In response to [If Dinosaurs had REALLY lived side by side with human for centuries and into the 1400s, don't you think people would have mentioned it? Fairly often?]
Not at all. You have to remember, dinosaurs were not unusal or special to the people living at the same time as them anymore than elephants or whales are special to us. The people living at the same time as dinosaurs had no idea that in the future, certain people would claim dinosaurs all died out 70 million years ago...it's such an arbitrary and ridiculous idea.
We have soft dinosaur tissue present today and carvings of dinosaurs made in the late 1400's...how would people know what dinosaurs had looked like if they died out 70 million years ago?
94 comments
"Not at all. You have to remember, dinosaurs were not unusal or special to the people living at the same time as them anymore than elephants or whales are special to us."
By writing that, you have just provided us with an example in the modern day of a reference in text to elephants and whales, despite the fact that they are commonplace animals.
Assuming you are not lying or pulling facts out of your posterior, we would expect to find something similar referring to dinosaurs in the good old 1400s.
Honestly, the 1400's. I know they think they lived in biblical times but the 1400's!!
The Crusades were winding down, the plague was killing Europeans and Columbus was sailing the ocean blue.
I think someone would have written it down if they saw a god damm dinosaur walking around.
Next they will be saying the plague did all the dinosaurs in :)
The idea that the ancients wouldn't have bothered writing about dinosaurs if they had seen them is ridiculous. They wrote about everything else around them. They even wrote about mastodon bones, which they thought were huge human leg bones.
The people of old painted and carved all sorts of creatures; griffins, dragons, imps with bat-like ears, winged horses, etc. There are whole "bestiaries" that were made by monks, most of whom had never been much beyond their own front gate. Check out the gargoyles on medieval buildings. It's not too surprising that a few might have looked like dinosaurs.
"We have soft dinosaur tissue present today"
We have soft tissue that fossilized 65+ million years ago. This was a remarkable find, since soft tisue doesn't usually fossilize.
But still, fossilized soft tisue =/= soft tissue that's been preserved intact in its original state.
Ozzie, "Next they will be saying the plague did all the dinosaurs in :)"
I just lol'ed. You win the internets.
It's so stupid it hurts!
Are you telling me that the people before Noah and indeed Noah went "Big fuck of Brontasaurus? No didn't see it. Lion, fuck in hell trying to bite my leg off! Help!"
And what do you mean the 1400's, This is the time of Henry IV, while fighting against Richard II, they were trying to avoid Rapters?
I think if Dinosaurs existed in 1400 the last thing the English would be concerned about is who should be King.
About 65 MIllion years ago the Dinosaurs became extinct. How do we know Geology, the layers of rock that show the history of the Earth.
For fucks sake get a life!
Wait ... your username is "knight in black leather"?
Isn't that kinda on the ... kinky side, for you Fundies?
It was fossilized tissue, in other words minerals that had infiltrated and hardened into rock in the form of the tissue that was there. It was not 'meat' from a T-rex you idiot.
The fossiled tissue was dated at 65+ million years old. After being treated to remove most minerals it became somewhat pliant.
Unfortunately all the photos that went out with the news articles were of the tissue looking wet and red after being acid washed and further treated to demineralize it. The creationist crowd jumped on them saying that 'meat' could never have been preserved for 65 million years. (of course not idiots)
If they bothered to check their facts they would know this, but they don't care. It is just another thing that they can lie for jesus about to try to counter evolution.
Uh.
Why is there a shitload of carvings, paintings, sculptures, writings, etc. portraying horses then? Horses are commonplace animals. Everybody knows what a horse is, especially back then, when they were pretty darn vital...
And yet Xenophon saw fit to write about horses and horsemanship, but oddly, not a word about dinosaurs...
You'd think at least one picture of a rider fighting off hordes of raptors, no?
@ #925985
Efrain
... do you have proof of those dinosaurs?
Dinosaur carvings I mean.
