Flintstones Archaeology

my talk today concerns the OP recited that dinosaurs lived with man I get this argument from all the creations that I talk to most of them of course being the young earth variety and even when they're not alright even when they're not young earth creationists they still tend to believe in the Loch Ness monster and Bigfoot and things of that sort so um there we go there's okay alright my first recognized encounter with creationism was on Easter Sunday 1971 I was 11 years old I was at my grandmother's house in a rural Arizona town and I wanted to know how to celebrate Easter in a traditional way and my grandmother only knew one way and that was to go to church which I thought was a really lame way to celebrate holiday I rarely went to church and but I went I went along with her anyway it was it was an experience and the man behind the podium described a bit of news that sounded like an interesting scientific discovery something that I was not expecting to hear in church he said that day listen here we go he said that they had found a Sandals footprints of a human walking alongside a dinosaur track way on the river taxes and that both sets of tracks dated to the same time can you guess the time six thousand years ago so my eleven-year-old mind imagine how there could be some isolated community of say iguanodons still still wandering around in pre-columbian Americas and I of course took the sandals to be some but there was a human footprints would of course have to be Native Americans we knew that they were here for 12,000 years or so or 6,000 years or so so well into that well into that time range and there's no rule that says that absolutely all of the dinosaurs had to have been extinct after by the KT impact 65 million years ago there could easily have been several lines yet undiscovered that could have survived in the Eocene and maybe even the paleo scene and it's not impossible that some final remnant of that lineage may have carried on into pre-columbian America reported here one problem that I did have was the sandaled footprint he said yeah Native Americans didn't wear sandals they were moccasins and moccasins rarely leave clear tracks and they didn't have time to give us any more thought because of the next thing that the guy said which was proving that those were Adams footprints remember my 11 year old mind Locke did you know wait I already knew enough about logic and assertions to know that you can't make a positive ID of anyone from yet from antiquity based on your Footwear and there was no way anyone could audit honestly make such a claim and I looked around the room and no one was correcting this guy that I found really amazing nobody nobody raising is a you can't say that and so I said to my grandmother sitting next to me kind of under my breath I said grandma he's lying her reaction was somewhat unexpected no one really expects to have your grandmother slug you in the solar plexus and I learned that it is forbidden to question the man behind the podium no matter how wrong he obviously is see if I can with this they've actually been several tracks just just in the Paluxy River bed near Glen Rose Texas that were reported to be human track ways interlaced with dinosaur tracks and so far most have turned out to be dinosaur tracks in this case somewhere back filled with mud as is illustrated here and has suddenly obvious on the other image and others turned out to be what were said to be human footprints were just poorly eroded and when they eroded further after having been exposed to rain and all they turned out to be dinosaur tracks going the opposite direction not all of them can be explained so easily occasionally you see one like this is a threatened okay I think I might've mr. mr. Skipworth skipped a step okay um yeah I did nope hold on yep I am missing the slide how about that okay well you can see the slide that that's behind him and I will just have to do with that one I don't know why it's missing from this layout but I there's a very different explanation for this type of can you see what that is there's a human footprint a very poorly unrealistic human footprint and overlaid on that is a dinosaur footprint now there's several footprints that have been presented and usually you just get the human footprint by itself and occasionally you'll get it mixed with something else like a trilobite or something like that will be embedded in the footprint but in cases like this one and the one that's strangely missing from here what the description is that they were man-made and in the slightest that's absent was a very Flintstones looking foot it's not a very realistic foot at all and there was a description on how to create it in the slab has excavated with no footprint it was actually when you look at the way the sediment is deep the piece of rock that was extracted was actually upside down and footprint was carved in it kind of backwards a little bit impossible for any kind of sedimentation that way the see this was was reportedly card by George Adams a Glen Rose resident in the 1930s and these were popularly presented to and by creationists until the 1970s when Adams nephew explained how they were made and that's the the reason the footprint was with with a rib print was me by hand using hammer and chisel and the center punch to simulate raindrops this course you had to have a flood in or somewhere and tell-tale blemishes could be dulled with muriatic acid and the fresh marks could be artificially aged by being covered in manure for a few days the last application has become quite a tradition among pseudoscience enthusiasts you may notice that most of the compelling