The Instigator
Thiest_1998
Pro (for)
The Contender
Thoht
Con (against)

Dinosaurs and the Bible

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Debate Round Forfeited
Thiest_1998 has forfeited round #4.
Our system has not yet updated this debate. Please check back in a few minutes for more options.
Time Remaining
00days00hours00minutes00seconds
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 5/26/2018 Category: Science
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Debating Period
Viewed: 588 times Debate No: 114403
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (8)
Votes (0)

 

Thiest_1998

Pro

I take the notion the Bible is historically and scientifically accurate and also believe that man lived with dinosaurs not millions of years ago, anyone who disagrees with me feel free to accept the debate.
Thoht

Con

I will need some clarification so that we may start in round 2. I'm sure you'll clarify everything perfectly there.

We can only really debate one idea at a time, so you will have to choose one of these:

1. The Bible is Historically and Scientifically Accurate (You are Pro)
2. Dinosaurs and Man lived together at the same time. (You are Pro)
3. Dinosaurs did not exist millions of years ago, but within the last "X" amount of years. (You are Pro)
4. The Bible can be referred to showing that Dinosaurs and Man lived together. (You are Pro)

I will happily do all four, but with the debate.org settings settling on one topic for one post seems to make more sense. I will hold my evidence for when one topic is chosen.

Happy to debate with you.
Debate Round No. 1
Thiest_1998

Pro

Hi Thoht thank you for debating me and putting your impressive record on the line the 1-0 truly astonishing.

You said
2. The Bible can be referred to showing that Dinosaurs and Man lived together.

My response

Firstly to everyone reading I don't believe that there is proof for my beliefs, I believe that that the evidence points to my beliefs.

The Bible says Genesis 1:1 In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.
KJV
And in Exodus 20:11 11 For in six days the Lord made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them is

Which includes the animals and Humans so that's where the bible hinted that we co-existed which means man and dinosaurs lived together.
Thoht

Con

Very well.

You say that your beliefs are not proven. Excellent. You say "the evidence" points to the topic we're discussing being true. That is most certainly false.

Current scientific evidence points to evolution creating both dinosaurs and humans, over the course of the history of the Universe - beginning 13+ Billion years ago, to the history of our planet - roughly 4.5 billion years ago via radiometric dating of meteorites. The error margins on this for various reasons are a handful of million years, but not billions. [1] Every previous dating process known to man prior to radiometric dating, and prior to accounting for a handful of other factors, measured in the millions of years. If you disagree specifically with radiometric dating, (Science's current method for accounting of the age of rocks, for the most part) please let me know and I'll elaborate.

The creationists' view of the age of the earth varies from between 3.8k and 5.5k years B.C. the average putting the age of the earth around 6 thousand years. [2] The error margins for these are mostly based on translations of the Bible and disputes about the age of certain biblical figures.

So if we're talking about "evidence" for the age of the earth, you have the Bible on your side, and every other measurement the rest of humanity has agreed on (including many religious people, Christians among them) uses radiometric dating.

The importance of this is that you specifically say evidence is on your side for this debate, while providing none outside of the Bible, whose passages match little of what we have otherwise been able to verify using any method.

Also, because the Earth is 6,000 years in your view, you have to explain to us how the Dinosaurs became extinct and humans did not within this 6,000 year span. Modern science believes an asteroid impact is the most likely cause, dating and showing a crater and aging it to be 65 million years ago, roughly. [3] According to creationists, the Noah's Ark scenario occurred roughly 4 thousand years ago. [4] In the story of Noah, 2 of each animal was brought upon the Ark, as well as his family. Nothing specific in the scripture, to my knowledge, says anything other than that Noah brought 2 of each kind of animal with him. This would include dinosaurs were they to exist.

In the current day times, most Americans believe in evolution. Many of these are religious humans who believe their God had a hand in guiding this. [5] If you believe in both Noah's Ark and Evolution, this presents a problem with your argument as well.

The problem occurs with science's idea of Minimum Viable Population (MVP) [6] as well as Incest, in paricular. In a Biblical understanding of the world, Noah brought only 2 of each species on board. This would mean there was only 2 left of every species which walks this Earth. A population of 50 giant pandas leads to a 30% chance of extinction factoring in multiple factors. With 2 left of each species, that percentage goes up massively. With 2 left of each though, who do you think survives in the aftermath of the flood, weak species like the human, or the T-rex? Now let's factor in incest. With 2 left of each species incest is inevitable. The results of incest [7] can be quite nasty or perhaps relatively mild. However, in order to believe in Creationism one must not only say that humanity survived one bout of MVP, but two. Adam and Eve would be considered the first humans and from which all humanity stemmed, and then Noah and his family were the only ones to survive the flood. In these situations incest, and the negative effects, are inevitable.

