Plesiosaur Lie
On page 80 and 18, there is the E rhyme that addresses the 5th day of creation claiming that the plesiosaurs and all other forms of sea life being created on day 5 of creation week. Teachers are to tell the kids that God made the sea creatures on day 5, which means He also made the sea reptiles like the Plesiosaurs as well. Is that so, then look at this page and you will see a different, much better interpretation of Genesis 1:20-23. Ham asserts that although there are not strictly dinosaurs, they, according to the evolutionists, supposedly (and factually) lived at the same time as the dinosaurs and are often called marine dinosaurs. No scientist ever calls them marine dinosaurs. They're just simply referred to as marine reptiles. Marine reptiles did live at the same time as the dinosaurs, just like what the fossil record tells us. But does Ham care? No. He just tells people to deny everything and pretend it's not there. Ham wants teachers to show to the children a picture of what it actually is a basking shark being pulled up from the water. But Ham (back then when the book was published) insists it's a Plesiosaur. If it is, then the concept of millions of years can sure be a problem…at least that's what Ham asserts. But guess what! The plesiosaur myth is now part of the list of arguments they think creationists should not use as shown here on the AiG site. After spending years defending the plesiosaur fallacy, AiG is finally giving up the plesiosaur myth, just like many others like him. However, there are still other creationists out there that continues to vehemently and vainly defend the plesiosaur myth, even though the battle is lost. Kent Hovind and Carl Baugh is two of those creationists.
Ham's Claim About When Life First Appeared
Now in the next idiot exercise, there is an age-old question of which comes first, the chicken or the egg? Children are to write the answer down and give out the reason for it. According to Ham's idiot answer, it's the chicken because God made the birds on the fifth day (Two paleontologists, however, bags to differ). If so then God must have used dinosaurs as templates to create birds just what the scientific evidence is showing us. Next, Ham tells the parent to say to the (sic)"exceptionally bright student" that people who "believe" evolution claim that life evolve from the sea. The claim is true. Life did start from the sea; exactly what the scientific evidence has shown us. Ham, however, want parents and students to deny it and believe that the Bible says that life first appeared on land through plants being created on the third day (never mind plants appearing underwater first before coming up on land and never mind the various types of plants the live underwater.) He wants kids to believe that all evidence and answers for everything science, origins, first life, etc. can all be found in the Bible (Wrong!). As you can see, even though plants were the first forms of life to conquer the land, Life really did began in the water.
You can also see how plants evolved and how they conquered the land by visiting this webpage just down below.
http://scitec.uwichill.edu.bb/bcs/bl14apl/conq.htm
The Great Dinosaur Lie
The next claim involves the F rhyme on pages 82 and 20 stating that the land animals and man was all created on the sixth day, including dinosaurs. There is a major flaw. If all animals and man were created at the same time, the world would have been a huge, overcrowded place.
Ham, the liar, wants everyone to believe that dinosaurs and man lived a the same time (never mind the fossil record saying otherwise) and that all animal species lived at one time in the Middle East (never mind animals like kangaroos and wombats, prehistoric and modern living exclusively on island continents like Australia and nowhere else.) and be ignorant of the real evidence AGAINST what Ham and others constantly claim. Ham tells parents to tell the kids about the word dinosaur being invented by Richard Owen in 1841 to describe the bones of great reptiles that has been found on earth. The word "dinosaur" means "terrible lizard." This is why in Ham's lying eyes the word dinosaur does not appear in the Bible because it is a made up word, invented in 1841. Although Richard Owen (1804-1892) did invent the word "dinosaur," he actually coined the word "Dinosauria," which more accurately means "fearfully great lizards." Richard invented Dinosauria in a scientific paper in 1842, not 41. Plus the Bible is written and compiled at the time dinosaurs and science as we know of was completely unknown to the ancients. Therefore using the Bible as evidence for man living with dinosaurs is completely worthless. Despite what the little poem said in the next idiot exercise, due to the undeniable empirical fossilized evidence that's out there, Dinosaurs and man, especially Adam and Eve, DON'T MIX!