arguments for creationism are in fact very in now moving on to this slide in the creationist tradition if you can't find any actual evidence you create your own likewise if you can't find any authorities to support you you create those too and if those alleged experts can't get appropriate credentials you can also create those meet dr. Carl Baugh is one of the few remaining professional creationists still trying to defending Paluxy man track he also has the dubious dishonor of having been called out as a fraud even by other creationists here we see what the man with another tract of the dinosaur study on it like I said was not the one they wanted to show what when I want to show was Hokies believe Vaz a charlatan someone who calls himself a doctor but doesn't actually have a legitimate PhD he claims three doctorates one of which was only an honorary degree given by an unaccredited school which he never actually attended another was a school that didn't offer the degree he claimed so he said he got it from an extension of that school located on the other side of the world but that extension apparently never existed somebody went to Australia and looked for it it isn't there his third doctorate was another honorary degree from another unaccredited school which means he can't which means it can't give read degrees honorary or otherwise and he should have known that since he was the president of that school when he gave that degree to himself one of those colleagues dr. Cara dr. Kent Hovind isn't really a doctor either his PhD came from a mail-order service rather than a natural institution of education so he calls himself doctor and the facility where he now resides calls him inmate number zero six seven no one knows what his roommates call him with the lights go off he too is a fraud and he's also one of the last of the prominent prominent creationists who still says that a Japanese fishing trawler hauled up a plesiosaur in 1977 at the time the discovery created quite a sensation in Japan and American creationists ran with us for decades helleberg tissue samples and the original documented observation determined that this was actually a basking shark it's hard to picture from this drawing but a dead basking shark decomposes preferentially so that at some point you begin to look like a plesiosaur sometimes they wash up on the shore allowing folks to document the entirety comes decomposition into this what you see is looking at eye sockets are actually nostrils now look with the Japanese fishing trawler actually caught the head is mostly rotted away but as you can see the gill bar looking like a wishbone to mark where the saw is that the head actually was I read an article with the amusing title of maintaining creationist integrity it was Ken Ham from Answers in Genesis org attempting to reason with Kent Hovind a creation science evangelism ministries trying to explain all the ways that we know that this is a basking shark and not a plesiosaur both mandatory is for discarding evidence against their positions but Answers in Genesis knew they couldn't look past the fact that the original observation described a skeleton made of cartilage rather than bombing nobody wanted to believe that the Loch Ness monster was real more than me as a kid I tried to rationalize how such a thing it still exists and eventually I had to accept that it just wasn't feasible nonetheless I was still disappointed when in 1993 a then 93 year 93 year old huckster gave a deathbed confession to his part of the hoax in 1934 the head and neck that you see here are about 10 inches long and mounted on a clockwork try of tin plate toy submarine there is an interesting story behind this conspiracy and the three men involved into it but I'm not going to go into that here I read an article recently which said that the 2012-2013 school year a bill pushed through by Governor Bobby Jindal to thousands of students of Louisiana will receive state voucher month myth voucher money transferred from funds intended for public schools to attend private religious schools instead in some of these teach from a Christian curriculum which suggests that the Loch Ness monster disproves evolution that the alleged creature which has never been demonstrated to even exist has been tracked by some reason probably and it's probably a Buddhist or and the curriculum also claims that a Japanese fishing boat caught a dinosaur completely Sora's are not dinosaurs but that's beside the point the point is that an idea that is so absurd that even the leading creationist organizations no longer defendant may now be taught as fact in Louisiana schools and if Texas and acts a voucher program that sort of the idiocy will be the fate of our students - yeah I don't mean to imply that none of the young earth creationists have any legitimate degrees some of the leading ones do and when they do they're usually of this caliber each of these men is a young earth creationist actively seeking to disprove or discredit evolution each of them has a legitimate doctorate in biology but they are not biologists they're certainly not scientists each of these men are dentists you may recognize Don McLean Roy former chairman of the State Board of Education beery visionary who felt qualified to stand up to experts this is also the man who told his fourth-grade Sunday School students to keep chipping away at that objective empirical evidence opposite him is dr. Jobe Martin who claims to be a converted evolutionist and one of my best friends in high school now runs at evangelical Christian school part of a mega church in Fort Worth when he and I reconnected briefly in 2004 we argue about illusion of course and he