Were Dragons Real?

Send me the papers!!

And where did I claim its contamination? I said it’s something that needs to be seriously considered.

You mean the event for which there is no evidence? Goodness. Just blows my mind that you think a handful samples of outweighs literally hundreds of thousands of other samples that reach the exact opposite conclusion. Especially when there is an extensively studied process that can cause the outliers. But that’s what science deniers have always done. Ignore huge bodies of data and trends and instead look at the outliers and then claim these outliers refute the theory/hypothesis. Have a good day

1 Like

8 posts were split to a new topic: How Science Works: One Anomaly Versus A Mountain of Evidence

How is he supposed to when you won’t confirm which fossil you’re talking about?

1 Like

Just want to say that the AiG piece was about Dragons not dinosaurs. Where is the scientific evidence for Dragons?

1 Like

Just want to say that the AiG piece was about Dragons not dinosaurs. Where is the scientific evidence for Dragons?

Interesting. When do you think the word ‘Dinosaur’ was first coined?

Wasn’t it 'Terrible Lizard" in the 1800"s?

This topic was about AiG pseudoscience. AiG uses bible quotes to misrepresent paleontology. It is blatant lying as the bibical quotes were written at a time when nobody knew much of anything about extinct animals. Today the science of paleontology is extensive and the passages of the bible has no relevance to the science. AiG should stop lying about the science.

I see you’ve completely ignored the C14 calibration data I provided which uses a dozen independent dating proxies to calibrate results back 50,000 years.

That’s OK, in years of presenting this I’ve never seen a YEC honestly deal with the calibration data. :slight_smile:

How is that? Either the 25K year date is valid which disproves a YEC young Earth, or the results are invalid and say nothing about the actual age of the fossils.

Can’t have it both ways. So which is it?

Just a note to say @PDPrice, you are coming through loud and clear and have my complete support. I am very much enjoying the dialogue and – of course – coming down on your side. I utterly love these kinds of investigations into the real ages of dino bones, etc. The nonsense of millions of years has sufficiently been jettisoned by several approaches over recent years. These guys you are arguing with of course will never come around to admit what the real data say. Hang in there! You are doing just fine.

2 Likes

LOL! Freudian slip. :wink:

And oh, for the record @pdprice, this one is a live one. You will definitely have fun with him.

You got it. So, what word do you think an English-speaking individual would have used to describe a living dinosaur, had they encountered one, prior to the coining of this term in the 1800’s?

1 Like

Haven’t you been agreeing with an old Earth all this time? Now suddenly the YEC position is correct? Why don’t you take some time and get your story straight.

Oh, and feel free to be the first Creationist to explain the C14 calibration data.

@PDPrice and I both agree on the age of life. For now that is enough. And for now, I am being thoroughly entertained. Not to mention I am taking some good notes from @PDPrice quotes.

Centaurs have been described in literature for thousands of years. Does that make half-man half-horse centaurs actually exist?

No you don’t. Price is arguing for a 6000 year Creation and fossils of animals killed in the Flood 4500 years ago. You have already agreed life goes back at least 50,000 years. Have you forgotten your Lake Suigetsu debacle already?

1 Like

@PDPrice (this guy loves to hear himself talk, by the way. He is hard – and I mean hard to silence). Just for the record I am YLC, not necessarily YEC but big deal. I am always ready to convert back to YEC. Keep going.

Really now?