About everyone, from child to adult, likes dinosaurs, and unfortunately, evolutionists use that attraction to try and convince people the earth is millions of years old.
A child's education starts at a very early age with large colorful pictures next to paragraphs of extensive evolutionary propaganda.
|The first words, as all children's books and textbooks use, say, "Millions of years ago..." Children have to believe in millions of years before they can believe in evolution, so dinosaurs are the best method for the evolutionists to plant the seed.|
Textbooks will commonly ask the following question: "
(See Holt Biology: Visualizing Life, 1994, p. 579, ISBN: 0-03-053817-3)
This question is not designed to help students to think, but rather is designed to tell them what to think. This question assumes that dinosaurs went extinct. For example, there are panthers still living wild in Florida. Many people have lived their entire lives in Florida, and have never seen a panther. Because they have not seen one, does that mean panthers do not exist in Florida? No, it simply means they are hard to find. No one could prove the extinction of anything unless they were at all places at all times at the same time. So the real question here is not, "How did the dinosaurs go extinct," but rather, "
All throughout history, dinosaurs have been known as "dragons." Many evolutionists make complaint that dinosaurs are not mentioned in the Bible, but that is simply not true. Dragons are mentioned in the Bible 34 times. Here are a few examples:
Their wine is the poison of dragons, and the cruel venom of asps.
Thou shalt tread upon the lion and adder: the young lion and the dragon shalt thou trample under feet.
In that day the LORD with his sore and great and strong sword shall punish leviathan the piercing serpent, even leviathan that crooked serpent; and he shall slay the dragon that is in the sea.
Does this author know that, or does he think that? He cannot possibly know that. There is no way he has spoken with every man that has ever lived. He is
"The fact that some prehistoric man made a pictograph of a dinosaur on the walls of this canyon
upsets completely all of our theories regarding the antiquity of man.Facts are stubborn and immutable things. If theories do not square with the facts then the theories must change, the facts remain."
-Samuel Hubbard, Honorary Curator of Archaeology of the Oakland Museum, "Discoveries Relating to PREHISTORIC MAN by the Doheny Scientific Expedition in the HAVA SUPAI CANYON, NORTHERN ARIZONA," Publish by the Oakland Museum of Oakland California with Curator and Paleontologist Charles W. Gilmore, Jan 26, 1925 [Expedition Oct-Nov, 1924; sponsored by E.L. Dhoeny], p. 5
first mentionof these incredible stones is from a Spanish priest journeying to the Ica region in 1535.Father Simon, a Jesuit missionary, accopanied Pizarro along the Peruvian coast and recorded his amazement upon viewing the stones. In 1562, Spanish explorers sent seome of the stones back to Spain. The Indian chronicler, Juan de Santa Cruz Pachacuti Llamqui, wrote that at the time of the Inca Pachacutec many carved stones were foujnd in the Kingdom of Chincha, in Chnchayunga, which was called Manco."
-Dr. Dennis Swift, Secrets of the Ica Stones and Nazca Lines, published David Swift, 2006, p. 16-17
The stones are covered with a fine patina of natural oxidationwhich also covers the grooves by which their age should be able to be deduced. I have not been able to find any notable or irregular wear on the edges of the incisions which leads me to suspect that these incisions or etchings were executed not long before being deposited in the graves or other places where they were discovered."
-Dr. Eric Wolf (geologist), Lima, Peru, June 8, 1967, from lab testing of 33 Ica stones requested by Dr. Javier Cabrera to Luis Hochshild, Secrets of the Ica Stones and Nazca Lines, published David Swift, 2006, p. 19
These are just a small portion of the many discoveries that have been made, but ignored and/or buried by evolutionists. So is it correct to say 'no human being has ever seen a live dinosaur?' Or is the author assuming the earth is millions of years old and therefore needs no man to have ever seen a live dinosaur to protect his theory?
It is taught uniformly all over the world that dinosaurs went extinct 65 million years ago. We just saw evidence of man and dinosaur being alive at the same time. According to the evolution theory, man did not appear on the earth until about 3 million years ago. Now the evolutionists have a serious problem because evidence of man and dinosaur living at the same time would prove their theory false.
Why do they have to ignore these findings? Why could they just not adjust the evolution theory based on the evidence? Because they have to protect the geologic column.
If any evidence found does not match their geologic column, the evidence is thrown out, never to be considered. This means that the evidence does not shape their theory, but rather, their preconceived theory shapes the evidence they will accept.
(Read The Carbon Dating Game here at creationliberty.com to get more information on how evolutionists selectively pick from a series of wild numbers to get the dates they want)
"About a year ago a photograph of the 'dinosaur' [pictograph of dinosaur drawn on rock walls] was shown to a scientist of national repute, who was then specializing in dinosaurs. He said, 'It is not a dinosaur,
it is impossible, because we know that dinosaurs were extinct 12 million years before man appeared on earth.'"
-Samuel Hubbard, Honorary Curator of Archaeology of the Oakland Museum, "Discoveries Relating to PREHISTORIC MAN by the Doheny Scientific Expedition in the HAVA SUPAI CANYON, NORTHERN ARIZONA," Publish by the Oakland Museum of Oakland California with Curator and Paleontologist Charles W. Gilmore, Jan 26, 1925 [Expedition Oct-Nov, 1924; sponsored by E.L. Dhoeny], p. 9
See how the evolutionary bias gets in the way of real scientific research? He says "it is impossible," and therefore, you are not allowed to consider that could be a dinosaur because it conflicts with the preconceived evolution theory. This is another reason we can see why evolution is not science, but a religious worldview.
(Read Evolution: A New Age Religion here at creationliberty.com for more details)
There are many things have been claimed to be extinct millions of years ago, but then were recently discovered. For example, the coelacanth, a lobe-finned fish, was considered for many years to be a "missing link," in the evolutionary chain, but it was discovered to be alive as early as 1938.
(See Sally M. Walker, Fossil Fish Found Alive: Discovering the Coelacanth, published Carolrhoda Books, 2002, ISBN: 9781575055367)
Here's a photo of the coelacanth swimming off the coast of Australia:
Just as I mentioned at the beginning, how do you prove the extinction of anything? You have to be at all places, at all times, at the same time. We cannot prove the extinction of any creature, and as we do more research, we find the evolutionists claims of extinction to be false. Just as we cannot prove the extinction of the coelacanth, and it was later found to be alive, the same may be true of the dinosaurs.
(Read Evolution: A New Age Religion here at creationliberty.com for more details)
The Bible says bring two of every "kind," so the question is how many kinds of animals did Noah take on the ark?
God told Noah to take two of each kind, and seven of some kinds (Genesis 7:2-3), and we can also determine that this did not include insects or fish. (Genesis 7:22) Where exactly is the line between each kind? Scientists have not yet determined the kind barriers for many creatures, but some have estimated there are around 8,000-10,000 basic kinds of animals on the planet, which is much more reasonable for Noah and his family to accomplish.
(See John Woodmorappe, Noah's Ark: A Feasibility Study, published Institute for Creation Research, 1996, ISBN: 9780932766410)
The next logical question is that if Noah had all these animals on the ark, how would he have room for all these huge dinosaurs?
Noah did not have to bring the biggest animals he could find. He could bring babies and it would be MUCH easier. There are all sorts of reasons why bringing babies would be more logical:
Some evolutionists will claim that the dinosaurs would have eaten the other animals and the 8-man crew of the boat, however God does not allow the eating of meat until after the flood. (Genesis 9:3) Before the flood, everything was vegetarian.
Under these conditions, it is reasonable for Noah and his family to complete this task. However, for evolutionists, the story of Noah's flood MUST be false, otherwise all the water would destroy their geologic column, which is a foundational model for their presupposition.
This does not mean all dinosaurs were hunted and killed to the point of extinction. It just means that we do not typically see them anymore because most of them have been hunted and killed. There is the possibility of dinosaurs still being alive today.
Most reptiles never stop growing their entire life. Give a reptile all the food and space it needs to grow, and it could get really big.
"The officials of the Brazil-Columbia Boundary Commission... in 1933... killed a
98 ft. (30m) snake 2 feet in diameterwith a machine gun on the banks of the Rio Negro... [It weighed] two tons. Four men had been unable to lift its head."
-Bernard Heuvelmans, On the Tracks of Unknown Animals, published Hill and Wang, 1965, p. 306
"[He] saw a
"There were five witnesses present, and the rest of the 300 villagers felt the effect of this thing as it dragged itself along and dived into the river Napo,"
(See Reuters News Service, "Monstrous Boa Report by Terrified Villagers," Aug 20, 1997; See also Fortean Times, Issues 102-106, John Brown Publishing, 1997, p. 18)
Again, the word 'dinosaur' means "terrible lizard." Though many were killed off, some dinosaurs may have been lizards that lived for hundreds of years, and grew to be enormous. Dinosaurs are not getting as big as they used to be, and we cover more on that in our seminar "The Garden of Eden," available free here at creationliberty.com.
Behold now behemoth, which I made with thee; he eateth grass as an ox.
God would not say, "Behold now behemoth," if Job could not behold behemoth.
So this is obviously a land dwelling creature that eats like an ox.
Lo now, his strength is in his loins, and his force is in the navel of his belly.
Some Bible footnotes jump to conclusions and say this may be an elephant or hippopotamus.
Before drawing conclusions, let's read all the description:
He moveth his tail like a cedar: the sinews of his stones are wrapped together.
These tails look less like a cedar tree and more like a twizzler.
What about this creature? A brachiosaurus fits the description so far.
Remember, the Bible TEXT is the Word of God, not the footnotes.
His bones are as strong pieces of brass; his bones are like bars of iron.
He lieth under the shady trees, in the covert of the reed, and fens.
reed: the straight stalk of any of various tall grasses growing in marshy places
fens: low land covered wholly or partially with water; boggy land; a marsh
(See 'reed' and 'fens', Random House Dictionary, Random House Inc, 2010; See also Collins English Dictionary, 10th Edition, William Collins Sons & Co, 2009)
(See Herman A. Regusters, Mokele-mbembe: An Investigation Into Rumors Concerning A Strange Animal in the Rupublic of the Congo, published California Institute of Technology, 1982)
Considering the near impossibility to bring camera film and electronic equipment on expeditions due to the high humidity levels and extreme traveling conditions, it is no wonder why it remains unexplored, but some are attempting the trip into the unforgiving jungle to find a strange creature reported to live there.
Roy Mackel, an evolutionary biologist and professor of zoology, raised a quarter of a million dollars to go on an expedition into the Congo jungle to find a creature referred to by the surrounding inhabitants as, mokele-mbembe. He came back from that expedition, and wrote a book called: A Living Dinosaur? The Search for Mokele-Mbembe.
When the pygmies in those regions are asked to describe mokele-mbembe, they drew an outline in the sand of a brachiosaurus:
Mokele-mbembe means 'stopper of rivers'. Though the behemoth is not as large as it used to be, it can, according to the locals, get large enough to enter a small river and stop it from flowing.
"The white flowers... [f]ruit and leaves of the Malombo plant. This alleged food plant of the Mokele-mbembe has been described by French and German botanists and is widely distributed throughout the Likouala swamps."
-Roy P. Mackal, A Living Dinosaur?: In Search of Mokele-mbembe, published Brill Archive, 1987, p. 58, ISBN: 9789004085435
There are many accounts of people claiming to have seen mokele-mbembe in the Congo:
"Many members of the expedition had seen the creature and heart it making noise... Herman saw it. Kia saw it and they saw it on several occasions and they heard it making this tremendous roar...
Many other members of the expedition, and this includes government officials from the Republic of the Congo, saw it and heart it.It's not just two people from Pasadena who have seen it. It's a number of people."
(From Associated Press Article; See also Herman A. Regusters, Mokele-mbembe: An Investigation Into Rumors Concerning a Strange Animal in the Rupublic of the Congo, published California Institute of Technology, 1982)
"Reports of strange giant creatures living in the Congo's rivers and swamps have circulated for centuries among the pygmies. Ancient pictographs from nearby areas depict an animal remarkably like the Mokele-Mbembe, the legendary long-necked dinosaur that is believed by the natives to live in the area around Lake Tele."
The Bible describes a creature such as the brachiosaurus, and there is some evidence to suggest they are still living in the Congo. They are not as big as they used to be, but many people, from pygmies to government officials, have gone on record and reported they have seen it. Just as evidence and sightings of Behemoth have been reported, there are also reports of other strange creatuers from around the world.
Lockness Lake is about 24 miles long, 1.5 miles wide, and up to 900 feet deep depending on the location. It is very secluded, surrounded by mountain ranges on all sides. Prior to 1933, anyone wanting to visit this area had to climb over the mountain range, or row up-river about seven miles.
In 1933, a road was built going through the mountain to make the lake a tourist attraction. That same year, many sightings of a strange creature were reported.
So why, after so many people claiming they have seen this creature, do evolutionists fight against it? It's not because they are "skeptics" looking for the truth, but rather because of the danger it causes to the evolution theory. The people who have seen this creature report that it looks exactly like a plesiosaur dinosaur, which is claimed by evolutionist to have gone extinct anywhere from 70-200 million years ago. (It depends on who you're talking to, but it's all imaginary anyway so it doesn't matter.)
|Sir Peter Scott, member of Parliament and founder of the World Wildlife Fund, and his wife, both reported that they have seen the creature at lochness lake. Why would reputable people like this go on record and say they have seen "Nessie?" Probably because they have seen it.|
"I had a splendid view of the object. In fact I almost struck it with my motorcycle. It had a long neck and large oval shaped eyes on top of a small head. The tail would be from five to six feet long and very powerful; the curious thing about it was that the end was rounded off: it did not come to a point. The total length of the animal would be 15 to 20 feet.
Knowing something of natural history I can say that I have never seen anything in my life like the animal I saw.It looked like a hybrid. I jumped off my cycle and followed the animal, which had entered the loch with great speed. There was a huge splash and from the disturbance of the surface it had evidently made away before I reached the shore."
-Arthur Grant, quoted by William Gibbons, Missionaries and Monsters, 2nd Edition, Coachwhip Publications, 2006, p. 10, ISBN: 9781930585249; See also Peter Costello, In Search of Lake Monsters, Garnstone Press, 1974, p. 46, ISBN: 9780855114008
There have been many attempts to locate or photograph this creature, but the task is almost impossible with our current technology. The muddy water of Lockness Lake is nearly pitch black when after going down so many feet, and the bottom of the lake is wrinkled up like a raisen, with multiple caverns going up inside the mountain range. "Nessie" could hide in any wide number of places where we could never find her, but there have still been a few interesting photographs taken of this similar-looking creature.
Many evolutionists claim the creature they pulled on board the Zuiyo Maru was just a basking shark because when the protein was analyzed, it was 96% similar to a basking shark. However, there are some problems that evolutionists are ignoring to make this claim:
(See The Incredible Edible DNA for more details)
Is it a plesiosaur? I do not know. I was not there. However, this is not a situation where the evidence does not point to this being a plesiosaur, rather, it is a situation where the evolutionists need the evidence to fit their geologic column. According to the evolutionists, this creature CANNOT be a dinosaur because it would destroy their precious theory, and because of that, we can see clearly that evolution is a hindrance to real scientific investigation.
"My examination of the monster was quite thorough... It had no teeth. Its head is large and its neck is 20 feet long. The body is weak and the tail is only three feet in length from the end of the backbone... with a bill like it possesses, it must have lived on herbage and undoubtable inhabited a swamp.
-E.L. Wallace, President of the Natural History Society of British Columbia's 1925 eye-witness analyzation of the creature, quoted by Skin Diver Magazine, November, 1989
"Another witness, Judge W.R. Springer from Santa Cruz, felt the creature was from a prehistoric age. He added his observation: 'evidence of two short feet or flippers, and probably swam with its head high above the water.'"
-Skin Diver Magazine, quoting Judge W.R. Springer, November, 1989
If these people all claim to have seen a dinosaur-like creature, why is that so hard to believe? Because it disrupts a preconceived evolution theory. Not only is evolution a very illogical and dangerous religion, but keep in mind, it's a now multi-billion dollar tax-supported industry. If a dinosaur was found to be alive today, it would force the rewriting of every book in the business, and no one wants to forfeit their large paychecks and fame status.
For the love of money is the root of all evil:
-1 Timothy 6:10
If you would like to get more information on this topic, here are some suggested materials to help you get started:
(Watch free here at creationliberty.com)
Baker Books, 2000, ISBN: 9780912986197 (Uses NIV for reference, but still has a lot of a good material.)
CoachwhipBooks.com, 2010, ISBN: 9781616460105