d2jsp
Log InRegister
d2jsp Forums > Off-Topic > General Chat > Science, Technology & Nature > God And Creation
123Next
Add Reply New Topic New Poll
Member
Posts: 10,776
Joined: Dec 29 2009
Gold: Locked
Dec 28 2010 10:16pm
God made the universe + humans in 6 days (the beginning of everything).

Where does dinosaurs fit into all this?

This post was edited by red_man_27 on Dec 28 2010 10:16pm
Member
Posts: 5,901
Joined: Dec 13 2005
Gold: 2,508.53
Dec 29 2010 01:52am
Quote (red_man_27 @ Dec 28 2010 11:16pm)
God made the universe + humans in 6 days (the beginning of everything).

Where does dinosaurs fit into all this?


Mesozoic as I recall we named it.
Member
Posts: 10,776
Joined: Dec 29 2009
Gold: Locked
Dec 29 2010 02:02am
Quote (WhirlingDervish @ Dec 29 2010 02:52am)
Mesozoic as I recall we named it.


So humans lived among the dinos?

Because evolution theory says we came after right?
Member
Posts: 5,901
Joined: Dec 13 2005
Gold: 2,508.53
Dec 29 2010 02:37am
Quote (red_man_27 @ Dec 29 2010 03:02am)
So humans lived among the dinos?

Because evolution theory says we came after right?


#1 Best I have studied there may be mention of a few "lifeforms" mentioned early, that could possibly have been dinos. They are mentioned in Job. They could be something like crocodiles as well because they are on mentioned in passing. By the rarity, we could assume at best, the "lifeforms" mentioned are a novelty and the time period is not the Mesozoic era. You could go off on a wild tangent and think "If they were dinos, they lived way, way past their known archeological time-period." If you do that you are way out on a limb early in the thought to begin with. Possible but not even probable by Science as we understand at the moment.

#2 To kill arguments, toss evolution and go with archeological evidence. You can even toss arguments about C-14 dating. We can get a general relative pattern, without arguing specifics, with large enough samples. Those patterns tell us humans came along after dinosaurs and there was a major extinction event between them. That being said, it is unlikely any would survive till the time man walk the earth.

------

A Side note is you are projecting from Genesis and it is not a Scientific text. Therefore, After over 20 years of looking at it periodically myself, from both sides, I would be amazed if you found anything more concrete than my ever so statistically improbable outlier thoughts.

In conclusion, I'm not sure what you are trying to accomplish but this train of thought seems pretty fruitless beyond what I've mentioned in the end by what we can find atm.

<3
Member
Posts: 13,578
Joined: Jul 27 2010
Gold: 2,285.00
Dec 29 2010 08:43am
A couple possibilities.
1) The Creation stories aren't to be taken literally, so the 6 day time span and limited inclusion of lifeforms is pretty meaningless.
2) Dinosaurs were put there in the rocks by Satan to confuse people.

Quote (WhirlingDervish @ Dec 29 2010 03:37am)
#2 To kill arguments, toss evolution and go with archeological evidence. You can even toss arguments about C-14 dating. We can get a general relative pattern, without arguing specifics, with large enough samples. Those patterns tell us humans came along after dinosaurs and there was a major extinction event between them. That being said, it is unlikely any would survive till the time man walk the earth.

I agree with this except for one common misconception. C-14 dating is only good for things that are up to about 60,000 years old because C-14 has a half life of about 5700 years. So after 60,000 years, that's over 10 half lives, so there would be less than a tenth of a percent of the original amount of C-14 by that point. For older fossils, they use other radioactive elements.
Member
Posts: 9,692
Joined: Apr 10 2006
Gold: 19,597.59
Dec 29 2010 03:07pm
how long is a day in the eyes of god?
Member
Posts: 5,901
Joined: Dec 13 2005
Gold: 2,508.53
Dec 29 2010 07:49pm
Quote (bentherdonethat @ Dec 29 2010 09:43am)
I agree with this except for one common misconception. C-14 dating is only good for things that are up to about 60,000 years old because C-14 has a half life of about 5700 years. So after 60,000 years, that's over 10 half lives, so there would be less than a tenth of a percent of the original amount of C-14 by that point. For older fossils, they use other radioactive elements.


