Originally Posted By: ikillbux
Originally Posted By: Peach
Originally Posted By: westflgator
Originally Posted By: jbc
Originally Posted By: westflgator
Originally Posted By: deadeye48

Originally Posted By: Remington270
Originally Posted By: deadeye48
Why would there even be a debate whether or not dinosaurs were on the ark because there is nothing definitive in scripture concerning the animals on there. Didn't Marco Polo write about seeing large flying reptiles ??


I don't know about Marco Polo, but many a mariner did write about seeing Mermaids.

Dinosaurs predated man by millions of years. No overlap. You're right, it's not really a debate.


You do know there are cave drawings depicting dinosaur like animals and there is a dry riverbed in (Texas) i think ...it has fossilized human and dinosaur tracks in it?


There are also human and dinosaur fossils in the same fossil beds found relatively close together. The whole argument of evolutionists is that different strata mean different time periods. There is evidence all over the world to debunk that but it's still taught to our kids regardless. An example would be fossilized trees going through multiple layers of strata (supposed millions of years worth) upside down with the roots facing upward. These have been found in multiple places around the world but you see a picture of one in a science book because it doesn't fit their agenda.


Link?


We have a video series on creation vs. evolution and the scientific evidence that supports creation. I don't have a link to it, but in the series, he does source all of the info he puts forth. I will try and watch them again and write down all his main sources. The trees are fairly common and there are pics of them that can probably be found and a simple search.

Here's a link. And yes I know this guy got convicted of tax evasion and it definitely hurt his ministry. However, he still puts forth very solid evidence for creation and for a worldwide flood. He also holds his own very well with the evolutionist that I've seen him debate. I would say he won all of the debates that I've watched (videos not in person).

The guys name is Ken Hovine and he is a scientist. I went to one of his seminars years ago and thought it was amazing. He really changed a lot of my thoughts on creationism and used good evidence to prove his points.


Kent Hovind (Dr. Dino) is awesome!!! Yeah, he got jailed for tax evasion, but that was really a pissing contest between him and the government (I think they came after him because he was a such a force against them). One thing in particular that he said that I still chew on today...In the middle of a long list of genealogies, he draws attention to a man named Peleg and notes that he's the only one who had a qualifier ("in his days the earth was divided"). Divided? Well, if you look at the lifespan of the men before him, they lived hundreds of years. And those who lived after him had substantially shorter lives, like half as long. What happened? The flood!!! Peleg lived during the flood. So why did people begin dying at half the age afterwards? Hovind suggests that prior to the flood there was a canopy of water in the earth's atmosphere, literally a layer of water encompassing the earth. Water blocks UV rays, and UV is the worst degenerator, it kills! God wouldn't have created the earth originally without protection from the UV rays of the sun. Hovind says there wouldn't have been enough water within the earth to flood the whole earth (think about it, that's basic science really), so the bulk of the water came from that atmospheric layer. Whatever caused the flood was such a catastrophic event that it collapsed that water layer. (FYI, that could also be what killed the dinosaurs, along with the flooding) Anyway, you see where I'm going with all that, and it connects to what we've been discussing above.


Why not just create the Sun to not be harmful? Why create a harmful sun then a water canopy that floods the Earth and kills everyone regardless of their relationship with God. Unless somehow the sun only became harmful after original sin, which I doubt that's the cause of skin cancer.


It is easier to fool a man than to convince him he has been fooled.