Irenaeus, Siteadmin, Check users, oversight, Administrators
351,411
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 2:
Line 2: − + − Creationist scientist reject the [[Theory of evolution|evolutionary view]] that dinosaurs existed millions of years ago.+ − Creationist scientists also reject the "Great Impact Theory" that a meteor struck the earth and caused climatic changes which caused the extinction of dinosaurs and claim there are multiple problems evidentially with this theory. <ref>http://www.answersingenesis.org/home/area/faq/docs/dino_meteor.asp</ref>+ + + − Creationists scientists also contend that birds being descendants of dinosaurs goes against present science and also is not scientifically supported with any evidence. <ref>http://www.answersingenesis.org/home/area/re1/chapter4.asp</ref> Line 14:
Line 15: + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + Line 30:
Line 50: − +
SYSOPS: please do not unlock the page until disputes are worked out. If they aren't we ask Aschlafly to step in
==Creationist Perspective==
==Creationist Scientists Perspective==
Creationist scientists believe that dinosaurs and man coexisted which they claim is based on a number of pieces of evidence. <ref>http://www.answersingenesis.org/home/area/faq/dinosaurs.asp</ref>
Creationist scientists believe that dinosaurs and man coexisted which they claim is based on a number of pieces of evidence. <ref>http://www.answersingenesis.org/home/area/faq/dinosaurs.asp</ref>
They reject the [[Theory of evolution|evolutionary view]] that dinosaurs existed millions of years ago.
They also reject the "Great Impact Theory" that a meteor struck the earth and caused climatic changes which caused the extinction of dinosaurs and claim there are multiple problems evidentially with this theory. <ref>http://www.answersingenesis.org/home/area/faq/docs/dino_meteor.asp</ref>
Creationist scientists also contend that birds being descendants of dinosaurs is unreasonable and is also is not scientifically supported with any evidence. <ref>http://www.answersingenesis.org/home/area/re1/chapter4.asp</ref><ref>http://www.answersingenesis.org/creation/v26/i1/planes.asp</ref>
In addition, creationists cite the current online World Book Encyclopedia which states:
In addition, creationists cite the current online World Book Encyclopedia which states:
"No fossil of any such birdlike reptile has yet been found." <ref>http://creationwiki.org/Fossil_record_quotes</ref><ref>http://www.worldbookonline.com/wb/Students?content_spotlight/dinosaurs/creatures_birds</ref>
"No fossil of any such birdlike reptile has yet been found." <ref>http://creationwiki.org/Fossil_record_quotes</ref><ref>http://www.worldbookonline.com/wb/Students?content_spotlight/dinosaurs/creatures_birds</ref>
Creationist scientists Dr. [[Jonathon Safarti]] wrote regarding dinosaurs being descendants of bird the following:
<blockquote style="background: #F9F9F9; border: 1px solid #AAAAAA; padding: .3em;">
The same logic applies to the dinosaur-[[Bird|bird]] debate. It is perfectly in order for creationists to cite [[Alan Feduccia|Feduccia]]’s devastating criticism against the idea that birds evolved ‘ground up’ from running dinosaurs (the cursorial theory). But the dino-to-bird advocates counter with equally powerful arguments against Feduccia’s ‘trees-down’ (arboreal) theory. The evidence indicates that the critics are ''both'' right — birds did not evolve either from running dinos or from tree-living mini-crocodiles. In fact, birds did not evolve from non-birds at all!
<ref>http://www.answersingenesis.org/news/scientific_american.asp</ref>
</blockquote>
Creationists also cite the evolutionist [[Ernst Mayr]] who in 1942 stated the following:
“It must be admitted, however, that it is a considerable strain on one’s credulity to assume that finely balanced systems such as certain sense organs (the eye of vertebrates, or the bird’s feather) could be improved by random mutations." <ref>http://www.creationscience.com/onlinebook/ReferencesandNotes10.html</ref>
Creationist scientists also cite the March 2003 issue of Scientific American which stated:
<blockquote style="background: #F9F9F9; border: 1px solid #AAAAAA; padding: .3em;">
"The origin of feathers is a specific instance of the much more general question of the origin of evolutionary novelties--structures that have no clear antecedents in ancestral animals and no clear related structures (homologues) in contemporary relatives. Although evolutionary theory provides a robust explanation for the appearance of minor variations in the size and shape of creatures and their component parts, it does not yet give as much guidance for understanding the emergence of entirely new structures, including digits, limbs, eyes and feathers'''...." <ref>http://www.answersingenesis.org/docs2003/0313sciam.asp</ref><ref>http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?articleID=000CD7F6-B16F-1E41-89E0809EC588EEDF</ref>
</blockquote>
===Humans and Dinosaurs Coexisting===
===Humans and Dinosaurs Coexisting===
Because the term only came into use in the 19th century, the [[Bible]] obviously does not use the word "dinosaur." However, they are alleged to be mentioned in numerous places throughout the biblical account. For example, the '''behemoth''' in [[Job]] and the '''leviathan''' in [[Isaiah]] are sometimes said to be references to dinosaurs,<ref>[http://www.answersingenesis.org/tj/v15/i2/behemoth.asp "Could Behemoth have been a dinosaur?"], ''TJ'' 15(2):42–45, August 2001</ref> <ref>http://www.answersincreation.org/job4041a.htm</ref>, although some reject this view, saying that behemoth was a hippopotamus and leviathan was a crocodile. There is a problem with this view, however, such as the fact that a hippo doesn't have a "tail like a cedar" and a crocodile does not accurately match the description of leviathan.
Because the term only came into use in the 19th century, the [[Bible]] obviously does not use the word "dinosaur." However, they are alleged to be mentioned in numerous places throughout the biblical account. For example, the '''behemoth''' in [[Job]] and the '''leviathan''' in [[Isaiah]] are sometimes said to be references to dinosaurs,<ref>[http://www.answersingenesis.org/tj/v15/i2/behemoth.asp "Could Behemoth have been a dinosaur?"], ''TJ'' 15(2):42–45, August 2001</ref> <ref>http://www.answersincreation.org/job4041a.htm</ref>, although some reject this view, saying that behemoth was a hippopotamus and leviathan was a crocodile. There is a problem with this view, however, such as the fact that a hippo doesn't have a "tail like a cedar" and a crocodile does not accurately match the description of leviathan.
==Evolutionary Perspective==
==Evolutionary Scientists Perspective==
===Extinction===
===Extinction===