Obedience To God
On pages 22 and 84, there is a G rhyme that deals with the Garden of Eden and how it could have been Adam and Eve's home forever if they never have eaten the forbidden fruit coming from the tree of knowledge of good and evil. This is not so bad, for both lesson and exercise all deal with obedience to God and how we must obey God and His Word just like the whale, the ravens, and the wind and the waves, have done at God's command as told in many stories found in the Bible. So why do Ham and other YECs and their followers NOT obey God when He says, "Thou shall not lie; Thou shall not bear false witness against thy neighbor; Thou shall not speak evil of others; and Judge not lest you be judged?" Bad examples they're giving to their followers, huh?
Hunger Pains
Now, there is an H rhyme on pages 86 and 24 that deals with severe case of cranks. This rhyme and stupid lesson claims that Adam does not have to worry when dinosaurs, especially those with big mouths, eat because they were all created to eat only plants just like what Genesis 1:29-30 allegedly claims. This claim is not worth digesting over (no pun intended.). If God really truly wanted all the animals to eat only plants, then why the heck did God gave animals like T.rex all of what it takes to be a carnivore? This assertion is totally flawed to the core. Ham and other creationists have NO honest, valid answers or explanations to the question mentioned above and the question mentioned in this remark, "Some children may wonder why animals have sharp teeth if they were not created to eat meat." Ham can't honestly answer or explain them without invoking some blasphemous miracles and notions that implies God to have set those sharp toothed animals up for the fall. Also, children are to be told that the creationists own "mothers uses sharp knives to cut up vegetables (does this mean the YECs at one time were all raised to be vegetarians as children?) so animals would have needed sharp teeth just to cut through vegetables and fruits they were eating. Meaning just because animals have sharp teeth doesn't mean it eats meat. It simply means it has sharp teeth for eating other types of foods. It's exactly as just because animals have blunt teeth doesn't mean it eats plants. (i.e. Humans, rats, mice, Placodus, a Triassic reptile, and Globidens, a Mosasaur.) It simply means it has blunt teeth for eating other types of foods such as meat whether raw or cooked, especially shellfish!"
The claim about the knives are totally flawed and groundless. Those flimsy, flat knives all have nothing to do with the functions of the animal's sharp tooth dentistry. What children are refrained from being told is that unlike the homodontically sharp teeth of a T.rex and a lion that is always thick, conical, sharp, rigid, and long lasting (Lions have not just sharp canine teeth. They also have carnassials, special molars that help lions to get a good solid grip on their meat), those flimsy, flat sharp kitchen knives when used a lot wears out to the point where they have to be sharpened with a wet stone from time to time. They're thin, flat, and can bend, rust, even break. Thus, making the claim a highly weak and useless comparison.
A waste of resources too. If He did made the animals to have sharp teeth, strong legs, sharp claws and a stomach for red food, yet He orders them all to eat only plants, what good is it? God would have been a very wasteful God. Believe it or not, in the Bible, there are verses YECs deliberately ignore and dismiss as one of God's weak intentions (Does this mean that God is weak too when they say that? Possibly so, leading to another form of blasphemy being made by the creationists.) that clearly condones and upholds carnivory and meat-eating without a problem. One of the examples of it is in Psalms 104: 21 were the lions rely on the Lord to provide them with prey to eat. Also, there is a article on godandscience.org down below that addresses the issue of carnivores and tells us that God did create some animals to eat only meat.
http://www.godandscience.org/youngearth/carnivores.html
See Creationist crank of animal diet for more of this falsehood.
Click here also to check out this article that refutes the notion about sharp teeth doesn't mean carnivore myth and read about the true functions of camel teeth. If you think this YEC claim is bad, ha! You ain't see nothing yet! The next one is even worse!
Salvation For Animals?
