Nearly all at the same time, Answers in Genesis and Creation Ministries International each posted 2 articles that tells about the world's most famous dinosaur, Tyrannosaurus Rex. Nearly everyone, whether they are dinosaur enthusiasts or not, can recognize T.rex the instant they set eyes on the Tyrant dinosaur. This is one of the first dinosaurs children see when they are first introduced to the study of dinosaurs and the only dinosaur nearly everyone can recognize and correctly pronounce. And this dinosaur is the subject of both articles made by those 2 idiot sites that claims this dinosaur along with all others lived alongside man at one time, while time and time again the fossil record clearly shows us that it's not the case.
The first article I'll go over is from AiG entitled "Feedback: Does T.rex tastes like chicken?" A laugh-riot of a stupid question that only an ignorant person can ask. Especially this ignorant individual, who by the name of a Dr. L.B., U.S, which he claims to be part of an evolutionary biology department (!), gave a so-called Dr. Georgia Purdom a whole slew of the most idiotic LOL questions ever asked from a crank professor. Get a load of these howlers,
"Hello, I have many questions. What was the relationship between man and T-rex? Did we hunt them? How many humans were killed by T-rex? Were they white meat or dark? (These 2 questions are the stupidest yet!) Did they taste like chicken? Why does the Bible not talk about T-rex? I am sure you will not respond to my email because you don't know, however, if you do have the data to support your answers, please email me so that I may invite you to speak to the graduate students in my evolutionary biology department and enlighten them. Until then, we will continue to be rational."
Here's my answer to all of these,
- There is none.
- No, we never did.
- Zero.
- How should we know? We weren't around when T. Rex was alive millions of years ago.
- Same as 4.
- The Bible is entirely neutral on the subject of dinosaurs. It never, ever spoke about T.rex and any other prehistoric life to begin with. Why should it? The authors of the Bible never saw and knew the dinosaur to begin with let alone trilobites, mammoths, Apatosaurus, and all other prehistoric animals known and unknown. They were all long dead by the time The Bible was first written out a few millenniums ago.
There's about six questions answered realistically. Now here's the lol answers coming from Purdom herself.
The first stupid answer claims,
"Well, one thing is for sure, man and T. rex didn't marry. But seriously, according to the Bible, God created all land animals and man on Day 6 of Creation Week."
That doesn't make the fossil record be conform to the narrow minded views of the creationists.
God created animals according to their "kind" or baramin (bara means "created," and min means "kind"). A baramin is usually thought to be equivalent to the family or order level (in taxonomic terms). A primary means of testing baramin is reproduction-like the cat kind, dog kind, and so on. When dealing with dinosaurs that are no longer around, it is difficult to determine their taxonomic classifications. Although there are hundreds of dinosaur names, many are based on very little fossil evidence, such as a tooth. It has been estimated that all dinosaurs could fit into approximately 50 dinosaur kinds. Each of these kinds was created with large diversity in their DNA. This type of diversity can lead to many dinosaur species within a given kind. T. rex was a species of dinosaur within a particular kind. The example below shows many species within the proposed Ceratopsia kind."
In other words, in the beginning, God created only created less then 200 kinds of animals including the less then 50 kinds of dinosaur as claimed by Ham and his crackhouse. Then from there these animals, acting like cloning machines, developed into a huge variety of animals species similar to each other over a short period of time. Sounds like evolution creationists are advocating here despite their constant denial of the fact that young earth creationists do teach evolution — in the fast lane.
