are you? LOL! Isn't this thread suppose to be a religious view about dinosaurs? The page provides an eye-opening insight into how some people come to such mistaken views.
Yeah, I know the link is for the religious-minded, but the author claims to have "studied" the carving and attempts to make his case proving it. It's worth a look because it demonstrates how people who are determined to put dinos along side of man are so intent with their belief that they lose sight of everything else.
No disrespect meant to Eric Buffettaut, but while he may be a paleontologist, he's not a specialist in the field of ancient art and architecture. I'm not meaning to toot my own horn, but I've been familiar with the region for decades. While I suppose it's possible the carving is fake, I have my doubts. Yes, the color looks different because the grime has been cleaned off. After all, the carving has become quite a tourist attraction. For Pete's sake, sounds like even Eric has bought into the dino idea whether fake or not! I think the carving is genuine. I'll explain why. The real question is whether the carving actually represents a stegosaurus. Maybe not.
The author mentions a couple of books about the site that state, "...a very convincing representation of a stegosaur" and, "an animal which bears a striking resemblance to a stegosaurus." Evidently, those seeds of thought made a striking impression on the author, who I presume knows little or nothing about the region. For all I know, he may have been there on a tourist visa.
If you look at the other carvings above and below, you'll find each contain elements in common. For example each is encircled by stylized fish and serpents. You'll also see that surrounding that are what look like flower petals. They aren't. They are stylized flames radiating outward.
Another common element is that each carving features a different animal, but animals that are commonly found in the region. A monkey, a bird, a lizard. If you look at the photo where the author is standing next to the column, at the bottom is a character with a raised sword. Around its head are more of the stylized radiating flames.
People might know about dinosaurs today, but in the distant past, a stegosaur would have been completely unknown. Even if bones of one had been found, they'd have no idea what the animal looked like. That leaves one other choice, the "stegosaur" is not a stegosaur at all, but some other animal common to the region.
The things above the animal are more stylized radiating flames, but clearly there isn't enough room to go completely around the animal. If you block them out you begin to see something else. It is either a stylized gaur, which is a type of wild cattle - not very common in the region these days. Or it's a stylized water buffalo - which are very common in Southeast Asia.
What amazes me is how easy it is for some people, who are determined to put dinos and people as co-existing together, to see what they want to see instead of seeing what it really is.
In 1970, Dr. Swift was completely confident that evolution was a scientitic fact. And he felt that way, until he had what I call a Genesis moment. At the sametime he had fully imbraced evolution, he was working on a Nazcan tomb. While the sun was now setting, Dr. Swift saw the light from the sun suddenly illuminate a single Ica Stone in the cave inwhich he was working. It was then, when Dr. Swift froze, with his eyes transfixed on that Ica Stone. For there before him, Dr. Swift saw the reality, and the truth. On that one illuminated stone, was clearly a carved dinosaur, and one that could of only been made in the ancient past. It was on that day, that Dr. Swift came to his final conclusion.
What this image revealed to me was that evolutionism's column and fine tuned intellectual tower of time with its yawning gap of sixty five million years between dinosaurs and man was merely a myth.
When those in science ignored other Ica stones showing depictions of dinosaurs, and then saying they were fakes, Dr. Swift had agreed with them. Yet now, it was Dr. Swift himself that discovered one. And he also knew he could no longer agree with that popular scientific belief. And he also knew, that this stone could not of been made by any villagers in modern times.
the bible is not a history book. its literature designed to teach moral lessons.
not a good place to learn about disosaurs.
It is because of the Bible, Christians believe that dinosaurs existed in our recent past, and historical discovery is showing this to be true.
Dr. Swift, who was a confirmed believer in evolution, changed his whole belief when he discovered a dinosaur image carved in stone while working in a Nazcan tomb. This occured in the year 1970, and after his discovery, his final conclusion is stated below.
Dr. Swift. What this image revealed to me was that evolutionism's geologic column and fine tuned intellectual tower of time with its yawning gap of sixty five million years between dinosaurs and man was merely a myth.
And stone and clay figurines found in 1947 at the base of El Toro mountain, also contain figurines of dinosaurs. And some of them, were of dinosaurs yet not discovered. Here again, science will claim this evidence is fake. Yet they make these claims without any scientific review.
There he goes again, lying his fool head off. I told you, Tom; stop it; the Acambarans won't cooperate with science, not the other way around. Just say it a few times until you've got the jist of it! Then you can go out and play with the others!
Now for years, science told us that soft tissue would never be found on dinosaur bones, because such tissue could only last about 10,000 years. Yet in recent times, dinosaur bones are not only being found with soft tissue, they are also being found with stretchable blood vessels. So now the believers in evolution have revised their theory on soft tissue. And we are now being told, that soft tissue can last 70 million years. LOL
Actually, if you'd bother to represent things correctly (I'm beginning to suspect you're quite an accomplished prevaricator, Tom...) you'd have to say that we're talking about FROZEN dino remains now, and those can be and are preserved in salty or oxygen-free cold water, high pH mud or in pre-metamorphic stone formations, as well as in tar pits. makes sense. You know, where bacteria can't survive.
Don't try to constantly confuse the issue with lies, Tom. Folks are far too educated now by National Geographic, Scientific American, their own high-school educations or their own natural inquisitive nature. To just blurt out nonsense while waggling your finger at the congregation, with a stern and menacing look in your eye, ain't gonna cut it any more. Society's getting too smart for dogmatic fundamentalist Christian myths now.