What makes creationists think that animals need saving too along with the human race? The I rhyme on pages 88 and 26, implies the whole universe was cursed all because Adam and Eve ate the apple. Something the Bible says NOTHING of. Only the serpent in disguise of the Devil, along with Adam and Eve was cursed. God cursed the serpent saying that he will crawl on his belly and eat the dust of the earth and have entity between him and the woman and all of her descendants. Adam, on the other hand, will have to work, sweat, and slave his butt off for food, pulling up painful thorny weeds up from the ground and Eve will have an increase in labor pangs and be a subject to her husband. Adam and Eve was banished from the Garden of Eden (so they won't eat the Tree of Life) as a result of their disobedience to face a world outside of Eden that was hard, treacherous, dangerous, and lonesome. The next stupid lesson states that what Adam and Eve did brought sin, rebellion, and death into this world. Nothing bad about it unless it is told the YE way like this: All because Adam sin, the whole creation is groaning and travailing in pain as told in Romans 3:14-19. But does it mean the creature that is really lost human souls plagued with sin or the nature creation itself? This article here addresses the issue.
Death is a necessary part of life whether we like it or not. However, according to the creationists, physical death came to the world through Adam's sin as told in Romans 5:12. But they deliberately neglect the fact that the verse actually implies a spiritual death, not physical. Also YECs deliberately ignores the fact that when animals eat plants, they're killing them! Creationists asserts that they are not alive because they are not among those that have a breath of life in them. That a lie. Plants are living things. They too have a breath of life in them. They take in carbon dioxide and give out oxygen. Plants are living things that reproduce, need food, water, sunshine, and lots of TLC to make them grow and flourish just like all of us.
When animals eat plants, they are really taking the life out of them, thus killing them to satisfy their hunger. Digestion is a form of decay. Does Ham thinks the food will only just pass through one opening and out the other without being digested in the stomach? If all animals and people eat plants, then the plant kingdom will never stand a chance for survival. The Plant Kingdom will face extinction before they know it, then what will they eat? Rocks? Dirt? Excrement? Why not have all who have a breath of life in them eat rocks if no death ever occurred before Adam sinned since rocks don't have a breathe of life in them? Get Real! The notion of having no death and decay before the fall is completely flawed and false. Ham thinks the major reason that Christians can't really "believe" in both evolution and the Bible is because of dinosaur bones not being there before Adam sinned (assuming Adam is the head of all creation hence, his branding as the scapegoat behind all the world's evils.). There would have been no dinosaur bones after the Fall let alone after the Flood at all if Ham claims to be the case. The truth is that we are finding bones of dinosaurs within only the Mesozoic strata and human remains only within the top Holocene strata and not at all mixed together with each other let alone mixed with all other forms of animals both living and extinct. This tells us clearly that dinosaurs all lived, flourished, and died in a time period that once occurred BEFORE the days of Hominids, Adam and Eve, and all the rest of the human race. Hydrodynamic sorting crap won't help because that would lead to more questionable myths, stupid lies, groundless miracles, god-done-its, ad hocs, strawmen, and stupidities. It's all flawed to the core.
Food for Thought: If no death occurred before the Fall, then it will be pointless to plant the Tree of Life right in the Garden of Eden.
Emotional Ignorance
The next paragraph is contradictory and a pleading to emotional ignorance. Children are to be told that God had to judge sin because He is holy and perfect and have to use death so that we will be able to live in the perfect world again after we die or when Jesus comes back again. ONLY if we accept Jesus as Lord and Savior and nothing else will we go to heaven. But Ham's emotional pleadings to ignorance, lies, falsehoods, a false form of salvation (If he thinks his stupid lies, scare tactics, faulty conversion tactics; deceptively, smooth, sounded Bible talks, and his emotional pity parties is all going to save us and himself from eternal damnation, he's greatly mistaken!), and a severe case of misunderstanding over what evolution is all about will actually lead people on a one way ticket to atheism, Hell, and agnosticism. Either that or a much different path in the Christian walk that doesn't favors the YECs at all. More on this later. Nowhere does the Bible say about animals becoming meat-eaters after the Fall and nowhere does it say anything about carnivores being evil either. But creationists don't give a dang about it. This idea of animals being evil along side of humans is a form of New Age, Gnosticism, and other certain atheistic religions. Now that's one reason why we should avoid getting into this young earth crap. It's because they compromise Christianity with all other pagan religions of the world.