Hmm…Let's see..if God really did what that he must have created the following:
1. bear
2. aardvark
3. kangaroo
4. snake
5. koala
6. alligator
7. mammoth
8. bird
9. ant
10. butterfly
11. bee
12. lion
13. cat
14. dog
15. elephant
16. seal
17. squirrel
18. rat
19. pig
20. armadillo
21. beaver
22. mouse
23. fish
24. buffalo
25. bison
26. platypus
27. dodo
28. rhinoceros
29. hippopotamus
30. cockroach
31. whale
32. starfish
33. oyster
34. octopus
35. clam
36. hyena
37. eel
38. goat
39. camel
40. rabbit
41. jackal
42. wolf
43. meerkat
44. donkey
45. horse
46. zebra
47. turtle
48. hedgehog
49. llama
50. cattle
51. Magyarosaurus - a titanosaurid
52. Scutellosaurus - a primitive ankylosaurus
53. Alioramus - a primitive tyrannosaur
54. Compsognathus - one of the smallest dinosaurs related to Archaeopteryx
55. Protohadros - a non crested duckbill dinosaur
56. Zuniceratops - a primitive horned dinosaur
57. Thecodontosaurus - a primitive prosauropod
58. Callovosaurus - a camptosaurid
59. Masiskasaurus - an abelisaurid
60. Proceratosaurus - an early ceratosaurid
61. Buitreraptor - a dromaeosaurid
62. Homalocephale - a pachycephaolosaurus
63. Dicraeosaurus - a well known dicraeosaurid with a short neck
64. Lesothosaurus - a fabrosaurid
65. Heterodontosaurus - a heterodontosaurid
66. Huayangosaurus - a primitive stegosaur
67. Incisivosaurus - a primitive oviraptor
68. Irritator - a Spinosaurid
69. Harpyminus - an ornithomimid
70. Saurolophus - a crested duckbill dinosaur
71. Segisaurus - a primitive coelurosaur
72. Saurornithotholestes - a stynonychosaurid
73. Technosaurus - an early ornithschian dinosaur
74. Falcarius - an early therizinosaur
75. Chindesaurus - a Herrerasaur
76. Jeholosaurus - a Hypsilophodont
77. Dimetrodon
78. trilobite
79. plesiosaurus
80. pterodactyl
81. shark
82. beetle
83. salamander
84. sea horse
85. wolf
86. Guinea Pig
87. hamster
88. smilodon
89. tiger
90. jellyfish
91. mosquito
92. sheep
93. spider
94. wombat
95. seal
96. yak
97. zebu
98. bat
99. Echidna
100. fly
101. Mosasaurus
102. Ichthyosaurus
103. monkey
104. ape
105. wildebeest
106. sloth
107. giraffe
108. Tasmanian devil
109. okapi
110. gerbil
111. dik-dik
112. oryx
All this while ignoring the millions upon millions of animal kinds and species God must have forgotten to create, yet they exist anyway. All this while ignoring scores and scores of fossils, range mostly from semi-complete to 100% complete, that tells us that there were 100,000 times more species and kinds of dinosaurs ever known and yet to be known. Creationists would like you to believe that every fossil they found are all made up of just scrappy remains out of ignorance of the truth which points to the opposite.
Creationists, especially AiG, have build up a large empire made up of lies and deceit, abuse and manipulation of God's Word, The Bible, inflammation and guile, blame gaming, mudslinging, and scapegoating, giving their followers what they want to hear instead of the truth for wealth, power and control and above all setting them all up for the fall just to try to keep them in line. Tell me. Is this Christian? No it is not. Is this of Satan? Yes it is. Only Satan can beguile people into believing in false teaching cloaked as Christian doctrine which is what young earth creationism truly is exactly.
Purdom then goes on,
"Before Adam and Eve sinned (the Fall), man and T. rex would have peacefully co-existed."
No fossils of man and T.rex have been found together in the fossil record.
"That is what we would expect from a God of peace. (This seems incredulous to us because we are so accustomed to the fallen state.)"
What we would expect from God and what God is really is two different things. The God of peace, who so many times have instigated wars to further him and his people's agenda (Which is where the God-starting-wars excuse came from when some people are asked why they refuse to accept Christianity.) and to punish people of their sins, according to so many passages in the Bible, is also the God of War, Justice, and Vengeance who also created evil, chaos, calamity, and destruction (Isaiah 45:7 KJV). But, He's also the God of Forgiveness, Mercy, Healing, and Redemption, too. God is absolutely everything, never without any exceptions.
"In Genesis 1:29-30, God gave animals and man only plants for food."
