Top 10 Myths About Dinosaurs
Published on November 2, 2007 - 98 Comments
This list explores some of the popular misconceptions about dinosaurs; about how much we actually know about them, and about how well the evidence supports some of our most cherished beliefs concerning dinosaurs.
1. Myth One
The Myth: Humans lived alongside dinosaurs
Dinosaurs and people coexist only in books, movies and cartoons. The last dinosaurs - other than birds - died out dramatically about 65 million years ago, while the fossils of our earliest human ancestors are only about 6 million years old.
2. Myth Two
The Myth: Mammals only evolved after dinosaurs died out
Tiny mammals lived in the shadow of the dinosaurs for more than 150 million years, occupying ecological niches as small, nocturnal animals weighing as little as 2 grams. The ancestors of mammals, animals called synapsids, actually appeared before dinosaurs.
Mammals remained relatively small until 65 million years ago, when the demise of the dinosaurs left a mass of niches for larger mammals to fill. Most of the types of mammals we know today evolved after this time.
3. Myth Three
The Myth: Dinosaurs died out because mammals ate their eggs
Dinosaurs coexisted with mammals for 150 million years. Although dinosaur nests were undoubtedly vulnerable, the most dangerous predators were probably smaller dinosaurs. Most mammals of the time were probably too small to eat the eggs of large dinosaurs.
4. Myth Four
The Myth: An asteroid impact alone killed the dinosaurs
A layer of iridium-rich rock marks the impact 65 million years ago of a 10-kilometre asteroid in shallow water covering what is now Mexico’s Yucatan peninsula. That impact formed the 180 kilometre-wide Chicxulub crater. There is no convincing evidence that any non-avian dinosaurs survived the aftermath of the impact. Yet we are still not totally sure how the dinosaurs died.
The impact itself could only have killed the dinosaurs in the immediate vicinity of the crater. But it also produced devastating after-effects including giant tsunamis, rain that may have been as acidic as battery acid, and clouds of dust that darkened and cooled the globe for months or even decades.
Another theory suggests that before the impact, dinosaurs were already dwindling as falling sea levels and volcanic eruptions took their toll. A combination of those effects probably wiped out the dinosaurs.
5. Myth Five
The Myth: Dinosaurs died out because they were unsuccessful in evolutionary terms
Dinosaurs survived for more than 150 million years, so they cannot be considered unsuccessful. Hominids have lived for only 6 million years, and Homo sapiens date back no more than 200,000 years. Dinosaurs out-competed other animals of their era, but they lost the battle to survive the effects of the asteroid impact.
6. Myth Six
The Myth: All dinosaurs died out 65 million years ago
Birds evolved about 150 million years ago. Most experts believe they evolved from small predatory dinosaurs, which would classify them as dinosaurs according to modern methods of grouping animals. These avian dinosaurs probably suffered some losses after the asteroid impact, but they soon rebounded.
7. Myth Seven
The Myth: Dinosaurs were slow and sluggish animals
Early paleontologists thought dinosaurs must have been slow and sluggish to have lost the “evolutionary race” to birds and mammals. Modern studies find no sign that they were laggards, lazily dragging their tails behind them.
Most dinosaurs were probably as mobile as large, modern mammals. Like lions, meat-eating dinosaurs were active predators that probably lay down and rested after eating their fill.
One study in 2000 of an exceptionally well-preserved hadrosaur fossil, found in a South Dakota riverbed, suggested that dinosaurs had powerful hearts more like those of birds or mammals than modern reptiles. Researchers argue that the fossilized, four-chambered heart points to an active, bird-like metabolism.
8. Myth Eight
The Myth: All large land reptiles from prehistoric times were dinosaurs
Terrestrial reptiles reached 5 metres in length before the first dinosaurs evolved 230 million years ago. Some - such as sail-backed Dimetrodon, which flourished in North America during the Permian period (290 to 240 million years ago) - were related to dinosaurs, but were not true dinosaurs.
9. Myth Nine
The Myth: Marine reptiles - for example, plesiosaurs and ichthyosaurs - were dinosaurs
Several types of marine reptiles evolved during the dinosaur age, but all true dinosaurs were terrestrial animals. Marine crocodiles, like other crocodiles, were closely related to the dinosaurs and so were large, extinct marine reptiles called plesiosaurs, pliosaurs, mosasaurs and ichthyosaurs.