The Jewish people can only eat certain kinds of meat and not pork, rats, and other ritually unclean meats. Jesus however lifted the restrictions so that we can even eat all the pork we want and all the ham we want. However, Some people think that eating meat is a sin which is a form of Legalism that biblically unfounded. In the next idiot exercise on page 88, the children are simply to be told to make a list of the kinds of meats man would've never had if Adam hadn't sinned. Please keep in mind Genesis 1: 29-30 is NOT a command but a provision that God made to Adam and the animals to help them satisfy their hunger.
Reference,
http://www.godandscience.org/youngearth/death.html
http://www.answersincreation.org/teeth.htm
http://members.tripod.com/~Black_J/death.html
Sinful Animals?
The J rhyme on pages 90 and 28 implies that it's 'just awful' for animals to sin along side of the human race which the Bible speaks zero of. Just like I said, what makes the YECs think that the animals need saving too along with the human race? They think the word "flesh" the verse in Genesis 6:12-13 to mean both people and animals being all corrupt and evil as told on page 90. This ignores the fact that the word "flesh" only implies to the sinful human race, not the animal race. There are many Bible verses out there that speaks of the flesh to mean the sinful human race only. Like this verse here for one example: Psalm 78:39 in the NIV
"He remembered that they were but flesh, a passing breeze that does not return." Here's the KJV version of the verse. "For he remembered that they were but flesh; a wind that passeth away, and cometh not again."
Those verses clearly imply that the "flesh" word really describes the sinful human race only and has nothing to do with animal race. Unlike humans, animals, being morally innocent they are, don't think and reason like we do. So, there's no way can they be included in the sinful flesh category. For more info, see this reference here and just scroll down to "All moral creature were involved in the Flood" and you will see exactly what I mean.
In the next idiot exercise, children are told to pretend to be newspaper reporters and report the incidents occurring at the time of Noah. Children can report the events being made at the time of Noah when everything human wise turned bad and how the hearts of the people become very, very corrupt. And how the animals and plants were suffering because of what man is doing to them. A great Sunday School lesson…if only it were not marred by YE creation dogma.
The K rhyme on pages 30 and 92 implies that knowledge is bad. In this stupid lesson, children are to be told that Noah was a righteous man before God's eyes and God had to warn Noah and his family about the coming flood and discuss with them His plans to save them from the flood. The bad part is this— what makes him think nearly everyone in the world is wrong in everything science while creationists and their followers are right in everything science? A direct example of self righteousness, don't you think? Ham wants everyone to think this way and hide from their kids the fact that there are many "evolutionists" who are all devout Christians who believe that God created everything. They are right when they say that evolution true because of empirical evidence being uncovered that clearly shows evolution to be fact. This is the evidence Ham and his followers would rather deny and pretend to not exist. But denying the evidence is not going to make it all go away.
In another rather Sunday School exercise, Children are to pretend they are Noah and give a short sermon to warn the people of the approaching flood.
The Fate of the So-Called Billions of dead things
The L rhyme on pages 94 and 32 says Noah should listen, which he did. However, in the next stupid lesson, there is a broken record statement about dinosaurs being drowned in the flood and turning to fossils, which there is no evidence for. Ham reasons,
"If Noah's flood occur, we should see billions of dead things, buried in rock layers, laid down by water all over the earth."
We found NONE of it. As a matter of fact, the inspiration for this type of indoctrination comes from a Karoo Formation, a fossil site that yielded up to a whopping 800 billion remains of fossils all dated to the Palaeozoic Era. None of these fossils were formed during Noah's Flood. And yet, Ham wants parents to lie to the children, saying that this is exactly what we find. If so, where are they? How come we are finding far LESS than billions of dead things that are actually laid down by localized flooding, sandstorms, volcanic eruptions, droughts, tar and mud traps, and predators each occurring separately over great multiple periods of time all over the earth? Finding fossils are extremely rare. If there were billions of dead things laid down by water all over the earth. We would have easily step on them and see billions of dead things for miles and miles on end. Paleontologists and normal people alike would all have a very easy time finding and digging up the fossils of all sorts of life forms found mixing together that would have all been found in all layers rock from top to bottom. But none are found!
And no fossil is all found only in mud layers. Scientists have found fossils found embedded in many different kinds of stone, like sandstone, limestone and shale for instance. In many cases, there are fossils being found where they were all formed on dry land and in much calmer, quieter conditions, like the mummified Hadrosaur fossils for instance. However, Ham's ignorance knows no bounds as he once again states that the fossils could not have been there before Adam sinned (They were). Only after Adam sinned is when we find fossils of dinosaurs. So therefore, Adam is to be blamed for the causing of all those fossils to formed. Another great example of scapegoating Adam which is just as unbiblical as Ham's animal-sins-due-to-Adam's-sin idiocy.
He ignores the fact that there are NO such evidences of fossils being found after Adam's sin and laid down by Noah's flood being found. No fossils of dinosaurs found along side of man. No dinosaurs found in all of earth's rock strata other than the Mesozoic strata. No human fossils found below the Pliocene strata either. So what does he do? The usual— he makes up false evidences, empty tautologies, and twist bible verses, etc..
Ham then claims that Noah took up 2 of every kind of animal and 7 of every kind of animal that will be used as food and sacrifices to the Lord. Other than birds, Noah also took up 2 of every kind of dinosaur up with him in the ark (or so Ham asserts), which Noah actually did no such thing. Dinosaurs were long dead by the time man appeared on earth around 4 million years ago. Otherwise, we would have seen evidences of dinosaurs and man living recently found in both scientific, archaeological, and historical evidence such as a mixture of man and dinosaur bones found in all of rock strata from top to bottom, ancient tombs where both dinosaurs and man are buried together, ancient manuscripts, figurines, and images that are valid, non-hoax, non-fabricated, and made up by actual ancient people, whether they're Romans, Egyptians, or people living in Medieval times as seen in Dinotopia, bridals, saddles, harnesses, nose rings big enough to fit in a dinosaur nose, large wagons, barns, and stables built for them, skins, weapons, traps and cages big enough for them to be kept in. But none are found! Not even in ancient ruins of human dwellings such as villages, farms, and cities.
90 Million Animals and One Small Ark
Ham is ignorant of the fact that there are over 90 million species of animals both living and extinct being made known on this planet. If Noah took all these animals aboard in the ark along with his family, the ark will be so over crowded that the whole boat would probably break apart and sank down into the flood waters for good even with such a 450 x 75 x 45 big boat. Noah must have taken into the ark 2 of every kind of animal that Noah is most familiar with and are natives to the Middle East like camels and donkeys for instance, not dinosaurs other than birds and not all those 90 million plus creatures living and extinct that's out there. So what does Ham do when faced with fact that there is no way can Noah and his Family take up, care for and feed all those 90 million plus animals that all over crowded the ark? Simple, deny it. Have children to do the same thing; Be as deluded as he is! One of his ways is to do it is to have the children believe in this stupid lie.
Children, in the next idiot exercise, are to write the "billions of dead things" broken record statement on a piece of paper and illustrate the caption on a poster board. Then they have too memorized the lie and recite it so that they be indoctrinated into this stupid dogma like Ham wants them to. It's simply just another example of how this crap should never ever be taught in every school in the world, ever. Especially when it involves poisoning the minds of children into falsehoods and having them to believe in every stinkin' lie and nonsense creationists dish out constantly from time to time.
Babies in the Ark
The M rhyme on pages 96 and 34 claims Noah took up small dinosaurs into the ark that are in many cases juveniles, which he wasn't supposed to do. Noah was commanded to take up with him 2 of every fully mature> animals only, not immature, inexperienced babies. In this stupid lesson on page 96, Ham claims that the dinosaurs being reptiles would continue to grow all their lives and like reptiles, dinosaurs hatched from eggs. He claims it must have taken hundreds of years from them to grow to enormous sizes, which is false.
Scientists have learned from studying sauropod, hadrosaur and other fossils that dinosaurs grew very fast. For example, on average, sauropods can grow from hatchling to adult within a matter of 10 to 15 years. Others dinosaurs took less to grow to adult size; in some cases within a matter of months. Ham asserts that Noah took only young and small dinosaurs on board. He took only birds aboard actually. He never did took up all the non-avian dinosaurs aboard. By the time the hominids, Adam, Noah and all other humans appeared, the non-avian dinosaurs were long extinct for over 60 million years. Ham then states that no more than 70,000 individual animals could fit in the ark and much more. Even with 70,000, there's no way can 8 people take care of all these animals without the proper care and maintenance. You have to have much more than just 8 people to take care of these animals. Even with an ark about 458 x 75 x 45, there is no way can all those 70,000 animals could ever fit in such an ark. You have to have more than one ark to fit all those animals in as well as more people to care for them than just one ark and eight people.
Ignorance of Animal Clades
Ham's ignorance over his lack of knowledge over animal classification is paraded in the next idiot exercise. Children are to go to the library and look up books about many different kinds of animals. Parents are to lie to children; telling them to be ignorant of the scientific term of animal classification called clades. They are to tell them that although there are many different types of animals like the dog for instance, they are still those animals. For example, there are many different types of dogs, Ham claims, but they are still dogs. So are they still the Genius Canis; so are they still the Family Canidae; so are they still the Order, Carnivora; so are they still the Class Mammalia; And finally, so are they still the Phylum Chordata which is also what wolf and fox is a part of along with Order, Carnivora and the Family Canidae. However, the fox is the Genius, Vulpes and the species for dog is Familiaris, the wolf is Lupes, and the fox is also the same as the Genius as well, which is vulpes. Scientists used these methods of animal classification to help identify animals better and to trace these animals back to their dog-like common ancestor. Ignoring how dogs, wolves, and foxes, let alone all other organisms related to each other, living and extinct, is neither going to make evolution false nor will it make the evidence for it go away.
Flood Folly
The N rhyme on pages 98 and 36 falsely claims the fossils of dinosaurs were formed as the result of Noah's flood when the dinosaurs outside the ark drowned. In the next stupid lesson, parents are to lie to the kids, telling that we find plants and animals buried in mud all over the earth, which is a made up lie as described awhile back. Not all fossils were buried in mud. Most were buried in sand, volcanic ash, even tar. The parents are to share with the kids that most fossils would probably have been formed because of the effect of the worldwide flood that never in reality occurred.
Next, Parents are to tell the children that if you can add up all the dates in the Bible (never mind the gaps and out of order arrangements found in the Bible), the flood would have occurred (get this!) 4 and a half thousands years ago. Which means that most of the fossils, including dinosaur fossils, would be more than about 4,500 years of age. That's excrement to the 3rd degree!
4,500 years ago was at the time the Egyptians were building the pyramids! Especially the Step Pyramid which was built for King Djoeser of the 3rd Egyptian dynasty! No doubt there's no account of them being forced to call it quits when they see a wall of water coming their way found in the ancient Egyptian records. No way can the fossils of dinosaurs be that old! Accurate dating methods clearly tells us that dinosaurs are truly millions of years old and the fossils were all formed in certain conditions that have zero to do with Noah's flood.
In the next idiot lesson, children are to get a jar or a glass bottle, filled it with dirt half way, and water half way, shake it all up with the cap on and let it set for awhile. Ham wants to give an example of how does sediment form as a result of Noah's flood. Guess what! Really do that and I think all that will result in a mud mixture, not sediment. Then they are to make a diagram of the Grand Canyon and put in this idiot caption,
"Lots of water and lots of mud, Formed these layers during Noah's Flood."
Rather
"Lots of water and lots of mud, Formed completely nothing but crud."
Keep in mind there is NO evidence of sedimentary rock layers being formed by all mud. Ham tells parents to tell the children that this is what you expect to see in the jar; lots of layers after mixing it up, if the Flood of Noah's day is mixed with lots of mud. Sorry, Ham. If the Flood of Noah's day is fact, there won't be any layers forming, but a one huge, thick layer of crud instead. The fossil layers are actually all arranged gradually over periods of time by circumstances that has nothing to do with Noah's Flood.
