The fossil record shows no mammals larger than a weasel in the same geological strata as dinosaurs, and obviously none that are currently still extant. That means you're missing about 99.9999% of all mammal species that, according to you, should be buried alongside dinosaurs. That doesn't seem troubling to you?
Dinosaurs
- Thread starter Kdall
- Start date
The fossil record shows no mammals larger than a weasel in the same geological strata as dinosaurs, and obviously none that are currently still extant. That means you're missing about 99.9999% of all mammal species that, according to you, should be buried alongside dinosaurs. That doesn't seem troubling to you?
1.How many dinosaurs and how many mammals are found together?
2.How many mammals are as big as behemoth? Aren't most much smaller?
I'll wait.
False dilemma ignored for now.
Firstly, you misrepresented my quote by cutting it short.
1. Relatively few. Some shrew-like animals and other rodents. Also cynodonts, which are a transitional stage between reptiles and mammals. They looked similar to a dachshund
2. Yes. As were most dinosaurs. Are you under the impression that all dinosaurs were titanic?
Kdall, the evidence says it was not carved. But you have no interest in evidence, just propping up your religion of common descent.
Your links make a mockery of science. You should be ashamed.
You are like a child that sees what they want to see in a picture. The rest of us adults that prefer reality look at the tail and know it isn't a rhino. But that's because YEC's like us are just more honest than you.
You're right. I'm the one ignorant of science, even though I provided links explaining things clearly for you to view, which you didn't.
Find me one dinosaur species that looks like that image. Not sort of like it. Not a combination of three of four dinosaurs. One dinosaur. Go
Did you not know or are you being dishonest. The answer is nearly 50/50.
Both answers can not be true. They are mutually exclusive. Still waiting.
Dinosaur =fearfully-great lizard
Like behemoth and leviathan. They are huge. Birds are not dinosaurs. Iguanas are not dinosaurs. They are small and not fearfully great lizards. They are common lizards.
Interplanner
Well-known member
I don't have to see the picture, ive actually been to paluxy and seen them first hand.
There is no evidence at all that they were carved later. Thats just your thoughts.
Then you weren't the most observant. The human footprints would've had to be made by a 12 foot tall man. Does that sound likely to you?
Nick, if you honestly believe what you have posted here, then you need to quit getting your science facts from Answers in Genesis. There were not many mammalian species prior to the extinction of the dinosaurs, and none of them were bigger than a cat.
Your lack of knowledge on dinosaurs is somewhat more disturbing. There were a minimum of 900 species of dinosaur. Only a handful were the size of an elephant or greater. Many were man-sized, and many more were the size of a chicken. If you do not know what you are talking about, it would suit you not to act like you do.
To clarify my answer to your #2 earlier: No mammals were the size of the largest dinosaurs. But many dinosaurs were smaller than mammals, including those around at the time of the dinosaurs. We have fossils of dinosaur remains inside the stomachs of some of these tiny mammals.
George Affleck
TOL Subscriber
Please keep in mind the purpose of the exercise for the person(s) who worked on the embellishments at Angkor Wat.
Like this cartoon, the important elements for recognition are included but the but the intricate details left out.
Please keep in mind the purpose of the exercise for the person(s) who worked on the embellishments at Angkor Wat.
Like this cartoon, the important elements for recognition are included but the but the intricate details left out.
Except for the stone carving has horns added on the head that were not part of an actual stegosaurus. So if you are correct in saying that details were left out for convenience, why were extra details added?
PS: your cartoon illustration is about as accurate as it gets. The only thing it's missing is a beak at the tip of the nose
Only because you date strata by its fossil content.
And that nasty little thorn in your side of radiometric dating. You gonna go through that again?
TracerBullet
New member
The evidence says they were carved
"They also have a single human track of inferior quality that is in a limestone of a different color and texture from that of the other
prints. One of the three-toed dinosaur tracks and both types of man prints have been cross-sectioned. In each instance the rock layers end abruptly at the edge of the track, indicating that they are not the result of a foot stepping into soft mud but are produced by carving."
None of them are from there. In fact, I don't go to that site but I know it exists. I noticed you changed the subject and will not answer the fact that the ratio of mammals and dinosaurs is nearly 50/50.
The valid listed types is about 400. Although the heathens at .gov say only 300.
Google was not on the ball. They didn't understand my search and accidentally dropped this link from the heathen.
Soft tissue
Molecular analysis supports controversial claim for dinosaur cells
New evidence adds heat to the argument over prehistoric dinosaur tissue.
Furthermore, using a technique called mass spectrometry, the investigators found amino acid sequences of proteins in extracts of the dinosaur bone that matched sequences from proteins called actin, tubulin and histone4 that are present in the cells of all animals. Although some microbes have proteins that are similar to actin and tubulin, the researchers note that soil-derived E. coli as well as sediments that surrounded the two dinosaur specimens failed to bind to the actin and tubulin antibodies that bound to the extract containing the apparent osteocytes.
For the record, they are neither birds nor lizards.
Soft tissue
Molecular analysis supports controversial claim for dinosaur cells
New evidence adds heat to the argument over prehistoric dinosaur tissue.
Furthermore, using a technique called mass spectrometry, the investigators found amino acid sequences of proteins in extracts of the dinosaur bone that matched sequences from proteins called actin, tubulin and histone4 that are present in the cells of all animals. Although some microbes have proteins that are similar to actin and tubulin, the researchers note that soil-derived E. coli as well as sediments that surrounded the two dinosaur specimens failed to bind to the actin and tubulin antibodies that bound to the extract containing the apparent osteocytes.
For the record, they are neither birds nor lizards.
Sure about that?
"These species are placed in about 300 valid dinosaur genera (Stegosaurus, Diplodocus, etc.), although about 540 have been named. Recent estimates suggest that about 700 to 900 more dinosaur genera may remain to be discovered."
http://pubs.usgs.gov/gip/dinosaurs/types.html
Quick biology lesson - Scientific classification goes in this order, with the most broad category first and least broad last:
1. Domain
2. Kingdom
3. Phylum
4. Class
5. Order
6. Family
7. Genus (plural is Genera)
8. Species
Genera are not species. Normally, there are at least several species within any given genus. The site goes on to say that there were about 700 confirmed species of dinosaurs back in 2001. Many more have been confirmed since. So no sir, you are incorrect.
What is this 50/50 mammal dinosaur thing you keep referring to? The amount of mammalian species around when the dinosaurs existed (65+ million years ago) was not 50/50. Now throughout the course of history, obviously there have been more mammalian species than dinosaur species. But at the time they both existed on this Earth together, which is what I said repeatedly, there were more dinosaur species
That's true. They were a distinct type of reptile to go alongside crocodilians, lizards, turtles and tortoises, snakes, and the tuatara, as well as their flying and swimming prehistoric reptilian cousins. Birds are what some therapod species eventually gave rise to, but they were not themselves birds