Anonymous
Anonymous asked in Society & CultureReligion & Spirituality · 1 decade ago

Do fossils of now extinct creatures such as dinosaurs prove evolution?

The fact that dinosaurs once lived and are now extinct is no proof of evolution. Such fossils merely show us that certain species once living were destroyed and became extinct. Theorists have been able to reach no general agreement on the cause or causes of extinction. The theories on this subject are numerous and sometimes very imaginative. Since most fossils are found in sedimentary rocks and show signs of catastrophic burial, they seem to point to a global flood as the principal cause of extinction. They must have lived on earth at the same time, just as the Bible implies.

If the flood-geology interpretation of geological strata is correct, all or most dinosaurs became extinct at the time of the flood. Until that time, then, man and dinosaurs lived on the earth at the same time.

Is there any EVIDENCE outside of the Bible to support this view? Yes, there is. It is well known that along the Paluxy River in Texas many dinosaur footprints have been found in limestone strata classified as Cretaceous. Not so well known is the fact that for about fifty years human footprints have been reported in the same strata.

Source: Footprints in Stone(color-sound film)

But since the concept that man lived with dinosaurs is incompatible with the theory of evolution, many Scientists dismiss this documentary for the persuasive evidence unfolded.

21 Answers

Relevance
  • 1 decade ago
    Favorite Answer

    I do agree with you to some extent. It is impossible for humans to prove the actual "age" of the extinct dinosaur remains. When scientists try to "determine" the age of the dinosaur remains by soil composition and "carbon dating" etc, I just shake my head. Anybody can make an assumption about life that way. It is also impossible for humans to determine exactly how old the history of mankind is as well. Remember, in the early days of creation, people lived much longer then we do now. Of course they did. Adam lived for 930 years, and his son Seth lived for 912 years. Before the flood, many people lived well into their hundreds. There was a wonderful balance of nature then. No pollution or anything "man-made" existed to destroy that balance. God knew what he was doing right from the very beginning. His creation and existence is perfection in itself - he is the superb mastercraftsman! I bow to his absolute genius...

  • Anonymous
    1 decade ago

    Are you retarded?

    "The fact that dinosaurs once lived and are now extinct is no proof of evolution. Such fossils merely show us that certain species once living were destroyed and became extinct."

    Dinosaurs WERE evolving.

    There are three time periods that dinosaurs lived during. Triassic, Jurassic, and Cretaceous.

    T-Rex, for example, didn't exist in all three time periods, they existed at the end of the Cretaceous, and only at the end of the Cretaceous. T-Rex evolved from dinosaurs that lived before the late Cretaceous period. I'm not a dinosaur expert anymore, so I can't tell you exactly what dinosaurs evolved into T-Rex, but you can read about it and find out what paleontologists think.

    Quote from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tyrannosaur

    "Early in their existence, tyrannosauroids were small predators with long, three-fingered forelimbs. Late Cretaceous genera became much larger, including some of the largest land-based predators ever to exist, but most of these later genera had proportionately small forelimbs with only two digits."

    This implies that they EVOLVED. Do read it.

    "Theorists have been able to reach no general agreement on the cause or causes of extinction. The theories on this subject are numerous and sometimes very imaginative. Since most fossils are found in sedimentary rocks and show signs of catastrophic burial, they seem to point to a global flood as the principal cause of extinction. They must have lived on earth at the same time, just as the Bible implies."

    Paleontologists don't know why the dinosaurs died, because there are no witnesses. We can only speculate. However, while some dinosaurs did indeed probably die as result of flooding, I've never heard of global flooding as the cause of the dinosaurs' extinction. Just because Christian websites state this, does not mean that this is what the experts (paleontologists) believe. It's what far-out Christians believe.

    We know that dinosaurs and man did not exist at the same time, because of how far down in the soil dinosaur fossils are found. That's how we know that dinosaurs stopped existing 65 million years ago. We pin-pointed it. It's the same way we can determine that our earliest relatives lived 400,000 years ago. Not even a million years ago. Dinosaurs and humans are separated by more than 64 million years - that is a HUGE number. Science proves that any kind of modern relative of humans did not live with the dinosaurs.

    "It is well known that along the Paluxy River in Texas many dinosaur footprints have been found in limestone strata classified as Cretaceous."

    It is also well-known that this is a hoax or misinterpretation.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paluxy_River

    It was debunked in the 1930's.

    Far-out Christians simply use this to try to prove their claim, and it is dishonest.

    Please do not take the Bible literally. It was written as a set of morals and guidelines to live by. The stories in it are no more real than Harry Potter, instead, they are examples. It is telling you to be a good person. Historically, there was no other way to make people behave.

    So keep your faith, but people do not continue looking like an idiot and telling people that dinosaur and people lived at the same time.