Fate Of Those Who Left the Ark
The O rhyme implies the animals and the dinosaurs all got out of the ark after the flood is over. Note on pages 100 and 38 on how the word "Stegasaurs" is misspelled with an "a" instead of an "o." The next stupid lesson shows Ham claiming that if dinosaurs went into the ark, then they must have come out of the ark after the flood, if they were all birds of coarse. But knowing him, he just would rather have the Mesozoic dinosaurs and the extinct animals alongside of Noah and all of the modern animals in the ark. Eventually they will leave the ark to face a very hostile world. Despite what Ham wants parents to tell their kids, all animal life will not stand a chance because all of the plants was destroyed in the flood. Coral and fish would not survived either. There are parasites and bacteria that spread diseases around and infect the animals no matter how healthy they appeared to be and humans too; getting them all sick and eventually die. Insects won't survive either (Not even on those imaginary vegetable mats creationists like Ham dredged up from their heads to help explain how did the insects survive the flood, if they ever survive at all.); soil would all be washed away to the point where no plants would grow; animals that eat meat would killed off all of the plant eaters and die of starvation themselves; and other major problems with the whole silly flood story creationists dredged up from their heads based on their bible interpretations they entirely made up themselves. Here on this on John Stear's site and Edward's site's page, you can see a whole list of essays being made on the problems that the flood model would make if ever was such thing did took place allegedly about 4,500 years ago. In the next exercise, which is not necessary a bad exercise when used as a non YEC project, the children are to just pretend to be Noah and make a diary of his voyage on the ark.
Dinosaur Names
Now the P rhyme on pages 102 and 40 is all about pronouncing dinosaur's names. The lesson is not that very bad at all if the Dinosaurs those Terrible Lizards book gets rejected and replaced with a much better dinosaur like Extreme Dinosaurs by Luis V. Ray for instance. All that it does is to teach kids how to pronounce dinosaur names. It can be done however with a normal dinosaur book than the pseudo-dinosaur books creationists dredged up to help spread their filthy lies. All you have to do is go to a library or to a bookstore and get a dinosaur book — a real one — and have your child look at the dinosaur images and learn how to pronounce their names, which it's easy and fun. On average, most children can pronounce dinosaur names better than adults can. And you know how children are very smart at that. Also on average, toddlers can easily identify a Tyrannosaurus and a Diplodocus long before they are able to identify a tiger or an elephant. Only a tad few children show little or no interest in dinosaurs. But that's okay. I would rather be among the mass majority who do show a much greater interest in dinosaurs without getting marred by satanic YE crap demagogues like Ham keeps dishing out from time to time.
Dinosaur Extinction
The Q rhyme on pages 104 and 42 deals with the popular question of why did the dinosaurs become extinct. Multiple theories have been put to explain the causes of the dinosaurs' demise including the increase in cold temperatures to spreading diseases. But to Ham, it's the Flood's aftermath that has caused the extinction whether it involves man killing them or dying of the cold. Such stupidity! Ham, in the next stupid lesson, still brings on that comical myth about at least 50 different kinds of dinosaurs were around (Never mind the 550+ that's on the SuperTree) as well as bring on the falsehood about dinosaurs coming out of the ark and living on the earth thousands of years ago. But if God wanted the dinosaurs to be salvaged, be fruitful and multiply, then why are they extinct? If man did lived with dinosaurs then why are their remains NOT found alongside of each other? And why are the remains of dinosaurs found only within the Mesozoic strata and nowhere else? If God want them to be salvaged and yet they die off eventually after the flood, then what's the point of ever salvaging them anyway? These are the questions Ham and the other creationists can never honestly answer and would rather be evasive, make up lies, and pretend that after the flood dinosaurs began to be fruitful and multiply and laid eggs and produce more dinosaurs only to get killed off by man and other extremes, which we find no evidence for.
Continued next post…