You don't have to believe in evolution specifically to see the negative effects of incest. This is well documented in science even if you ignore all material in those articles related to Evolution.

Because of MVP and Incest, most of the species on that boat would be dead, or unrecognizable, and God would have made not only all the animals in the world go through with incest hundreds of times, but would have subjected Humanity to this hundreds of times more.

The best thing you could argue at this point would be that the dinosaurs all died before the flood. This is most likely when your situation could have occurred within a creationist perspective. According to probability, likely the only time. Creationists believe that dinosaurs died after Noah's flood due to lack of food, whereas humans survived. [8] So you, I take it, believe that god saved the dinosaurs from the flood only to allow them (and likely 99% of the rest of the species) to be killed after the flood, except for humans and everything we currently see today.

Creationists would guess, completely guess, that Dinosaurs were made at the beginning, and died in the flood. They admit this because it does not refer specifically to Dinosaurs anywhere. They presume, with no evidence, that dinosaurs died before, or shortly after the flood. This would be why they appear in written material dating back the last thousand(s) of years. [9] Radiometric dating, again, showing us the youngest fossil near the 65m mark. [10]

Not only is it statistically unlikely that Creationist belief in this area is correct, it defies all common-sense as well as evidence and proof we've collected thus far. The Bible makes many references to "dragons" and one of a behemoth, but several of those occur after Noah's flood. [11] This would mean if those referred to dinosaurs, creationism would disprove its own theory on the matter. On top of that, you'd have to account for how they went extinct otherwise. You'd also need to account for where this Behemoth went as it stands?

To conclude this portion, as I've given this a fair shot by anyone's standards, we have to see that when you say "the evidence points to my beliefs" you are referring to ONLY the Bible pointing to your beliefs. All we have of human knowledge that we can verify with our own tests points in the opposite direction. Your choice, as it were, would to be whether you find the Bible a more reliable, predictive, and credible source of information, or whether you find all of Human science and ingenuity, who have given us phones, GPS, the internet, and all sorts of new groundbreaking inventions whereas the Bible has been directly related to none.

---
[1] - https://en.wikipedia.org...
[2] - https://answersingenesis.org...
[3] - https://www.nationalgeographic.com...
[4] - https://answersingenesis.org...
[5] - http://www.pewforum.org...
[6] - https://en.wikipedia.org...
[7] - http://genetic-genealogy.co.uk...
[8] - https://answersingenesis.org...
[9] - https://en.wikipedia.org...
[10] - https://www.sciencedaily.com...
[11] - https://www.biblegateway.com...
Debate Round No. 2
Thiest_1998

Pro

You said

Current scientific evidence points to evolution creating both dinosaurs and humans, over the course of the history of the Universe - beginning 13+ Billion years ago, to the history of our planet - roughly 4.5 billion years ago via radiometric dating of meteorites. The error margins on this for various reasons are a handful of million years, but not billions. [1] Every previous dating process known to man prior to radiometric dating, and prior to accounting for a handful of other factors, measured in the millions of years. If you disagree specifically with radiometric dating, (Science's current method for accounting of the age of rocks, for the most part) please let me know and I'll elaborate.

My response

Well the way most scientists have been dating rocks have been inconsistent to say the least.

In June of 1992, Dr. Steven Austin took a sample of dacite from the new lava dome inside Mount St. Helens, the volcano in Washington state. The dacite sample was known to have been formed from a 1986 magma flow, and so its actual age was an established fact. Dr. Austin submitted the sample for radiometric dating to an independent laboratory in Cambridge, Massachusetts. The results came back dating the rock to 350,000 years old, with certain compounds within it as old as 2.8 million years. Dr. Austin's conclusion is that radiometric dating is uselessly unreliable. Critics found that Dr. Austin chose a dating technique that is inappropriate for the sample tested, and charged that he deliberately used the wrong experiment in order to promote the idea that science fails to show that the Earth is older than the Bible claims.

I will leave a link to the paper which can be downloaded

http://www.icr.org...

