Guest shiloh357 Posted January 23, 2014 Share Posted January 23, 2014 I am not erecting that standard, I was merely using the standard of the one I was replying to. Where was "proof" mentioned in any previous response that you were responding to? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Enoch2021 Posted January 23, 2014 Group: Royal Member Followers: 11 Topic Count: 19 Topics Per Day: 0.01 Content Count: 3,396 Content Per Day: 0.90 Reputation: 730 Days Won: 4 Joined: 12/21/2013 Status: Offline Birthday: 12/26/1963 Share Posted January 23, 2014 I am not erecting that standard, I was merely using the standard of the one I was replying to. Where was "proof" mentioned in any previous response that you were responding to? Dino's and Man From: http://www.genesispark.com/exhibits/evidence/historical/ancient/dinosaur/ Sorry tried to post some Pics of drawings, pottery, and architecture but had some "technical" difficulties. Also, if you ever have an occasion to visit the National Bridges Monument in Utah, ask one of the staff members to explain the presence of an antiquated dinosaur petroglyph @ the base of Kachina Bridge. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LookingForAnswers Posted January 23, 2014 Group: Seeker Followers: 0 Topic Count: 10 Topics Per Day: 0.00 Content Count: 1,033 Content Per Day: 0.27 Reputation: 67 Days Won: 2 Joined: 12/26/2013 Status: Offline Share Posted January 23, 2014 Please explain how drawings constitute scientific proof. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
other one Posted January 23, 2014 Group: Worthy Ministers Followers: 29 Topic Count: 597 Topics Per Day: 0.08 Content Count: 56,117 Content Per Day: 7.56 Reputation: 27,851 Days Won: 271 Joined: 12/29/2003 Status: Online Share Posted January 23, 2014 http://www.dinosaurc14ages.com/footprints.htm Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ARGOSY Posted January 23, 2014 Group: Diamond Member Followers: 2 Topic Count: 10 Topics Per Day: 0.00 Content Count: 1,695 Content Per Day: 0.45 Reputation: 583 Days Won: 2 Joined: 01/03/2014 Status: Offline Birthday: 04/11/1968 Share Posted January 23, 2014 I am not erecting that standard, I was merely using the standard of the one I was replying to. Where was "proof" mentioned in any previous response that you were responding to? Dino's and Man From: http://www.genesispark.com/exhibits/evidence/historical/ancient/dinosaur/ Sorry tried to post some Pics of drawings, pottery, and architecture but had some "technical" difficulties. Also, if you ever have an occasion to visit the National Bridges Monument in Utah, ask one of the staff members to explain the presence of an antiquated dinosaur petroglyph @ the base of Kachina Bridge. Its a strange thing that all the most ancient civilizations depicted dinosaurs on their artwork. Here's some examples: The first ever temple, Gobekli Tepe has a stone carving of a cynognathus. Lion? No way. http://www.openhandweb.org/Gobekli_Tepe%3A_a_key_to_humanity's_history An Egyptian tablet depicted two captured dinosaurs http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Narmer_Palette Stegosaur of Angkor http://ki-media.blogspot.com/2012/07/preah-khan-temple-mystery-door-of.html Plus thousands more. I guess evolutionists think each of those is a hoax http://www.helsinki.fi/~pjojala/Dinoglyfs.htm Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Enoch2021 Posted January 23, 2014 Group: Royal Member Followers: 11 Topic Count: 19 Topics Per Day: 0.01 Content Count: 3,396 Content Per Day: 0.90 Reputation: 730 Days Won: 4 Joined: 12/21/2013 Status: Offline Birthday: 12/26/1963 Share Posted January 23, 2014 Please explain how drawings constitute scientific proof. I'll make an exception this one time and if you continue to make substantive replies to others, I will consider lifting my personal BAN and reply more readily to your posts. "Please explain how drawings constitute scientific proof." You ready?....it's not "Scientific" 'Scientific Evidence: consists of observations and EXPERIMENTAL RESULTS that serve to support, refute, or modify a scientific hypothesis or theory, when collected and interpreted in accordance with the SCIENTIFIC METHOD.' http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evidence You see "Scientific Evidence" has a QUALIFIER ...."Scientific" which denotes the "Scientific Method" in which it is differentiated with..... 'Evidence, broadly construed, is anything presented in support of an assertion. This support may be strong or weak. The strongest type of evidence is that which provides direct proof of truth of an assertion. At the other extreme is evidence that is merely consistent with an assertion but does not rule out other, contradictory assertions, as in circumstantial evidence.' http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evidence Moreover, There are other techniques that can be employed besides "Science" that we can use to ascertain TRUTH: Intellect (Logic, inductive/deductive reasoning, critical thinking skills, problem solving, and good ole fashioned common sense). Now combine these with sound "Scientific" principles like "Scientific" Laws then that's a pretty powerful combination. Savvy?? Now to your question besides the "Scientific" issue: Well the Drawings/Architecture/Pottery is "Specifically Complex" that is, It was Intelligently Designed; hence, DESIGNER (Humans created it in this case).....nature didn't and can't do it. When we see these Dino's drawings et al, especially depicting excruciating details that marries up with the actual Dinosaur evidence collected, then logically we have only 2 reasonable conclusions: 1. Humans lived with Dinosaurs. 