Of course it would matter where they lived because that would allow humans to live nearby.... safely, or as safe as we are with bears nearby.
All the evidence says the dinosaurs did die out, the last species going about 65.5 million years ago. The Job poem was probably written between the 6th and 4th century BC.
Yes, but there's no evidence from the artworks themselves that they are prehistoric creatures, and the geological, etc evidence seems to preclude the possibility.
But it doesn't. Hard geological evidence versus visual impressions of what we think an artwork MAY have depicted?
It does not seem to have been worked out since then -- as the stuff about the footprint, etc doesn't seem to have been -- and the videos essentially rely on sense impressions of artwork without any additional evidence and also on dating artifacts without any evidence that their dates would have matched some late dates for dinosaur extinction. How does Baugh account for the geological and paleontological evidence of the date of the Cretaceous-Paleogene extinction event? Or does he suppose that all these artifacts were created 65.5 million years ago?
No, all the evidence doesn't say the dinosaurs died out 65 million or so years ago. That is a common teaching but nothing can be farther from the truth. If the Job book isn't just a poem (it sure doesn't seem to just be some made up story Job felt like telling but rather a real description of something that gives man a warning about it - If Job saw it, remember, he was there, then it existed just a couple of thousand years ago). And do you think it would be practical for the education system, for one example, to come out and say everything taught about the dinos was wrong, man lived/may have lived with them... etc.... that won't happen anytime soon.
No, evolution doesn't have "probable." You simply only see it that way because that is your understanding. My understanding is very different than yours (since I've given the Bible and creation evidence a harder look than you, or at least it seems that way, plus I've looked at evolution in a critical way just as I've done with creation and in the end and to my best knowledge, creation is where I stand).
I don't think any creationist here says evolution doesn't exist. The very opposite is true, we know things can change over time, but we don't believe that things have completely changed to something different..... for example, we don't believe though any number of generations, that people are related to dolphins, for example. No where does the Bible also say that man was created over vast amounts of time from various other forms of life, or evolution. It simply says man was created from the earth on the spot.
Job consists of a didactic folk tale hung around a poem likely composed centuries before, not merely 2000 years ago, and used by the prose writer for his own purposes. Parts of the frame story have been found in other texts. There is no evidence for Job's historicity -- in fact, the "Job motif" was quite common in Assyrian literature.
It would be especially impractical if it was wrong. In any event, that is not evidence that the "common" teaching is wrong.
No it isn't. It seems to consist in vague similarities between depicted creatures and how we think prehistoric creatures looked. We cannot be sure how the composers of the artworks intended to depict the behavior of the creatures beyond the way wild creatures in general would be depicted. Where is the evidence that they were thinking specifically of "dinosaur behavior" as opposed to the behavior of mythological animals or animals contemporaneous with them?
But many of the trueorigin claims -- for example, the helium diffusion data -- do not seem to have advanced beyond their probable fallacious bases while the talkorigin and other rebuttals seem to have advanced the evidence for their position. For example, Humphreys seems not to have answered any of the objections to his helium hypothesis or further strengthened his models whereas Loechelt's numerous recent criticisms and Henke's continued researches have poked numerous holes in it.
No, the evidence is there with the dinosaur examples from the videos. The clear descriptions cannot be ignored by the "artwork." I gave the reason as to why it isn't being taught inmy last post to you. And the evidence doesn't "prove" that dinos existed with man, it simply is exactly what it is, evidence - an open possiblity.
Poster above answered about the messiah may tarry.
You're wrong just by your statement that creationism is "possible," that must mean there is some evidence.
Can you stop the stereotyping?