10. Myth Ten
The Myth: Flying reptiles were dinosaurs
Flying reptiles called pterosaurs first appeared just after the dinosaurs, and then died out at the same time as the dinosaurs. The largest grew to the size of a small airplane. However, while they were close relatives, they were not true dinosaurs.
Source: New Scientist
Related ListsTop 10 DragonsTop 15 Quotes of Thomas Aquinas 10 More Unsolved Mysteries Top 10 Bizarre Museums |
SubscriptionsLike this article? Subscribe to the RSS feed to keep 'em coming, or subscribe via email: |
If you find this site helpful, please leave a donation so you can enjoy the spirit of giving too.
Email This Post
1. Dan - November 2nd, 2007 at 5:28 am
Great List! I have been a dino buff since 4th grade.
2. jfrater - November 2nd, 2007 at 5:36 am
Dan: I have always loved them too - I am surprised it has taken me this long to do a list on them!
3. dan231 - November 2nd, 2007 at 5:41 am
I mean come on: “The largest grew to the size of a small airplane” How cool is that?
4. jfrater - November 2nd, 2007 at 5:57 am
dan231: imagine what it must be like to see them in the sky! I wish someone would clone them!
5. evan - November 2nd, 2007 at 6:04 am
“dan231: imagine what it must be like to see them in the sky! I wish someone would clone them!”
Sound like a great idea! let’s make a movie about cloning dinosaurs….oh wait….damn
6. jfrater - November 2nd, 2007 at 6:06 am
evan: hehe - if only it were true!
7. dalandzadgad - November 2nd, 2007 at 6:45 am
awesome list. i’ve always been fascinated by dinosaurs.
8. Kelsi - November 2nd, 2007 at 7:25 am
Myth 11: Dinosaurs could talk and frequently worked together in an interspecies friendship to go on various adventures. They also had lovely singing voices.
9. Matt - November 2nd, 2007 at 7:56 am
Myth #12 Dinosaurs were purple and green, extremely obnoxious, loved by small human children and hated by 99.8% of adult humans.
10. RobS - November 2nd, 2007 at 8:10 am
So what you’re intimating is that the Flintstones were fictional?
My world no longer makes sense…
11. DiscHuker - November 2nd, 2007 at 8:22 am
myth #13 - if you tied a little mastadon to a set of wheels and attached a vertical pole it would act as a vacuum cleaner.
12. Kelsi - November 2nd, 2007 at 9:57 am
DiccHuker: That really had me in a giggle fit.
13. Jackie - November 2nd, 2007 at 10:02 am
So what’s the criteria for being a “true dinosaur”? The last three myths confused me….
14. StewWriter - November 2nd, 2007 at 10:04 am
OK, for fear of sounding angered, which I’m not, and for fear of sounding a little too un-scientific, which I am also not, I have to disagree with number one. I am a devout Christian who does believe in the bible and biblical facts and according to many new Christian teachers, dinosaurs did, in fact, exist along side at least Adam and Eve. In the bible the text describes beasts called behemoths having trunk-like legs and extensively long tails that were among the beast in and around the garden of eden. If I am not mistaken I believe some form of same were aboard the Ark as well. Now, I am a scientific minded fellow and found this incredibly hard to believe before speaking to a pastor I once had and he laid it out for me quite well making me understand how the dating processes that scientists have are not always accurate and that dino’s could have, in fact, lived alongside humans. Especially if you believe that God created all living things around about the same time. Here’s some info worth reading:
http://www.answersingenesis.org/docs/2.asp
Regardless, it is something that is hotly debated and a matter of faith for many of us. I understand that you might be more of the purely scientific mind that I am, and that is great– I wasn’t always as ‘Faithful’ as I am now, either– so to each his own and I shall not try to change your feelings otherwise. Great list indeed!
15. jen - November 2nd, 2007 at 10:04 am
Let’s hope there aren’t a lot of Christian fundamentalists who visit this site. If I want to see a flamewar I’ll go to Fark.
Kelsi and DiscHuker- hahaha
16. evan - November 2nd, 2007 at 10:10 am
I’m a Christian and I don’t believe in the creationist theory of the world. Its pretty comical IMHO. The bible, especially the old test in my view, isn’t to be taken literally. Just because I feel evolution happened/is happening, doesn’t mean I don’t believe in God though. God could be the force behind it. I just don’t believe in the literal view of creation as per the bible. That God created the earth just a few thousand years ago, with dinosaurs and man and all at the exact same time.
Some people believe, I could be wrong but I think Ben Franklin was one, in the “watch maker” view of God. That God create everything necessary in the universe (i.e. gravity, magnetism, matter…etc) and simply set the universe in motion and doesn’t interfere with it.
17. jen - November 2nd, 2007 at 10:13 am
evan- Exactly, that’s why you’re not a Christian fundamentalist.
18. jfrater - November 2nd, 2007 at 10:21 am
Jackie: to be a dinosaur it had to dwell entirely on land - not in the air or water - that is a good basic starting point
19. jfrater - November 2nd, 2007 at 10:24 am
stewWriter: There were giant creatures described in the Book of Genesis, but could it not be possible that they were mammoths of some kind? We know they existed side by side with man (in fact the last ones died out around 2500 BC) and they were giant elephants (though not dinosaurs). They would certainly have had trunk like legs
As far as science is concerned - while I agree completely that carbon dating is not always accurate (and therefore should almost never be relied upon) - no layer of earth contains both human and dinosaur bones at the same point - so regardless of the age of the earth - natural soil deposits would suggest that the dinos did not live on earth with man.
20. Mathilda - November 2nd, 2007 at 10:43 am
I’m anxiously awaiting the re-opening of the Dinosaur Hall at the Carnegie Museum. They are renovating it for several reasons, one being that they have realized that some of the dinosaurs’ poses were not entirely accurate (the dinosaurs have been there since the ’40’s, I believe). Apparently we’ve got the definitive T. Rex, and all others are compared to this one. (Our T. Rex is better than your T. Rex!) I would bet that most people have seen the Dinosaur Hall; Jodie Foster walks through it in Silence of the Lambs. I’m watching it at Dinosaur Cam.
21. jfrater - November 2nd, 2007 at 10:50 am
Mathilda: great site - though it doesn’t seem to like macs
22. evan - November 2nd, 2007 at 10:51 am
one disappointing thing about museums is almost every single piece on display of “bones” or “fossils” are fakes. They’re castings not the real deal. The real ones are behind lock and key away from the public
23. goshdarnitt - November 2nd, 2007 at 10:54 am
evolution could have been god’s method for creating man. i know that pretty much throws the holy bible out(or just genesis), but it’s my belief that no omnipotent being would have dictated it’s writing anyway. if he can hand moses the comandments then why not just hand us a book. that’s what i say. i may just be a deist.
…oh sorry
myth #1 totally busted
24. StewWriter - November 2nd, 2007 at 10:56 am
JFrater: At the risk of sounding lazy and dull today: I’m just too lazy and dull today to create a rebuttal. I know exactly what you are saying anyway, since my brain loves to be 50% scientific and 50% Christian (although a believe Einstein said that the two should not be without the other). I am aware of all the compelling evidence of your argument and I want, with 100% of me, to believe it is all true… but it is so hard to do both when the credo for Christianity when faced with such issues is just: take it all on Faith. I will submit to defend this round and continue to be torn asunder by both apparently correct theorems. I have but little other choice…
25. Tony Brooklyn - November 2nd, 2007 at 11:00 am
Long live Godzilla !!! Come to think of it, I wonder where I can find the Mothra song those tiny little ladies sing.
26. evan - November 2nd, 2007 at 11:01 am
i dont think its wrong for you question parts of your faith. to me, to just take it all on faith is unreasonable. to me, blind faith is no faith.
27. jfrater - November 2nd, 2007 at 11:03 am
StewWriter: I wasn’t intending to cause you to need to rebutt
There are many Christian religions that believe in the creation of man by God but also accept that parts of the Bible - whilst being 100% the Word of God, are sometimes given in a metaphorical sense (such as the mustard seed being the smallest seed - it isn’t - but Christ used that as an example - it doesn’t mean the Bible contains errors). Faith and reason (fides et ratio) can go hand in hand without contradiction - just read Aquinas - he will convince you 
28. Mathilda - November 2nd, 2007 at 11:07 am
StewWriter - I read an article years ago about a gentleman who believed that the Bible was strictly accurate, but was having problems resolving that with his equally firm belief that dinosaur fossils were more than 6,000 years old. So he came up with a theory which I truly admire - he suggested that God did indeed create the world 6,000 years ago. However, when he did so, he created fossils in rocks that were millions of years old. Sorry I cannot remember his name. I really liked the argument though; he said that theoretically God could have created the world ten minutes ago, and given all of us false memories of our lives (that we never actually led) up until that point.