You said

The creationists' view of the age of the earth varies from between 3.8k and 5.5k years B.C. the average putting the age of the earth around 6 thousand years. [2] The error margins for these are mostly based on translations of the Bible and disputes about the age of certain biblical figures.

My response

Elaborate please

You said

Also, because the Earth is 6,000 years in your view, you have to explain to us how the Dinosaurs became extinct and humans did not within this 6,000 year span. Modern science believes an asteroid impact is the most likely cause, dating and showing a crater and ageing it to be 65 million years ago, roughly. [3] According to creationists, the Noah's Ark scenario occurred roughly 4 thousand years ago. [4] In the story of Noah, 2 of each animal was brought upon the Ark, as well as his family. Nothing specific in the scripture, to my knowledge, says anything other than that Noah brought 2 of each kind of animal with him. This would include dinosaurs were they to exist.

My response

After the flood some dinosaurs were hunted for their meat
Some where killed off because they were a menace, after the flood a lot of animals like the dinosaurs started to get hostile.

You said

In the current day times, most Americans believe in evolution. Many of these are religious humans who believe their God had a hand in guiding this. [5] If you believe in both Noah's Ark and Evolution, this presents a problem with your argument as well.

My response

FYI not American nor a believer in evolutionism

You said

The problem occurs with science's idea of Minimum Viable Population (MVP) [6] as well as Incest, in paricular. In a Biblical understanding of the world, Noah brought only 2 of each species on board. This would mean there was only 2 left of every species which walks this Earth. A population of 50 giant pandas leads to a 30% chance of extinction factoring in multiple factors. With 2 left of each species, that percentage goes up massively. With 2 left of each though, who do you think survives in the aftermath of the flood, weak species like the human, or the T-rex? Now let's factor in incest. With 2 left of each species incest is inevitable. The results of incest [7] can be quite nasty or perhaps relatively mild. However, in order to believe in Creationism one must not only say that humanity survived one bout of MVP, but two. Adam and Eve would be considered the first humans and from which all humanity stemmed, and then Noah and his family were the only ones to survive the flood. In these situations incest, and the negative effects, are inevitable.

My response

No Noah brought two of every kind of animal eg dog kind cat kind ect also animals that had nostrils.

ps I'm having to rush because I have very little time left sorry

I have to end it here because I have just over a minute left but a last thing to add the word dinosaur was created in the 1800s the bible was written in the 1600 so they couldnt use the word dinosaurs
Thoht

Con

1. Dr. Steven Austin's claims et cetera.

Your link does not go to what you speak of, so I had to dig a little bit on my own.

What you're telling me is that the vast majority of scientists, except for the creationists, accept radiometric dating as accurate within a certain margin of error [1](the margin of error is well over the total age you believe) but you believe this one man found an error in that. An error that all other scientists deny by pointing out various flaws. (again besides creationists) You believe this one man is more likely to be telling the truth, and that he has not made a mistake? That all other scientists in the field have? You also believe this when creationists haven't a shred of evidence in their favor as far as scientific evidence goes to show the earth is ~6k years old. (Studies funded by the "Institute for Creation Research" are extremely suspect)

The problem I have is I cannot find one scientist outside of religious journals to support your argument. But you believe these people because of their scientific understanding, as it were, which you claim is greater than all other scientists? This after you link an article largely unrelated to your claim.

You have to say that many scientists who are not creationists are hiding the fact that radiometric dating is flawed. You have to say that they are intentionally hiding the truth. For what reason? The burden of proof for that claim is almost as difficult to meet as the burden of proof for the claim we are debating!

Even if you disprove radiometric dating, when we're debating on this topic you have the burden of proof, and have supplied no evidence for your side.

2. "Elaborate please"

I linked the full article. It is one of the first columns. You will see various religious "scholars" and their calculations as to the age of the earth based on the bible. I need not elaborate more. Read the article if you have some dispute with them.

3. "Dinosaurs were hunted for their meat." (et cetera)

This is a claim you have presented no evidence for. Do we have caveman paintings of dinosaurs? Large groups of humans coming at dinosaurs with spears? [2] I can't argue a claim you believe despite the lack of evidence.

4. "I'm not a believer in Evolution"

There is as much proof of the scientific theory of evolution as there is for the scientific theory of gravity. No one, not even most creationist thinkers, deny evolution exists in some form. They debate the extent to which it can mold one life form into another. "micro" versus "macro." Either way, all the evidence is on one side, and the other side only presents the bible.

5. "No Noah brought two of every kind of animal eg dog kind cat kind ect (?) also animals that had nostrils."

