Jump to content
  • Welcome Guest

    For an ad free experience on Online Baptist, Please login or register for free

The Gap theory GARBAGE


Recommended Posts

  • Members
5 minutes ago, wretched said:

I see little difference between artist's conceptions of mammoths, mastodons, or dinos and the actual appearance of elephants, bears and lizards or gators/crocs apart from size and extra long fur in some cases. Even the wild guessing of scientists link them together when describing the extinct ones most of the time.

Besides I like my theory much more than yours....

:lol:

 

The difference is that the actual structure of a dinosaur is very different to any living reptiles.

The location and jointing of the legs is probably the most prominent difference.

There are no lizards today that have the same leg jointing as the dinos - they had a leg jointing which is far closer to that of mammals than of existing reptiles.

In fact it really brings up more questions about how do they KNOW for certain that these things were reptiles? Armadillos have armour not unlike scales, and the quadruped dinos have a leg structure far more like an elephant for instance than any existing reptile. The bipedal dinos have a leg structure far more like a kangaroo than any existing reptile.

It is possible that these things were actually warm blooded scaled something a little mammalian?

Unlikely, because there are other markers which indicate reptile, but structurally they totally different to any existing reptile.

In any case, my real point was that the tar pit argument is a non-argument, because there are so many opposing evidences, and so many possible and reasonable explanations as to why there are (Apparently) no dino bones in that tarpit..... Including the possibility that those who have examined that tarpit have simply not told anyone about the dino bones they found. Wouldn't be the first time that "long age scientists" have lied..... (Been a few on the other side as well, to be fair.)

 

There is NO GOOD REASON for any Christian to "find" a gap in Genesis chapter 1

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members
6 minutes ago, DaveW said:

:lol:

 

The difference is that the actual structure of a dinosaur is very different to any living reptiles.

The location and jointing of the legs is probably the most prominent difference.

There are no lizards today that have the same leg jointing as the dinos - they had a leg jointing which is far closer to that of mammals than of existing reptiles.

In fact it really brings up more questions about how do they KNOW for certain that these things were reptiles? Armadillos have armour not unlike scales, and the quadruped dinos have a leg structure far more like an elephant for instance than any existing reptile. The bipedal dinos have a leg structure far more like a kangaroo than any existing reptile.

It is possible that these things were actually warm blooded scaled something a little mammalian?

Unlikely, because there are other markers which indicate reptile, but structurally they totally different to any existing reptile.

In any case, my real point was that the tar pit argument is a non-argument, because there are so many opposing evidences, and so many possible and reasonable explanations as to why there are (Apparently) no dino bones in that tarpit..... Including the possibility that those who have examined that tarpit have simply not told anyone about the dino bones they found. Wouldn't be the first time that "long age scientists" have lied..... (Been a few on the other side as well, to be fair.)

 

There is NO GOOD REASON for any Christian to "find" a gap in Genesis chapter 1

I do agree with your stand on the gap thing and understand where you are coming from on the tar pits thing.

But: I can see right now the you and I place much different levels of acceptance on what scientists claim when it comes to dino intricate details, anatomy, etc. There is no possible way for them to make those presumptions appear as fact IMO. And it has always been very difficult by their own admissions to keep from mixing up the identification of these species bones with other species without knowing for sure. The jointing of legs is also suspect and argued among the same scientists. Much of it is wild guessing and many of them have admitted that over the years. You must remember that these same men in some cases also mixed up human/ape/bear/even dog bones in their quests to make evolution true.

ICR goes out of their way to indicate their "theories" on intricate dino details are based mainly on speculation. Nothing is new under the sun and I do believe these are simply very large, muey dangerous versions of lizards and crocodilians. I just don't buy the intricate detail claims at all.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Ohhhhhh - please don't "Accuse" ;) me of putting too much store in scientists.......

I agree with you entirely about the mistakes and lies made by these guys, but there are complete skeletons of many of the best known dinos that show a "mammalian," style upright hip, rather than the reptilian sideways hip. From these there is no doubt that the mainstream dinos had a different hip structure to existing reptiles.

Existing reptiles, the legs stick out sideways, the "Main dinos" have upright hips - and this single difference is known from complete skeletons. I agree entirely that there are huge amounts of guessing done by "Scientists" even to the point that they "Assume" that these things were actually cold blooded, and they "Assume" they were reptiles, based on commonality of structure etc.

As I previously mentioned, there are "Armoured mammals" like armadillos etc and it is possible that the "hip structure" being so similar to large mammals could indicate that in fact these things were mammals with armour - that is if you accept that the skin imprints that indicate scales are from the same animal and are in fact indicative of "Scales".

 

There is so much that is vague, incomplete, and in some cases falsified, that it is very difficult to trust this field of science.

But assuming the multitude of complete skeletons found are not ALL fakes, the hip structure alone is not common with any existing reptile. This is clear even to an untrained eye (assuming such skeletons are not fakes.)

For what it's worth, there is plenty of evidence that today's "existing reptiles" were also present in those days (Pre-flood), as you would expect with God creating things directly.

By the way, you are also assuming that these things were "muey dangerous". Why do you accept that idea? It is drilled into us by "Scientists" that T-Rex etc were vicious meat eaters - but that is based ONLY on the tooth and Jaw structure, and there are plenty of modern VEGETARIAN animals that have strong jaws and sharp tearing style teeth.

The implication from the creation account is that all creatures were originally vegetarian, and that means also the dinos were originally.

When did they change, if indeed they did change, to being carnivorous?

They might have been as gentle as sheep...... (And I know sheep can be mean so........)

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members
7 hours ago, DaveW said:

Ohhhhhh - please don't "Accuse" ;) me of putting too much store in scientists.......

