A creationist has linked me to his blog.

[Crazyharp81602]

But that's not all..

Blatantly ignorant of the fact that no traces of human remains alongside dinosaur remains has ever been found, this creationist (http://elliott1985.blogspot.com/2007/05/living-with-dinosaurs.html) has all the nerve of falsely accusing me of the following..

It is disappointed that the way some Christians use incorrect knowledge trying to argue their point. Instead of making more people believe in God, it would just give the general publics an image that Christians are liars.

Incorrect knowledge indeed!! :banghead:

[Smohg]

That link is interesting. Why would old civilizations have dinosaur icons?

[KeithJM]

However, it is a common sense that dinosaurs have already extincted millions of years ago

I got all the way up to that sentence, felt an aneurysm coming on and decided it would be in my best interests to abstain from further perusal. Anyone who can't be arsed to learn English by the time they're in college doesn't deserve to put forth any kind of opinion using the language on any subject whatsoever.

[Monad]

But that's not all..

Blatantly ignorant of the fact that no traces of human remains alongside dinosaur remains has ever been found, this creationist (http://elliott1985.blogspot.com/2007/05/living-with-dinosaurs.html) has all the nerve of falsely accusing me of the following..



Incorrect knowledge indeed!! :banghead:

Where's he calling you a liar? He's clearly referring to creationist hoaxes where "evidence" has been manufactured and linking to your site to back that up.

[Monad]

I got all the way up to that sentence, felt an aneurysm coming on and decided it would be in my best interests to abstain from further perusal. Anyone who can't be arsed to learn English by the time they're in college doesn't deserve to put forth any kind of opinion using the language on any subject whatsoever.

It is pretty absysmal.

[Monad]

That link is interesting. Why would old civilizations have dinosaur icons?

Not sure they do. As stated 2 of those 4 findings were clear fakes (the two more obviously dinosaur ones). The other two could be interpreted in any number of ways. Firstly many cultures have myths of enlarged versions of animals they know - for example aboriginal myths have enlarged goannas (lizards), kangaroos, snakes etc. I know of other cultures that have myths of snakes with legs, giant lizards that breath fire etc. Furthermore images of such creatures are often combined with various repeating patterns - either based on natural forms (the creature in the Cambodian temple for example is surrounded by several layers of repeating patterns that appear to me to be based on leaves), or more abstract forms. I can see how a representation of a giant lizard god could easily be reinterpreted by modern eyes as a "dinosaur".

That being said I see no reason why ancient people's couldn't at some point also have seen fossils themselves and tried to interpret what they looked like in the flesh - probably seeing them as evidence of giants and monsters or gods from the past. Even if finds were not complete, many aboriginal people's have very good anatomical knowledge and may have been able to roughly visualise what a fossilised animal would have looked like on the basis of a few bones and it only takes a few such interpretations for such creatures to become preserved ever after in oral and pictorial histories (and become further glorified).

[Crazyharp81602]

Where's he calling you a liar? He's clearly referring to creationist hoaxes where "evidence" has been manufactured and linking to your site to back that up.

I thought he was. It's in the quote I gave you which is located near the end of his article. The way he has been writing the article and showing off images of fake artifacts and posting links to creationist sites, it really made me feel he is a creationist. I thought he was making an article criticizing the real views on dinosaurs and use my blog against me through it. So that's why I took the article so negatively.

[DISSIDENT AGGRESSOR]

I never think of Christians as liars, just simply mistaken... around here anyway;)

[Monad]

I thought he was. It's in the quote I gave you which is located near the end of his article. The way he has been writing the article and showing off images of fake artifacts and posting links to creationist sites, it really made me feel he is a creationist. I thought he was making an article criticizing the real views on dinosaurs and use my blog against me through it. So that's why I took the article so negatively.

Yes but if you read the full paragraph s/he's clearly criticising the fakers and those who make misleading use of the fakes, not you, and then in the last sentence about liars linking to your site to back up his/her argument.