offered to introduce me to dr. Joe author of several creationist books and lauded by many creations the world over as an expert in evolutionism my friend said that dr. Martin would be able day after all the questions that I seek and instead of meeting dr. Martin I wrote a nineteen thousand word critique of his book evolution of a creationist in which I just proved every sentence in the second chapter Lee everyone I posted it to talk about origins that explained it to my friend that duck jump Martin doesn't have any of the answers because he does not even understand the questions nestled between these two icons of ignorance one with a book in one of the movie we have dr. Javier Cabrera - qarth or dark hair shown here with the collection of native Peruvian carvings that make its famous Cabrera have believed as Erich von I hinted that ancient Peruvians were incapable were capable of futuristic medical techniques and that they had knowledge of extraterrestrial species and the technology for interstellar travel and that they rode on domesticated dinosaurs to prove this he purchased hundreds of hand-carved stones and clay figurines from local villagers some of which depicted telescopes undiscovered planets at the end of December Quinn's spacecraft and of course dinosaurs these he added to his existing collection of similar-looking but otherwise authentic pre-columbian artifacts once the lies were mixed with a bit of truth the significance to pseudoscience was exploited by professional creations like Dennis Swift and some stones depicting dinosaurs and other questionable elements were tested in German and Swiss labs and found to be decades all that most was some made so recently that they still contain water impoverished villages or villagers having confessed to create thousands of the stones over the years to suit cover errors demands to show the your natural erosion we do have they show no natural erosion for the new show traces of sandpaper and we're given the appearance of advanced age by being covered in chicken oh I'm sorry that's Eric Colvin he's the son if he convicted fraud we saw earlier and this is proof that one bad apple doesn't grip depart from the money tree it was something like that in 1975 local farmers claiming to have created the first such depictions said they referred to comic books which is why they're dinosaurs are so inaccurate they look more like they came from the Flintstones for example ceratopsians did not have dorsal ridges for another example take a look at this Tyrannosaurus look at standing straight up on its tail like kangaroos did we know that they couldn't have held that position because they have fused vertebrae on their tail but they would have to adopt a position more similar to chickens which is why this doesn't look like a national Trento source but does look suspiciously like this remember even other creationists reject this including cryptozoologists the very ones who most want to believe the persistency persistent existence of extinct paleo fauna and even they can prove that these artifacts aren't legitimate for example listen to what Steven Myers vice-president of the Discovery Institute had to say about this one I bought a replica of an eco stone with a carving of a dinosaur on it from Kent Colvin's website and I was amazed to find that his carp dinosaur had five fingers and five toes a turtle like shell on its back and doughnut rings on its skin I do not know of any dinosaur like this he continues my theory is that the real dinosaurs do where the real stones do not have men writing on dinosaurs or telescopes or planets Neptune or Uranus carved on them these would be the fake ones I would like to challenge dr. Swift without one of his stones with the dinosaur on him to be examined and tested by experts firsthand observation by Neil steed said that even though the stones he examined did have this patina there was no patina in the grooves and these suggest that while the stones were very old the carvings were clearly of far more recent origin once again Answers in Genesis at one point said much the same thing and I quote unfortunately some initially plausible evidences I love what they say evidences for man's contemporaneity with Dinosaurs has later turned up be mistaken it's a clever work from dishonest yes I allegedly genuine pre-inca art engravings from dinosaur wear of dinosaurs from Peru have since been shown via fraud creation 24 featured these with the cautionary label too good to be true in fact it turns out that an unscrupulous Peruvian surgeon has purchased these stones from local artists and installed them in his Museum claiming them to be ancient artifacts and the the artist himself makes the stones for tourists and never claims them to be ancient the Institute of geological sciences in London has since examined these stones and confirmed their modern origin the fraud was exposed on a nova television documentary in 2002 entitled the case of the ancient astronauts end quote that was in 2007 since then perhaps under pressure from other creationist organizations still determined to promote these as legitimate Answers in Genesis seems to have pulled to set this comment off their web page I was not able to find it now other creationist sites argue against the evolutionist conspiracy to test only the stones that we know were fakes so that no one would know about the other ones that are really real these aren't the only man-made artifacts purporting to depict dinosaurs prior to paleontology for example in a children's book called the great dinosaur mystery creationist Paul Taylor shows this petroglyph from the havasu by Canyon in Arizona whatever it is its resemblance to a painted a painting labeled at Montessori might be convincing to children only until they find out that the author painted this himself deliberately and literally contorting it to match the cliff because Edmontosaurus couldn't stand erect like kangaroos either their vertebrae wouldn't allow it as well and so they had to walk more like this but if we compare the mystery petroglyphs to others found in southwest it seems it was much more likely someone trying to render a bird that's right here we go and this is either a poorly rendered or badly eroded or is really a dinosaur further aggravating and injury to an already broken tail likewise this image could be absolute 100% proof that there were once giant man-eating herons as tall as telephone calls either dad I think looks like a man here was really going to be a frog and the artist just wasn't very good and that's probably the case for a lot of these not really dinosaur renderings to to give some perspective let's look at some cave art these are from France of course these some of these are estimated to be 20,000 years old and in another location they are estimated to be more than 30,000 years old of these are obviously horses there's no Nvidia there's no ambiguity here nor is there any surprise at seeing horses in France but this is this is very this one down here at the pod or left that's very definitely Orion foam and rhinos are not so he is typically seen in France especially not that because those are extinct yet there's no doubt that that's what that is see we've got a better view of it here and it's clear as a state it can't be mistaken for anything else we know what this is supposed to be unlike oil visa you know allegedly dinosaur entries here there was a mammoth dinner and it wasn't some strange distortion coming with them imagine a mammoth to be what's obviously intended to be Emily didn't be anything else but okay and you can see this with ibex now these are typically the ibex are African and obviously the climate is a little different in France but we also have a misrepresenting a whole other different and these are where they overlap and so these people are writing our drawings thousands of years ago thousands of years before this mythic flood and they're seeing things with their own eyes and there we go there we have the aurochs the granddaddy of all Western cattle breeds and look at this amazing detail now imagine the artist behind this and wonder what it would be like for this artist to render a dinosaur if dinosaurs actually existed and he ever saw them okay now we don't have to guess at these either we don't have to switch our eyes and say maybe you know those these are these are lines and they're not just cats they're definitely lines without a doubt and it's interesting that we have what appears to be an accomplished artist doing rid of the work and as you see some of these are not quite so good so we appear to have an apprentice but even the crappy artist does it well enough that we can still tell what it is now we want to see cave paintings in the dinosaurs there it is okay give you just some contrast look at this and look at that and if you're still having trouble I'll help you remember you just if you don't see it maybe you just don't have enough faith you got to see it you got it you gotta fake it till you make it you just gotta believe hard enough but so um if you really saw a giant sauropod with your own eyes is that the way you draw it especially if you were able to do that other that the aurochs with the detail that you have we take the highlighted way you see it now see how to stick what there you go you have you asked for any greater proof if dinosaurs existed then this and I'll go a little step further okay look at what you get here now these are really impressive large and powerful animals these are horses and cows look at the attention that they get what if you saw something that was really impressive like a Tyrannosaurus Rex especially if it's locked in mortal combat with a woolly mammoth what would an artist capable of this do given such a dramatic scene as a t-rex versus a man prepare yourself there it is are you stunned you need a little help with buffet there there's the highlight we have a battle of hand puppets with Barney inside and Dumbo on the other stay focused because I'm Steeve up so I'm just going to take the highlight away look at that I know you're wowed okay and this is what creationists present as proof that all the experts specialists in the world are wrong and that only undereducated evangelists have it right here is the proof that Fred Flintstone really live with Deena and how could you argue with that and that's not all creationists have lots of evidence of chess this stunning caliber look at this cockatrice this is a chicken with a dog's head and a snake's tail and bats wings growing out of all places its kneecaps let's forget the fact that they couldn't possibly fly this is a taxonomic impossibility it's a no more real than Pegasus Manticore or Centocor and obviously came from the same location this is a chimera a monster of the imagination obviously never existed in real life same with this dogosaurus the website I got this from supposed that this was supposed to be a Tyrannosaurus I think that they probably met Paris Rafa was and amusingly they argued the dishes because that are plausible because we already have two legged lizards okay yet obviously they don't understand what a dinosaur is it doesn't matter as long as it's make-believe that's the purchased whole thing what's the excuse for this this is a lion was just a lion with a ridiculously long neck it was nothing else to do it and I don't