I agree with you entirely about the mistakes and lies made by these guys, but there are complete skeletons of many of the best known dinos that show a "mammalian," style upright hip, rather than the reptilian sideways hip. From these there is no doubt that the mainstream dinos had a different hip structure to existing reptiles.

Existing reptiles, the legs stick out sideways, the "Main dinos" have upright hips - and this single difference is known from complete skeletons. I agree entirely that there are huge amounts of guessing done by "Scientists" even to the point that they "Assume" that these things were actually cold blooded, and they "Assume" they were reptiles, based on commonality of structure etc.

As I previously mentioned, there are "Armoured mammals" like armadillos etc and it is possible that the "hip structure" being so similar to large mammals could indicate that in fact these things were mammals with armour - that is if you accept that the skin imprints that indicate scales are from the same animal and are in fact indicative of "Scales".

 

There is so much that is vague, incomplete, and in some cases falsified, that it is very difficult to trust this field of science.

But assuming the multitude of complete skeletons found are not ALL fakes, the hip structure alone is not common with any existing reptile. This is clear even to an untrained eye (assuming such skeletons are not fakes.)

For what it's worth, there is plenty of evidence that today's "existing reptiles" were also present in those days (Pre-flood), as you would expect with God creating things directly.

By the way, you are also assuming that these things were "muey dangerous". Why do you accept that idea? It is drilled into us by "Scientists" that T-Rex etc were vicious meat eaters - but that is based ONLY on the tooth and Jaw structure, and there are plenty of modern VEGETARIAN animals that have strong jaws and sharp tearing style teeth.

The implication from the creation account is that all creatures were originally vegetarian, and that means also the dinos were originally.

When did they change, if indeed they did change, to being carnivorous?

They might have been as gentle as sheep...... (And I know sheep can be mean so........)

 

Well, I have seen these complete skeletons and have to interject a little on that point. The caveat to complete skeletons has always been that they were never excavated as complete skeletons, they have always been pieced together from differing dig sites or spread out over large areas. They tend to arrange the bones in whatever way makes sense to them and cannot know the actual placement and joint angles because no cartilage or tendon remains. It is this sinew that determines bone placement/angles/fulcrum points/etc. Without it, It is still just guess work.

On the last point, some of the dinos became meat lovers after the fall in the same way lions and tigers and bears, etc.. did. The curse of sin caused that remember?

We just disagree, no problem

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Actually complete skeletons have been found in situ, and the bone structure indicates the joint type, not the cartilage and sinew.

And my point about vege or carni is : how do you KNOW any became carni?

Yes, it is likely, but there is far more assumption in that than in hip joint type............

 

And yes we disagree, and that doesn't cause me any grief either. ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members
8 minutes ago, DaveW said:

Actually complete skeletons have been found in situ, and the bone structure indicates the joint type, not the cartilage and sinew.

And my point about vege or carni is : how do you KNOW any became carni?

Yes, it is likely, but there is far more assumption in that than in hip joint type............

 

And yes we disagree, and that doesn't cause me any grief either. ;)

 

According to the NRA, this is the only complete dino skeleton found attached to what they believe is a T-Rex hip which also proves they hunted meat.

 

8023964e6cfbb4807e0d5794cc495f62.jpg

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Has it occurred to anyone that "death passed upon all men", could indicate that death already existed for animals but had not yet happened to men? Else, when God told Adam "thou shalt surely die" BEFORE he ate the fruit, Adam would not have known what God was talking about? I mean, did Adam say "death? Is that a bad thing?"

Has it also occurred that other "evil" things like the thorns and thistles of  "the curse" ALREADY existed because the Bible plainly says that God had RESTED on the 7th day from all that he had made? God did tell Adam, after the fall, that the ground would bring forth the thorns etc. but He never said he would newly create those things, so they most likely existed in nature, maybe as dormant seed in Eden, along with deadly bacteria, viruses, leaches, internal parasites, external parasites, vultures, maggots, komodo dragons, lions, tigers, jaguars, bears and dinos with flesh-eating teeth. And how could all those things be "very good"? Could it be that God's shewing forth his power in those things was indeed, collectively a good thing to reveal?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members
30 minutes ago, heartstrings said:

Has it also occurred that other "evil" things like the thorns and thistles of  "the curse" ALREADY existed because the Bible plainly says that God had RESTED on the 7th day from all that he had made? God did tell Adam, after the fall, that the ground would bring forth the thorns etc. but He never said he would newly create those things, so they most likely existed in nature, maybe as dormant seed in Eden, along with deadly bacteria, viruses, leaches, internal parasites, external parasites, vultures, maggots, komodo dragons, lions, tigers, jaguars, bears and dinos with flesh-eating teeth. And how could all those things be "very good"? Could it be that God's shewing forth his power in those things was indeed, collectively a good thing to reveal?

All those things existed and did good things for God before the fall.  While we detest mosquitoes, I'm sure they had a good purpose before the fall.  Today, a good mosquito is a dead mosquito!  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Has it also occurred to you all that the dinosaurs died off naturally centuries ago, like MANY animal 'lines' have, and that is why we do not see the relation of current lizards to older dinosaurs?

(Many species have disappeared over the last several centuries and we don't see them anymore. AND it hasn't affected us one bit. Btw.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members
12 hours ago, Genevanpreacher said:

Has it also occurred to you all that the dinosaurs died off naturally centuries ago

I know of nobody who has witnessed this or read about someone else recording this.  However, I have read accounts that dinosaurs were hunted and killed off by man over the centuries.  Certainly many dinosaur kinds died off but I reckon the majority wound up on spits over a toasty fire pit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.



×
×
  • Create New...