Did dinosaurs ever live alongside humans?

User avatar
dwight92070
Posts: 1550
Joined: Sat Dec 10, 2011 12:09 am

Re: Did dinosaurs ever live alongside humans?

Post by dwight92070 » Wed Mar 01, 2017 12:39 am

Well, since Adam named the animals ...

User avatar
steve
Posts: 3392
Joined: Thu Aug 21, 2008 9:45 pm

Re: Did dinosaurs ever live alongside humans?

Post by steve » Wed Mar 01, 2017 3:43 pm

Jon,

The value of Job in this matter is that it is clearly an ancient book—written long before the modern discovery of dinosaur bones, yet the author is as familiar with these creatures as he is with horses, mountain goats, etc. The author introduces them without trying to convince anyone of their existence. The author seems to assume the reader's familiarity with them. The challenge is to explain how the author could have described these creatures and their habits without ever having seen them.

An ancient written document, even if secular, in which a writer describes, as living creatures, those which we know only from their bones, is a "physical" piece of evidence—though it falls within the realm of culture, rather than the realm of science. Science is not the only (nor the primary) source of historical knowledge. There are a great many historical facts for which we do not depend upon scientific evidence. For such things, we generally accept testimony or witnesses.

Whether dinosaurs and men ever walked together (like most other questions debated by those with differing views of origins) is a historical question, not a scientific one. There is no scientific test by which you could discover whether I ever saw a duck-billed platypus. You'd learn more by asking me.

User avatar
jonperry
Posts: 137
Joined: Wed Jun 19, 2013 10:00 pm
Location: Corvallis Oregon
Contact:

Re: Did dinosaurs ever live alongside humans?

Post by jonperry » Wed Mar 01, 2017 6:35 pm

You would qualify behemoth as a description of an actual dinosaur? It seems a stretch to me. All we know is that it was strong, eats grass, it "moveth his tail like a cedar" (What does it mean to move your tail like a cedar? Does it mean he has a big tail? Does it mean his tail doesn't move because cedars don't move?) and we know it drinks entire rivers which seems like an exaggeration.

In biology, our standard of evidence is different than in history, and apparently, it's different than it is in Christianity. Historians are often satisfied with testimonies but in science we normally require verifiable evidence - things that can be examined by everyone, especially if the claim being made is outside the currently accepted norm. To drive this home, the motto at the Royal Society is "Nullius in verba" which roughly translates to: take nobody's word for it.

Most biologists, for example, don't accept Bigfoot as a real animal. There are thousands of stories about the species, most testimonies describe the animal more or less the same, several photos/videos that may or may not be images of the species do exist, but the vast majority of biologists want an actual body or live specimen before they accept the species as being real.

As others pointed out, behemoth may have been a metaphorical creature. I suggest it might also have been a mythical creature that Job, and many in his community, honestly thought was real even though it wasn't. Today, 29% of Americans believe in bigfoot, even those who don't can easily describe bigfoot. The same goes for little green aliens with small mouths and huge eyes. Do you accept their testimonies as proof?

If most Chrisitans accept the behemoth as a dinosaur, I would say it illustrates a pretty big difference in what Christians hold as a standard of evidence, vs what the scientific community holds as a standard of evidence. This isn't a bad thing, but it helps to understand that such a dramatic difference exists when the two groups are trying to have "evidence" based conversations with each other.

User avatar
steve
Posts: 3392
Joined: Thu Aug 21, 2008 9:45 pm

Re: Did dinosaurs ever live alongside humans?

Post by steve » Wed Mar 01, 2017 8:15 pm

Yes, science and history are separate disciplines, and have different standards of evidence. Some historical claims can be verified scientifically, if they are claims about events that left a lasting physical mark that can be observed afterward. However, most things that happen (which become history as soon as they have happened) leave no physical marks to be studied by later observers. They are known to us by reports.

To say that we would expect to find dinosaur remains in the same place as human remains, if they had historically lived on the planet at the same time, reflects a rather limiting set of presuppositionsFirst, it presupposes that we have discovered the remains of such a large majority of the humans and dinosaurs who ever lived as to be able to describe a universal trend (which seems extremely unlikely). It assumes also that dinosaurs and humans lived and died in proximity with each other. This seems somewhat unlikely to me, as well. If I lived in an age when dinosaurs roamed certain regions, I would probably set up housekeeping in a region where they were least likely to show up. While the lack of discovered dinosaur and human remains in the same place may tell us that dinosaurs and men lived in distinct eras—it could as easily tell us that they lived in distinct areas.

The burden of proof is upon someone who wishes to prove something that is not readily obvious. Christians have nothing to prove about dinosaurs and men living together on earth. Some Christians believe they did, some think not. I think the former, but have no bone to pick with those who think not. It is the evolutionist that has something to prove. In considering the burden of proof, it should be remembered that the absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.

Those who believe that dinosaurs and men lived together are not making a claim of a scientific nature, but of a historical nature. For the latter, documentary evidence, as a category, is appropriate, and generally adequate.

Singalphile
Posts: 903
Joined: Sun Apr 22, 2012 12:46 pm

Re: Did dinosaurs ever live alongside humans?