Yea, I just chose a layman specific and didn't expand to include heavy metal dating, such as uranium.

Thumbs up on you actually calculating that out as well. I usually don't bother on a first response because I seem to confuse the innumerate. :mellow:


Quote (juliusjuice @ Dec 29 2010 04:07pm)
how long is a day in the eyes of god?


For example: 2 Peter 3:8 (King James Version) But, beloved, be not ignorant of this one thing, that one day is with the Lord as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day.

I've studied not only this specific example but time in general and perspective seems as much or maybe more important than the idea of time itself, in these passages.

In a nutshell, from hardcore examination from dimensional/temporal Physics, to diligent study of Scripture and every place in between; a western centered view of time and impersonal analytical interpretation are an astronomical unit, from being a tangent in thought, most of the time.
Member
Posts: 10,776
Joined: Dec 29 2009
Gold: Locked
Dec 29 2010 08:29pm
Quote (WhirlingDervish @ Dec 29 2010 03:37am)
#1 Best I have studied there may be mention of a few "lifeforms" mentioned early, that could possibly have been dinos. They are mentioned in Job. They could be something like crocodiles as well because they are on mentioned in passing. By the rarity, we could assume at best, the "lifeforms" mentioned are a novelty and the time period is not the Mesozoic era. You could go off on a wild tangent and think "If they were dinos, they lived way, way past their known archeological time-period." If you do that you are way out on a limb early in the thought to begin with. Possible but not even probable by Science as we understand at the moment.

#2 To kill arguments, toss evolution and go with archeological evidence. You can even toss arguments about C-14 dating. We can get a general relative pattern, without arguing specifics, with large enough samples. Those patterns tell us humans came along after dinosaurs and there was a major extinction event between them. That being said, it is unlikely any would survive till the time man walk the earth.

------

A Side note is you are projecting from Genesis and it is not a Scientific text. Therefore, After over 20 years of looking at it periodically myself, from both sides, I would be amazed if you found anything more concrete than my ever so statistically improbable outlier thoughts.

In conclusion, I'm not sure what you are trying to accomplish but this train of thought seems pretty fruitless beyond what I've mentioned in the end by what we can find atm.

<3


We'll if the book of Genesis is true, then humans have been living longer than dinosaurs right?

Either way, it sounds weird humans being created at the same time as the earth was (like 4 billion years ago).

Quote (WhirlingDervish @ Dec 29 2010 08:49pm)


For example: 2 Peter 3:8 (King James Version) But, beloved, be not ignorant of this one thing, that one day is with the Lord as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day.
.


It implies that one day spent with God (spiritually) is greater than a thousand years spent without God. Not actual time differences
Member
Posts: 5,901
Joined: Dec 13 2005
Gold: 2,508.53
Dec 29 2010 10:51pm
Quote (red_man_27 @ Dec 29 2010 09:29pm)
We'll if the book of Genesis is true, then humans have been living longer than dinosaurs right?

Either way, it sounds weird humans being created at the same time as the earth was (like 4 billion years ago).


Not at all! The linear patter places man at the end of the events and that fits the archeological discoveries we have uncovered by Science.


Quote (red_man_27 @ Dec 29 2010 09:29pm)
It implies that one day spent with God (spiritually) is greater than a thousand years spent without God. Not actual time differences


That is quite abstract for a native Hebrew speaker at the time, if that is the case, for Hebrew seems to love the concrete.

The thought is likely a stated stated as what we would see as a possible contradiction or opposite, to paint a single thought, at it's root.

The idea of day in the Hellenistic Greek, infers a period, light and dark etc. Ancient Greek seems to love abstracts. :rofl:

There seems to be more there but it would, not help the discussion and be out of the realm of the subforum.
Member
Posts: 59,252
Joined: Aug 5 2007
Gold: Locked
Warn: 60%
Dec 30 2010 02:48am
I believe in science.
Go Back To Science, Technology & Nature Topic List
123Next
Add Reply New Topic New Poll