This is as close to a nonsense phrase as I've ever heard and addresses none of my points. (MVP and Incest) Do you also not believe in incest causing genetic issues? Again, all the evidence is on my side in this issue. Incest may have been permissible in the Bible, but if you'd like to continue debating I'm going to need you to supply evidence of your 6,000 year old theory outside of just the bible, or at the very least respond to my points (MVP and Incest) in full. I don't see much good coming from a debate on the nostrils of animals allowed on Noah's Ark, seeing as how the Bible is not evidence for your position.

6. "The word dinosaur was created in the 1800s the bible was written in the 1600 (??) so they couldnt use the word dinosaurs"

So what is the word in the Bible for them? "Behemoth" was surely not it. Please cite me some verses with what you believe dinosaurs were referred to as the bible. Do you believe anyone would speak of birds but not speak on dinosaurs?

We can allow the bible as an account of what may have happened. You have to provide evidence to verify the account of what happened. You have provided no evidence to verify the Bible's account, and have provided shady quotes at best from the bible itself to even suggest such a being as a dinosaur existed in the bible at all.

Please, in your next argument cite me the specific quote that suggests dinosaurs in the bible. Quoting the bible saying "god created everything" does not constitute showing dinosaurs in the bible.

Please, in your next argument reference any source that is not specifically the bible that would suggest the Earth is 6,000 years old.

Please, in your next argument reference any source that is not specifically the bible that suggests humans and dinosaurs may have lived at the same time. Cave man paintings, any science at all.

Until you can do so your burden of proof is not met, and you will have to concede this debate on the grounds that the only source you have for your claim is the bible, and the only quote you have sourced from there does not directly link to your claim.

Happy thinking with you.

---
[1] - https://ncse.com...
[2] - http://www.bradshawfoundation.com...
Debate Round No. 3
This round has not been posted yet.
This round has not been posted yet.
Debate Round No. 4
This round has not been posted yet.
This round has not been posted yet.
Debate Round No. 5
8 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 8 records.
Posted by Thoht 3 years ago
Thoht
I'm happy to finish this debate if you wish to repost it and copy+paste the previous arguments.
Posted by Thiest_1998 3 years ago
Thiest_1998
Sorry for not replying the website wasn't working at the time
Posted by mosc 3 years ago
mosc
Dude the bible its just a bunch of translations...poor translations at best. Brit does not mean covenant and tohor does not mean clean and tuma does not mean unclean and the 4 letter Name its the Spirit of Life and N O T a word. The bible never once brings this Name, which no man can pronounce. Why can no man pronounce the Name of the Hebrew God? B/c that Name lives as Spirit. And this living Spirit its not a word. Men can speak words but words can not cause Spirits to live.
Posted by Nd2400 3 years ago
Nd2400
@ Thiest_1998

You didn't prove anything. Just because you said GoD doesn't mean you have proof. You have no solid evidence on people living with dinosaurs.....

I guess that why you folded in this debate...
Posted by Im_Intelligent 3 years ago
Im_Intelligent
@Thiest_1998
Your believes have already been disproven over and over and over and over again.

All of your rebuttals fall under at least one of these five category's.

*Failure with regard to the scientific method and/or relevant scientific principles.
*Unreasonable/inconsistent standard of evidence.
*Vague terminology
*You just got to have faith
*Special pleading

But you will likely regard this as nothing more then inconvenient to you right?

So i give you this, it holds over 500+ claims made by Christians and Creationists, Scientists have refuted them all, have fun.

http://www.talkorigins.org...
Posted by Thiest_1998 3 years ago
Thiest_1998
@Nd2400

And God created great whales, and every living creature that moveth, which the waters brought forth abundantly, after their kind, "and every winged fowl after his kind": and God saw that it was good.

Here is proof eg bird produce birds and and whales produce whales, so scientifically it is accurate if you'd like to disprove my beliefs go ahead.
Posted by Im_Intelligent 3 years ago
Im_Intelligent
My Grand Daddy was Trex Farmer back in the gud ol days before da flud.
Posted by Nd2400 3 years ago
Nd2400
You can't prove the bible is scientifically accurate nor you can't prove people live with dinosaurs. Another thing the bible never said anything about dinosaurs. Your whole thesis is fabricated...
This debate has 2 more rounds before the voting begins. If you want to receive email updates for this debate, click the Add to My Favorites link at the top of the page.

By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use.