2. Humans conjured these creatures in their imaginations that coincidentally married up with the actual evidence collected. Moreover, these artifacts were from multiple different cultures and places, so; if this is your choice, then you would have to conclude that these conjured imaginations weren't localized and developed patterns!! What's your choice? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Enoch2021 Posted January 23, 2014 Group: Royal Member Followers: 11 Topic Count: 19 Topics Per Day: 0.01 Content Count: 3,396 Content Per Day: 0.90 Reputation: 730 Days Won: 4 Joined: 12/21/2013 Status: Offline Birthday: 12/26/1963 Share Posted January 23, 2014 I am not erecting that standard, I was merely using the standard of the one I was replying to. Where was "proof" mentioned in any previous response that you were responding to? Dino's and Man From: http://www.genesispark.com/exhibits/evidence/historical/ancient/dinosaur/ Sorry tried to post some Pics of drawings, pottery, and architecture but had some "technical" difficulties. Also, if you ever have an occasion to visit the National Bridges Monument in Utah, ask one of the staff members to explain the presence of an antiquated dinosaur petroglyph @ the base of Kachina Bridge. Its a strange thing that all the most ancient civilizations depicted dinosaurs on their artwork. Here's some examples: The first ever temple, Gobekli Tepe has a stone carving of a cynognathus. Lion? No way. http://www.openhandweb.org/Gobekli_Tepe%3A_a_key_to_humanity's_history An Egyptian tablet depicted two captured dinosaurs http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Narmer_Palette Stegosaur of Angkor http://ki-media.blogspot.com/2012/07/preah-khan-temple-mystery-door-of.html Plus thousands more. I guess evolutionists think each of those is a hoax http://www.helsinki.fi/~pjojala/Dinoglyfs.htm Too funny, Thanks Argosy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LookingForAnswers Posted January 23, 2014 Group: Seeker Followers: 0 Topic Count: 10 Topics Per Day: 0.00 Content Count: 1,033 Content Per Day: 0.27 Reputation: 67 Days Won: 2 Joined: 12/26/2013 Status: Offline Share Posted January 23, 2014 Please explain how drawings constitute scientific proof. I'll make an exception this one time and if you continue to make substantive replies to others, I will consider lifting my personal BAN and reply more readily to your posts. "Please explain how drawings constitute scientific proof." You ready?....it's not "Scientific" 'Scientific Evidence: consists of observations and EXPERIMENTAL RESULTS that serve to support, refute, or modify a scientific hypothesis or theory, when collected and interpreted in accordance with the SCIENTIFIC METHOD.' http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evidence You see "Scientific Evidence" has a QUALIFIER ...."Scientific" which denotes the "Scientific Method" in which it is differentiated with..... 'Evidence, broadly construed, is anything presented in support of an assertion. This support may be strong or weak. The strongest type of evidence is that which provides direct proof of truth of an assertion. At the other extreme is evidence that is merely consistent with an assertion but does not rule out other, contradictory assertions, as in circumstantial evidence.' http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evidence Moreover, There are other techniques that can be employed besides "Science" that we can use to ascertain TRUTH: Intellect (Logic, inductive/deductive reasoning, critical thinking skills, problem solving, and good ole fashioned common sense). Now combine these with sound "Scientific" principles like "Scientific" Laws then that's a pretty powerful combination. Savvy?? Now to your question besides the "Scientific" issue: Well the Drawings/Architecture/Pottery is "Specifically Complex" that is, It was Intelligently Designed; hence, DESIGNER (Humans created it in this case).....nature didn't and can't do it. When we see these Dino's drawings et al, especially depicting excruciating details that marries up with the actual Dinosaur evidence collected, then logically we have only 2 reasonable conclusions: 1. Humans lived with Dinosaurs. 