Jbuza wrote:I understand you not being convinced, after all you think it is absurd to think that dinos lived just a short while ago.
If numerous people said they saw you take the cocaine from my car I would be in trouble.
VIable DNA in dinos, eyewitness reports, geological anomalies, footprints of man and dinos together. The evidnece is there, but you reject it all because it is foolishness to you.
That's fine really, but I think it goes more to what you want to be true, than a fair examination of the evidence.
Were the Japaneese seamen and Govt biologist said to be mistaken so that their expert account of dragging up a dino can be rejected?
was Someone carving human tracks in strata in texas then burying them under tons of shale.
You can reject the evidence if you like. Believe it to be absurd and you will come up with all manner of explanations, and attack the accounts as lies, anything but to entertain the idea that the preponderence of the evidence suggests just what it appears to suggest.
It is not absurd necessarily to believe dinosaurs lived a short while ago. We have forms of dinosaurs still alive today in similar form to what they were as evidenced in the geologic record. Crocodiles for instance appear to be in similar form, although not as large as earlier specimens. What is absurd is to believe that all the forms that the geologic record shows were alive less than 6,000 years ago.
Appeals to mythology as evidence of dinosaurs are not very convincing. Drawings in caves do not depict scale and lizards have been with us all the while, so that is not very convincing.
Claims of Dinosaur DNA have more often than not been determined to be Human contaminents.
http://www.dinosauria.com/jdp/misc/dna.htm
There's no reason to reject forms of dinosaurs being found, where the sightings and more importantly the physical evidence would be good. There's just not good evidence. The Loch Ness Monster and BigFoot have plenty of sightings. Do you accept them as reported? There may be something there, but it is evident that the human mind and suggestion have a great deal to do with these types of reports.
Footprints of man and dinos together, see this link.
http://paleo.cc/paluxy/paluxy.htm
Note there are many, many links below the main article giving a very broad examination of many of these claims.
The plesiosaur claim from 1954, is questionable on several levels.
http://home.austarnet.com.au/stear/aig_ ... _henke.htm
What is remarkable in all these claims is how little evidence there is for them in the first place. If Dinosaurs were alive and destroyed in the flood with all of mankind except the 8 on the ark, you would expect for there to be multiple cases of human bones found with dinosaur bones instead of just the few where the more plausible explanation appears to be strata shifting or human intrusion by digging down.
Why is this not the case?
If these dinosaurs were alive at the time of Noah, why were they not on the ark? Do you have a textually consistent explanation?
By the way, did you know that Elvis is still alive? It's true. Look at all the people who have claimed to see him.