There are whole lot of discoveries throughout the world pointing to the direction that dinosaurs may once coexist with human beings. Such findings become one of the reasons some Christians argue that God did created everything. I am not saying it is bad to find evidences and argue for the truth in order to have more people believe in God. However, if one do a in depth research, one would find out that of the four discoveries shown above, two of them are in fact man made evidence. Ica stones are a hoax and the Acambaro figures are also a well known lie. It is disappointed that the way some Christians use incorrect knowledge trying to argue their point. Instead of making more people believe in God, it would just give the general publics an image that Christians are liars.

My reading of this is this is an ignorant and probably misinformed student trying to educate themselves and question things and not a dogmatic creationist.

[post tenebras lux]

Well I read it that the blogger is complaining about people using the (obviously/proven/known/etc.) fake evidence (thereby allowing people like Crazyharp81602 to comment about 'creationist fairy tales') when "there are still plenty of interesting findings of dinosaurs that have not yet found to be a hoax".

And - please - "If you are interested on finding more about dinosaurs' interaction with human" he helpfully links you to http://www.1timothy4-13.com/files/bible/dino.html as well as http://www.genesispark.org/genpark/ancient/ancient.htm :banghead:

[ohforf]

Well I read it that the blogger is complaining about people using the (obviously/proven/known/etc.) fake evidence (thereby allowing people like Crazyharp81602 to comment about 'creationist fairy tales') when "there are still plenty of interesting findings of dinosaurs that have not yet found to be a hoax".

This is how I read it, too. Of course, that particular blogger expresses his thoughts so poorly that it's hard to know for sure. No one will take him seriously. I wouldn't worry about his link to your blog.

[NZSkep]

I got all the way up to that sentence, felt an aneurysm coming on and decided it would be in my best interests to abstain from further perusal. Anyone who can't be arsed to learn English by the time they're in college doesn't deserve to put forth any kind of opinion using the language on any subject whatsoever.

to be fair, it looks like the blogger is actually asian judging from the characters at the bottom of the page - Chinese or Japanese maybe I'm not sure?

[Monad]

Well I read it that the blogger is complaining about people using the (obviously/proven/known/etc.) fake evidence (thereby allowing people like Crazyharp81602 to comment about 'creationist fairy tales') when "there are still plenty of interesting findings of dinosaurs that have not yet found to be a hoax".

And - please - "If you are interested on finding more about dinosaurs' interaction with human" he helpfully links you to http://www.1timothy4-13.com/files/bible/dino.html as well as http://www.genesispark.org/genpark/ancient/ancient.htm :banghead:

Oh I'm not saying this person is not some sort of creationist - just that they are clearly not the died-in-the-wool dogmatic type. More likely someone brought up that way and arguing from a position of relative ignorance but open minded enough to acknowledge that there have been fakes and in fact bemoaning the fact that such fakes lend support to those who would portray all Christians as liars.

The point being I see this as someone potentially open to evidence and certainly they are not compeletely closed off or hostile or accusing Crazyharp of being the liar.

[ohforf]

Oh I'm not saying this person is not some sort of creationist - just that they are clearly not the died-in-the-wool dogmatic type. More likely someone brought up that way and arguing from a position of relative ignorance but open minded enough to acknowledge that there have been fakes and in fact bemoaning the fact that such fakes lend support to those who would portray all Christians as liars.

The point being I see this as someone potentially open to evidence and certainly they are not compeletely closed off or hostile or accusing Crazyharp of being the liar.

Frankly, I don't think this

It is disappointed that the way some Christians use incorrect knowledge trying to argue their point. Instead of making more people believe in God, it would just give the general publics an image that Christians are liars (http://dinocreationistsfairytale.wordpress.com/tag/mythology/).

is altogether different in spirit than this

Persistently using discredited arguments is both ineffectual and, more importantly, immoral—it’s the truth that sets us free (John 8:32), not error, and Christ is “the truth” (John 14:6)! Since there is so much good evidence for creation, there is no need to use any of the “doubtful” arguments.(From here (http://answersingenesis.org/home/area/faq/dont_use.asp).)