think this ever existed either and everything about it says that this is a lion yet the website I got this from argue that this was a sauropod like from source so oh this this Mesopotamian lion chicken's neck again if you use your imagination and you don't clutter that up with education you can may believe that this is a sauropod dinosaur too of course you'll have to ignore old a whole bunch of things that prove that it isn't but that's what confirmation bias is for right now a creationist named Carl gallops recently released a video where he said that woolly mammoths and ground sloths were dinosaurs and he defines dinosaur as any ancient extinct prehistoric animal and that that includes madness and of course there is a precise definition it's a specific subset of artists ORS so lizards and plesiosaurs are not artists ORS pterosaurs are but there are sisters group two dinosaurs birds actually are dinosaurs both by definition and derivation although creations usually won't admit that when young earth creationist Lawrence Tisdale was on the Michael Coren show these are the things he claimed as proof that dinosaurs lived with men he claimed that they were not fantastic creatures he said they were consistent and here's one of his examples according to the description I read this is two sides of the same vase and noticed that it has two heads and notice that both sets of legs are the back legs and that both of the heads are therefore mounted on tails rather than X but this is not fantastic this is consistent consistently crazy this is a favorite among anti-science cryptozoologists who don't know what a dinosaur is and when I debated a Bob pastor Bob and yard this was one that he threw at me if you go to this Hindu temple in Cambodia and you go to this one particular building and you look at the decorative relief on this one particular column you'll see a typical creationist just desperation and Distortion look how each of these animals depicted is depicted with the background very ornate similar to the repeating pattern of leaves and flower petals or whatever else these are supposed to be and when you zoom in on this one in the middle you'll see what creationists they is supposed to be a Stegosaurus of course it doesn't look like a Stegosaurus but if we imagine the background pattern is being part of its back that still wouldn't explain why it has hooves external ears and the kind of wispy dangly tail that we normally only see on ungulate mammals if you take away the background flower petals of the image how much like a Stegosaurus look now it becomes even more obvious now but though there are those who think this is supposed to be a rendering of a baby rhinoceros I personally think that it's a pig but whatever it is this pig asaurus doesn't look like a circus or and when I debated Bob duco on his nationally syndicated radio show he presented this also as proof of dinosaurs and when I played why it couldn't be he said it wouldn't matter because he has so many other examples he had to prove his point just put those back you seen the stig story look at the tail on the the pig asaurus and have named leaders versus the state under the state table and look how tiny the head is and look at this pink sin again biggest source okay and then moving on to the next one I challenged Bob dude Coe to present one thing that he would back his reputation that he would one thing that he could give me that could be scientifically verified to actually be a pre-columbian rendering of a dinosaur one thing that he could verify was actually true and that's what he came up with a handful of Tucson artifacts which I think should be called dinosaurs they're a collection of cheap sword replicas made out of lead and these were found in an already excavated hole with dirt shoved on top of them in the 1930s you can barely see I guess maybe you can't there's a sauropod on that that looks exactly like the brontosaurus that Fred Flintstone is writing in the in the beginning of their cartoon what you can't see very clearly here are the writings in Hebrew these were purported to be artifacts from a Hebrew expedition into the Americas before the time of Columbus I guess they were trying to support out of Mormonism or something but the writings in Hebrew turned out to be exactly copied verbatim from three different Hebrew language textbooks that had already been printed at the time and that when the B would be on top would you call it an artist whatever he would you call this guy his huckster when he tried to was a very leaf trying to learn Hebrew but where he tried to change the case or change the statement he showed that he didn't understand how to speak Hebrew so these were exposed to some fraud a lifetime ago and this is what above duco thought was the most compelling the most compelling and the most scientifically supported argument in favor of dinosaurs living alongside humans creationists arguments and evidence doesn't really get any better than that I say this is the only thing that I saw that I thought might actually be a dinosaur but it's only a skull and not a living room or not living animal and not only that but that this type of skull is very common among dioxins and may it will just get lizard lizards get confused with Dinosaurs an awful lot snakes too you know we should was one of the earliest depictions of the dragon and it turns out that most of the references to dragons in medieval literature whether in history or scripture are referring to snakes or any particular kind of lizard that is the closest living relative to snakes the most famous example is say George slaying the dragon depictions of this beast vary wildly some of them