I believe their is enought evidence out there to support the belief that dinosaurs were walking the earth 2,000 years ago.
Nope. In fact, there's no one tiny wit of evidence. Of course YOU believe it, but so what? There's absolutely NO VALID EVIDENCE of recent co-existing dinos, but there is lots of evidence that they walked the Earth millions of years asgo. And I mean LOTS OF IT. We've NEVER found dino bones fossilized alongside those of even gorillas, much less man.
And I can say that, because ancient art shows us such dinosaurs. Yet it is todays science, that ignores this evidence.
Science never ignores anything, Tom. They investigate, review, test and then conclude. Well, of course they don't persist if the thing being investigated has been completely and repeatedly debunked. I mean, why waste time repeating nonsense investigations just because one side of the argument is unhappy.
Science abandons the absurd, Tom. Let's repeat: Science Abandons The Absurd.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Campbell34
... you should care what the Bible states about dinosaurs, because if the Bible is speaking the truth, then someone else is not.
Or, this good alternative...
Quote:
Originally Posted by Spotted1
Or someone else is speaking the truth and the bible is not.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Campbell34
And when did you see a fully intact dinosaur that would give you full knowledge of the existance or non existance of a navel?
Well now, let's see how science works, shall we???:
Fact: we' ve found dino eggs in China as recently as last year. Do you deny that?
Eggs, Tom. With obvious little fossilized dinosaurs in them! Check out the pictures!
Fact: Navels are an artifact of mammalian in-utero fetal support. Eggs are not attached to a reptilian mother with an umbillical cord, Tom. Here's some proof 'cause you don't want to believe me 'bout nuthin' apparently....
Science never ignores anything, Tom. They investigate, review, test and then conclude. Well, of course they don't persist if the thing being investigated has been completely and repeatedly debunked. I mean, why waste time repeating nonsense investigations just because one side of the argument is unhappy.
Science abandons the absurd, Tom. Let's repeat: Science Abandons The Absurd.
Or, this good alternative...
Well now, let's see how science works, shall we???:
Fact: we' ve found dino eggs in China as recently as last year. Do you deny that?
Eggs, Tom. With obvious little fossilized dinosaurs in them! Check out the pictures!
Fact: Navels are an artifact of mammalian in-utero fetal support. Eggs are not attached to a reptilian mother with an umbillical cord, Tom. Here's some proof 'cause you don't want to believe me 'bout nuthin' apparently....
Fact: dinos, being reptiles and notmammals, didn't have umbillical cords, and hence they had NO navels. Ever. NEVER EVER.
See how simple yet convincing that was? No global conspiracy, no "ignoring the facts", just the plain God's truth!
You, of all people ought to appreciate that!
Well Dr. Swift was a true believer in Evolution until he discovered a carved image of a dinosaur in a Nazcan tomb. He was one of those who believed that those Ica burial stones were all fakes. Yet when he personally discovered one himself, he could nolonger deny their reality. So he left the scientifically correct crowd, and imbraced what he knew was the truth.
It is because of the Bible, Christians believe that dinosaurs existed in our recent past, and historical discovery is showing this to be true.
It's not uncommon for a person to define "Christian" as a specific element of Protestantism. Amongst your group this is likely the definition of Christians and most of the world's Christians are semi-pagan or false Christians or whatever.
Still this is a public forum so I think it's a bit presumptuous to go on such a narrow definition of the word "Christian." For most of the world "Christians" includes many denominations. So generally speaking Christians don't believe that dinosaurs existed in our recent past. They either are unaware of the idea, disinterested in it, or belong to denominations that reject the theory.
It is because of the Bible, Christians believe that dinosaurs existed in our recent past, and historical discovery is showing this to be true.
Dr. Swift, who was a confirmed believer in evolution, changed his whole belief when he discovered a dinosaur image carved in stone while working in a Nazcan tomb. This occured in the year 1970, and after his discovery, his final conclusion is stated below.
Dr. Swift. What this image revealed to me was that evolutionism's geologic column and fine tuned intellectual tower of time with its yawning gap of sixty five million years between dinosaurs and man was merely a myth.
I guess your Dr. Smith was as gullible as you are....Didn't your read my post on the last page? It wasn't science that rejected the Inca stones.
Here I'll use your method....I'll repeat it for you.
The stones were created by local villagers to sell to gullible tourists. Two peasants from Callango, Basilio Uchuya and his wife, Irma Gutierrez de Aparcana, have admitted to carving the stones they sold to Cabrera, basing their designs on illustrations from comic books, school books, and magazines.
By the way, most Christians do not believe as you do. Most accept evolution.
It is because of the Bible, Christians believe that dinosaurs existed in our recent past, and historical discovery is showing this to be true.
Let me correct that. "It is because of some whacked out interpretation of some verses in the Bible, that certain Christians believe that dinosaurs existed in our recent past, eventhough historical and empirical scientific discovery is showing this not to be true." There, now it is correct.
Quote:
Dr. Swift, who was a confirmed believer in evolution, changed his whole belief when he discovered a dinosaur image carved in stone while working in a Nazcan tomb. This occured in the year 1970, and after his discovery, his final conclusion is stated below.
Dr. Swift. What this image revealed to me was that evolutionism's geologic column and fine tuned intellectual tower of time with its yawning gap of sixty five million years between dinosaurs and man was merely a myth.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Try a little honesty!