2. Humans conjured these creatures in their imaginations that coincidentally married up with the actual evidence collected. Moreover, these artifacts were from multiple different cultures and places, so; if this is your choice, then you would have to conclude that these conjured imaginations weren't localized and developed patterns!! What's your choice? You can keep your condescending holier than though attitude, I don't need your disdain and will not put up with it. It is people like you that have kept me home on Sunday's, those that think they are giving someone a gift by even responding to them. As for these paintings and such... Lets start with FoxNews' view...http://www.foxnews.com/scitech/2011/03/29/creationists-claim-humans-lived-dinosaurs-scientists-disagree/ and a more in-depth view...http://palaeo-electronica.org/content/2012-issue-2-articles/275-rock-art-dinosaurs Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LookingForAnswers Posted January 23, 2014 Group: Seeker Followers: 0 Topic Count: 10 Topics Per Day: 0.00 Content Count: 1,033 Content Per Day: 0.27 Reputation: 67 Days Won: 2 Joined: 12/26/2013 Status: Offline Share Posted January 23, 2014 I am not erecting that standard, I was merely using the standard of the one I was replying to. Where was "proof" mentioned in any previous response that you were responding to? Dino's and Man From: http://www.genesispark.com/exhibits/evidence/historical/ancient/dinosaur/ Sorry tried to post some Pics of drawings, pottery, and architecture but had some "technical" difficulties. Also, if you ever have an occasion to visit the National Bridges Monument in Utah, ask one of the staff members to explain the presence of an antiquated dinosaur petroglyph @ the base of Kachina Bridge. Its a strange thing that all the most ancient civilizations depicted dinosaurs on their artwork. Here's some examples: The first ever temple, Gobekli Tepe has a stone carving of a cynognathus. Lion? No way. http://www.openhandweb.org/Gobekli_Tepe%3A_a_key_to_humanity's_history An Egyptian tablet depicted two captured dinosaurs http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Narmer_Palette Stegosaur of Angkor http://ki-media.blogspot.com/2012/07/preah-khan-temple-mystery-door-of.html Plus thousands more. I guess evolutionists think each of those is a hoax http://www.helsinki.fi/~pjojala/Dinoglyfs.htm I am not sure what your links are supposed to show, only the last one has anything that looks like a dinosaur. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Enoch2021 Posted January 23, 2014 Group: Royal Member Followers: 11 Topic Count: 19 Topics Per Day: 0.01 Content Count: 3,396 Content Per Day: 0.90 Reputation: 730 Days Won: 4 Joined: 12/21/2013 Status: Offline Birthday: 12/26/1963 Share Posted January 23, 2014 Please explain how drawings constitute scientific proof. I'll make an exception this one time and if you continue to make substantive replies to others, I will consider lifting my personal BAN and reply more readily to your posts. "Please explain how drawings constitute scientific proof." You ready?....it's not "Scientific" 'Scientific Evidence: consists of observations and EXPERIMENTAL RESULTS that serve to support, refute, or modify a scientific hypothesis or theory, when collected and interpreted in accordance with the SCIENTIFIC METHOD.' http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evidence You see "Scientific Evidence" has a QUALIFIER ...."Scientific" which denotes the "Scientific Method" in which it is differentiated with..... 'Evidence, broadly construed, is anything presented in support of an assertion. This support may be strong or weak. The strongest type of evidence is that which provides direct proof of truth of an assertion. At the other extreme is evidence that is merely consistent with an assertion but does not rule out other, contradictory assertions, as in circumstantial evidence.' http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evidence Moreover, There are other techniques that can be employed besides "Science" that we can use to ascertain TRUTH: Intellect (Logic, inductive/deductive reasoning, critical thinking skills, problem solving, and good ole fashioned common sense). Now combine these with sound "Scientific" principles like "Scientific" Laws then that's a pretty powerful combination. Savvy?? Now to your question besides the "Scientific" issue: Well the Drawings/Architecture/Pottery is "Specifically Complex" that is, It was Intelligently Designed; hence, DESIGNER (Humans created it in this case).....nature didn't and can't do it. When we see these Dino's drawings et al, especially depicting excruciating details that marries up with the actual Dinosaur evidence collected, then logically we have only 2 reasonable conclusions: 1. Humans lived with Dinosaurs. 2. Humans conjured these creatures in their imaginations that coincidentally married up with the actual evidence collected. Moreover, these artifacts were from multiple different cultures and places, so; if this is your choice, then you would have to conclude that these conjured imaginations weren't localized and developed patterns!! What's your choice? You can keep your condescending holier than though attitude, I don't need your disdain and will not put up with it. It is people like you that have kept me home on Sunday's, those that think they are giving someone a gift by even responding to them. As for these paintings and such... Lets start with FoxNews' view...http://www.foxnews.com/scitech/2011/03/29/creationists-claim-humans-lived-dinosaurs-scientists-disagree/ and a more in-depth view...http://palaeo-electronica.org/content/2012-issue-2-articles/275-rock-art-dinosaurs Yep, That's what I thought. I will not read or reply to your posts. Hope you find the Truth Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts