Total Posts:32|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

Of Dinosaurs and Dragons

GarretKadeDupre
Posts: 2,023
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/9/2014 5:53:18 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
Challenge for people who don't believe humans ever co-existed with giant, fire and/or smoke breathing lizards:

How do you explain the prevalence of dragon myths in cultures from virtually every country around the world?

Why does the Chinese astrology table have 11 extant creatures and just 1 dragon? Doesn't seem very consistent for them to have put a fake creature with real ones, does it?

What about Marco Polo's eye-witness account of a 100-foot lizard in China?
Proof that people witnessed living dinosaurs:
http://www.debate.org...
Ramshutu
Posts: 4,063
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/10/2014 7:10:26 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 8/9/2014 5:53:18 PM, GarretKadeDupre wrote:
Challenge for people who don't believe humans ever co-existed with giant, fire and/or smoke breathing lizards:

How do you explain the prevalence of dragon myths in cultures from virtually every country around the world?

Why does the Chinese astrology table have 11 extant creatures and just 1 dragon? Doesn't seem very consistent for them to have put a fake creature with real ones, does it?

What about Marco Polo's eye-witness account of a 100-foot lizard in China?

Dunno.

I guess we should throw away the massive bredth of detailed compelling evidence in almost all facets of paleontology and biology that conclusively demonstrate that humans and dinosaurs did not coexist, and that there is no physical detailed evidence showing that they did at any level, nor is there any evidence for the physical existance of dragons. All because a set of broadly disparate mythology about "dragons", which various quite significantly in appearance, behaviour, and morphology ranging from snake like, to winged reptile exist in predonimantly european and asian cultures.
lifemeansevolutionisgood
Posts: 551
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/10/2014 9:53:11 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 8/9/2014 5:53:18 PM, GarretKadeDupre wrote:
Challenge for people who don't believe humans ever co-existed with giant, fire and/or smoke breathing lizards:

How do you explain the prevalence of dragon myths in cultures from virtually every country around the world?

Why does the Chinese astrology table have 11 extant creatures and just 1 dragon? Doesn't seem very consistent for them to have put a fake creature with real ones, does it?

What about Marco Polo's eye-witness account of a 100-foot lizard in China?

Though I do not always rely on them for information, it includes different possibilities.
http://www.smithsonianmag.com...
tkubok
Posts: 5,044
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/10/2014 11:43:53 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 8/9/2014 5:53:18 PM, GarretKadeDupre wrote:
Challenge for people who don't believe humans ever co-existed with giant, fire and/or smoke breathing lizards:

How do you explain the prevalence of dragon myths in cultures from virtually every country around the world?

1. The chinese concept of Dragons is vastly different from the western concept of dragons. Chinese dragons are depicted as long snakes that do not breathe fire and are mythical, godly in nature, with attributes such as whiskers, living in water, lack of wings, etc.

2. There are also Unicorn myths, from the Qilin or Kirin from Asia mirroring in similarity, but also slightly different from their western counterparts as well.

3. There are also Faerie myths, ranging from the pixies to the Hindu Yakshini to the Koro-pok-guru from japanese mythos.

Even if we ignore the fact that there are clear similarities and differences, the things these creatures resemble arent completely alien. A unicorn is a horse with a horn. A dragon(atleast in western depictions) is a lizard with wings. And these things exist all around the world.

Why does the Chinese astrology table have 11 extant creatures and just 1 dragon? Doesn't seem very consistent for them to have put a fake creature with real ones, does it?

Clearly the chinese thought that the dragon existed. You know, kind of like how the Greeks thought the Zeus existed.

What about Marco Polo's eye-witness account of a 100-foot lizard in China?

Curiously enough, Marco Polos eye witness account of the lizard matches greatly with the komodo dragon, or alligators. And interestingly enough, the depiction of this "Dragon" doesnt match the account of what the chinese considered as a dragon, either. And of course, Marco polos tales were always truthful and accurate, and all historians and scholars agree to this(sarcasm).... http://www.smithsonianmag.com...
GarretKadeDupre
Posts: 2,023
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/10/2014 2:04:38 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 8/10/2014 7:10:26 AM, Ramshutu wrote:
At 8/9/2014 5:53:18 PM, GarretKadeDupre wrote:
Challenge for people who don't believe humans ever co-existed with giant, fire and/or smoke breathing lizards:

How do you explain the prevalence of dragon myths in cultures from virtually every country around the world?

Why does the Chinese astrology table have 11 extant creatures and just 1 dragon? Doesn't seem very consistent for them to have put a fake creature with real ones, does it?

What about Marco Polo's eye-witness account of a 100-foot lizard in China?

Dunno.

I guess we should throw away the massive bredth of detailed compelling evidence in almost all facets of paleontology and biology that conclusively demonstrate that humans and dinosaurs did not coexist,

You're completely correct. I was mistaken. Neither Dinosaurs nor the Wollemi Pine Tree ever co-existed with humans, because absence of evidence is conclusive evidence of absence.

and that there is no physical detailed evidence showing that they did at any level, nor is there any evidence for the physical existance of dragons.

You mean no evidence that any dinosaurs breathed fire or smoke?

You must realize that if all we had of electric eels were fossils, we'd never know they were capable of electrocuting a horse to death in an instant while remaining totally unharmed themselves.
We'd never know Bombardier Beetles could squirt chemicals out of his butt-hole at 212 degrees Fahrenheit.
Or that Marine Iguanas shot salt water out of their nose.
Or that the Horned Lizard could shoot blood 5 feet out of its eyes.
Or that fireflies could glow in the dark.

But what evidence DO we have? Well, there are dinosaur fossils with literally giant holes in their head. Large compartments. For example, T. rex had lots of compartments in his head... SUPPOSEDLY his sinus cavities took up more room than his brain:

http://news.softpedia.com...

Or maybe that's where he had his fire-breathing faculties.

All because a set of broadly disparate mythology about "dragons", which various quite significantly in appearance, behaviour, and morphology ranging from snake like, to winged reptile exist in predonimantly european and asian cultures.

There are no myths of a fire-breathing hamster. Or butterfly. Or dog. When you take all the dragon myths from around the globe, 99% of them are fire-breathing LIZARDS (with or without wings).

That's not coincidence. People didn't make all this stuff up. They saw them in real life.
Proof that people witnessed living dinosaurs:
http://www.debate.org...
Ramshutu
Posts: 4,063
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/10/2014 2:28:36 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 8/10/2014 2:04:38 PM, GarretKadeDupre wrote:
At 8/10/2014 7:10:26 AM, Ramshutu wrote:
At 8/9/2014 5:53:18 PM, GarretKadeDupre wrote:
Challenge for people who don't believe humans ever co-existed with giant, fire and/or smoke breathing lizards:

How do you explain the prevalence of dragon myths in cultures from virtually every country around the world?

Why does the Chinese astrology table have 11 extant creatures and just 1 dragon? Doesn't seem very consistent for them to have put a fake creature with real ones, does it?

What about Marco Polo's eye-witness account of a 100-foot lizard in China?

Dunno.

I guess we should throw away the massive bredth of detailed compelling evidence in almost all facets of paleontology and biology that conclusively demonstrate that humans and dinosaurs did not coexist,

You're completely correct. I was mistaken. Neither Dinosaurs nor the Wollemi Pine Tree ever co-existed with humans, because absence of evidence is conclusive evidence of absence.

Well no that's not actually true; with the plethora of evidence showing dinosaurs lived 65m years ago and before, with no examples of dinosaurs living after that time despite the massive numbers of discovered fossiles; combined with the evidence of fossilized mammals and birds after that date showing that they lived at different times with no majority of modern extent taxa existing prior to that in the fossile record combined with no evidence of any extant mammals coexisting with dinosaurs is pretty conclusive evidence of abscence.

and that there is no physical detailed evidence showing that they did at any level, nor is there any evidence for the physical existance of dragons.

You mean no evidence that any dinosaurs breathed fire or smoke?

No, no evidence of them coexisting.

You must realize that if all we had of electric eels were fossils, we'd never know they were capable of electrocuting a horse to death in an instant while remaining totally unharmed themselves.
We'd never know Bombardier Beetles could squirt chemicals out of his butt-hole at 212 degrees Fahrenheit.
Or that Marine Iguanas shot salt water out of their nose.
Or that the Horned Lizard could shoot blood 5 feet out of its eyes.
Or that fireflies could glow in the dark.

And? None of those things show that animals can breath fire. I'm pretty sure you could tell from a well preserved dinosaur soft tissue whether it could breath fire or not; you should be able to find quite a few well preserved dinosaur specimins if they were only 6-10k years old.

But what evidence DO we have? Well, there are dinosaur fossils with literally giant holes in their head. Large compartments. For example, T. rex had lots of compartments in his head... SUPPOSEDLY his sinus cavities took up more room than his brain:

http://news.softpedia.com...

Or maybe that's where he had his fire-breathing faculties.


And? Making the leap from large hole in their head that is generally used for sinus's, to "must have breathed fire" is simply crazy speculation and just as well supported as suggesting that T Rex had a large hole in his head because "that's where the leprachauns live"

It's this sort of random and wild speculation devoid of any supporting evidence, asserted as if it's some compelling positive evidence that typifies the creationist mindset.

All because a set of broadly disparate mythology about "dragons", which various quite significantly in appearance, behaviour, and morphology ranging from snake like, to winged reptile exist in predonimantly european and asian cultures.

There are no myths of a fire-breathing hamster. Or butterfly. Or dog. When you take all the dragon myths from around the globe, 99% of them are fire-breathing LIZARDS (with or without wings).

As mentioned above, this is rubbish. Chinese dragons don't breath fire, and they are a significant proportion of dragon examples.

That's not coincidence. People didn't make all this stuff up. They saw them in real life.

Yeah. It's not like mythology is ever made up....

So, so far, you have "T-Rex has a big sinus hole" and "Asians and Europeans have grossly different myths about two different types of lizard like creature with different some similarities, but many differences to show that humans and fire breathing dinosaurs coexisted.

Science, on the other hand has a significant amount of evidence concerning chronology, fossile species, locations, evolutionary progression and exintction of dinosaurs, all of which shows they died out tens of millions of years before the first human walked the earth; no evidence of any modern taxa finds in earlier strata in any example; no evidence of human beings fighting, killing eaten, or being eaten by dinosaurs, no cave paintings clearly depicting ugg-the-head-clubber being savaged by a velociraptor, and despite your claim that dinosaurs and man coexisted, NO evidence of any dinosaur having died in the last few thousand years.

But hey, real evidence is no match for weird speculation.
GarretKadeDupre
Posts: 2,023
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/10/2014 2:36:07 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 8/10/2014 2:28:36 PM, Ramshutu wrote:
At 8/10/2014 2:04:38 PM, GarretKadeDupre wrote:
At 8/10/2014 7:10:26 AM, Ramshutu wrote:
At 8/9/2014 5:53:18 PM, GarretKadeDupre wrote:
Challenge for people who don't believe humans ever co-existed with giant, fire and/or smoke breathing lizards:

How do you explain the prevalence of dragon myths in cultures from virtually every country around the world?

Why does the Chinese astrology table have 11 extant creatures and just 1 dragon? Doesn't seem very consistent for them to have put a fake creature with real ones, does it?

What about Marco Polo's eye-witness account of a 100-foot lizard in China?

Dunno.

I guess we should throw away the massive bredth of detailed compelling evidence in almost all facets of paleontology and biology that conclusively demonstrate that humans and dinosaurs did not coexist,

You're completely correct. I was mistaken. Neither Dinosaurs nor the Wollemi Pine Tree ever co-existed with humans, because absence of evidence is conclusive evidence of absence.

Well no that's not actually true; with the plethora of evidence showing dinosaurs lived 65m years ago and before, with no examples of dinosaurs living after that time despite the massive numbers of discovered fossiles; combined with the evidence of fossilized mammals and birds after that date showing that they lived at different times with no majority of modern extent taxa existing prior to that in the fossile record combined with no evidence of any extant mammals coexisting with dinosaurs is pretty conclusive evidence of abscence.

I'm confused. Are you saying dinosaurs didn't co-exist with mammals and birds? Because both have been found in dinosaur's stomachs.

and that there is no physical detailed evidence showing that they did at any level, nor is there any evidence for the physical existance of dragons.

You mean no evidence that any dinosaurs breathed fire or smoke?

No, no evidence of them coexisting.

You mean no fossil evidence. Because there is eye-witness accounts which counts as evidence.

You must realize that if all we had of electric eels were fossils, we'd never know they were capable of electrocuting a horse to death in an instant while remaining totally unharmed themselves.
We'd never know Bombardier Beetles could squirt chemicals out of his butt-hole at 212 degrees Fahrenheit.
Or that Marine Iguanas shot salt water out of their nose.
Or that the Horned Lizard could shoot blood 5 feet out of its eyes.
Or that fireflies could glow in the dark.

And? None of those things show that animals can breath fire. I'm pretty sure you could tell from a well preserved dinosaur soft tissue whether it could breath fire or not; you should be able to find quite a few well preserved dinosaur specimins if they were only 6-10k years old.

Really? How would you go about determining whether a dinosaur could breath fire from it's fossils?

But what evidence DO we have? Well, there are dinosaur fossils with literally giant holes in their head. Large compartments. For example, T. rex had lots of compartments in his head... SUPPOSEDLY his sinus cavities took up more room than his brain:

http://news.softpedia.com...

Or maybe that's where he had his fire-breathing faculties.


And? Making the leap from large hole in their head that is generally used for sinus's, to "must have breathed fire" is simply crazy speculation and just as well supported as suggesting that T Rex had a large hole in his head because "that's where the leprachauns live"

It's not crazy speculation. It's supported by eye-witness accounts.

It's this sort of random and wild speculation devoid of any supporting evidence, asserted as if it's some compelling positive evidence that typifies the creationist mindset.

I love how you keep denying I have any evidence for my claims at all.

All because a set of broadly disparate mythology about "dragons", which various quite significantly in appearance, behaviour, and morphology ranging from snake like, to winged reptile exist in predonimantly european and asian cultures.

There are no myths of a fire-breathing hamster. Or butterfly. Or dog. When you take all the dragon myths from around the globe, 99% of them are fire-breathing LIZARDS (with or without wings).

As mentioned above, this is rubbish. Chinese dragons don't breath fire, and they are a significant proportion of dragon examples.

Wow, some dinosaurs breathed fire and some didn't. Why does that seem absurd to you? I'm saying SOME dinosaurs breathed fire, not necessarily ALL of them.

That's not coincidence. People didn't make all this stuff up. They saw them in real life.

Yeah. It's not like mythology is ever made up....

Not consistently like that.

So, so far, you have "T-Rex has a big sinus hole" and "Asians and Europeans have grossly different myths about two different types of lizard like creature with different some similarities, but many differences to show that humans and fire breathing dinosaurs coexisted.

Science, on the other hand has a significant amount of evidence concerning chronology, fossile species, locations, evolutionary progression and exintction of dinosaurs, all of which shows they died out tens of millions of years before the first human walked the earth; no evidence of any modern taxa finds in earlier strata in any example; no evidence of human beings fighting, killing eaten, or being eaten by dinosaurs, no cave paintings clearly depicting ugg-the-head-clubber being savaged by a velociraptor, and despite your claim that dinosaurs and man coexisted, NO evidence of any dinosaur having died in the last few thousand years.

But hey, real evidence is no match for weird speculation.
Proof that people witnessed living dinosaurs:
http://www.debate.org...
Ramshutu
Posts: 4,063
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/10/2014 2:55:51 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 8/10/2014 2:36:07 PM, GarretKadeDupre wrote:
Well no that's not actually true; with the plethora of evidence showing dinosaurs lived 65m years ago and before, with no examples of dinosaurs living after that time despite the massive numbers of discovered fossiles; combined with the evidence of fossilized mammals and birds after that date showing that they lived at different times with no majority of modern extent taxa existing prior to that in the fossile record combined with no evidence of any extant mammals coexisting with dinosaurs is pretty conclusive evidence of abscence.

I'm confused. Are you saying dinosaurs didn't co-exist with mammals and birds? Because both have been found in dinosaur's stomachs.

Modern birds, and modern mammal species; or even any species that was present after the dinosaurs died out. Prehistoric mammals were around at the time of the dinosaurs, but in no way similar to how they are now. And hey, we all no birds are dinosaurs.

and that there is no physical detailed evidence showing that they did at any level, nor is there any evidence for the physical existance of dragons.

You mean no evidence that any dinosaurs breathed fire or smoke?

No, no evidence of them coexisting.

You mean no fossil evidence. Because there is eye-witness accounts which counts as evidence.

Eye witness testimony is the worst form of evidence, by far and away. Considering that there is SO LITTLE eye witness testimony, and you rely on mythology, which is NOT eye witness testimony and is at best heresay (which is even worse than that).

You have no scientific evidence to support your point, or even compelling historical evidence; if dinosaurs truly did live at the same time as people, you should have a lot of both.

You must realize that if all we had of electric eels were fossils, we'd never know they were capable of electrocuting a horse to death in an instant while remaining totally unharmed themselves.
We'd never know Bombardier Beetles could squirt chemicals out of his butt-hole at 212 degrees Fahrenheit.
Or that Marine Iguanas shot salt water out of their nose.
Or that the Horned Lizard could shoot blood 5 feet out of its eyes.
Or that fireflies could glow in the dark.

And? None of those things show that animals can breath fire. I'm pretty sure you could tell from a well preserved dinosaur soft tissue whether it could breath fire or not; you should be able to find quite a few well preserved dinosaur specimins if they were only 6-10k years old.

Really? How would you go about determining whether a dinosaur could breath fire from it's fossils?

The same way you would go about determining that's where leprachauns lived.

Really, you can pull random explanations with no additional supporting for anything out of your rear end. The fact that they have a large nasal cavity, like many other creatures, is not really compelling evidence for something so bizarre.

But what evidence DO we have? Well, there are dinosaur fossils with literally giant holes in their head. Large compartments. For example, T. rex had lots of compartments in his head... SUPPOSEDLY his sinus cavities took up more room than his brain:

http://news.softpedia.com...

Or maybe that's where he had his fire-breathing faculties.


And? Making the leap from large hole in their head that is generally used for sinus's, to "must have breathed fire" is simply crazy speculation and just as well supported as suggesting that T Rex had a large hole in his head because "that's where the leprachauns live"

It's not crazy speculation. It's supported by eye-witness accounts.

There is eye witness accounts of bigfoot, nessy, leprachauns, ghosts, aliens, Elivis being alive, etc.

Considering you may have one or two documented eye witnesses, and mythology dating back to thousands of years ago (with no other documented eye witnesses in any intervening time) is NOT compelling and still makes your argument crazy speculation.

It's this sort of random and wild speculation devoid of any supporting evidence, asserted as if it's some compelling positive evidence that typifies the creationist mindset.

I love how you keep denying I have any evidence for my claims at all.

I was pretty clear what evidence you have; this does not qualify as supporting because of the nature of that evidence completely contradicted by all the ACTUAL evidence; in fact I summarised it pretty neatly at the end.

I particularly love how you accuse me of denying that "large nose holes" and collective mythology of two out of 5 continents" is compelling", yet you deny pretty much the combined sum of paleontological, biological, historical and scientific evidence gathered over the last 150 years that stand directly and totally opposed to your point of view. Please.

As mentioned above, this is rubbish. Chinese dragons don't breath fire, and they are a significant proportion of dragon examples.

Wow, some dinosaurs breathed fire and some didn't. Why does that seem absurd to you? I'm saying SOME dinosaurs breathed fire, not necessarily ALL of them.

The fact that you are making this argument at all as if it has any evidential credence is pretty absurd to me.

Yeah. It's not like mythology is ever made up....

Not consistently like that.

So, so far, you have "T-Rex has a big sinus hole" and "Asians and Europeans have grossly different myths about two different types of lizard like creature with different some similarities, but many differences to show that humans and fire breathing dinosaurs coexisted.

Science, on the other hand has a significant amount of evidence concerning chronology, fossile species, locations, evolutionary progression and exintction of dinosaurs, all of which shows they died out tens of millions of years before the first human walked the earth; no evidence of any modern taxa finds in earlier strata in any example; no evidence of human beings fighting, killing eaten, or being eaten by dinosaurs, no cave paintings clearly depicting ugg-the-head-clubber being savaged by a velociraptor, and despite your claim that dinosaurs and man coexisted, NO evidence of any dinosaur having died in the last few thousand years.

But hey, real evidence is no match for weird speculation.

Bump this last bit ^^^
GarretKadeDupre
Posts: 2,023
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/10/2014 3:20:38 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 8/10/2014 2:55:51 PM, Ramshutu wrote:
At 8/10/2014 2:36:07 PM, GarretKadeDupre wrote:
Well no that's not actually true; with the plethora of evidence showing dinosaurs lived 65m years ago and before, with no examples of dinosaurs living after that time despite the massive numbers of discovered fossiles; combined with the evidence of fossilized mammals and birds after that date showing that they lived at different times with no majority of modern extent taxa existing prior to that in the fossile record combined with no evidence of any extant mammals coexisting with dinosaurs is pretty conclusive evidence of abscence.

I'm confused. Are you saying dinosaurs didn't co-exist with mammals and birds? Because both have been found in dinosaur's stomachs.

Modern birds, and modern mammal species; or even any species that was present after the dinosaurs died out. Prehistoric mammals were around at the time of the dinosaurs, but in no way similar to how they are now. And hey, we all no birds are dinosaurs.

Saying modern species didn't exist with dinosaurs is pedantry. The same alligators that we see today co-existed with dinosaurs:

http://creation.com...

So did ostracods. They are the same today as they were when they lived with dinosaurs.

So did the Wollemi Pine.

So your claim that "any species that was present after the dinosaurs died out [did not live with dinosaurs]" is flat out false.

and that there is no physical detailed evidence showing that they did at any level, nor is there any evidence for the physical existance of dragons.

You mean no evidence that any dinosaurs breathed fire or smoke?

No, no evidence of them coexisting.

You mean no fossil evidence. Because there is eye-witness accounts which counts as evidence.

Eye witness testimony is the worst form of evidence, by far and away. Considering that there is SO LITTLE eye witness testimony, and you rely on mythology, which is NOT eye witness testimony and is at best heresay (which is even worse than that).

This is a circular argument. You're assuming nobody saw dinosaurs in order to argue dragons are pure myth and not eye witness.

You have no scientific evidence to support your point, or even compelling historical evidence; if dinosaurs truly did live at the same time as people, you should have a lot of both.

Define 'compelling historical evidence' so I can provide it to you.

You must realize that if all we had of electric eels were fossils, we'd never know they were capable of electrocuting a horse to death in an instant while remaining totally unharmed themselves.
We'd never know Bombardier Beetles could squirt chemicals out of his butt-hole at 212 degrees Fahrenheit.
Or that Marine Iguanas shot salt water out of their nose.
Or that the Horned Lizard could shoot blood 5 feet out of its eyes.
Or that fireflies could glow in the dark.

And? None of those things show that animals can breath fire. I'm pretty sure you could tell from a well preserved dinosaur soft tissue whether it could breath fire or not; you should be able to find quite a few well preserved dinosaur specimins if they were only 6-10k years old.

Really? How would you go about determining whether a dinosaur could breath fire from it's fossils?

The same way you would go about determining that's where leprachauns lived.

You do realize that's stupid, right? Leprachauns aren't plausible. Fire-breathing lizards are. They don't break any laws of biology or physics.

Really, you can pull random explanations with no additional supporting for anything out of your rear end. The fact that they have a large nasal cavity, like many other creatures, is not really compelling evidence for something so bizarre.

I didn't say it was proof on it's own. It's part of a cumulative case.

But what evidence DO we have? Well, there are dinosaur fossils with literally giant holes in their head. Large compartments. For example, T. rex had lots of compartments in his head... SUPPOSEDLY his sinus cavities took up more room than his brain:

http://news.softpedia.com...

Or maybe that's where he had his fire-breathing faculties.


And? Making the leap from large hole in their head that is generally used for sinus's, to "must have breathed fire" is simply crazy speculation and just as well supported as suggesting that T Rex had a large hole in his head because "that's where the leprachauns live"

It's not crazy speculation. It's supported by eye-witness accounts.

There is eye witness accounts of bigfoot, nessy, leprachauns, ghosts, aliens, Elivis being alive, etc.

Considering you may have one or two documented eye witnesses, and mythology dating back to thousands of years ago (with no other documented eye witnesses in any intervening time) is NOT compelling and still makes your argument crazy speculation.

One or 2 eye witnesses? I've got tons, bro. But I need you to define "credible eye witness/historical accounts" first.

It's this sort of random and wild speculation devoid of any supporting evidence, asserted as if it's some compelling positive evidence that typifies the creationist mindset.

I love how you keep denying I have any evidence for my claims at all.

I was pretty clear what evidence you have; this does not qualify as supporting because of the nature of that evidence completely contradicted by all the ACTUAL evidence; in fact I summarised it pretty neatly at the end.

I particularly love how you accuse me of denying that "large nose holes" and collective mythology of two out of 5 continents" is compelling", yet you deny pretty much the combined sum of paleontological, biological, historical and scientific evidence gathered over the last 150 years that stand directly and totally opposed to your point of view. Please.


As mentioned above, this is rubbish. Chinese dragons don't breath fire, and they are a significant proportion of dragon examples.

Wow, some dinosaurs breathed fire and some didn't. Why does that seem absurd to you? I'm saying SOME dinosaurs breathed fire, not necessarily ALL of them.

The fact that you are making this argument at all as if it has any evidential credence is pretty absurd to me.

Yeah. It's not like mythology is ever made up....

Not consistently like that.

So, so far, you have "T-Rex has a big sinus hole" and "Asians and Europeans have grossly different myths about two different types of lizard like creature with different some similarities, but many differences to show that humans and fire breathing dinosaurs coexisted.

Science, on the other hand has a significant amount of evidence concerning chronology, fossile species, locations, evolutionary progression and exintction of dinosaurs, all of which shows they died out tens of millions of years before the first human walked the earth; no evidence of any modern taxa finds in earlier strata in any example; no evidence of human beings fighting, killing eaten, or being eaten by dinosaurs, no cave paintings clearly depicting ugg-the-head-clubber being savaged by a velociraptor, and despite your claim that dinosaurs and man coexisted, NO evidence of any dinosaur having died in the last few thousand years.

But hey, real evidence is no match for weird speculation.

Bump this last bit ^^^

First, define "credible historical evidence".
Proof that people witnessed living dinosaurs:
http://www.debate.org...
Ramshutu
Posts: 4,063
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/10/2014 3:47:36 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 8/10/2014 3:20:38 PM, GarretKadeDupre wrote:
At 8/10/2014 2:55:51 PM, Ramshutu wrote:
At 8/10/2014 2:36:07 PM, GarretKadeDupre wrote:
Well no that's not actually true; with the plethora of evidence showing dinosaurs lived 65m years ago and before, with no examples of dinosaurs living after that time despite the massive numbers of discovered fossiles; combined with the evidence of fossilized mammals and birds after that date showing that they lived at different times with no majority of modern extent taxa existing prior to that in the fossile record combined with no evidence of any extant mammals coexisting with dinosaurs is pretty conclusive evidence of abscence.
Saying modern species didn't exist with dinosaurs is pedantry. The same alligators that we see today co-existed with dinosaurs:
So your claim that "any species that was present after the dinosaurs died out [did not live with dinosaurs]" is flat out false.

I bolded the appropriate part. We both know about the handful of living fossiles species and the species that have been relatively unchanged.

Despite the vast overwhelming minority of examples of such species; the fundamental point still stands. We have lots and lots and lots of fossiles of extant species that appear after dinosaurs and never before.

Eye witness testimony is the worst form of evidence, by far and away. Considering that there is SO LITTLE eye witness testimony, and you rely on mythology, which is NOT eye witness testimony and is at best heresay (which is even worse than that).

This is a circular argument. You're assuming nobody saw dinosaurs in order to argue dragons are pure myth and not eye witness.

No I'm not. I'm arguing that eye witnesses lie, decieve, are misunderstood, misrepresent, exhaggerate, distort and are generally highly unreliable. That is my point; moreover you only have a couple of incidents of actual eye witnesses, with most of what you are calling "eye witness testimony", an inferrance that "well, someone must have seen it if they are talking about", which is at the very best inferred heresay which is even weaker.

You have no scientific evidence to support your point, or even compelling historical evidence; if dinosaurs truly did live at the same time as people, you should have a lot of both.

Define 'compelling historical evidence' so I can provide it to you.

Heh, I liked the way you skipped over the scientific evidence part.

So let me see; cave paintings or significant artistic works predating dragon mythology unambiguously showing dinosaurs and extinct taxa

Really? How would you go about determining whether a dinosaur could breath fire from it's fossils?

The same way you would go about determining that's where leprachauns lived.

You do realize that's stupid, right? Leprachauns aren't plausible. Fire-breathing lizards are. They don't break any laws of biology or physics.

Really, you can pull random explanations with no additional supporting for anything out of your rear end. The fact that they have a large nasal cavity, like many other creatures, is not really compelling evidence for something so bizarre.

I didn't say it was proof on it's own. It's part of a cumulative case.

A cumulative case consisting of one peice of random speculation, and finding it interesting that several culturess have dragon myths. Not exactly cumulative.

It's not crazy speculation. It's supported by eye-witness accounts.

There is eye witness accounts of bigfoot, nessy, leprachauns, ghosts, aliens, Elivis being alive, etc.

Considering you may have one or two documented eye witnesses, and mythology dating back to thousands of years ago (with no other documented eye witnesses in any intervening time) is NOT compelling and still makes your argument crazy speculation.

One or 2 eye witnesses? I've got tons, bro. But I need you to define "credible eye witness/historical accounts" first.

Eye witness testimony from several unrelated people who were witnessing a dinosaur from disparate view points; such as a number of different eye witness describing a single dinosaur event, such as one coming close to a town or city. IE: corroberated eye witness testimony.

So, so far, you have "T-Rex has a big sinus hole" and "Asians and Europeans have grossly different myths about two different types of lizard like creature with different some similarities, but many differences to show that humans and fire breathing dinosaurs coexisted.

Science, on the other hand has a significant amount of evidence concerning chronology, fossile species, locations, evolutionary progression and exintction of dinosaurs, all of which shows they died out tens of millions of years before the first human walked the earth; no evidence of any modern taxa finds in earlier strata in any example; no evidence of human beings fighting, killing eaten, or being eaten by dinosaurs, no cave paintings clearly depicting ugg-the-head-clubber being savaged by a velociraptor, and despite your claim that dinosaurs and man coexisted, NO evidence of any dinosaur having died in the last few thousand years.

But hey, real evidence is no match for weird speculation.

Bump this last bit ^^^

First, define "credible historical evidence".

To overturn the massive wealth of evidence standing against you; the historical evidence significant and widespread enough over many cultures describing attacks, hunts, in many cases historical artifacts containing dinosaur DNA, or dinosaur bones obviously killed and cut with human tools.

You have a LOT of evidence to provide to overturn all the evidence that says you are wrong.
GarretKadeDupre
Posts: 2,023
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/10/2014 4:06:36 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 8/10/2014 3:47:36 PM, Ramshutu wrote:
At 8/10/2014 3:20:38 PM, GarretKadeDupre wrote:
At 8/10/2014 2:55:51 PM, Ramshutu wrote:
At 8/10/2014 2:36:07 PM, GarretKadeDupre wrote:
Well no that's not actually true; with the plethora of evidence showing dinosaurs lived 65m years ago and before, with no examples of dinosaurs living after that time despite the massive numbers of discovered fossiles; combined with the evidence of fossilized mammals and birds after that date showing that they lived at different times with no majority of modern extent taxa existing prior to that in the fossile record combined with no evidence of any extant mammals coexisting with dinosaurs is pretty conclusive evidence of abscence.
Saying modern species didn't exist with dinosaurs is pedantry. The same alligators that we see today co-existed with dinosaurs:
So your claim that "any species that was present after the dinosaurs died out [did not live with dinosaurs]" is flat out false.

I bolded the appropriate part. We both know about the handful of living fossiles species and the species that have been relatively unchanged.

Oh I hadn't noticed. lol

Despite the vast overwhelming minority of examples of such species; the fundamental point still stands. We have lots and lots and lots of fossiles of extant species that appear after dinosaurs and never before.

What is your argument? That absence of humans and an organism in the same layer is proof they never co-existed?

Eye witness testimony is the worst form of evidence, by far and away. Considering that there is SO LITTLE eye witness testimony, and you rely on mythology, which is NOT eye witness testimony and is at best heresay (which is even worse than that).

This is a circular argument. You're assuming nobody saw dinosaurs in order to argue dragons are pure myth and not eye witness.

No I'm not. I'm arguing that eye witnesses lie, decieve, are misunderstood, misrepresent, exhaggerate, distort and are generally highly unreliable. That is my point; moreover you only have a couple of incidents of actual eye witnesses, with most of what you are calling "eye witness testimony", an inferrance that "well, someone must have seen it if they are talking about", which is at the very best inferred heresay which is even weaker.

You have no scientific evidence to support your point, or even compelling historical evidence; if dinosaurs truly did live at the same time as people, you should have a lot of both.

Define 'compelling historical evidence' so I can provide it to you.

Heh, I liked the way you skipped over the scientific evidence part.

So let me see; cave paintings or significant artistic works predating dragon mythology unambiguously showing dinosaurs and extinct taxa

That's a stupid, unattainable standard, really. That's like demanding I show you a drawing of a chicken from a time before people told stories about chickens. Seriously? If dragons were real, and people saw them, the stories (myths) about them should be dated the same as the drawings.

Really? How would you go about determining whether a dinosaur could breath fire from it's fossils?

The same way you would go about determining that's where leprachauns lived.

You do realize that's stupid, right? Leprachauns aren't plausible. Fire-breathing lizards are. They don't break any laws of biology or physics.

Really, you can pull random explanations with no additional supporting for anything out of your rear end. The fact that they have a large nasal cavity, like many other creatures, is not really compelling evidence for something so bizarre.

I didn't say it was proof on it's own. It's part of a cumulative case.

A cumulative case consisting of one peice of random speculation, and finding it interesting that several culturess have dragon myths. Not exactly cumulative.

It's not crazy speculation. It's supported by eye-witness accounts.

There is eye witness accounts of bigfoot, nessy, leprachauns, ghosts, aliens, Elivis being alive, etc.

Considering you may have one or two documented eye witnesses, and mythology dating back to thousands of years ago (with no other documented eye witnesses in any intervening time) is NOT compelling and still makes your argument crazy speculation.

One or 2 eye witnesses? I've got tons, bro. But I need you to define "credible eye witness/historical accounts" first.

Eye witness testimony from several unrelated people who were witnessing a dinosaur from disparate view points; such as a number of different eye witness describing a single dinosaur event, such as one coming close to a town or city. IE: corroberated eye witness testimony.

Unrelated people? You mean not genetically related?
Proof that people witnessed living dinosaurs:
http://www.debate.org...
Ramshutu
Posts: 4,063
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/10/2014 4:33:16 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 8/10/2014 4:06:36 PM, GarretKadeDupre wrote:
Despite the vast overwhelming minority of examples of such species; the fundamental point still stands. We have lots and lots and lots of fossiles of extant species that appear after dinosaurs and never before.

What is your argument? That absence of humans and an organism in the same layer is proof they never co-existed?

I was pretty clear what my argument was a few posts ago; there is a plethora of specific evidence that prooves dinosaurs and humans lived at different geological ages; with not just humans but all predecessors, relatives, and in general pretty much all extant life showing the same pattern. All evidence points to this, and considering the nature of the fossiles we find and how we find them, to suggest that they actually lived at the same time is simply not shown by the record; if they lived at the same geological time we should see them at the same geological time. We don't.

This is not a smattering of evidence, or evidence of some absent little minutae, this is the combined sum of the fossile record from 65m years ago until today. To state otherwise is to simply make up a theory, and flat out ignore every single implication of that theory that simply does not match the evidence.

Eye witness testimony is the worst form of evidence, by far and away. Considering that there is SO LITTLE eye witness testimony, and you rely on mythology, which is NOT eye witness testimony and is at best heresay (which is even worse than that).

This is a circular argument. You're assuming nobody saw dinosaurs in order to argue dragons are pure myth and not eye witness.

No I'm not. I'm arguing that eye witnesses lie, decieve, are misunderstood, misrepresent, exhaggerate, distort and are generally highly unreliable. That is my point; moreover you only have a couple of incidents of actual eye witnesses, with most of what you are calling "eye witness testimony", an inferrance that "well, someone must have seen it if they are talking about", which is at the very best inferred heresay which is even weaker.

You have no scientific evidence to support your point, or even compelling historical evidence; if dinosaurs truly did live at the same time as people, you should have a lot of both.

Define 'compelling historical evidence' so I can provide it to you.

Heh, I liked the way you skipped over the scientific evidence part.

So let me see; cave paintings or significant artistic works predating dragon mythology unambiguously showing dinosaurs and extinct taxa

That's a stupid, unattainable standard, really. That's like demanding I show you a drawing of a chicken from a time before people told stories about chickens. Seriously? If dragons were real, and people saw them, the stories (myths) about them should be dated the same as the drawings.

If dragons are real, relatively widespread ( as they should be considering what we know of the fossile record) and people saw them, there would be unambiguous drawings of them on the walls of caves like there are of pretty much every other animal humans encountered predating the mythology.

This is certainly not unattainable; you are claiming humans and dinosaurs lived at the same time; if the fossile record dates are wrong (which they're not) which they have to be in your theory, then they also lived in the same geographical location, many of them were predators and would have had a significant impact on the lives of humans. It is incredulous to beleive that considering the disparate type of animals relflected in cave art, there is not a single clear example of any the widespread set of species that would have preyed on or been hunted by humans.

In fact, you saying it is unattainable belies the horrible lack of understanding as to the logical consequences of the things you are stating are true. This is probably wise, because if you did have an understanding of the logical consequences of your speculative hypothesis, you would have discarded it a few minutes later.

Really? How would you go about determining whether a dinosaur could breath fire from it's fossils?

The same way you would go about determining that's where leprachauns lived.

You do realize that's stupid, right? Leprachauns aren't plausible. Fire-breathing lizards are. They don't break any laws of biology or physics.

Really, you can pull random explanations with no additional supporting for anything out of your rear end. The fact that they have a large nasal cavity, like many other creatures, is not really compelling evidence for something so bizarre.

I didn't say it was proof on it's own. It's part of a cumulative case.

A cumulative case consisting of one peice of random speculation, and finding it interesting that several culturess have dragon myths. Not exactly cumulative.

It's not crazy speculation. It's supported by eye-witness accounts.

There is eye witness accounts of bigfoot, nessy, leprachauns, ghosts, aliens, Elivis being alive, etc.

Considering you may have one or two documented eye witnesses, and mythology dating back to thousands of years ago (with no other documented eye witnesses in any intervening time) is NOT compelling and still makes your argument crazy speculation.

One or 2 eye witnesses? I've got tons, bro. But I need you to define "credible eye witness/historical accounts" first.

Eye witness testimony from several unrelated people who were witnessing a dinosaur from disparate view points; such as a number of different eye witness describing a single dinosaur event, such as one coming close to a town or city. IE: corroberated eye witness testimony.

Unrelated people? You mean not genetically related?

I mean individual statements from a collection of people all witnessing the event and recording it independantly. Being unrelated genetically is probably important, but harder for you to prove.
GarretKadeDupre
Posts: 2,023
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/10/2014 4:52:25 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 8/10/2014 4:33:16 PM, Ramshutu wrote:
At 8/10/2014 4:06:36 PM, GarretKadeDupre wrote:
Despite the vast overwhelming minority of examples of such species; the fundamental point still stands. We have lots and lots and lots of fossiles of extant species that appear after dinosaurs and never before.

What is your argument? That absence of humans and an organism in the same layer is proof they never co-existed?

I was pretty clear what my argument was a few posts ago; there is a plethora of specific evidence that prooves dinosaurs and humans lived at different geological ages; with not just humans but all predecessors, relatives, and in general pretty much all extant life showing the same pattern. All evidence points to this, and considering the nature of the fossiles we find and how we find them, to suggest that they actually lived at the same time is simply not shown by the record; if they lived at the same geological time we should see them at the same geological time. We don't.

So your argument is basically, the youngest layer containing a dinosaur fossil is older than the youngest layer with human fossil, therefore they didn't co-exist. Right?

In fact, you saying it is unattainable belies the horrible lack of understanding as to the logical consequences of the things you are stating are true. This is probably wise, because if you did have an understanding of the logical consequences of your speculative hypothesis, you would have discarded it a few minutes later.

What logical consequences don't I understand?

One or 2 eye witnesses? I've got tons, bro. But I need you to define "credible eye witness/historical accounts" first.

Eye witness testimony from several unrelated people who were witnessing a dinosaur from disparate view points; such as a number of different eye witness describing a single dinosaur event, such as one coming close to a town or city. IE: corroberated eye witness testimony.

Unrelated people? You mean not genetically related?

I mean individual statements from a collection of people all witnessing the event and recording it independantly. Being unrelated genetically is probably important, but harder for you to prove.

So I need at least 2 eye-witness reports of the same dinosaur at the same time at the same location? Or do I need 3? Or more?
Proof that people witnessed living dinosaurs:
http://www.debate.org...
Ramshutu
Posts: 4,063
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/10/2014 5:06:48 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 8/10/2014 4:52:25 PM, GarretKadeDupre wrote:
At 8/10/2014 4:33:16 PM, Ramshutu wrote:
At 8/10/2014 4:06:36 PM, GarretKadeDupre wrote:
Despite the vast overwhelming minority of examples of such species; the fundamental point still stands. We have lots and lots and lots of fossiles of extant species that appear after dinosaurs and never before.

What is your argument? That absence of humans and an organism in the same layer is proof they never co-existed?

I was pretty clear what my argument was a few posts ago; there is a plethora of specific evidence that prooves dinosaurs and humans lived at different geological ages; with not just humans but all predecessors, relatives, and in general pretty much all extant life showing the same pattern. All evidence points to this, and considering the nature of the fossiles we find and how we find them, to suggest that they actually lived at the same time is simply not shown by the record; if they lived at the same geological time we should see them at the same geological time. We don't.

So your argument is basically, the youngest layer containing a dinosaur fossil is older than the youngest layer with human fossil, therefore they didn't co-exist. Right?

Not JUST that. If you summarise it down like that it becomes a straw man. Re-read what I have been saying.

In fact, you saying it is unattainable belies the horrible lack of understanding as to the logical consequences of the things you are stating are true. This is probably wise, because if you did have an understanding of the logical consequences of your speculative hypothesis, you would have discarded it a few minutes later.

What logical consequences don't I understand?

Primarily the ones I stated; if humans and dinosaurs really coexisted, then our entire society would be littered with examples of them; if they really lived 6000 years ago, then almost every fossile we find should have DNA, soft tissue, be carbon datable, etc; the sheer volume of fossiles we have of animals that should have lived together but are NEVER found together simply beggars belief, the fact that few, if any mythological descriptions of dinosaurs actually morphologically match any real living dinosaur for which remenants have been discovered in the appropriate area.

You are wildly speculating because you desperately want to beleive what you are saying, however the logical consequences of your theory are massive; what the world SHOULD look like if your opinion was real is nothing like it actually looks like and for that reason your theory completely fails.

One or 2 eye witnesses? I've got tons, bro. But I need you to define "credible eye witness/historical accounts" first.

Eye witness testimony from several unrelated people who were witnessing a dinosaur from disparate view points; such as a number of different eye witness describing a single dinosaur event, such as one coming close to a town or city. IE: corroberated eye witness testimony.

Unrelated people? You mean not genetically related?

I mean individual statements from a collection of people all witnessing the event and recording it independantly. Being unrelated genetically is probably important, but harder for you to prove.

So I need at least 2 eye-witness reports of the same dinosaur at the same time at the same location? Or do I need 3? Or more?

I would say two, provided they can be show to be completely unrelated. So for example two guys out fishing and come back claiming to have seen a dinosaur would not count.

As a rule of thumb; replace dinosaur with "Bigfoot", "Fairies", "Leprauchauns", etc. If it sounds like that typical type of "eyewitness" report; then it is rejected
tkubok
Posts: 5,044
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/10/2014 7:35:17 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 8/10/2014 4:52:25 PM, GarretKadeDupre wrote:
So I need at least 2 eye-witness reports of the same dinosaur at the same time at the same location? Or do I need 3? Or more?

Speaking on this subject, may i ask how many people it would take, who have witnessed and experienced alien abductions for it to become credible, scientific evidence, where it would be irrational and illogical to reject their existance and the events that occurred?
GarretKadeDupre
Posts: 2,023
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/10/2014 8:42:48 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 8/10/2014 7:35:17 PM, tkubok wrote:
At 8/10/2014 4:52:25 PM, GarretKadeDupre wrote:
So I need at least 2 eye-witness reports of the same dinosaur at the same time at the same location? Or do I need 3? Or more?

Speaking on this subject, may i ask how many people it would take, who have witnessed and experienced alien abductions for it to become credible, scientific evidence, where it would be irrational and illogical to reject their existance and the events that occurred?

Apples and oranges. We already know dinosaurs existed; it's just a matter of when that' we're debating.
Proof that people witnessed living dinosaurs:
http://www.debate.org...
GarretKadeDupre
Posts: 2,023
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/10/2014 8:47:26 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 8/10/2014 5:06:48 PM, Ramshutu wrote:
At 8/10/2014 4:52:25 PM, GarretKadeDupre wrote:
At 8/10/2014 4:33:16 PM, Ramshutu wrote:
At 8/10/2014 4:06:36 PM, GarretKadeDupre wrote:
So your argument is basically, the youngest layer containing a dinosaur fossil is older than the youngest layer with human fossil, therefore they didn't co-exist. Right?

Not JUST that. If you summarise it down like that it becomes a straw man. Re-read what I have been saying.

Please put your argument in a syllogism. Because I'm still not sure what your argument is.

So I need at least 2 eye-witness reports of the same dinosaur at the same time at the same location? Or do I need 3? Or more?

I would say two, provided they can be show to be completely unrelated. So for example two guys out fishing and come back claiming to have seen a dinosaur would not count.

As a rule of thumb; replace dinosaur with "Bigfoot", "Fairies", "Leprauchauns", etc. If it sounds like that typical type of "eyewitness" report; then it is rejected

Apples and oranges. Evidence for bigfoot can very easily be faked by a human. Bigfoot is virtually a large man wearing a suit. Fairies and Leprauchauns... not comparable either. We both agree dinosaurs existed; not so for fairies and leprauchauns.
Proof that people witnessed living dinosaurs:
http://www.debate.org...
tkubok
Posts: 5,044
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/10/2014 10:22:58 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 8/10/2014 8:42:48 PM, GarretKadeDupre wrote:
At 8/10/2014 7:35:17 PM, tkubok wrote:
At 8/10/2014 4:52:25 PM, GarretKadeDupre wrote:
So I need at least 2 eye-witness reports of the same dinosaur at the same time at the same location? Or do I need 3? Or more?

Speaking on this subject, may i ask how many people it would take, who have witnessed and experienced alien abductions for it to become credible, scientific evidence, where it would be irrational and illogical to reject their existance and the events that occurred?

Apples and oranges. We already know dinosaurs existed; it's just a matter of when that' we're debating.

Youre positing a fire breathing dragon which is quite different from a dinosaur.

But with regards to your argument, youre basically using eyewitness testimony(Marco polo and the like) as a basis for scientific inquiry. We already do know dinosaurs existed; We do not know, nor is any of the evidence supporting the claim that Dinosaurs co-existed with humans. With regards to that, this is no different from aliens. Whether or not we know aliens exist, is irrelevant as to whether we have a). Eyewitness testimony, and b) an utter lack of any other scientific evidence that demonstrates that the event in question(Be it dinosaurs existing with humans or alien abductions and visitations), and therefore making such a claim sufficiently believable.
GarretKadeDupre
Posts: 2,023
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/10/2014 10:57:46 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 8/10/2014 10:22:58 PM, tkubok wrote:
At 8/10/2014 8:42:48 PM, GarretKadeDupre wrote:
At 8/10/2014 7:35:17 PM, tkubok wrote:
At 8/10/2014 4:52:25 PM, GarretKadeDupre wrote:
So I need at least 2 eye-witness reports of the same dinosaur at the same time at the same location? Or do I need 3? Or more?

Speaking on this subject, may i ask how many people it would take, who have witnessed and experienced alien abductions for it to become credible, scientific evidence, where it would be irrational and illogical to reject their existance and the events that occurred?

Apples and oranges. We already know dinosaurs existed; it's just a matter of when that' we're debating.

Youre positing a fire breathing dragon which is quite different from a dinosaur.

But with regards to your argument, youre basically using eyewitness testimony(Marco polo and the like) as a basis for scientific inquiry. We already do know dinosaurs existed; We do not know, nor is any of the evidence supporting the claim that Dinosaurs co-existed with humans. With regards to that, this is no different from aliens. Whether or not we know aliens exist, is irrelevant as to whether we have a). Eyewitness testimony, and b) an utter lack of any other scientific evidence that demonstrates that the event in question(Be it dinosaurs existing with humans or alien abductions and visitations), and therefore making such a claim sufficiently believable.

So dinosaurs living with humans = alien abduction? bye
Proof that people witnessed living dinosaurs:
http://www.debate.org...
tkubok
Posts: 5,044
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/11/2014 8:30:54 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 8/10/2014 10:57:46 PM, GarretKadeDupre wrote:
At 8/10/2014 10:22:58 PM, tkubok wrote:
At 8/10/2014 8:42:48 PM, GarretKadeDupre wrote:
At 8/10/2014 7:35:17 PM, tkubok wrote:
At 8/10/2014 4:52:25 PM, GarretKadeDupre wrote:
So I need at least 2 eye-witness reports of the same dinosaur at the same time at the same location? Or do I need 3? Or more?

Speaking on this subject, may i ask how many people it would take, who have witnessed and experienced alien abductions for it to become credible, scientific evidence, where it would be irrational and illogical to reject their existance and the events that occurred?

Apples and oranges. We already know dinosaurs existed; it's just a matter of when that' we're debating.

Youre positing a fire breathing dragon which is quite different from a dinosaur.

But with regards to your argument, youre basically using eyewitness testimony(Marco polo and the like) as a basis for scientific inquiry. We already do know dinosaurs existed; We do not know, nor is any of the evidence supporting the claim that Dinosaurs co-existed with humans. With regards to that, this is no different from aliens. Whether or not we know aliens exist, is irrelevant as to whether we have a). Eyewitness testimony, and b) an utter lack of any other scientific evidence that demonstrates that the event in question(Be it dinosaurs existing with humans or alien abductions and visitations), and therefore making such a claim sufficiently believable.

So dinosaurs living with humans = alien abduction? bye

Did you seriously just ignore my entire post? I specifically demonstrated the parallel between your argument of Eyewitness testimony with regards to your example of Marco Polo and fire breathing dragons. And yes, fire breathing dragons or not, dinosaurs living with humans is as absurd as alien abductions.

I guess its easier to say "Bye" than to actually address a valid argument. I guess we know whos the scientist in this discussion.
TheGreatAndPowerful
Posts: 3,012
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/11/2014 8:36:47 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 8/9/2014 5:53:18 PM, GarretKadeDupre wrote:
Challenge for people who don't believe humans ever co-existed with giant, fire and/or smoke breathing lizards:

How do you explain the prevalence of dragon myths in cultures from virtually every country around the world?

Imagination.


Why does the Chinese astrology table have 11 extant creatures and just 1 dragon? Doesn't seem very consistent for them to have put a fake creature with real ones, does it?

What about Marco Polo's eye-witness account of a 100-foot lizard in China?

Exaggeration.
lifemeansevolutionisgood
Posts: 551
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/11/2014 8:53:03 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
Well, I am done here. Garret is just trying to argue that he must be right, so he goes to the person that has presented the weakest argument. Did he address tkubok's points? Nope.

It is painfully obvious what Garret's purpose here is, and it is beyond pathetic.
Ramshutu
Posts: 4,063
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/11/2014 10:57:24 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 8/10/2014 8:47:26 PM, GarretKadeDupre wrote:
At 8/10/2014 5:06:48 PM, Ramshutu wrote:
At 8/10/2014 4:52:25 PM, GarretKadeDupre wrote:
At 8/10/2014 4:33:16 PM, Ramshutu wrote:
At 8/10/2014 4:06:36 PM, GarretKadeDupre wrote:
So your argument is basically, the youngest layer containing a dinosaur fossil is older than the youngest layer with human fossil, therefore they didn't co-exist. Right?

Not JUST that. If you summarise it down like that it becomes a straw man. Re-read what I have been saying.

Please put your argument in a syllogism. Because I'm still not sure what your argument is.

I summarised the argument quite neatly a few posts back. You are proposing that dinosaurs lived at the same time as man, if this were true there should be evidence of it.
LOTS of evidence. From finding dinosaurs in the same strata, to cave paintings, to tool marks on dinosaur bones, evidence of non fossilised dinosaur remains, soft tissue, DNA, and many others.

In a single throwaway statement, the implications of what evidence there should be is simply staggering, it should permeate everything we find that is dinosaur related from geological locations, to geological chronology, to the state of bones, and indirect measures of the age of dinosaurs. We find not one single example of such evidence with all the tens of thousands of fossile remnants that we find.

We find all this evidence with all extant and recently extinct creatures. All of it. More importantly, we have all of the above evidence for extinct creatures like the wooly mammoth: which is directly analogous to what you are proposing. Considering the finds related to wooly mammoths, including cave art, tool marks on bone, proximity of human settlement to relatively well preserved specimens, we KNOW humans and wooly mammoths coexisted.

Considering the mammoth went extinct around the time you are suggesting dinosaurs roamed the earth, were not nearly as prevalent or geographically diverse, trying to convince anyone that dinosaurs and man coexisted without bringing any of this same such evidence to the fore, and being under the impression that a large nasal cavity and myths from two continents is somehow compelling evidence compared to this is simply delusional.

In this case, absence of evidence is evidence of abscence. In this case, what you are proposing SHOULD and MUST have left significant trace, significant evidence permeating every facet of paleontology, geology and anthropology. The fact that is not one single shred of such evidence is most assuredly evidence that your wild speculation is absolutely false.


So I need at least 2 eye-witness reports of the same dinosaur at the same time at the same location? Or do I need 3? Or more?

I would say two, provided they can be show to be completely unrelated. So for example two guys out fishing and come back claiming to have seen a dinosaur would not count.

As a rule of thumb; replace dinosaur with "Bigfoot", "Fairies", "Leprauchauns", etc. If it sounds like that typical type of "eyewitness" report; then it is rejected

Apples and oranges. Evidence for bigfoot can very easily be faked by a human. Bigfoot is virtually a large man wearing a suit. Fairies and Leprauchauns... not comparable either. We both agree dinosaurs existed; not so for fairies and leprauchauns.

Of course we agree that dinosaurs exist. Last time I checked however, your not trying to argue that dinosaurs exist. You are trying to convince my a mythological creature exists, and that it was a dinosaur. Because you are trying to argue a mythological creature actually does or did exist, it is directly comparable to all other mythological creatures.

Even so, my point wasn't to compare the two; If you actually read what I posted instead of trying to divert the conversation away from you providing evidence, my point was that if you present "evidence", and by this I mean highly weak and subjective eye witness testimony, a good judge of whether that eye witness testimony will get laughed at is if the testimony is comparable to the testimony given about Bigfoot, etc.
GarretKadeDupre
Posts: 2,023
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/11/2014 11:06:20 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 8/11/2014 10:57:24 AM, Ramshutu wrote:
At 8/10/2014 8:47:26 PM, GarretKadeDupre wrote:
At 8/10/2014 5:06:48 PM, Ramshutu wrote:
At 8/10/2014 4:52:25 PM, GarretKadeDupre wrote:
At 8/10/2014 4:33:16 PM, Ramshutu wrote:
At 8/10/2014 4:06:36 PM, GarretKadeDupre wrote:
So your argument is basically, the youngest layer containing a dinosaur fossil is older than the youngest layer with human fossil, therefore they didn't co-exist. Right?

Not JUST that. If you summarise it down like that it becomes a straw man. Re-read what I have been saying.

Please put your argument in a syllogism. Because I'm still not sure what your argument is.

I summarised the argument quite neatly a few posts back. You are proposing that dinosaurs lived at the same time as man, if this were true there should be evidence of it.
LOTS of evidence. From finding dinosaurs in the same strata, to cave paintings, to tool marks on dinosaur bones, evidence of non fossilised dinosaur remains, soft tissue, DNA, and many others.

In a single throwaway statement, the implications of what evidence there should be is simply staggering, it should permeate everything we find that is dinosaur related from geological locations, to geological chronology, to the state of bones, and indirect measures of the age of dinosaurs. We find not one single example of such evidence with all the tens of thousands of fossile remnants that we find.

In other words, your argument is:

P1: If the evidence that dinosaurs lived with humans isn't staggering, dinosaurs didn't live with humans.
P2: The evidence that dinosaurs lived with humans isn't staggering.
C1: Dinosaurs didn't live with humans.

Is that a just summary of your argument?

We find all this evidence with all extant and recently extinct creatures. All of it. More importantly, we have all of the above evidence for extinct creatures like the wooly mammoth: which is directly analogous to what you are proposing. Considering the finds related to wooly mammoths, including cave art, tool marks on bone, proximity of human settlement to relatively well preserved specimens, we KNOW humans and wooly mammoths coexisted.

So if I find a cave art, tool marks on bone, nearby human settlement to relatively well preserved dinosaurs, you will agree they coexisted at one point?

Considering the mammoth went extinct around the time you are suggesting dinosaurs roamed the earth, were not nearly as prevalent or geographically diverse, trying to convince anyone that dinosaurs and man coexisted without bringing any of this same such evidence to the fore, and being under the impression that a large nasal cavity and myths from two continents is somehow compelling evidence compared to this is simply delusional.

In this case, absence of evidence is evidence of abscence. In this case, what you are proposing SHOULD and MUST have left significant trace, significant evidence permeating every facet of paleontology, geology and anthropology. The fact that is not one single shred of such evidence is most assuredly evidence that your wild speculation is absolutely false.


So I need at least 2 eye-witness reports of the same dinosaur at the same time at the same location? Or do I need 3? Or more?

I would say two, provided they can be show to be completely unrelated. So for example two guys out fishing and come back claiming to have seen a dinosaur would not count.

As a rule of thumb; replace dinosaur with "Bigfoot", "Fairies", "Leprauchauns", etc. If it sounds like that typical type of "eyewitness" report; then it is rejected

Apples and oranges. Evidence for bigfoot can very easily be faked by a human. Bigfoot is virtually a large man wearing a suit. Fairies and Leprauchauns... not comparable either. We both agree dinosaurs existed; not so for fairies and leprauchauns.

Of course we agree that dinosaurs exist. Last time I checked however, your not trying to argue that dinosaurs exist. You are trying to convince my a mythological creature exists, and that it was a dinosaur. Because you are trying to argue a mythological creature actually does or did exist, it is directly comparable to all other mythological creatures.

Even so, my point wasn't to compare the two; If you actually read what I posted instead of trying to divert the conversation away from you providing evidence, my point was that if you present "evidence", and by this I mean highly weak and subjective eye witness testimony, a good judge of whether that eye witness testimony will get laughed at is if the testimony is comparable to the testimony given about Bigfoot, etc.

So if I provide objective eye witness testimony, you will believe dinosaurs and people coexisted?
Proof that people witnessed living dinosaurs:
http://www.debate.org...
Ramshutu
Posts: 4,063
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/11/2014 11:30:12 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 8/11/2014 11:06:20 AM, GarretKadeDupre wrote:
At 8/11/2014 10:57:24 AM, Ramshutu wrote:
At 8/10/2014 8:47:26 PM, GarretKadeDupre wrote:
At 8/10/2014 5:06:48 PM, Ramshutu wrote:
At 8/10/2014 4:52:25 PM, GarretKadeDupre wrote:
At 8/10/2014 4:33:16 PM, Ramshutu wrote:
At 8/10/2014 4:06:36 PM, GarretKadeDupre wrote:
So your argument is basically, the youngest layer containing a dinosaur fossil is older than the youngest layer with human fossil, therefore they didn't co-exist. Right?

Not JUST that. If you summarise it down like that it becomes a straw man. Re-read what I have been saying.

Please put your argument in a syllogism. Because I'm still not sure what your argument is.

I summarised the argument quite neatly a few posts back. You are proposing that dinosaurs lived at the same time as man, if this were true there should be evidence of it.
LOTS of evidence. From finding dinosaurs in the same strata, to cave paintings, to tool marks on dinosaur bones, evidence of non fossilised dinosaur remains, soft tissue, DNA, and many others.

In a single throwaway statement, the implications of what evidence there should be is simply staggering, it should permeate everything we find that is dinosaur related from geological locations, to geological chronology, to the state of bones, and indirect measures of the age of dinosaurs. We find not one single example of such evidence with all the tens of thousands of fossile remnants that we find.

In other words, your argument is:

P1: If the evidence that dinosaurs lived with humans isn't staggering, dinosaurs didn't live with humans.
P2: The evidence that dinosaurs lived with humans isn't staggering.
C1: Dinosaurs didn't live with humans.

No, this would be a straw man. I guess you can't help it.

P1: if dinosaurs lived with humans there should be staggering evidence in all facets of the relevant sciences, including dating, geology, fossilisation and indications of human-dinosaur interactions, along the same lines as exist for wooly mammoths, mainly, due to ubiquity of dinosaurs and humans living.
P2: if dinosaurs lived at completely different times, dating, geology, state of fossilisation, location and many other lines of evidence should show this.
P2: there is no such evidence of any kind for P1, and vast amounts of evidence for P2.
C1: dinosaurs did not live with humans.

Is that a just summary of your argument?

We find all this evidence with all extant and recently extinct creatures. All of it. More importantly, we have all of the above evidence for extinct creatures like the wooly mammoth: which is directly analogous to what you are proposing. Considering the finds related to wooly mammoths, including cave art, tool marks on bone, proximity of human settlement to relatively well preserved specimens, we KNOW humans and wooly mammoths coexisted.

So if I find a cave art, tool marks on bone, nearby human settlement to relatively well preserved dinosaurs, you will agree they coexisted at one point?

If you find evidence significant, compelling and broad enough to cast significant doubt on the wealth of objective evidence we have showing it isn't true.

You don't overturn most established biology, paleontology, geology and physics of dating by finding a single bone with a tool mark. Because there are so many other plausible explanations that are just as valid without rejecting most of science.


Considering the mammoth went extinct around the time you are suggesting dinosaurs roamed the earth, were not nearly as prevalent or geographically diverse, trying to convince anyone that dinosaurs and man coexisted without bringing any of this same such evidence to the fore, and being under the impression that a large nasal cavity and myths from two continents is somehow compelling evidence compared to this is simply delusional.

In this case, absence of evidence is evidence of abscence. In this case, what you are proposing SHOULD and MUST have left significant trace, significant evidence permeating every facet of paleontology, geology and anthropology. The fact that is not one single shred of such evidence is most assuredly evidence that your wild speculation is absolutely false.


So I need at least 2 eye-witness reports of the same dinosaur at the same time at the same location? Or do I need 3? Or more?

I would say two, provided they can be show to be completely unrelated. So for example two guys out fishing and come back claiming to have seen a dinosaur would not count.

As a rule of thumb; replace dinosaur with "Bigfoot", "Fairies", "Leprauchauns", etc. If it sounds like that typical type of "eyewitness" report; then it is rejected

Apples and oranges. Evidence for bigfoot can very easily be faked by a human. Bigfoot is virtually a large man wearing a suit. Fairies and Leprauchauns... not comparable either. We both agree dinosaurs existed; not so for fairies and leprauchauns.

Of course we agree that dinosaurs exist. Last time I checked however, your not trying to argue that dinosaurs exist. You are trying to convince my a mythological creature exists, and that it was a dinosaur. Because you are trying to argue a mythological creature actually does or did exist, it is directly comparable to all other mythological creatures.

Even so, my point wasn't to compare the two; If you actually read what I posted instead of trying to divert the conversation away from you providing evidence, my point was that if you present "evidence", and by this I mean highly weak and subjective eye witness testimony, a good judge of whether that eye witness testimony will get laughed at is if the testimony is comparable to the testimony given about Bigfoot, etc.

So if I provide objective eye witness testimony, you will believe dinosaurs and people coexisted?

No. There is too much evidence to be simply overturned as such, but it is worth at that point considering to offer an alternative plausible explaination that falls far short of "omg dinosaurs and people"
GarretKadeDupre
Posts: 2,023
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/11/2014 12:02:28 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 8/11/2014 11:30:12 AM, Ramshutu wrote:
At 8/11/2014 11:06:20 AM, GarretKadeDupre wrote:
At 8/11/2014 10:57:24 AM, Ramshutu wrote:
At 8/10/2014 8:47:26 PM, GarretKadeDupre wrote:
At 8/10/2014 5:06:48 PM, Ramshutu wrote:
At 8/10/2014 4:52:25 PM, GarretKadeDupre wrote:
At 8/10/2014 4:33:16 PM, Ramshutu wrote:
At 8/10/2014 4:06:36 PM, GarretKadeDupre wrote:
P2: if dinosaurs lived at completely different times, dating, geology, state of fossilisation, location and many other lines of evidence should show this.
P2: there is no such evidence of any kind for P1, and vast amounts of evidence for P2.
C1: dinosaurs did not live with humans.

P2 is false because it says "no such evidence of any kind" yet there is evidence. For example, "state of fossilization"; T. rex blood cells indicate the T. rex died while humans walked the earth.


Is that a just summary of your argument?

We find all this evidence with all extant and recently extinct creatures. All of it. More importantly, we have all of the above evidence for extinct creatures like the wooly mammoth: which is directly analogous to what you are proposing. Considering the finds related to wooly mammoths, including cave art, tool marks on bone, proximity of human settlement to relatively well preserved specimens, we KNOW humans and wooly mammoths coexisted.

So if I find a cave art, tool marks on bone, nearby human settlement to relatively well preserved dinosaurs, you will agree they coexisted at one point?

If you find evidence significant, compelling and broad enough to cast significant doubt on the wealth of objective evidence we have showing it isn't true.

You don't overturn most established biology, paleontology, geology and physics of dating by finding a single bone with a tool mark. Because there are so many other plausible explanations that are just as valid without rejecting most of science.

How many dinosaur bones with tool marks do I need then?


Considering the mammoth went extinct around the time you are suggesting dinosaurs roamed the earth, were not nearly as prevalent or geographically diverse, trying to convince anyone that dinosaurs and man coexisted without bringing any of this same such evidence to the fore, and being under the impression that a large nasal cavity and myths from two continents is somehow compelling evidence compared to this is simply delusional.

In this case, absence of evidence is evidence of abscence. In this case, what you are proposing SHOULD and MUST have left significant trace, significant evidence permeating every facet of paleontology, geology and anthropology. The fact that is not one single shred of such evidence is most assuredly evidence that your wild speculation is absolutely false.


So I need at least 2 eye-witness reports of the same dinosaur at the same time at the same location? Or do I need 3? Or more?

I would say two, provided they can be show to be completely unrelated. So for example two guys out fishing and come back claiming to have seen a dinosaur would not count.

As a rule of thumb; replace dinosaur with "Bigfoot", "Fairies", "Leprauchauns", etc. If it sounds like that typical type of "eyewitness" report; then it is rejected

Apples and oranges. Evidence for bigfoot can very easily be faked by a human. Bigfoot is virtually a large man wearing a suit. Fairies and Leprauchauns... not comparable either. We both agree dinosaurs existed; not so for fairies and leprauchauns.

Of course we agree that dinosaurs exist. Last time I checked however, your not trying to argue that dinosaurs exist. You are trying to convince my a mythological creature exists, and that it was a dinosaur. Because you are trying to argue a mythological creature actually does or did exist, it is directly comparable to all other mythological creatures.

Even so, my point wasn't to compare the two; If you actually read what I posted instead of trying to divert the conversation away from you providing evidence, my point was that if you present "evidence", and by this I mean highly weak and subjective eye witness testimony, a good judge of whether that eye witness testimony will get laughed at is if the testimony is comparable to the testimony given about Bigfoot, etc.

So if I provide objective eye witness testimony, you will believe dinosaurs and people coexisted?

No. There is too much evidence to be simply overturned as such, but it is worth at that point considering to offer an alternative plausible explaination that falls far short of "omg dinosaurs and people"

Ok so eye witness testimony won't work. Gotcha.
Proof that people witnessed living dinosaurs:
http://www.debate.org...
Ramshutu
Posts: 4,063
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/11/2014 4:25:44 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 8/11/2014 12:02:28 PM, GarretKadeDupre wrote:
At 8/11/2014 11:30:12 AM, Ramshutu wrote:
At 8/11/2014 11:06:20 AM, GarretKadeDupre wrote:
At 8/11/2014 10:57:24 AM, Ramshutu wrote:
At 8/10/2014 8:47:26 PM, GarretKadeDupre wrote:
At 8/10/2014 5:06:48 PM, Ramshutu wrote:
At 8/10/2014 4:52:25 PM, GarretKadeDupre wrote:
At 8/10/2014 4:33:16 PM, Ramshutu wrote:
At 8/10/2014 4:06:36 PM, GarretKadeDupre wrote:
P2: if dinosaurs lived at completely different times, dating, geology, state of fossilisation, location and many other lines of evidence should show this.
P2: there is no such evidence of any kind for P1, and vast amounts of evidence for P2.
C1: dinosaurs did not live with humans.

P2 is false because it says "no such evidence of any kind" yet there is evidence. For example, "state of fossilization"; T. rex blood cells indicate the T. rex died while humans walked the earth.

It's not false, while unusual, those examples are explainable. We're not talking a complete soft tissue find of a whole T. Rex, merely a few remnants of cells. If it died while humans walked the earth there should have been a complete soft tissue preserved T. Rex without fossilised bone, but there wasn't. Obviously you ignore these sort of inconvenient facts.


Is that a just summary of your argument?

We find all this evidence with all extant and recently extinct creatures. All of it. More importantly, we have all of the above evidence for extinct creatures like the wooly mammoth: which is directly analogous to what you are proposing. Considering the finds related to wooly mammoths, including cave art, tool marks on bone, proximity of human settlement to relatively well preserved specimens, we KNOW humans and wooly mammoths coexisted.

So if I find a cave art, tool marks on bone, nearby human settlement to relatively well preserved dinosaurs, you will agree they coexisted at one point?

If you find evidence significant, compelling and broad enough to cast significant doubt on the wealth of objective evidence we have showing it isn't true.

You don't overturn most established biology, paleontology, geology and physics of dating by finding a single bone with a tool mark. Because there are so many other plausible explanations that are just as valid without rejecting most of science.

How many dinosaur bones with tool marks do I need then?

Again, depends. Enough to overturn the massive amount of compelling evidence we have that say it can't happen.

But I'll bite. Find me a human tool mark on a non fossilised dinosaur bone, at least you can say you have evidence that way.



Considering the mammoth went extinct around the time you are suggesting dinosaurs roamed the earth, were not nearly as prevalent or geographically diverse, trying to convince anyone that dinosaurs and man coexisted without bringing any of this same such evidence to the fore, and being under the impression that a large nasal cavity and myths from two continents is somehow compelling evidence compared to this is simply delusional.

In this case, absence of evidence is evidence of abscence. In this case, what you are proposing SHOULD and MUST have left significant trace, significant evidence permeating every facet of paleontology, geology and anthropology. The fact that is not one single shred of such evidence is most assuredly evidence that your wild speculation is absolutely false.


So I need at least 2 eye-witness reports of the same dinosaur at the same time at the same location? Or do I need 3? Or more?

I would say two, provided they can be show to be completely unrelated. So for example two guys out fishing and come back claiming to have seen a dinosaur would not count.

As a rule of thumb; replace dinosaur with "Bigfoot", "Fairies", "Leprauchauns", etc. If it sounds like that typical type of "eyewitness" report; then it is rejected

Apples and oranges. Evidence for bigfoot can very easily be faked by a human. Bigfoot is virtually a large man wearing a suit. Fairies and Leprauchauns... not comparable either. We both agree dinosaurs existed; not so for fairies and leprauchauns.

Of course we agree that dinosaurs exist. Last time I checked however, your not trying to argue that dinosaurs exist. You are trying to convince my a mythological creature exists, and that it was a dinosaur. Because you are trying to argue a mythological creature actually does or did exist, it is directly comparable to all other mythological creatures.

Even so, my point wasn't to compare the two; If you actually read what I posted instead of trying to divert the conversation away from you providing evidence, my point was that if you present "evidence", and by this I mean highly weak and subjective eye witness testimony, a good judge of whether that eye witness testimony will get laughed at is if the testimony is comparable to the testimony given about Bigfoot, etc.

So if I provide objective eye witness testimony, you will believe dinosaurs and people coexisted?

No. There is too much evidence to be simply overturned as such, but it is worth at that point considering to offer an alternative plausible explaination that falls far short of "omg dinosaurs and people"

Ok so eye witness testimony won't work. Gotcha.

Considering the amout of physical evidence that completely contravenes the smattering of vague eye witness reports you will come up with, absolutely.

It's slightly more reasonable to reject vague, old and unreliable eye witness testimony than it is to reject all of modern science, as you are doing,

Let's be clear. You are the one who is rejecting evidence for no reason.
GarretKadeDupre
Posts: 2,023
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/11/2014 4:30:34 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 8/11/2014 4:25:44 PM, Ramshutu wrote:
At 8/11/2014 12:02:28 PM, GarretKadeDupre wrote:
At 8/11/2014 11:30:12 AM, Ramshutu wrote:
At 8/11/2014 11:06:20 AM, GarretKadeDupre wrote:
At 8/11/2014 10:57:24 AM, Ramshutu wrote:
At 8/10/2014 8:47:26 PM, GarretKadeDupre wrote:
At 8/10/2014 5:06:48 PM, Ramshutu wrote:
At 8/10/2014 4:52:25 PM, GarretKadeDupre wrote:
At 8/10/2014 4:33:16 PM, Ramshutu wrote:
At 8/10/2014 4:06:36 PM, GarretKadeDupre wrote:
P2: if dinosaurs lived at completely different times, dating, geology, state of fossilisation, location and many other lines of evidence should show this.
P2: there is no such evidence of any kind for P1, and vast amounts of evidence for P2.
C1: dinosaurs did not live with humans.

P2 is false because it says "no such evidence of any kind" yet there is evidence. For example, "state of fossilization"; T. rex blood cells indicate the T. rex died while humans walked the earth.

It's not false, while unusual, those examples are explainable. We're not talking a complete soft tissue find of a whole T. Rex, merely a few remnants of cells. If it died while humans walked the earth there should have been a complete soft tissue preserved T. Rex without fossilised bone, but there wasn't. Obviously you ignore these sort of inconvenient facts.

So your making the following argument, correct?

P1: If an organism lived with humans, there is a complete soft tissue preserved of it.
P2: There is no complete soft tissue preserved of any dinosaur.
C1: Therefore, no dinosaurs lived with people.

Am I correct?



Is that a just summary of your argument?

We find all this evidence with all extant and recently extinct creatures. All of it. More importantly, we have all of the above evidence for extinct creatures like the wooly mammoth: which is directly analogous to what you are proposing. Considering the finds related to wooly mammoths, including cave art, tool marks on bone, proximity of human settlement to relatively well preserved specimens, we KNOW humans and wooly mammoths coexisted.

So if I find a cave art, tool marks on bone, nearby human settlement to relatively well preserved dinosaurs, you will agree they coexisted at one point?

If you find evidence significant, compelling and broad enough to cast significant doubt on the wealth of objective evidence we have showing it isn't true.

You don't overturn most established biology, paleontology, geology and physics of dating by finding a single bone with a tool mark. Because there are so many other plausible explanations that are just as valid without rejecting most of science.

How many dinosaur bones with tool marks do I need then?

Again, depends. Enough to overturn the massive amount of compelling evidence we have that say it can't happen.

But I'll bite. Find me a human tool mark on a non fossilised dinosaur bone, at least you can say you have evidence that way.

Just so I can say "I have evidence that way"? No, I want to know how many examples I need for you to change your mind. You say "it depends". Depends on what? I need to know what the goalposts are so I can tell if you push them back ;)




Considering the mammoth went extinct around the time you are suggesting dinosaurs roamed the earth, were not nearly as prevalent or geographically diverse, trying to convince anyone that dinosaurs and man coexisted without bringing any of this same such evidence to the fore, and being under the impression that a large nasal cavity and myths from two continents is somehow compelling evidence compared to this is simply delusional.

In this case, absence of evidence is evidence of abscence. In this case, what you are proposing SHOULD and MUST have left significant trace, significant evidence permeating every facet of paleontology, geology and anthropology. The fact that is not one single shred of such evidence is most assuredly evidence that your wild speculation is absolutely false.


So I need at least 2 eye-witness reports of the same dinosaur at the same time at the same location? Or do I need 3? Or more?

I would say two, provided they can be show to be completely unrelated. So for example two guys out fishing and come back claiming to have seen a dinosaur would not count.

As a rule of thumb; replace dinosaur with "Bigfoot", "Fairies", "Leprauchauns", etc. If it sounds like that typical type of "eyewitness" report; then it is rejected

Apples and oranges. Evidence for bigfoot can very easily be faked by a human. Bigfoot is virtually a large man wearing a suit. Fairies and Leprauchauns... not comparable either. We both agree dinosaurs existed; not so for fairies and leprauchauns.

Of course we agree that dinosaurs exist. Last time I checked however, your not trying to argue that dinosaurs exist. You are trying to convince my a mythological creature exists, and that it was a dinosaur. Because you are trying to argue a mythological creature actually does or did exist, it is directly comparable to all other mythological creatures.

Even so, my point wasn't to compare the two; If you actually read what I posted instead of trying to divert the conversation away from you providing evidence, my point was that if you present "evidence", and by this I mean highly weak and subjective eye witness testimony, a good judge of whether that eye witness testimony will get laughed at is if the testimony is comparable to the testimony given about Bigfoot, etc.

So if I provide objective eye witness testimony, you will believe dinosaurs and people coexisted?

No. There is too much evidence to be simply overturned as such, but it is worth at that point considering to offer an alternative plausible explaination that falls far short of "omg dinosaurs and people"

Ok so eye witness testimony won't work. Gotcha.

Considering the amout of physical evidence that completely contravenes the smattering of vague eye witness reports you will come up with, absolutely.

It's slightly more reasonable to reject vague, old and unreliable eye witness testimony than it is to reject all of modern science, as you are doing,

Let's be clear. You are the one who is rejecting evidence for no reason.

Let's be clear, Obama, no I'm not.
Proof that people witnessed living dinosaurs:
http://www.debate.org...
Ramshutu
Posts: 4,063
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/11/2014 4:39:44 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 8/11/2014 4:30:34 PM, GarretKadeDupre wrote:
At 8/11/2014 4:25:44 PM, Ramshutu wrote:
At 8/11/2014 12:02:28 PM, GarretKadeDupre wrote:
At 8/11/2014 11:30:12 AM, Ramshutu wrote:
At 8/11/2014 11:06:20 AM, GarretKadeDupre wrote:
At 8/11/2014 10:57:24 AM, Ramshutu wrote:
At 8/10/2014 8:47:26 PM, GarretKadeDupre wrote:
At 8/10/2014 5:06:48 PM, Ramshutu wrote:
At 8/10/2014 4:52:25 PM, GarretKadeDupre wrote:
At 8/10/2014 4:33:16 PM, Ramshutu wrote:
At 8/10/2014 4:06:36 PM, GarretKadeDupre wrote:
P2: if dinosaurs lived at completely different times, dating, geology, state of fossilisation, location and many other lines of evidence should show this.
P2: there is no such evidence of any kind for P1, and vast amounts of evidence for P2.
C1: dinosaurs did not live with humans.

P2 is false because it says "no such evidence of any kind" yet there is evidence. For example, "state of fossilization"; T. rex blood cells indicate the T. rex died while humans walked the earth.

It's not false, while unusual, those examples are explainable. We're not talking a complete soft tissue find of a whole T. Rex, merely a few remnants of cells. If it died while humans walked the earth there should have been a complete soft tissue preserved T. Rex without fossilised bone, but there wasn't. Obviously you ignore these sort of inconvenient facts.

So your making the following argument, correct?

P1: If an organism lived with humans, there is a complete soft tissue preserved of it.
P2: There is no complete soft tissue preserved of any dinosaur.
C1: Therefore, no dinosaurs lived with people.

Am I correct?

No. You seem intent on massively watering down the strength of the evidence by the way you are phrasing the argument. I'm not going to let you sucker me into a straw man,

But still, feel free to present to me a completely preserved dinosaur, with non fossilised bones and full soft tissue. THAT would be compelling.



Is that a just summary of your argument?

We find all this evidence with all extant and recently extinct creatures. All of it. More importantly, we have all of the above evidence for extinct creatures like the wooly mammoth: which is directly analogous to what you are proposing. Considering the finds related to wooly mammoths, including cave art, tool marks on bone, proximity of human settlement to relatively well preserved specimens, we KNOW humans and wooly mammoths coexisted.

So if I find a cave art, tool marks on bone, nearby human settlement to relatively well preserved dinosaurs, you will agree they coexisted at one point?

If you find evidence significant, compelling and broad enough to cast significant doubt on the wealth of objective evidence we have showing it isn't true.

You don't overturn most established biology, paleontology, geology and physics of dating by finding a single bone with a tool mark. Because there are so many other plausible explanations that are just as valid without rejecting most of science.

How many dinosaur bones with tool marks do I need then?

Again, depends. Enough to overturn the massive amount of compelling evidence we have that say it can't happen.

But I'll bite. Find me a human tool mark on a non fossilised dinosaur bone, at least you can say you have evidence that way.

Just so I can say "I have evidence that way"? No, I want to know how many examples I need for you to change your mind. You say "it depends". Depends on what? I need to know what the goalposts are so I can tell if you push them back ;)

As a creationist, you are an expert on moving goalposts, so let's say this. Find me one human tool mark on a non fossilised dinosaur bone, and I will not be able to explain it.




Considering the mammoth went extinct around the time you are suggesting dinosaurs roamed the earth, were not nearly as prevalent or geographically diverse, trying to convince anyone that dinosaurs and man coexisted without bringing any of this same such evidence to the fore, and being under the impression that a large nasal cavity and myths from two continents is somehow compelling evidence compared to this is simply delusional.

In this case, absence of evidence is evidence of abscence. In this case, what you are proposing SHOULD and MUST have left significant trace, significant evidence permeating every facet of paleontology, geology and anthropology. The fact that is not one single shred of such evidence is most assuredly evidence that your wild speculation is absolutely false.


So I need at least 2 eye-witness reports of the same dinosaur at the same time at the same location? Or do I need 3? Or more?

I would say two, provided they can be show to be completely unrelated. So for example two guys out fishing and come back claiming to have seen a dinosaur would not count.

As a rule of thumb; replace dinosaur with "Bigfoot", "Fairies", "Leprauchauns", etc. If it sounds like that typical type of "eyewitness" report; then it is rejected

Apples and oranges. Evidence for bigfoot can very easily be faked by a human. Bigfoot is virtually a large man wearing a suit. Fairies and Leprauchauns... not comparable either. We both agree dinosaurs existed; not so for fairies and leprauchauns.

Of course we agree that dinosaurs exist. Last time I checked however, your not trying to argue that dinosaurs exist. You are trying to convince my a mythological creature exists, and that it was a dinosaur. Because you are trying to argue a mythological creature actually does or did exist, it is directly comparable to all other mythological creatures.

Even so, my point wasn't to compare the two; If you actually read what I posted instead of trying to divert the conversation away from you providing evidence, my point was that if you present "evidence", and by this I mean highly weak and subjective eye witness testimony, a good judge of whether that eye witness testimony will get laughed at is if the testimony is comparable to the testimony given about Bigfoot, etc.

So if I provide objective eye witness testimony, you will believe dinosaurs and people coexisted?

No. There is too much evidence to be simply overturned as such, but it is worth at that point considering to offer an alternative plausible explaination that falls far short of "omg dinosaurs and people"

Ok so eye witness testimony won't work. Gotcha.

Considering the amout of physical evidence that completely contravenes the smattering of vague eye witness reports you will come up with, absolutely.

It's slightly more reasonable to reject vague, old and unreliable eye witness testimony than it is to reject all of modern science, as you are doing,

Let's be clear. You are the one who is rejecting evidence for no reason.

Let's be clear, Obama, no I'm not.

You are rejecting all of modern paleontology, all of modern dating methods and all fossile evidence ever found.

You may not be Obama, in terms of rejecting a plethora of scientific evidence: yes you can.
Oryus
Posts: 8,280
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/11/2014 5:59:12 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 8/9/2014 5:53:18 PM, GarretKadeDupre wrote:
Challenge for people who don't believe humans ever co-existed with giant, fire and/or smoke breathing lizards:

How do you explain the prevalence of dragon myths in cultures from virtually every country around the world?

People didn't start finding dinosaur bones at the inception of modern paleontology.
People started finding those bones ages ago and tried to make explanations for them. "Dragons" was one of those explanations.
In fact, we know about the hominid gigantopithecus because its' teeth were found in a Chinese apothecary by an anthropologist- being sold as "dragon bones." Every ancient creature's bones they found that were larger than animals they'd seen before, they called them dragons and crushed them up and used them as medicine. It doesn't support your ideas at all. They couldn't even distinguish between the bones of a mammal and a lizard- let alone between animals that exist and don't.

Why does the Chinese astrology table have 11 extant creatures and just 1 dragon? Doesn't seem very consistent for them to have put a fake creature with real ones, does it?

Why is Scotland's national animal the unicorn? It's an iconic animal. It is a symbol dear to each respective nation. That doesn't at all mean it's real.
What about Marco Polo's eye-witness account of a 100-foot lizard in China?
What about it? One guy says "I saw a big lizard" and all of a sudden the whole body of paleontological and anthropological evidence is disproven? No.
: : :Tulle: The fool, I purposely don't engage with you because you don't have proper command of the English language.
: :
: : The Fool: It's my English writing. Either way It's okay have a larger vocabulary then you, and a better grasp of language, and you're a woman.
:
: I'm just going to leave this precious struggle nugget right here.