Post by Singalphile » Wed Mar 01, 2017 9:17 pm

I used to think that people in my sub-culture were too often gullible and overly confident in their opinions. But as I got out more, I've found that that seems to be the case in all the culture. Most of us accept what we've heard from someone, if it's in our comfort zone, but we usually couldn't really provide evidences any more than most of us could design a cell phone.

For my part, if dinosaur-ologists (i.e., people who study dinosaurs for a living) say something about dinosaurs then ... well, I suppose they'd know as much as anyone, so I'll go with them by default. I suspect, though, that many - just like software developers, like myself - are not particular bright or competent outside of one or two narrow skill sets, and often exaggerate the evidence that supports the view they prefer, like everybody else.

What I really want to say is that the post office story brought a smile to my face, Steve. I just heard it in the car on the way home. I needed a laugh today. :)
... that all may honor the Son just as they honor the Father. John 5:23

User avatar
steve
Posts: 3392
Joined: Thu Aug 21, 2008 9:45 pm

Re: Did dinosaurs ever live alongside humans?

Post by steve » Wed Mar 01, 2017 9:36 pm

I felt like someone in a sitcom!

User avatar
jonperry
Posts: 137
Joined: Wed Jun 19, 2013 10:00 pm
Location: Corvallis Oregon
Contact:

Re: Did dinosaurs ever live alongside humans?

Post by jonperry » Thu Mar 02, 2017 1:29 am

Steve, there's a number of things I'd like to say about your response but let's take it one at a time:
steve wrote: To say that we would expect to find dinosaur remains in the same place as human remains... assumes... that dinosaurs and humans lived and died in proximity with each other.
Finding bones in proximity to each other would be awesome (dinos eating people or people hunting/taming/using dinos) but it's not actually necessary. Are you familiar with how geological maps are created? It doesn't matter if two populations lived physically next to each other. If they lived in the same time, even on different continents, we can figure it out by studying rock layer compositions. We know, for example, where the Cretaceous layers are on every continent. On most continents these layers contain lots of dinosaurs. Dinosaurs vanish at the end of the Cretaceous. Apes don't show up until 3 sets of rock layers later in a set called the Oligocene. Modern forms of humans don't show up until 6 sets of layers above the dinosaurs in a set called the Pleistocene.

Do you accept the following ideas:
  • 1. Sets of rock layers represent different time periods in Earth's history
    2. Under normal conditions, deep layers represent older time periods than shallow layers
    3. Rock layers on different continents can be correlated with each other by studying several independent signatures such as chemical composition, radiometric dating, and paleomagnetic analysis
To help me keep track of this conversation, please respond to each list item with a yes or no.

Here's a little fun history/info on stratigraphy:

In 1815, William Smith, a canal digger, realized that England had the same sequence of layers in its bedrock everywhere, though erosion wore some of the top layers down to nothing in certain regions of the country. He named the layers and made the first geological map. It allowed him to look at the surface layer and predict what the layers directly below would be made of. This helped him predict how many people and what kinds of tools he would need for a given dig project. We've since realized that the entire planet has layers that can be correlated with each other from continent to continent. See my animation (in the first post of this conversation) for a bit on how we correlate them.

FYI, layer correlating and geological map production is mainly done today so that prospectors can find oil. It's the oil companies and governments lobbied by them that fund and create these maps. The side benefit is that we now get to study the global fossil record in chronological order. Pretty awesome!

User avatar
TK
Posts: 1477
Joined: Mon Aug 25, 2008 8:42 pm
Location: North Carolina

Re: Did dinosaurs ever live alongside humans?

Post by TK » Thu Mar 02, 2017 9:18 am

Jon-

If they did happen to find a t-Rex skeleton, for example, with a jumble of human bones in the region of where it's digestive system would be, would you accept that as evidence of cohabitation? Would evolutionists in general accept it as evidence?

User avatar
jonperry
Posts: 137
Joined: Wed Jun 19, 2013 10:00 pm
Location: Corvallis Oregon
Contact:

Re: Did dinosaurs ever live alongside humans?

Post by jonperry » Thu Mar 02, 2017 12:39 pm

TK wrote:Jon-

If they did happen to find a t-Rex skeleton, for example, with a jumble of human bones in the region of where it's digestive system would be, would you accept that as evidence of cohabitation? Would evolutionists in general accept it as evidence?
Of course I would. Any varified remains of humans in the Cretaceous layers or older would do it, any verified remains of dinosaurs in the Pleistocene or younger would also do it.

Did you watch the video? In it I list all the types of evidence that would convince the scientific community that humans and dinosaurs lived at the same time.

User avatar
TK
Posts: 1477
Joined: Mon Aug 25, 2008 8:42 pm
Location: North Carolina

Re: Did dinosaurs ever live alongside humans?

Post by TK » Thu Mar 02, 2017 3:33 pm

Quote: "Did you watch the video? In it I list all the types of evidence that would convince the scientific community that humans and dinosaurs lived at the same time."


Weird- I thought I did but the first time I watched it it stopped right after the part about the birds and I thought that was it.

I think the young earth folks would say something along the lines that the strata was not laid down uniformly due to Noah's flood. Not sure what problems that solves but that is what is stated.

Post Reply

Return to “Creation/Evolution”