Taking a guess here...since many dinosaur skeletons show where someone artistically filled in the missing portions with plaster, missing bones, etc., I've seen where fundies claim the "dino" was started with part of an old cow bone, and the whole rest of him was made up by teh evilll scientists, maybe with a helping hand from Tom Savini, Rick Baker, and the Devil Himself; Darwin. Bearing in mind, fundies are not prone to visit museums to study such things, if they saw one with a major portion filled in, or heard a rumor about one from another fundie, they would regard it as Gospel Truth(TM) and shut the door on further information. Hence; carvings = more lies from the Jesus haters.
(nintendofreakcgn)
"Why am I picturing knights riding raptors right now? Sheesh, Chocobo knights from Final Fantasy games were weird enough."
No, actually they were riding on ostrich-like birds that hadn't yet lost their ability to fly, but they couldn't stay away from those pesky pterodactyls and lava trolls. 'Twas probably a bit before your time, though, so I'm not surprised you didn't know that.
Um, asuming that dinosaurs were around in 1400 and everyone just disregarded them wouldn't there be records of how thousands of beasts which would presumably be trying to eat you just died one day.
Like, if you were a farmer and suddenly these monsters that are your sheep and cattle suddenly stopped wouldn't someone write about it, I would think it would be a pretty important moment in history, the day people were finally able to survive without having to worry about t-rex attacks.
The thing about the the tissue. It wasn't soft. It was as hard as the bone it was in, and nearly just as mineral. It wasn't until it was treated with acids and chemicals did the paleontologists discover that "Holy shit! This tissue hasn't completely fossilized yet." It wasn't like they found something that had looked like it was preserved yesterday. Chances are if you found the thing you would think it was all fossil anyway.
But this is a moot point. Radio-isotope dating put the fossil at 65 million years ago.
The thing is, these people did mention elephants and whales; and dogs, cats, gophers, ants, and hundreds of other references. Don't you think the Romans would of liked to have a pack of raptors in the arena?
Another thought, are these the same people that believed God killed every first born in Egypt, but despite the Egyptians being an advanced civilisation and recorded their lives, somehow missed this glaringly obvious happening?
If I was a commentator of the day, I think this was News worthy, don't you?
Well, I dunno about you, but even though cats are "not special" to us, I talk about them all the time, and am currently working on a major research project involving them.
There have been naturalists throughout time, for some of them (even some ancient ones) we have the written works they left behind which include things that were "not special" to anyone in particular when they lived. One SHOULD be able to find at least a reference, if not drawings, in at least ONE of these such works.
Most of the supposed dinosaur depictions are either: hoaxes, depictions of modern animals (often very stylized), laughably inaccurate with regards to dinosaur anatomy, or vague enough to be anything, iirc. Hell, some of them are more than one of those...
Not to mention that if dinosaurs had survived into historical times, we'd see the sort of proof thereof that we *do* see for modern animals (and recently extinct ones, like mammoths).
OK I'm pissed so my thinking is a bit slow. However faster than Kibl, I hope.
If dinosaurs were not unusual or special, what the hell is Attenburgh doing making documentaries about animals today? Why did Darwin even bother. Why did anyone bother to write Zoology books. Why didn't the Romans feed the Christians to the Dinosaurs. Surly that would be more of an attraction?
This whole statement is so wrong. Is this the result of US Home School?
We have soft dinosaur tissue present today...
When I was a kid, I had a magic book that showed how to make a chicken bone soft and flexible. The dinosaur "soft tissue" was made by taking hard fossil material and "softening" it with chemicals. It's unfortunate that one of the researchers, some woman named Schwartz (her first name escapes me), decided to jump ahead and claim she found red blood cells. A garbled account got into the popular press, but she hasn't said much about it since; and as far as I know, her lab hasn't let anyone else test the material (going on 10 years now).
@Zeus: "Sweet Jebus! We actually let these people operate heavy machinery, vote and reproduce?!?"
Actually, I think you have to be qualified to operate any heavy machinery. At least here in Norway.
You have to remember, dinosaurs were not unusal or special to the people living at the same time as them anymore than elephants or whales are special to us.