29. evan - November 2nd, 2007 at 11:09 am
Also, hasn’t the Vatican stated that evolution is a creditable version of God’s creation or something along those lines?
Thomas Aquinas, lol every time I hear that name now, I think of Governor Arnold saying it from the movie line.
30. StewWriter - November 2nd, 2007 at 11:14 am
Yes, I agree that accepting Faith but holding onto a little bit of science is fine. In fact, that is what I desperately try to do. I have to say that my battle cry for a long time is that God has created something(s) to evolve thereby giving the rest of us something else to occupy our time while still inherently accepting God as the one power who did it all. I also like the comment about God pretty much being able to have created all things ten minutes ago and no one would be the wiser, and, consequently, could have shoved fossils in the earth just to have something to dig up. Such a crazy notion but equally as intriguing none the less! I suppose it’s just as compelling as anything else, right?
31. RobS - November 2nd, 2007 at 11:15 am
Evan,
But even the “real things” aren’t the real bones of dinos. They’re just stone that filled in the organic bones.
32. jen - November 2nd, 2007 at 11:19 am
goshdarnitt- I’m not religious anymore, but evolution doesn’t necessarily throw out the story of creation found in Genesis. Many Christians read it symbolically; for example, they believe each “day” represents millions of years.
33. philo - November 2nd, 2007 at 11:20 am
Most, if not all, biblical scholars recognize that beasts such as “leviathan” (or _lotan_) and “behemoth” are motifs taken directly from Ancient Near East stories (e.g., Ugarit). They represent something else besides a biological reality.
And that both are presented in the Wisdom literature (e.g., Psalms, Job) which often uses such poetic license to depict a superreality or a metaphorical way of seeing the world is significant.
In any case, as far as Christians go, the older churches of Catholicism and Orthodoxy allow Evolution to be an open question. There is no doctrine on it other than that it’s a scientific question that needs to be explored scientifically.
34. rdog - November 2nd, 2007 at 11:23 am
Whatever happened to the idea of a worldwide flood possibly killing all the animals(dinosaurs are animals too). If scientists focused on that possibilty then maybe they would discover that God does exist. I encourage all to check out the websites …www.icr.org and the links provided..http://www.icr.org/article/1842/ These are scientists that are as educated as those that believe in evolution and the dinosaur theories. Science has proven creation.
35. evan - November 2nd, 2007 at 11:30 am
RobS, duh lol, I mean real fossils, not plaster recreations.
36. philo - November 2nd, 2007 at 11:33 am
Scientific methods have shown that the earth is not an infinite entity, it hardly has shown that the earth was created by a divinity. As an Orthodox Christian I would like it be so, but it is not the case.
It certainly is not as apparent as if one can read these words and say “Hey, these are words in a sentence.” Instead, Creationism relies on non-falsifiable criteria; i.e., the problem that no one can disprove the idea.
Here’s one example: many (not all) creationists–especially Young Earth creationists–contend that divinity created the earth with the appearance of age, which would include fossils that appear to be older than the creationist date of creation (whenever that would be).
The problem is that there are no criteria by which to disprove this idea, hence it is not scientific at all.
I can say, “I created you” to someone. Since they cannot disprove it, then am I their creator?
37. evan - November 2nd, 2007 at 11:43 am
True, and I’m not arguing for a creationists, but science cannot always be trusted as the end all be all of knowledge. Whenever we think we know something, it usually then becomes clear we don’t.
Example, the grand unification theory still doesn’t exist. We dealing with things like large scale compare to small scale, so far, even science fails to explain it. Take Newton’s theories, work well until you go to the atomic level, then they don’t make sense anymore. So then you must switch to Einstein’s Theory of General Relativity, which contradicts Newton. But works great until you go to even smaller scale, sub atomic. Then it too breaks down, and you must switch to another theory, string theory, etc.
So to say beyond all doubt that some form of creation didn’t occur because science says so, don’t mean it’s completely fact. Which is why it’s still called the THEORY of evolution, not the law.
38. Mean - November 2nd, 2007 at 12:25 pm
very informative… i love topics about animals including those extinct ones especially dinosaurs. i didnt even know myths such as those existed. even if i knew they did, i wouldnt have believed them anyway.
btw id have to agree with evan and jamie, dinosaurs didn’t coexist with ancient humans. like what they said, dinosaurs were extinct waaaaay before humans appeared. what else is needed for proof aside from the age of their fossils? and in national geographic there is this layer of earth having very large amounts of iridium, (usually only found in very little quantity) believed to be the period of time when the killer asteroid hit earth. under such layer is an abundance of dinosaur fossils, and above the layer rich in iridium there is a complete absence of them. and it is quite a long period of time before the layer of earth came where the humans existed.
well thats just what i read and watched, im not very good at explaining things but i hope you guys get the point…
39. Scott - November 2nd, 2007 at 12:32 pm
Really? debating the age of dinasours? really? whats next? heliocentrism? thats opposed the bible. spherical earth?
40. Adam W. - November 2nd, 2007 at 12:58 pm
How does a dinosaur page turn into religion…? *sigh*
41. evan - November 2nd, 2007 at 1:02 pm
I believe comment #14 is was started it. But why the *sign*? if the top ten lists didnt start off shoot discussion i wouldnt find the site so appealing. All you would have is a bunch of comments like “good list!” or “bad list!!!!”. Keeps it fresh
42. RobS - November 2nd, 2007 at 1:32 pm
Evan,
What do you think a ‘real fossil’ is? It’s rock. Minerals that have replaced the bone.
43. evan - November 2nd, 2007 at 1:41 pm
DUH! rock! minerals that over time, have naturally replaced the bone! NO CRAP!
But the vast majority ones in Museums on display are man made plaster replicas, made from a mold of the original fossil (ROCK, yes i know), and not the original MADE OF ROCK fossil that was dug up out of the ground.
44. Shane S. - November 2nd, 2007 at 1:53 pm
Not the momma! Not the momma!
45. rigbydog - November 2nd, 2007 at 1:55 pm
Wow…giant thingies that lived many many many millions of years ago can cause such debate. Fascinating that science and faith can actually clash. One is based on hardcore (hopefully), the other on…….hope. I guess we must ask ourselves as individuals, which is more important? Fascinating indeed. Thx Jfrater for fostering a realm of intellectual discourse.
46. SubliminalDeath666 - November 2nd, 2007 at 2:07 pm
Beautiful list jfrater! I’ve always wanted to be a paleontologist since I was 6. I hope you make another list of of dinosaurs in the future like Top 10 Famous Dinosaurs or something like that.
47. Samsung - November 2nd, 2007 at 2:26 pm
I hate to say it but StewWriter’s right. I saw a documentary about humans coexisting with dinosaurs. I think it was called Jurssic park or something
48. Adam - November 2nd, 2007 at 2:47 pm
I just want to say Einstein never, never, said that faith and science should go together as StewWriter said. I’m not against religion, but there are many quotes from Einstein that he never said or have been taken out of context (maybe make a list about those?).
49. philo - November 2nd, 2007 at 2:48 pm
I’m curious as to why anyone would think that there is any problem about these topics. While dissent always swirls around any idea, and consensus is not necessarily the leading agent of truth, it would be interesting to see how philosophically-flawed ideas in Creationism are supposed to be good.
Evolution may not be true, that’s fine. But a construction of a theory based on empirical falsifiability is better than one (i.e., Creationism) based on anti-theory, tendentiousness, and non-falsifiability.
50. Yarr - November 2nd, 2007 at 3:03 pm
Hooray! Another religious debate! Jfrat- you knew this would happen didn’t you? I can see you there, somewhere in the world, clacking away on your keyboard, lauging like the villan in an old cartoon,”HAHAHAHAHAHA!!! This will get them talking!!!!”
Then you kick back, have a snack and watch the sharks start to frenzy.
Evil!