"Elliott" may or may not be open to new evidence, but I get the impression that he's simply posting a warning that using discredited arguments for creationism doesn't help the cause. (There's probably no need to enumerate his failures here.) I don't think he calls Crazyharp a liar, but I don't think he's really encouraging critical thinking, either.

Again, I wouldn't be alarmed. For one reason or another, the blogger isn't very good at communicating through his chosen medium. I doubt that this will cause Crazyharp further grief.

[Ubercat]

I never think of Christians as liars, just simply mistaken... around here anyway;)

Once you've clearly demonstrated how they're mistaken, repeatedly, and they ignore you and keep repeating the same claptrap, it's hard not to see them as having moved past "mistaken" and into something else.

-Ubercat

[Major Billy]

Apparently modern paleontologists are all wrong. Dinosaurs did drag their tails:

http://www.bible.ca/tracks/tracks-acambaro-dino27.jpg
http://www.bible.ca/tracks/tracks-acambaro-dino36.jpg

[Crazyharp81602]

Yes but if you read the full paragraph s/he's clearly criticising the fakers and those who make misleading use of the fakes, not you, and then in the last sentence about liars linking to your site to back up his/her argument.



My reading of this is this is an ignorant and probably misinformed student trying to educate themselves and question things and not a dogmatic creationist.

I understand now.

[Boro Nut]

Not sure they do. As stated 2 of those 4 findings were clear fakes (the two more obviously dinosaur ones). The other two could be interpreted in any number of ways.Heaven forbid people would ever make shit up to adorn temples and the like or sell more hamburgers. Next thing they'll be saying blue people with six arms never founded India and that you're allowed to have a company logo without having met it.

And if environmentalists are right about plastic having a half life of 56 billion years then the only thing anyone digging around our rubbish dumps will find in the future will be Barbie dolls and model dinosaurs. They'll be quite within their rights to conclude we we're not only contemporary, but survived some mysterious global catastrophe together by hermetically sealing ourselves into strangely Tupperware-like arks.

Boro Nut

[Wounded King]

Hi Crazyharp,

This isn't directly related to your OP but it is a similar issue.

We recently had a drive-by creationist poster at EvCforum who was complaining about a blogger making fabricated claims to discredit the new creationist museum. The principle thing he was complaining about was the idea that the museum propounded the idea that T.rex ate coconuts (http://www.scientificblogging.com/fish_feet/t_rex_ate_coconuts). Ken Ham himself wrote on his AIG blog (http://blogs.answersingenesis.org/aroundtheworld/2007/05/08/what-are-we-smoking/) that ...

This is a new one! I’ve never heard of anyone at AiG saying T. rex ate coconuts. However, maybe Sarda is right!!! As I stated, there are no guides at the Museum. People will learn that all animals, including the T. rex dinosaurs ate plants originally—which means, all sorts of plants/fruits, etc.

But looking around I saw a number of other places where this claim appeared, including several articles by Chris Hedges (http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/20070326_a_world_where_lies_are_true/), the author of 'American Fascists'.

The earliest reference I have turned up was in your dissection (http://dinocreationistsfairytale.wordpress.com/2006/12/03/book-rebuttal-the-great-dinosaur-mystery-solved-part-3/) of Ken Ham's book 'The great dinosaur mystery solved!'.

Pages 22-25 tells of a crank version of Tyrannosaurus featuring, in some cases, outdated descriptions of T,rex and many comical YE falsehoods about him worth a billion laughs, including his eating habits. Creationists reasoned falsely that since God in Genesis 1:30 has “commanded” that all animals must eat plants, then T.rex must have been a vegetarian before the Fall as well, eating melons, coconuts, gourds (I honestly didn’t know that these are in fact embryonic plant stems), and others kinds of vegetarian foods that will actually give the Tyrant a very bad belly ache, make him very sick, and have all of his carnivore teeth, jaws, see forward eyes, and stomach to digest red meat be wasted away and rendered useless.

So I was wondering if you could clarify whether Ham himself has actually claimed that coconuts were part of T.rex's diet?

Many thanks.

TTFN,

WK