give it mammalian features like external ears as is shown here sometimes they have bats wings and sometimes they have fur this sort of pen air is another evolutionary impossibility but it usually looks about like this like a very big lizard and you see the tongue darting out remember that can you see it that's important here's a slightly more realistic relief from the 16th century you know super close it with another realistic rendering again we see the darting tongue again indicating that this is a brannad a giant monitor lizard a genus of several very large and dangerous species which includes the Komodo dragon apparently it really is a dragon and it's important to note that Saint George was not in England when he encountered this dragon he was in Africa and they really do have lizards this size now as a herpetologist closely familiar with these things I've had a few of them as pets I wouldn't suggest it but I can tell you that these are surprisingly accurate renderings of Brennan's monitor lizards the one exception is that the tail is supposed to be forked like a snake's and of course would only have two prompts I guess it's hard to see when you first look at it especially if you're not inclined to study such things but when you see this motif being repeated again and again that's obviously one artist is copying another artist's work and it doesn't seem that anybody ever pointed out that hey that's supposed to be a tongue and it's only supposed to have two prongs because it keeps adding prongs as we go on until it doesn't look quite so much primacron setting what does it look like very case of course a site that where I found these in called the dinosaurs and specifically a play-doh Soros and the creationists as I said don't know the difference between lizards and dinosaurs they they have the same thing and that the C&L let's look at this two fiction and this is interesting because this was done by somebody who had obviously never seen one of these lizards he didn't know a great deal about them this is why it has mammalian features he definitely didn't know that that was supposed to be a tongue because looking at it look at the flames all around him this artist apparently saw previous works by other people and enhance this in being fire and look what this leads to now we have a giant monitor lizard such as hasn't existed in 20,000 years and never on the side of the world but look it's also got a tummy and fire and notice also that the name of the dragon is serpent also known as the worm Wyrm historically that's what they usually show up so it turns out - the fire-breathing dragon is actually a tongue-lashing lizard and nobody realized it because people in medieval Europe usually had no idea the tropical deserts ever got this big so it seems the T Komodo dragon since it really is a dragon and so are all monitors because they're the only lizards who do that think that mousse you've got completely wrong this is a Nile monitor name for the area where it resides and this species is the most likely candidate for the dragon slain by George st. George during his trip to Africa and remember that a good portion of the Bible comes from this area also and that many of the monstrous animals described in the Bible match African megafauna pretty well especially from the oldest book of the Bible which is actually not Genesis Genesis is a compilation of earlier works the oldest book of the Bible section the book of code which is about 3,500 years ago okay so again and see whether you're looking at historical references for medieval times or biblical scriptures in either case dragons are generally described as snakes or lizards and are often small sometimes venomous animals being trodden upon and are easily killed with rocks and sticks so knowing how this animal was exaggerated over the last 100 years or so imagine how much more primitive offers authors from way back in the Bronze Age would have describing the impressive beast like this novel crocodile imagine that you're living the Bronze Age you're just over five foot tall you're armed with only a pointed stick and a short sphere of sharpened bronze and you are inclined or charged to take this on the book of Job which was written consistent with that image describes a huge powerful yet graceful monster whose mouth is like a set of great doors ringed by fearsome teeth his back has rows of shields tightly sealed together each so close to the next that no air can pass between they are joined fast to one another they cling together and cannot be parted if you lay a hand on him you will remember the struggle and never do it again of course I'm quoting from the Bible here any hope of subduing him is false the mere sight of him is overpowering when he rises up the mighty are terrified they retreat before his thrashing the sword that reaches him has no effect nor does the spear or the dark or the javelin iron he treats like straw and bronze like rotten wood arrows do not make him flee sling stones are like chaff to him a club seems to him a piece of straw he laughs at the rattling of the Lance his undersides are jagged potsherds leaving a trail in the mud like a like a threshing sledge he makes depth the depths churn like a boiling cauldron and stirs up the sea like a pot of winged behind him he leaves a glistening wick one would think the deep had white hair nothing on earth is his equal a creature without fear of course I'm quoting Jove again and this is the Leviathan described as a scaly reptilian thing with legs dragging itself through the mud the common use of the word now is for whale but it apparently did not actually mean that originally and if you take out the obvious