Dinosaurs and People (Young Earth Creationism)

Creation on The Web (Creation Ministries International) has an interesting article on Angkor saw a stegosaur? The notion is that a glyph carved 800 years ago, represents a stegosaurus.

Here is the glyph.

Here is a reconstructed picture from fossils.

Advertisements

11 Responses

  1. On this subject (sort of), I remember watching a discovery channel special on the eruption of Mt St Helens in 1980, and they were showing the deep valleys with exposed strata that had been produced almost immediately by the force of the la jar (I think this is the right spelling?). As I was watching, I kept waiting for the scientists, who were talking, to explain this phenomenon, but no explanation was given. This erosion hadn’t taken millions of years, but instead, had taken only a few hours. Go figure!

  2. Evolutionists claim the stegosaurus carved out 800 years ago was actually a dragon…lol…No, it’s a dinosaur! You take out the implication on what it might mean and just show picture as is, it’s not a dragon, even to an evolutionist. Great blog here, keep up the good work!

  3. I’m not sure I understand the point here. Is the claim made here that the people who made that glyph must have been inspired by a live Stegosaurus, and couldn’t have been inspired by fossils of Stegosaurus or stories about such fossils?

  4. Carl wrote:

    I’m not sure I understand the point here. Is the claim made here that the people who made that glyph must have been inspired by a live Stegosaurus, and couldn’t have been inspired by fossils of Stegosaurus or stories about such fossils?

    What do you think it means Carl?

  5. Well, obviously I have no theological proclivities of any sort, much less those that would make me even slightly sympathetic to young-earth creationism. So I’m inclined to take the paleontological evidence as interpreted by mainstream scientists as a given, and speculate from there.

    The glyph is from Cambodia, apparently, and there are a few stegosaurs from China — although the best known examples are from the Midwest of the United States. So I don’t find it unreasonable to think that the carvers of this symbol could have seen fossils and been inspired by them.

    You might find this interesting: Adrienne Mayor

  6. The glyph is from Cambodia, apparently, and there are a few stegosaurs from China — although the best known examples are from the Midwest of the United States. So I don’t find it unreasonable to think that the carvers of this symbol could have seen fossils and been inspired by them.

    I do not dismiss that possibility, nor do I dismiss the possibility that they carved an image of an actual animal. Perhaps that puts me in the realm of a “kook,” but so be it (no I don’t believe in bigfoot).

  7. DB wrote:

    On this subject (sort of), I remember watching a discovery channel special on the eruption of Mt St Helens in 1980, and they were showing the deep valleys with exposed strata that had been produced almost immediately by the force of the la jar (I think this is the right spelling?). As I was watching, I kept waiting for the scientists, who were talking, to explain this phenomenon, but no explanation was given. This erosion hadn’t taken millions of years, but instead, had taken only a few hours. Go figure!

    Yes, it doesn’t fit the framework; therefore, is not discussed. AIG discusses the catastrophic geology associated with Mt. St. Helens. Uniformitarians don’t tend to talk about things that are outside of their worldview.

  8. So, from skeletal remains these ancient people carved out the body features that are depicted, including the elephant like legs and feet? Pretty savvy of them! I don’t know that I would have come up with this picture if all I had to go by were bones, but maybe I ain’t too bright!

  9. So, from skeletal remains these ancient people carved out the body features that are depicted, including the elephant like legs and feet? Pretty savvy of them!

    It’s interesting to think about what people would accept as evidence. The one conclusion I’m coming to is that it’s never conclusive.

    For instance, on the topic of imagining that the fossil evidence is not a record of catastrophism and instead one ought to imagine that each “uniform” layer represents millions of years and so on. For one thing, the geological column itself is imaginary but at any rate… one would think that a fossilized trees sticking down through many layers of sediment which we are imagining took millions of years to form would almost be conclusive evidence that we ought to imagine that such sediments were formed suddenly. But no, instead we should apparently imagine that the trees were stuck down through the layers later even if it seems rather “hard” to imagine. One would think that finding soft tissue in dinosaur bones would be conclusive evidence that they aren’t millions of years old at least in that instance. After all, there are living “dinosaurs” and there’s little reason to believe that the fossil record is an accurate record of time. But no, instead we should apparently imagine that soft tissue lasts much longer than one would think or be able to measure given current rates of decay. One would think that finding “living fossils” like the Coelacanth which supposedly fit into an imaginary geologic column which fit a sequence of imaginary evolutionary events in the past which fit on an imaginary time line used to date such sediments would be conclusive evidence against a pattern of imagining things about the past, yet this too can be imagined away.

    And so on, the only conclusion I would draw from the evidence is that the evidence can never be conclusive. It seems to me that the Creator has created a dangerous world in which faith is necessary while what we desire is a safe world in which science governs and Progress is assured.

  10. In fact stegosaurs did not have “elephant-like legs and feet” — the CGI is a bit misleading — but if someone was familiar with both living elephants and fossil stegosaurs, it’s reasonable (to me, anyway) that they would have inspired to depict an animal that had elephant-like legs and feet and a stegosaur-like head and back.

  11. Sorry, that last comment will probably be pretty confusing to those not already familiar with the issues surrounding creation and evolution.

    Also that last sentence is based on contrasting and comparing but not in the anti-clerical tradition of creating a simplistic conflict between faith and reason and so on. There has always been plenty of room in traditional theism for “Progress”/Providence, regularities/natural law, etc. The only problem for secular progressives is that there is also plenty of room for singularities/miracles, catastrophism, etc., and a general lack of safety and Progress as well.

    On a tangent… secular progressives and/or atheists often make the argument that they are Hard Men viewing the hard cold truth of the ultimate return of our sentience into oblivion and so on but actually theism includes hard truths that are much more dangerous to our sense of well being and so on. Also it’s worth pointing out that even if modern materialism is true there is no guarantee that our form of sentience won’t recur given infinite amounts of time or multiple universes, etc. If you are your brain events and neural nets then there is no guarantee that you won’t recur or that there will never be any semblance of “life after death” given materialism. It seems that materialists do not derive their beliefs from logic and evidence, instead their beliefs are generally defined by a rejection of traditional theism. I.e. theists believe in life after death and therefore materialists don’t but it seems to me that there is nothing intrinsic to materialism itself by which one can conclude that patterns of matter (which is all form and being is according to them) will never recur.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: