geni said:
There is at least one North American dragon, from the Hurons, which was not snakelike and that was the Drake. It was 4-legged and breathed fire. But yes, the rest of the North American dragons are plumed or finned serpent-like creatures, much the same as their cousins in China and elsewhere. This may not be surprising if you accept the premise that Native Americans trace their origins to Asia, and especially China.
There is a nice drawing and descriptions of these dragons at:
http://www.blackdrago.com/types.htm#drake
thaiboxerken
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- Sep 17, 2001
- Messages
- 34,592
LOL. Actually trying to debate with a person that thinks logic and reason are evil things that came from the devil is simply ridiculous. He reminds me of Waterboy's mom. School is of the DEVIL!!
From 1inC
I love the way you make assumptions, like the bible is the word of god, but then simply declare that your assumptions are exempt from being assumptions! Ahh, the beauty of argument through assertion... I'm right because I say so! Oh, and by the way, my invisible, un-detectable, un-testable friend here backs me up--he just told me so.
The reality, 1inC, is that you are making all sorts of assumptions but you then just declare that you aren't.
1inC edited to please Me:
I am the all powerful Skep! Hear my word, 1inChrist, I am revealing myself to you through this Holy Post. Through My word, you need not make any assumptions!
I love the way you make assumptions, like the bible is the word of god, but then simply declare that your assumptions are exempt from being assumptions! Ahh, the beauty of argument through assertion... I'm right because I say so! Oh, and by the way, my invisible, un-detectable, un-testable friend here backs me up--he just told me so.
The reality, 1inC, is that you are making all sorts of assumptions but you then just declare that you aren't.
1inC edited to please Me:
I am the all powerful Skep! Hear my word, 1inChrist, I am revealing myself to you through this Holy Post. Through My word, you need not make any assumptions!
Operaider
Muse
- Joined
- Apr 4, 2004
- Messages
- 913
1 in C,
I'm having some trouble following your points.
You say dragons are dinosaurs that have been attributed magical powers. You say that the stories about dragons are proof that dinosaurs were around in the time of man. But, you have yet to explain why they would think that dinosaurs could do things like breath fire and (in some cases) talk.
If they lived side by side with them for years, wouldn't they know that such things were ridiculous? I mean, I've lived with a dog half my life. I've never so much as suspected him of breathing fire. Why then did prehistoric man get it so wrong?
Easy, they didn't live with such beasts. They found bones of dinosaurs. Became afraid that such things were still around. Probably blamed other occurrences on dragons. (EXAMPLE: Something killed some of my sheep, it must have been a dragon). Their minds got a little ahead of themselves and they started imagining all the horrible powers it might have.
Basically this, similar to a kid seeing a horror movie and then thinking that Freddy Kruger is in his closet. He just doesn't understand what he saw, and his imagination is running away with him. Similarly, when prehistoric man discovered dinosaur bones he wouldn't have understood that it had been dead for millions of years. He would fear this new creature, and probably record his findings so other people could be warned.
I'm having some trouble following your points.
You say dragons are dinosaurs that have been attributed magical powers. You say that the stories about dragons are proof that dinosaurs were around in the time of man. But, you have yet to explain why they would think that dinosaurs could do things like breath fire and (in some cases) talk.
If they lived side by side with them for years, wouldn't they know that such things were ridiculous? I mean, I've lived with a dog half my life. I've never so much as suspected him of breathing fire. Why then did prehistoric man get it so wrong?
Easy, they didn't live with such beasts. They found bones of dinosaurs. Became afraid that such things were still around. Probably blamed other occurrences on dragons. (EXAMPLE: Something killed some of my sheep, it must have been a dragon). Their minds got a little ahead of themselves and they started imagining all the horrible powers it might have.
Basically this, similar to a kid seeing a horror movie and then thinking that Freddy Kruger is in his closet. He just doesn't understand what he saw, and his imagination is running away with him. Similarly, when prehistoric man discovered dinosaur bones he wouldn't have understood that it had been dead for millions of years. He would fear this new creature, and probably record his findings so other people could be warned.
Operaider
Muse
- Joined
- Apr 4, 2004
- Messages
- 913
1 in C,
A couple days ago I watched a tape titled "Creation or Evolution". This tape was put out by the Plain Truth Ministries. This tape, among others they produce, is aimed at bridging the gap between science and religion. It is clearly Christian propaganda, but wanting to see the other side’s points, I watched it.
The first half of the tape deals with the discussion of the age of the earth. After consulting geologists and paleontologists they come to the conclusion that the earth's strata is tens of millions of years old. (QUOTE: "The view that the fossil record is only a few thousands of years old must be rejected. The evidence shows that the earth is not a relatively recent creation. Dinosaur fossils are tens of millions of years old, and to believe otherwise is to improperly understand the physical evidence. So, is there a way to reconcile science and the bible concerning the age of the earth? Yes, there is. You see there really is no definitive statement made in the bible that denies the immense antiquity of the earth. Genesis chapter 1 verse 1 simply states "In the beginning god created the heaven and the earth". No time frame is assigned to that event. We shouldn't confuse the beginnings of human civilization as described in the early chapters of genesis with the creation of the earth billions of years earlier.
Later, they delve into the subject of evolution where they display an inability to grasp some very simple concepts. They hold the stance that animals can only have minor variations and that there are genetic restraints put upon the animals that prevent them from changing dramatically. Not realizing that with each mutation in the species those restraints are rewritten to apply to the new creature.
(EXAMPLE: Fruit flies are prone to genetic mutations, as anyone who's taken high school biology should know. Using devices on unhatched eggs can induce mutation. Unfortunately I do not know the name of this device, anyone out there able to help me with this? A common mutation in the fruit fly is for it to be born without wings. This trait is passed down generation to generation. In future generations further mutations may occur. If these changes prove beneficial that new race will have a better chance at survival. (AKA survival of the fittest). Depending on the initial mutation they may evolve in different directions. For example a winged insect may evolve into some form of bird, while the wingless insect may evolve into a type lizard. This would of course take millions of years.)
A couple days ago I watched a tape titled "Creation or Evolution". This tape was put out by the Plain Truth Ministries. This tape, among others they produce, is aimed at bridging the gap between science and religion. It is clearly Christian propaganda, but wanting to see the other side’s points, I watched it.
The first half of the tape deals with the discussion of the age of the earth. After consulting geologists and paleontologists they come to the conclusion that the earth's strata is tens of millions of years old. (QUOTE: "The view that the fossil record is only a few thousands of years old must be rejected. The evidence shows that the earth is not a relatively recent creation. Dinosaur fossils are tens of millions of years old, and to believe otherwise is to improperly understand the physical evidence. So, is there a way to reconcile science and the bible concerning the age of the earth? Yes, there is. You see there really is no definitive statement made in the bible that denies the immense antiquity of the earth. Genesis chapter 1 verse 1 simply states "In the beginning god created the heaven and the earth". No time frame is assigned to that event. We shouldn't confuse the beginnings of human civilization as described in the early chapters of genesis with the creation of the earth billions of years earlier.
Later, they delve into the subject of evolution where they display an inability to grasp some very simple concepts. They hold the stance that animals can only have minor variations and that there are genetic restraints put upon the animals that prevent them from changing dramatically. Not realizing that with each mutation in the species those restraints are rewritten to apply to the new creature.
(EXAMPLE: Fruit flies are prone to genetic mutations, as anyone who's taken high school biology should know. Using devices on unhatched eggs can induce mutation. Unfortunately I do not know the name of this device, anyone out there able to help me with this? A common mutation in the fruit fly is for it to be born without wings. This trait is passed down generation to generation. In future generations further mutations may occur. If these changes prove beneficial that new race will have a better chance at survival. (AKA survival of the fittest). Depending on the initial mutation they may evolve in different directions. For example a winged insect may evolve into some form of bird, while the wingless insect may evolve into a type lizard. This would of course take millions of years.)
Dr Adequate
Banned
- Joined
- Aug 31, 2004
- Messages
- 17,766
And also, you're dodging Ashles' point, which I'll make again. The bones can be dated. They are old.
Now you're trying to save the appearances for saurian-human coexistence by saying that dragon myths might be evidence for it. Well, it might be tenuous evidence for it, which would prop up your case if you could find a bit more (e.g. cave paintings). But there is no point in trying to refute the age of the bones by waving around a bit of very flimsy "evidence" for the contrary position. The dinosaur bones are old. Geologists say so. They have established this by several different methods. They are certainly good at the rest of their job. If there is something wrong with their dating methods, please point out what it is. Otherwise --- dinosaur bones are very old. Please respond to this and less about dragons.
Now you're trying to save the appearances for saurian-human coexistence by saying that dragon myths might be evidence for it. Well, it might be tenuous evidence for it, which would prop up your case if you could find a bit more (e.g. cave paintings). But there is no point in trying to refute the age of the bones by waving around a bit of very flimsy "evidence" for the contrary position. The dinosaur bones are old. Geologists say so. They have established this by several different methods. They are certainly good at the rest of their job. If there is something wrong with their dating methods, please point out what it is. Otherwise --- dinosaur bones are very old. Please respond to this and less about dragons.
Operaider
Muse
- Joined
- Apr 4, 2004
- Messages
- 913
First of all a mastodon is not a dinosaur. You have more in common with a mastodon, than a mastodon has with a dinosaur. Secondly it is Mr. Brown’s opinion that it would be unlikely for the bone fragments and the mud to have such different radiocarbon ages. Unlikely is not the same as impossible. He has not shown anything to prove that such an occurrence could not happen. For example, if the mastodon were to become frozen in ice and then thawed out 2,700 years later; where at which point mud flowed into it’s skull cavity, then it would be entirely possible that the mud would and bone fragments would be thousands of years apart. Not knowing the specifics of the case (other than it was a mastodon and found in Canada) we can’t tell if this is a possibility. And since Mr. Brown was probably not the one to discover the mastodon, nor do the testing; the chance of him knowing exactly how unlikely this scenario is, is slim.
Then you posted
I’m surprised you don’t see what a ridiculous statement this is. Nature works because a system of laws that do not change. They are not trends. They are not fads. They are constant. Elements and atomic bonds are not living things, so they do not act like living things. They do not evolve.
This a purely hypothetical situation, since there isn’t even any evidence to question the validity of our dating methods. Let alone disprove them. This would be like me asking you to assume for a moment that all of the world were made out of candy canes and we are all gummy bears. There is no evidence to indicate that this is true, so what’s the point in indulging the fantasy.
ARE YOU FREAKING KIDDING ME?!?!?! Describe for me a possible scenario in which 1 + 1 would not equal 2. It doesn’t matter if it’s 2 seconds ago or a billion years ago. It’s still the same. I don’t care if you’re talking about a planet 9 trillion light years away. It’s still the same. Perhaps you should put down the bible and open a physics book.
alfaniner
Penultimate Amazing
Operaider said:
That's the great thing about science. You can go to the Moon, or another planet, or another galaxy, for Pete's sake, and it still works.
Does the invisible, magical man who lives in the sky have any influence on the planet Mars?
geni
Anti-homeopathy illuminati member
- Joined
- Oct 14, 2003
- Messages
- 28,209
1inChrist said:
By your defintion. By the defintion of over a billion other people who consider themselves christian yes I am. Allthough you wont care about this muslims and athists tend to consider me a christian (don't know about hindus I haven't met any).
Dinosaurs went down to the size of a chicken
Modern times in this case is post the realisation of how the fossil bones being found did fit together.
see the link
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eastern_Orthodoxy#Theology
thaiboxerken
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- Sep 17, 2001
- Messages
- 34,592
You should really try to learn some science, 1Christer, because right now, your every post only shows the world how ignorant you are.
Have you accepted Christ as your Savior from the eternal Hellfire?
If this is true why aren't modern lizards and reptiles considered dinosaurs?
So you are saying all dinosaur-like dragon myth come after the finding of dinosaur fossils?
I'll read the link and get back to you.
Tricky
Briefly immortal
A whole bunch of your life is based on "materialistic science", including the computer you are using to post here. What would you call someone who denied the value materialistic science while using the products of that science?1inChrist said:
thaiboxerken
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- Sep 17, 2001
- Messages
- 34,592
1inChrist said:
Yes. They are also stupid.