  • 1 decade ago

    Actually the fossil record is strong supporting evidence for the theory of evolution, but for reasons you clearly aren't interested in understanding. Now the paluxy river man tracks that's an amusing story, the footpints of dinosaurs that weren't well eroded yet, were really far too large to be human tracks and which were so unclear on their own when pictures were taken by creationists that the creationists had to mark the outlines of human footprints with water to make the footprints actually look like human footprints.

    Those footprints are actually quite well known as being a common creationist claim long ago debunked, which creationists have acknowledged as debunked but some creationists still use.

    http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/paluxy.html

    http://www.dallasobserver.com/1996-12-12/news/foot...

    http://paleo.cc/paluxy/whatbau.htm

    http://www.answersingenesis.org/home/area/faq/dont...

    That last one is a long list of arguments that answers in genesis thinks creationists should not use and the paluxy man tracks is under the part they think creationists should DEFINITELY not use, their emphasis not mine. Except yes I know, they used italics not caps.

    So I find it interesting that not even all creationists were convinced by the Paluxy tracks even though they all had the same information. Must have been something wrong with the assertions or the methods used or both.

    EDIT: to whirlingmirc

    "Dinosaurs are extinct because the world after the flood is not conducive to such large and long living creatures as it used to be."

    So why did velociraptor go extinct? It was only the size of a chicken. Yes I saw Jurrasic Park, not accurate. But then why did Utah Raptor go extinct? Utah Raptor was only slightly larger than a tall man, certainly not even as large as an elephant. Neither of these dinosaurs would be called long lived. Not even by parrot standards. Galapagos toirtoses can live how long? Last I heard Darwin's tortoises were still alive. That's longer lived than the oldest we know of any dinosaur aging, at least based on the fossil remains we have uncovered, many sauropods might haved lived about 100 years. That's an estimate, though.

    But seriously what about Procompsognathus? Or Protoceratops? Or Microceratops? Styracosaurus was only about the size of a modern elephant...maybe a little longer. Why did it go extinct? Ankylosaurus was smaller than Styracosaurus, why did Ankylosaurus go extinct? Gallimimus was also maybe only slightly larger than an elephant, but was a theropod, so weighed a lot less. Why did Gallimimus go extinct? The reason whirlingmirc provides just doesn't fit these and actually most other species of dinosaur. The average size of a dinosaur is actually no larger than a relatively large dog. This is taking into account all of the large dinosaurs like Ultrasaurus, and then all of the very small dinosaurs like procompsognathus. The tiny ones like the procompsognathus bring the average down.

    Being large for a herivore was a great defense mechanism, but a difficult one for the environment to sustain, so it couldn't sustain as many large species, so most species, in order to survive, were small.

    Likewise being large for a carnivore was a great adaptation for taking on large herbivores, but was actually an even more difficult adaptation for the environments to sustain so large carnivores were less common. For the most part it was the large herbivores who could be more long lived, unless you count the icthiosaurs. And I wonder why there are no more fully aquatic reptiles left? What happened to all of the Icthiosaurs? Most of them were no larger than a dolphin. No species of Icthiosaur even aproached the size of the Blue Whale. Only one known specimen of Ultrasaurus comes even close to competing with the largest known Blue Whales.

    I'm sorry I just don't see how whirlingmirc's explanation fits any of these facts.

  • 1 decade ago

    Ugh. Yes, fossils can vindicate evolution. The fact that we have transitional fossils (i.e early homo sapiens), proves it. Moreover, the only thing that would give credence to flood-geology and creationism is if there were modern bunnies were found fossilized next to a Tyrannasaurus Rex. Of course, there is no such fossil found, and this only gives credence to evolution. Besides, the Bible does not name dinosaurs. It instead names them as 'Leviathan', and they were thought to be demons, not large lizards. And, besides, there is no proof of a great flood; if there was such a thing, there would have been no earthworms, no plants, no insects, etc. due to the flooding. The Bible says that Noah brought animals that 'breathe only through the nostrils'. This, of course, leaves out plants and the mighty earthworm, as well as any insects, simply because they have no nostrils to breathe with. How can you explain that. If there was a great flood, there would be no life on earth. It would have died out a long time ago. Give it up. We have the fossils. We win.

  • How do you think about the answers? You can sign in to vote the answer.
  • 1 decade ago

    The Paluxy tracks are a fraud that only creationists take seriously. Even Answers in Genesis advises against using that as an argument.

    To answer the question at the top, a single fossil does not point to evolution. A series of fossils with recognizable transitions, however, does.

    EDIT @ whirlingmerc - What was found in that bone was some mineralized badly degraded organic material that still had some recognizable cellular structures and some semi-intact pepties and extremely fragmentary DNA. Only a creationist could take that find and claim that red meat had been found. Only creationists are that dishonest.