Yet, there are enough registries of Dodo birds.
The mighty Bill Hicks pwned you better than I ever could...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-qmglGWMsdk
"And oh Jesus and the disciples walked to Nazareth but the trail was blocked by a giant Brontosaurus with a splinter in his paw..."
"Why didn't the Romans feed the Christians to the Dinosaurs. Surly that would be more of an attraction?"
That would have been awesome, actually. Can you imagine.
It is interesting that he keeps silent however about the fact that collagen, extracted from the dinosaur tissue resembles chicken collagen.
After all this confirms claims by evolutionists, that dinosaurs are the ancestors of birds ;)
"You have to remember, dinosaurs were not unusal or special to the people living at the same time as them anymore than elephants or whales are special to us."
Which is why elephants and horses are never mentioned in old writings.
And yet, at least elephants and whales merit a mention in the bible. Show me one mention of a dinosaur in you bible. Go on. Show me.
Or a painting? I'd take a painting.
*chirp* *chirp*
Thought so.
Now the fact is, the dinosaurs did not die out in the 15th century. They did not die out 65.10^6 years ago either. They just took to hiding in the trees (and singing, and flying, too).
@ Jedi Knight
I consider things like cars, SUVs as heavy machinery in that someone as stupid as the poster of this dinosaur bullshit is way too stupid to be let loose on the highways behind the wheel of 2-ton vehicles. Someone like that could be driving near the runway at night, and as the lights of a plane approaches assume it is the rapture and take his hands off the wheel anticipating his ascension to heaven.
<i>, dinosaurs were not unusal or special to the people living at the same time as them anymore than elephants or whales</i>
You think they'd use war elephants if they could have saddled a T-rex?
He does have a point. Historians sometimes would like to tear their hair out because of the lack of written descriptions and accounts of things and events we consider extraordinary today. Things and events that were everyday things to people of those time periods weren't worth writing about, particularly if writing equipment was expensive -- why waste a good parchment writing about normal stuff?
However, I don't think this applies to dinosaurs, LOL.
Except, people did mention elephants and whales in ancient texts, along with all kinds of other things that were mundane and ordinary. No mention of dinosaurs, unless you count dragons.
^^^
Bro Randy got called on that one a while ago when he was asked why wrote that satyrs never existed (since they're mentioned in Isaiah in the infallible KJV).
He decided they were in fact a mistranslation of a word for 'goat'. Much like 'wine' in his KJV Bible usually means 'grape juice'.
What an ignorant statement. We DO mention elephants, whales and creatures far more common such as mice, cockroaches, cats, and mosquitoes.
This is obviously just another example of the religious reich hoping everyone else is as stupid as they are.
What an ignorant statement. We DO mention elephants, whales and creatures far more common such as mice, cockroaches, cats, and mosquitoes.
This is obviously just another example of the religious reich hoping everyone else is as stupid as they are.
The irony is that creotards don't realize how they shoot themselves in the foot every time they post something like this. I mean, dinosaurs roamed in the 15th century with nobody bothering to mention this fact and fundies wonder why they are ridiculed or just simply ignored by intelligent human beings?
That might sound valid, however if dinosaurs survived up to the 1400s, we'd be finding actual bones filled with marrow. Instead we find nothing but fossils which take a very long time to form. Of course this idiot would probably claim fossilization occurs very quickly, "just look at the fossilized hat and the hammer covered in rock." And of course this idiot probably wouldn't know the difference between concretion and fossilization.
And these people want to be the future leaders of American, too, I'll bet.
Except ancient cultures did write a lot about other animals, including elephants which Hannibal used in his attack on Rome mainly for the psychological shock they gave.
I'm pretty sure they wouldn't be too shocked about elephants if much larger dinos were a so-called common occurrence.
Confused?
So were we! You can find all of this, and more, on Fundies Say the Darndest Things!
To post a comment, you'll need to Sign in or Register . Making an account also allows you to claim credit for submitting quotes, and to vote on quotes and comments. You don't even need to give us your email address.