That doesn't exempt animals like T.rex from eating meat. If God wanted all animals and people to be vegans, He would've never gave them traits of a carnivore in the first place.
"Adam and T. rex would not have feared each other because neither was going to be dinner for the other!" But things changed in Genesis 3, when man sinned.
They never experience ether of those things. The couple and the dinosaur lived millions of years apart from each other.
The second stupid answer claims,
"Biblically, man was not permitted to eat animals until after Noah's Flood. Possibly man hunted animals before the Flood for purposes other than food such as clothing. (Although in Genesis 6:12, all flesh is described as being corrupt so it is possible that man and dinosaurs ate each other before the Flood). From Genesis 9:2 it appears that man and animals did not fear each other before the Flood. As a result of the Flood, though, that relationship has changed; the "fear and dread" of man fell on the animals. In Genesis 9:3 God also permitted man to eat meat, in addition to his previous diet of plants."
Since when it is a sin for animals to eat meat? Since when did animals get included in the "flesh" category while no animal in the whole world, except humans, have the ability to think, reason, and sin and the term "flesh" only refers to the sinful human race? How is carnivory corruptive? Why did God set the animals up for destruction and demise by giving animals every trait needed to eat meat if he doesn't want them to eat it? If you think its wrong for animals to eat each other along with humans, then why are there passages in the Bible that condones even instigated the killing and devouring of animals and humans and for God to be praised for it? Where are the fossils of dinosaurs with human remains found if what the creationist stupidly claims is the case? Where are the fossils of dinosaurs with spears embedded inside their bones? If the young earth is true, we would have seen burned up, chewed up T.rex remains, T.rex remains with embedded spear heads inside, jewelry made up of T.rex bones, and tools made out of T.rex's bones in and around human dwellings. But none are found.
"After the Flood, the Bible mentions that both Nimrod (Genesis 10:9) and Esau (Genesis 25:27) were considered great hunters. A painting from Australia shows people attacking what appears to be a sea-dwelling "dinosaur" (possibly a plesiosaur). Other animals that are commonly hunted such as deer have been shown alongside dinosaurs in some petroglyphs."
The painting is a forgery. Nothing at all like the real artwork done by the Aborigines who did such wonderful artwork for tens of thousands of years to express their religious and spiritual beliefs and to tell the viewers stories about enlightenment. As for the petroglyphs, they are nothing more than attempts put on by the Native Americans natives to create images of monsters based on finding fossil remains of plants and invertebrates dated to the Permian period, nearby (Citation: Adrienne Mayor's Fossil legends and The First Americans, pg. 337, 403). Even if they were what creationists claim, they could not explain why are there no dinosaur fossils found alongside human remains in every part of the world.
The third stupid question gets peppered with a touch of crank,
"What makes you think T. rex killed humans? Possibly you have been influenced, as many others have, by movies like Jurassic Park that show the fierce T. rex eating every dinosaur and human it encountered. From the fossil record, the stomach contents of dinosaurs that belonged to the same kind as T. rex have typically revealed juvenile dinosaurs, such as hadrosaurs and triceratops. In addition, some evolutionists have suggested that some members of the T. rex kind even ate plants."
Only a dumb lying idiot will say that!! If she thinks some evolutionists have made such a suggestive crank, then name ONE credible evolutionist who ever made such a dimwitted claim! If she can't, then this just comes to show just how stupid, haughty, and pathetic her talks are! Otherwise she might be confusing Tyrannosaurids with Therizinosaurs, big armed, big clawed, roly-poly dinosaurs who ate mostly plants along with meat and Oviraptorids, mostly toothless beaked dinosaurs that also engage in either a herbivorous or an omnivorous lifestyle depending on species. But nevertheless, she's completely ignorant of the fact that all tyrannosaurs were strict carnivorous apex predators built to kill other dinosaurs for food, especially Hadrosaurids and Ceratopsians that lived at the same time. None of them has ever killed humans unlike what is shown in science fiction films, either. That has got to be one of the most idiotic answers ever gave out by a creationist to such a crank question!
The fourth and fifth one is also crank, too.
"These are obviously mocking questions,.."
Met by mocking answers.
"..but let's take a look at them anyway. Dinosaurs would have a combination of both white and dark meat. The designation "white" and "dark" come from the types of muscle fibers found in the muscles. Fast twitch fibers (white) are found in muscles that produce quick, powerful contractions. Slow twitch fibers (dark) are found in muscles that produce slower, long-lasting contractions. I will use a chicken to illustrate, since you mention it. Chicken breast is considered white meat because chickens don't fly much. They typically just use their wings when fleeing a predator when power is needed. Chicken legs are considered dark meat because chickens spend a lot of time on their feet; thus, endurance is needed."
This ties in with the latest study that tells us that the chicken is closely related to the T.rex genetic-wise. Thus, ties in very well with the factual notion of birds being modern descendants of dinosaurs. But there is one thing wrong with Georgia's crank answer about white and dark meat — muscles don't fossilized. So, much of what the idiot lady creationist says about dinosaurs having white and dark meat is entirely made up. Especially since every muscle in the dinosaur's body is entirely different than that of a chicken despite its relation to it genetic-wise.
The sixth and final crank question gets this following answer,
"What makes you think the Bible doesn't talk about T. rex? Follow me logically: if the name 'Tyrannosaurus rex' wasn't invented until 1905 (based on a fossil discovery of T. rex in 1902) and the word 'dinosaur' wasn't invented until 1841, then why would they be in the Bible, which was written thousands of years earlier?"
The Bible was written at the time LONG BEFORE dinosaurs like T.rex became known to man through fossils. Therefore, it is illogical and stupid to believe that T.rex is mentioned in the Bible.
"When looking at Genesis 1, remember, land animals were created on Day 6, so T. rex (or the original "kind") was created on Day 6, too. Also, the Bible does talk about dragons many times, sometimes metaphorically but also as real animals (Job 30:29). Leviathan is a sea-dwelling creature mentioned in the Bible that may breathe fire (Job 41). In addition, there are many dragon legends throughout the world which may have as their foundation an encounter with a real dinosaur."
Few things, 1.) The alleged T.rex (or the original kind) being created on Day 6 doesn't explain why are there no fossils of humans, extinct and modern plants and animals found mixed together in the fossil record. 2.) The dragon passage is mistranslated KJV versions of passages that tells about wolves, jackals, and perhaps hyenas, not dinosaurs. 3.) Leviathan is a creature of myth with 7 heads and a serpentine body. He is far from being a dinosaur. 4.) The dragon legends throughout the world are all based on sightings of fossils coming from mostly mammals dated to the Pleistocene, Miocene and Ice Age era, not live creatures except for crocodiles and snakes. Regarding live encounters with dinosaurs as "dragon encounters" are just as preposterous as regarding live encounters with cave bears and Woolly rhinos as dragon encounters. More than any other prehistoric fossil, these remains of 2 Ice Age mammals along with many other early Cenozoic and Ice Age mammal remains become the foundation of so many dragon, monster, and giant myths. In some cases, dragon myths are inspired by live sightings of crocodiles and snakes. But, none are based on live sightings of prehistoric animals.
Also far from being a dinosaur is the monster Behemoth, the "dumb beast" creationists, like Purdom, still wrongly insist to be a dinosaur as claimed here,
"While the Bible doesn't talk about T. rex directly, it does mention another land dinosaur-behemoth. Job 40:15-19 describes behemoth as being vegetarian, having great strength and power, a tail that "sways like a cedar," bones like bronze, limbs like iron, and "first among the works of God." This is some type of colossal creature! Some have suggested behemoth was a sauropod-type dinosaur!"
And that's definitely suggested out of ignorance of the fact that sauropod dinosaurs have no chewing teeth, no flexible cow-like jaws, no navels, and most importantly, no mammalian genitals. A tail that "sways like a cedar, euphemistically translate to "a penis that stiffens (or extends) like a pine". A colossal creature like behemoth, "the first in the ranks of God" don't necessary refer to a large dinosaur, but to a large colossal-size mammal.
