Page 12: Even in the face of accurate images of dinosaurs like T.rex made based on fossil evidence, the creationists continues to never get their dinosaur art right. Obviously, they're getting it wrong on purpose, never caring about how wrong they get in drawing dinosaurs as long as they use them to shovel #&^% down the throats of children.
Page 13: Oh yes, more alleged allegations of “imaginative mistakes” made over the years starting with the discovery that started it all— fragmentary remains of Iguanodon discovered by Mary Ann Mantell, the wife of Gideon Mantell, or was it really Gideon who discovered the fossil…
Page 14: Reveals a maze where a child can help Mary find her way to her discovery of the Iguanodon tooth
Page 15: Both erroneous versions of Iguanodon are shown. So is the rhetorical question concerning the the discovery of 38 (not 30) Iguanodon skeletons found inside of a Belgian coal mine in 1878 (not 77).
“Could this have happened as a result of the Great Flood?”
No. Absolutely not. Paleontologist David Norman have studied the area and found no trace of any catastrophic event that resulted in the Iguanodons' demise. What he did found is that the 38 Iguanodons were found in 4 separate layers, indicating the Iguanodons' death occurring in separate events.
“The mine records indicate at least four separate depositional layers. This is supported by taphonomic evidence revealed in the reconstruction of the excavation site" (Norman, D. B. 1987. On the history of the discovery of fossils at Bernissart in Belgium. _Archives of Natural History_, 14(1): 59-79. p. 72).”
Page 16: Aren't these creationists ignorant of the complete fully intact specimen of Stegosaurus discovered in Sheep Creek in 1992 which answers the question on how the plates are arranged? After years and years of debating how the plants are arranged, the 1992 discovery finally settled the matter once and for all. The plates stood upright and are alternated in alignment and arranged in a double row pattern. But the debate on how the plates are used for still continues. Note the mentioning of the supposed scientific debate over whether or not Stegosaurus walked with its forelimbs straight or in a bent position. Never mind all scientists knowing for certain that Stegosaurus walked on all four legs fully erect.
Page 18: Although Brontosaurus is a very famous name for a dinosaur, it's only a junior synonym for Apatosaurus which is the Sauropod's real name. According to the two creationists,
“The skull of Apatosaurus is unusual- for God placed its nostrils not at the end of the snout, but on top of its skull between the eyes”
That's what we used to believe until Paleontologist Lawrence Witmer studied the skulls and found that the nostrils were placed at the snouts after all. Even though the nasal openings are on top of the skull, sauropods actually had fleshy noses located in front of the snouts which they used to help small better and to serve as resonating chambers that produces sounds for communication.
Page 19: Another example of creationist hubris paraded here. Two creationists discusses how scientists “misinterpreted” the fossil of Oviraptor found on top of a nest long assumed to belong to a Protoceratops to be an “egg thief” at first. But then in 1993 scientists were caught by surprise when they found that the eggs found in the nest did not belong to Protoceratops, but instead belong to Oviraptor who was incubating the eggs when it was buried in a sandstorm 80 million years ago. This gave the creationists the excuse to arrogantly compare the so-called ever changing views of scientists who write about dinosaurs with God's written Word, the Bible, which is claimed to have never change.
“God is never wrong about anything. God never misinterprets anything. God never misleads anyone. Holy scripture tells us, 'God is not a man that should lie.' (Numbers 23:19)”
Numbers 23:19 is taken out of context. When put back into full context, we find that the verse only refers to Balaam's second oracle about God's plan to bless Israel. It has nothing to do with how paleontologists are learning from their mistakes and how they are having a better understanding about how dinosaurs lived.
Translation from creationist language:
“I'm never wrong about anything. I never misinterpret anything. I never mislead anyone. I'm not a man that should lie. I am God.”
That is what it really means. Such minced remarks like what the Sellenbergers utter is paraded in every creationist literature out of hypocrisy and blatant ignorance of both God being the biggest liar of all when they claimed He did this while in fact the scientific evidence clearly reveals that He didn't and the fact that the Bible is always changing over time due to it being translated in foreign languages, taken out of context, used as a tool to destroy lives by adding stuff to it, constantly revised so that people can understand them better, etc.
Page 20-28: Now here's a section containing flip flaps where children can cut along the dotted lines and flip the pages to help correctly match the sections depicting dinosaurs that are drawn wrong anatomically. These are made to distortedly illustrate the fossil layers being found containing dinosaurs buried among each other under layers of earth being laid down by “rushing flood waters.” The fossils are claimed to be made up of scattered remains of dinosaurs that were crushed, broken apart, mixed, and some carried away to the point where scientists have a hard time knowing which fossilized bones are a part of the same animal. If so, then how do the two creationists explain the fully intact fossils of dinosaurs found in layers that were never formed by the so-called Noah's Flood without invoking empty, miraculous, “goddidit” explanations?
Page 22: Another proof that creationists can't stomach the fact that Velociraptor was a full-fledged meat-eating dinosaur that never used its claws to “help shred tough plants into smaller pieces for swallowing” Anyone who believes in this totally ludicrous made-up crank is no expert in dinosaurs. Especially when it comes to their diet. Note how they misspelled “Djadochta” and “Bayn Dzak”, which are in fact rock formations where the fossils of Velociraptor have been found, in their crank descriptions of Velociraptor and how they claimed that another Velociraptor have been discovered in Kazakhstan and Shanxi when no such fossils have been found in those areas.
Page 124: Creationist idiocy knows no bounds when it comes to the two creationists fabricating dragon legends such as what is depicted on page 124, one of the last pages of the book, where it distorts the tale of Nimrod "the mighty hunter before the Lord" by asking,
"Did Nimrod became a great hero because he was able to slay fierce creatures that became dangerous to man after the Flood?"
No. Nimrod actually became a horrific tyrant who set up a nation where he tried to make the people rebel against God through brute force and power. He not only hunted animals for food and sacrifice, wearing the very same clothing used by God to clothe Adam and Eve, but he also went after people whom he greatly despises and hunted them down, too, including Abraham who escaped to Canaan after being persecuted by the tyrant. Nimrod was the one believed to be responsible for the building of the Tower of Babel that was never finished due to God confusing the language of the people so they won't understand each other.
The two creationists then claimed that there was a story in the Apocrypha about the prophet Daniel who slew a dragon by choking it to death and asks,
"Could this have been the same dragon that was pictured on a tile brick Ishtar Gate of Ancient Babylon?"
No! It was really a large python Daniel killed by feeding it a large cake made of goat's hair, pitch, and lard. The python ate the cake and it burst like an anaconda that ate a crocodile that was too big for its stomach.
The dragon pictured on the gate is Sirrush, a mythical monster creationists stupidly regard as a relative of Iguanodon, taking Archaeologist Robert Koldeway whom they misrepresent at his word by agreeing to his totally laugh-riot conclusion that the Iguanodon is closely related to Sirrush— proof that creationists will stoop so low in making outrageously laugh-riot claims and rely on wrongful conclusions coming from some other absent-minded people that will leave people in stitches, laughing their butts off when they hear such claims as this.
In reality, Sirrush is a mythical animal. It doesn't exist. It is only made up of modern animal composites such as the scales, tongue, head of a snake with curled up ears and a large horn on its forehead, body, forelegs, and tail of a cat, and hind feet of a bird. Iguanodon is a real large plant eating dinosaur that has in fact none of such things. Iguanodon is real, Sirrush isn't. What the two creationists made up is a direct fabrication of the mythical story of Sirrush that tells how the beast was tamed by Tishpak who fought and subdued the beast, forcing it to serve as a bodyguard for all the Babylonian deities. Later on Marduk, the supreme god of the Babylonians, adopt the monster as his symbol and is featured on the Ishtar gate along with lions and aurochs that were also decorated upon the gate.
Continue Next Post.