  • Anonymous
    1 decade ago

    You seem to be looking at this in the wrong frame of mind. What you need to do is look at the *facts* (not some creationist website's lies and distortions). The facts show almost 4 billion years of life on Earth, a progression of species, constant change, diversification, a gradual evolution of forms and anatomies, body parts gradually changing into different organs based on the same structure, not being created from new. These and many, many other facts point undeniably towards common descent, rather than common design.

  • 1 decade ago

    If what you say is true, then the Bible is therefore wrong, since it says that Noah gathered two of EVERY species into the ark. Or maybe God was wrong when he commanded Noah to build the ark to a certain specified size (in cubits) and after it was built and the two brontosauruses showed up to get on board along with the two brachiosaurs and the two dipodocuses and the two T. Rexes, etc. so Noah got a headache and said "Jeez, I can't fit all-o-y'all on this crate! Some o-yo got to stay behind!" But the bible kind of leaves that part out, doesn't it. (I can certainly understand leaving it out...I would be embarrassed to admit such a faux pas myself)

  • 4 years ago

    Archaeopteryx was a fully formed flyer with eliptical wings typical of modern woodland birds. If it was alive today it would be no more strange than a platypus. Anyway, a lot of paleontologists think that birds evolved from the lizard hipped dinosaurs rather than the bird hipped dinosaurs.

  • 1 decade ago

    If young earth creationism is true, we'd expect to find a fossil layer as follows: first, nothing but rock, then a sudden appearance of all animals and plants ever known, more or less all mixed together, then gradual appearance of human fossils and artifacts as humans populate the earth; then a flood layer, covering the entire planet, and full of artifacts and fossils of all types, then a dead time while the earth repopulated and the populations of all species increased slowly.

    We don't find this. We find no fossils out of place; we find simple organisms at the bottom and growing complexity as we grow up; we find many local but no global floods.

  • 1 decade ago

    Claim CC101:

    Human and dinosaur footprints have been found together in the Glen Rose formation at Paluxy River, Texas.

    Response:

    1. The footprints reputed to be of human origin are not. For example:

    * Some of the footprints are dinosaur footprints. Processes such as erosion, infilling, and mud collapse obscure the dinosaurian features of some footprints, making them look like giant human footprints, but careful cleaning reveals the three-toed tracks of dinosaurs (Hastings 1987; Kuban 1989).

    * Some of the reputed prints are erosional features or other irregularities. They show no clear human features without selective highlighting.

    * Some of the prints show evidence of deliberate alteration (Godfrey 1985).

    2. The Paluxy tracks are illustrative of creationists' wishful thinking and of their unwillingness to face evidence. Although some creationists have repudiated the Paluxy claim, many others still cling to it (Schadewald 1986).

    Source(s): Links: Kuban, Glen J. 1996. The Texas dinosaur/"man track" controversy. http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/paluxy.html Matson, Dave E. 1994. How good are those young-earth arguments? http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/hovind/howgood-gc.... References: 1. Godfrey, L. R., 1985. Foot notes of an anatomist. Creation/Evolution 5(1): 16-36. 2. Hastings, Ronnie J., 1987. New observations on Paluxy Tracks confirm their dinosaurian origin. Journal of Geological Education 35(1): 4-15. 3. Kuban, Glen, 1989. Color distinctions and other curious features of dinosaur tracks near Glen Rose, Texas. In: Gillette and Lockley, 1989 (see below), pp. 427-440. http://paleo.cc/paluxy/color.htm 4. Schadewald, Robert J. 1986. Scientific creationism and error. Creation/Evolution 6(1): 1-9, http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/cre-error.html Further Reading: Cole, John R. and Laurie R. Godfrey (eds.). 1985. The Paluxy River footprint mystery -- solved. Creation/Evolution 5(1). (special issue devoted to the topic) http://www.ncseweb.org/resources/articles/3868_iss... Gillette, David D. and Martin G. Lockley (eds.). 1989. Dinosaur Tracks and Traces, Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. (technical) Hastings, Ronnie J. 1986. Tracking those incredible creationists -- the trail continues. Creation/Evolution 6(1): 20-28. http://www.ncseweb.org/resources/articles/5063_iss... Hastings, Ronnie J. 1988. Rise and fall of the Paluxy mantracks. Perspectives on Science and Christian Faith 40(3): 144-155. Kuban, Glen J. 1986. A summary of the Taylor site evidence. Creation/Evolution 6(1): 11-19. http://www.ncseweb.org/resources/articles/5063_iss... Schadewald, Robert. 1986. Scientific creationism and error. Creation/Evolution 6(1): 2-10. http://www.ncseweb.org/resources/articles/5063_iss... ALL CREATIONIST ARGUMENTS ARE DISHONEST.
Still have questions? Get your answers by asking now.