Episode 33 – Dinosaurs and Humans

7 responses to “Episode 33 – Dinosaurs and Humans”

1. Cheri Fields

   August 12, 2013 at 12:34

   I like the That’s a Fact programs a lot. They’re a lot like a well thought out blog post: focused and brief, but all the more powerful for the limits. 🙂
2. agnophilo

   August 12, 2013 at 13:39

   So any large or unknown animal is automatically a dinosaur because you want it to be? Why not a large reptile or mammal or one of the many other extinct groups of species like dinosaurs? Claiming that something is a dinosaur specifically without evidence of specific dinosaur characteristics is storytelling, not evidence. Making things up and claiming they’re true when you don’t know they are is another form of dishonesty.

   “It is an established maxim and moral that he who makes an assertion without knowing whether it is true or false is guilty of falsehood, and the accidental truth of the assertion does not justify or excuse him.” – Abraham Lincoln

   Also the claims about dinosaur red blood cells and soft tissue were never true, they found fossilized husks of cells (fossilized cells last billions of years because they’re mineralized, it’s the original organic material that doesn’t last long) and fossilized slime with no in-tact organic molecules in them, just some fragments of one chemical which is not uncommon.

   I did a blog about this website when they first started:

   (Link not permitted by blog master).

   Lying about science is not good evangelism.
   • Ernesto E. Carrasco, M.C.Ed.

     August 12, 2013 at 13:53

     You seem to be so sure that you’re right. I am always amazed by the arrogance of those who think they have all the answers. I won’t challenge your response other than to suggest that you go to http://www.icr.org/home/search/ and type in the keywords “soft tissue.” You will be presented with an extensive list of articles on the topic. I would also recommend the short book “Dinosaurs and the Bible” from http://store.icr.org/. If you are really interested in learning, these may change your thinking – unless you are just so narrow-minded that nothing else can squeeze in. Thanks for the comment.
     • agnophilo

       August 12, 2013 at 14:08

       “You seem to be so sure that you’re right. I am always amazed by the arrogance of those who think they have all the answers.”

       You make a bunch of claims and that’s fine – I question the veracity of those claims (politely) and that makes me an arrogant egomaniac? Personal insults are childish.

       “I won’t challenge your response other than to suggest that you go to http://www.icr.org/home/search/ and type in the keywords “soft tissue.”

       I prefer to read the actual findings of the actual team that found the skeleton, not get my information filtered through a biased evangelical website that I know for a fact routinely lies about science.

       “You will be presented with an extensive list of articles on the topic.”

       Yes, I will find many articles written by experts in fields unrelated to what they are writing about as is par for the course with creationist websites. Just put a PhD next to their name and hope people don’t check to make sure the person lecturing them on genetics actually knows anything about genetics..

       “I would also recommend the short book “Dinosaurs and the Bible” from http://store.icr.org/.”

       All I said was that in order to support the claim that a description is describing a dinosaur as opposed to say a mammal, the description must include specifically dinosaur characteristics. How is that not a valid, common-sense conclusion? What in your book makes that idea invalid?

       “If you are really interested in learning, these may change your thinking – unless you are just so narrow-minded that nothing else can squeeze in. Thanks for the comment.”

       I never get tired of religious people assuming I’m evil or an idiot or that there’s something else deeply wrong with me because I’m not exactly like them. And you probably wonder why I’m not in a hurry to be more like you.

       I disagreed with you with logic and substance – you censored my link and gave one of your own and insulted me. Between the two of us I’m not the one whose issue is closed-mindedness.
     • Ernesto E. Carrasco, M.C.Ed.

       August 12, 2013 at 15:29

       The video is a one-minute, short presentation. It is not intended to be an extensive treatment of the subject. It is certainly not designed for intellectuals such as yourself.

       And why would you imply that as a “religious” person that I am assuming that you are “evil or an idiot.” Those are your words, not mine. I suggested that you were “arrogant,” and I will stand by that assessment unless you prove me otherwise. I still recommend that you read up on the subject from a different perspective. Of course, you can also decide to remain in your uninformed state.
3. Mike

   August 15, 2013 at 16:35

   I really liked this TAF video. The subject of dinosaurs has always fascinated me. I just finished Dinosaurs and the Bible on my flight up to CO. I learned quite a bit from Brian’s research. The flying serpents account was a huge eye-opener for me. I had never heard that view before.
4. Mike

   August 15, 2013 at 16:43

   Agnophilo:

   “I prefer to read the actual findings of the actual team that found the skeleton, not get my information filtered through a biased evangelical website that I know for a fact routinely lies about science.”

   What about Mary Schweitzer’s work? I don’t think she’s a creationist or biased from that perspective. She explained her findings very clearly in her 60 Minutes interview.

   “Yes, I will find many articles written by experts in fields unrelated to what they are writing about as is par for the course with creationist websites. Just put a PhD next to their name and hope people don’t check to make sure the person lecturing them on genetics actually knows anything about genetics..”

   “Par for the course” seems to be a big generalization. Which PhD’s are you referring to?