The rest of the article throws the subject of dinosaurs away and switches to the ad hoc subject of "reason vs bible" which has zero to do with T.rex and lots to do with newly invented creationist ad hoc term, "human reason" vs. "God's Word" or as I put it "old earth reality based on factual, credible evidence" vs. "make believe fairy tales based on ignorance, shoehorning irrelevant crap into the bible, hypocrisy, lies, and deceit." Proof that creationists like Purdom never really care about dinosaurs at all. Young earth creationism is in fact "human reason." All human reason that's a direct result of distorting, shoehorning, rewriting, twisting, and fabricating God's Word (the Bible), mythology, folklore, and science fiction to fit their perceptions of it.
Note how Purdom is giving false reference to a derange killer named Jeffrey Dahmer when she talks about how we must be conformed to a non-rational "biblical worldview" or instead of the rationalities of the "evolutionary worldview" or to put it to you simply — be conformed into a state of denial and ignorance instead of embracing reality and reason. If reason is a sin, then why did God gave us the ability to reason? Why are there verses in the Bible that encourages people, through The Lord, to reason if it is wrong for us to reason? Or is this your way of keeping people in your power with what you expect them to believe, accept, and not question everything concerning your young earth idiocy? The reason why deranged, madden, and power hungry church pastors past and present discourage people from reasoning is obvious - they love to exercise power, wealth, and control upon others and demands that no one challenges, questions, even contradict their motives let alone their dogma lest they lose all of what they love and lust after to freedom, reality, and reason.
"In the evolutionary worldview, Jeffrey Dahmer should not be criticized for killing and eating people because that was "rational" to him. Using the biblical worldview, Jeffrey Dahmer was not acting rationally. Instead, we can pronounce his actions reprehensible and wrong, as God gave the command not to murder (Exodus 20:13). You must borrow a biblical worldview to try to say logic, rationality, and truth exist."
There's one problem with this faulty rationality claim - this famous criminal came from a Christian fundamentalist family. His father, who is a member of AiG, fights with his wife constantly before divorcing her, lies to Larry King about his religious background, and forced his son to join the army which he didn't want to do. Dahmer was a heavy drinker who greatly resented his homosexual lifestyle and couldn't face it up with his father. He went about killing and eating boys and men (after he invited them over for gay sex) because of it along with their refusal to stay with him after their "business" is done. Eventually he was finally caught and imprisoned where he eventually died in a prison fight a short while after he lied about his motives behind his murders when he claimed to have been lead by evolution to commit murders while the truth behind his motives is found in The Lippard Blog.
Now CMI's article deals with CMI's response to the latest report made by Paleontologist, Thomas R. Holtz who made a recent study on T.rex's locomotion and discovers that T.rex is capable of outrunning a human being. T.rex has to be fast to catch his meal. It doesn't matter whether how large or bulky he was. Holtz's latest study on Tyrannosaur locomotion tells us that T.rex is now estimated to run at approximately 18 MPH, a bit faster than a human being can run on average.
As usual, Carl Wieland, the one who fought with Ham over power, wealth, and control for awhile before the two groups called in a truce which is still on going, tries to hold on to the T.rex scavenger idea by claiming,
"In the blockbuster movie Jurassic Park, a huge Tyrannosaurus rex was shown not only gobbling up humans, but chasing after them in a speeding jeep at perhaps 70 km/h (45 mph). Such fearsome predatory capacity raised the question in many minds as to how humans would have survived in a world that once included such seemingly swift and mighty carnivores. However, not long after that, we featured in our magazine Creation (and later, on our website) the results of scientific analysis (by evolution-believers) that debunked this image."
The movie is completely SCIENCE-FICTION! It's not meant to be a documentary whatsoever. I don't know why do creationists stupidly regard any science fiction movies and TV shows as "documentaries" while they are nothing more than just made up stories to stimulate imagination and entertainment. But I do know that every report released about anything science-wise gets an unpleasant earful from creationists who enjoy finding fault with every new scientific report that's out there.
Wieland then gives out an outdated study made by Paleontologist, James Farlow who studied how T.rex move and concludes that T.rex is so bulky that if he run real fast at 40 MPH, he'll carelessly trip over even a small branch, falls to the ground and die afterwards and adds,
"The relevance of all this to creation/evolution is, of course, that humans would have little to fear from this dinosaur that could be killed by merely tripping it up, and which would likely have moved very slowly to avoid any risk of an accidental stumble."
There will still be lots to fear from the dinosaur. His bone-crushing jaws would make short work of any living thing that moves. As a matter of fact, he doesn't need to be a fast runner to catch his prey. Most of his prey dinosaurs aren't real fast either. So, it would have been easy for the tyrant lizard to ambush and chase down his latest prey.
Wieland then mentions, while erroneously claiming that Allosaurus are all smaller versions of T.rex while their anatomy and their lineage debunks this, the findings of many Allosaurus fossils that were found with injuries in the rib cages caused by careless falling that have eventually healed over time. He then makes this next following claim,
"We also reported in 2001 on the comment by ‘Dinosaur Jack' Horner, the famous fossil expert after whom the hero in Jurassic Park was modeled, that T. rex ‘couldn't run', because its thighbone was longer than its shinbone, contrary to the pattern in fast bipedal predators of today."
Ham's idiot site also makes such a claim, too which would have made him just a mere walker if what they claimed was the case. But that's now known to be incorrect in comparison to Holtz' latest study that could answer a lot of questions about how fast T.rex could run, how his legs move, and how he can run at a very safe speed to avoid accidental injuries and deaths.
The reason T.rex legs looked robust and bulky with his thighbone longer than his shinbone is because of a mistake made by Henry Farfield Osborn who incorrectly made the legs of T.rex to be very similar to that of Allosaurus' legs, assuming wrongly that T.rex was a close relative or even a descendant of Allosaurus while correct modern studies show us that the legs of T.rex is nothing more than bigger versions of Ornithomimosaur legs.
Plus, Wieland's claim neglects to mention the fact that the legs of T.rex are the most gracile than any other animal that lived during the Mesozoic Era and afterwards and also neglects to mention that there are smaller tyrannosaurs out there, such as Eotyrannus and Dilong that have the same leg proportions as the Ornithomimosaurs, making them some of the most fastest dinosaurs that's out there.
Despite this, Wieland still says that T.rex was just a scavenger anyway because of poor eyesight. Yet this still fails to explain why is the dinosaur's eyes face forward, like the eyes of humans and cats, which helps the tyrant dinosaur to zero in on his prey. Not to mention the fact that those who advocate the scavenger idea completely forgot about one fossil skeleton of Edmontosaurus that shows bite marks on its tail spines indicating that T.rex attacked the dinosaur, but Edmontosaurus escaped, leaving with a mark that will haunt it for the rest of its life.
To close out the article, Wieland concludes,
"Finally, even in the unlikely event that tyrannosaurs were capable of outrunning and killing humans, it would not mean that humans would be wiped out by these beasts, and thus be an argument against the biblical coexistence of humans and dinosaurs."
The complete absence of human and dinosaur remains mixed together in the every record including the fossil record is enough to be to best, most credible, most valid argument against the so-called "biblical coexistence of humans and dinosaurs". Thus, making the coexistence of humans and dinosaurs unbiblical itself since it would regard the Bible as a book of lies when one is told that the Bible says man and dinosaurs lived at the same time long ago, only to turned around and find the fossil and historical records to contain no such scenario as what the Bible claims to exist at one time.
"Elephants can outrun and even kill humans. Yet human ingenuity, even when only spears, rocks and traps were available, has always seen elephants at greater risk from humans than vice versa. There is no reason to think that the same would not have been true of even the largest carnivorous dinosaurs."
It would have been true IF the young earth is true and we find remains of even the largest carnivorous dinosaurs to have embedded spearheads, bones carved into jewelry, tools, musical instruments, and/or discarded into garbage piles found in and around human dwellings just like what we find in Ice Age mammal remains. Problem is, none of these things has ever been found. Therefore, the notion of humans coexisting with dinosaurs is exactly right where the creationists regard evolution as — a lie.