embellishments giving it fiery breath as well then what you have left matches this pretty well creationists desperate to turn this into a dinosaur often admit the fiery correct thing to and try to say that Leviathan refers to something like a kronosaurus or live pleura Don but that doesn't fit the description at all another biblical beast alleged to be a dinosaur but which does not fit that description is the behemoth and creationist really want this to be a giant sauropod but that she just doesn't fit behold now the behemoth which I made with the he eateth breast as an ox and grass has never been found in the copra lights of any non-avian dinosaur because grass didn't exist yet in the Cretaceous low now his strength is in his loins and his force in the navel of his belly and dinosaurs developed within a shell of an egg and therefore don't have navels he moveth his tail like a cedar and this is the most contrived to all the creationist interpretations creationists ignore the swaying in which trees move and instead try to imply that his tale should be the size of the treatment of the Bible does it describe it that way they also admit that the word cedar is sometimes used to describe the sprig that they would swap flies away from themselves and of course that looks exactly like an elephant scale so the description is quite accurate you can get the dinosaur image back out of your head the sinews of his stones are wrapped together and external genitalia especially neat stones are a typically mammalian trait and not visible on reptiles like dinosaurs his bones are like strong pieces of brass his bars like that where his bones are like bars of iron and the elephant is the biggest strongest animal that anyone would have ever seen in the Bronze Age is chief in the ways of God elephants are extremely intelligent even compassionate animals whereas the brain of a sauropod was only about the size of a walnut surely the mountains bringing him forth food were all the beasts of the field play he lieth under the shady trees in the cover of the read and ferns the shady trees covered him with their shadow imagine a Brachiosaurus or a Diplodocus doing this sort of thing the Willows of the brook compass him about behold he drinketh up a river and hasteth not he trusted that he can draw up the jordan in his mouth and this obviously a better suits an elephant than it doesn't he sauropod he taketh it in with his eyes his nose pierces through snares and note that it doesn't say that a horn on the nose is piercing anything this is the nose itself and it's being importance one last animal I'd like to mention from job's bestiary is the unicorn one modern concept in the end corny is that it is a smallish horse do I have this yes I do okay let a single sort of a single horn coming out of its forehead and the origin of that multi spiral horn people think it's based on the narwhal and it might have been but it there was also a fossil of a fourth account that was found by reputed to a big sound by Julius Caesar and he just declared it to be the mourn of the unicorns oh that's where you get that from song 1910 says the unicorn has one horn Deuteronomy 3317 implies it has two horns creationists argue that these ancient tribesmen were actually hunting a triceratops which has three horns or a mono claudius which is a ceratopsian with a single horn on his nose and I'm going to read it directly from the creationist website that is trying to make this argument because in fact they make my argument for me in job 39 9 through 12 God asks will the Unicorn be willing to serve you or abide by your crib can you bind the unicorn with his band and put in the furrow or will he Jarro the valleys after you will will you trust him because his strength is great this passage shows that the unicorn whatever it was could not be tamed or used in farming as could an ox in this classic work Naturalis historia the first century author Pliny the Elder described an exceedingly wild beast called the mono saris which is one more it makes a deep blowing noise and one black horn two cubits long projects from the middle of its forehead he describes it as like an elephant in length but with much shorter legs other classical authors like alien opium and Marshall also mentioned a nose horn creature called Rhino Karras some claim that Rhino perished sharpens his horn in a rock and utilizes it to fight elephants and this is the root word from which we get the name rhinoceros and to be clear this animals Latin name is dice eres by cornice this animals Latin name is rhinoceros unicorns there's your unicorn now read all those King James Bible verses again they'll make much more sense now one more reason this is important and it relates to another cryptic dinosaur being promoted by creationist cryptozoologists this is the only physical evidence yet presented for the congolese sauropod alleged to living in their their rivers in deepest darkest Africa but as you notice this is three-toed footprint sauropods actually have four toes and usually have a claw on the inside rhinos have three toes so this is not a dinosaur footprint I'll be ridiculous this is the footprint of a unicorn

Channel: AronRa

Views: 333,372

Rating: 4.8839769 out of 5

Keywords: Carl Baugh, Kent Hovind, Eric Hovind, Laurence Tisdall, Carl Gallups, Jobe Martin, Xavier Cabrera, Ica Stones, Don McLeroy, petroglyph, Loch Ness, Behemoth, Unicorn, Leviathan, dragon, dinosaur, creationism, young earth, angkor wat, mkele mbembe, humanists Houston, cryptozoology, St. George, Paul Taylor, Bob Dutko, Bob Enyart, Dinosaurs in the Bible, Dennis Swift

Id: f5kckGxwJr4

Length: 46min 10sec (2770 seconds)

Published: Wed Feb 27 2013