51. jfrater - November 2nd, 2007 at 3:24 pm
Yarr - I truly didn’t think this would escalate
But it doesn’t matter if it does - I trust everyone here to go at it in a mature way 
52. Fe - November 2nd, 2007 at 3:55 pm
Just to throw my $.02 cents in, I’m a non-believer and find all three major theories - evolution, intelligent design and creationism, to be flawed, but evolution at least makes sense to me. The other two seem to posit that a higher being - assumably an infallible, powerful higher being - ultimately made something that is deeply flawed: human beings.
We’ve really screwed the pooch when it comes to our fellow creatures and our planet. At least with evolution, humans have no one but ourselves to blame when it comes to the mess we’ve made of things. If the higher power is so shorsighted that [it] couldn’t see what we would do if left to our own devices, well….it’s not a higher power I have a lot of faith in. Pun intended.
As for the list - look a list - I honestly didn’t know that flying reptiles and aquatic reptiles were not dinos. I thought they were all the same critter. My bad.
53. aplspud - November 2nd, 2007 at 4:25 pm
Evan: At the Museum of Natural History in New York many of the displays are made up of a mix of real fossils and plaster molds. Part of the reason for this is that some of the skeletons were not complete when they were dug up, so the museum had to fill in the blanks, so to speak. Also, on the T-Rex for example, the fossilized skull is in a display case on the floor, because it is too heavy to be suspended 20+ feet above the museum patrons.
54. goshdarnitt - November 2nd, 2007 at 4:37 pm
jen: too true. personally, i don’t think god had anything to do with the bible whether he exists or not.
has anyone here heard of dinosaur comics?!?!
http://www.qwantz.com
it’s beautiful. i wager everone here will giggle.
today’s comic reminds me of a sketch written by mark twain called “simplified spelling”
55. ben - November 2nd, 2007 at 5:22 pm
Im amazed. An argument about religion online that managed to stay not only educated and mature but profanity-free. its a cultural anomoly.
56. jfrater - November 2nd, 2007 at 5:35 pm
ben: that’s the listverse for you - we are all incredibly civil here
57. StewWriter - November 2nd, 2007 at 6:37 pm
Okay, so I got a little spat on while I was away by a guy coincidentally named Adam regarding a quote that Einstein said. Look, I wasn’t quoting verbatim, but since I have to now, here goes: “Science without religion is lame, Religion without science is blind.”
I hope that helps. I wouldn’t normally feel the need to jump back into a discussion, but i felt the need for vindication. It’s fun on occasion.
58. Jack - November 2nd, 2007 at 6:51 pm
ben: haha, I was just reading the comments and thinking the same thing when I came to yours. I’ve had religious debates before and they almost always degrade into non-believers just cussing believers out and everyone repeating the same arguments.
I’m a Christian by the way, and this has actually revealed some theories I didn’t really know about before 5 minutes ago. The whole “God could have created Earth 10 minutes ago and you wouldn’t know” theory is interesting. Not saying that’s quite what I believe but it’s worth consideration. I also have always been torn, because I don’t consider science to be anti-religion or anything. And even though carbon dating isn’t always accurate, it isn’t so inaccurate as to mix up 6000 years with 65 million years. Cool list Jfrater.
59. carv - November 2nd, 2007 at 11:26 pm
I live under a Christian background, my values are too. And GOD gave me the intelligence to discover evolution as well as to see what backward steps are such as creationism. Also religion was created by men and women. And the entire universe by coincidence in matter, natural chemistry and natural physics and evolution.
Don´t walk backward with covered eyes please.
60. John Robinson - November 3rd, 2007 at 12:12 am
Recovering from a hyper-drive time warp phenomenon, the Jupiter II landed on Earth three billion years ago to find deutronium fuel. The nefarious Doctor Zachary Smith, always complaining about his aching back, had to take a healthy dump and left the ship with the Robot. All life on this green Earth evolved from his copious quantity of bodily waste, left on a barren beach. It washed into the sea, and the rest is history.
61. jfrater - November 3rd, 2007 at 1:50 am
Wow - this really did end up being a very mature debate on the subject - I think we are truly the greatest community on the net
62. Kaustav - November 3rd, 2007 at 6:40 am
Guys, all of you are fascinating
I am yet to come across such a fascinating discussion blending religion, faith, science, evolution, spielberg, sean connery, Zachary and even some dinosaurs!. all of it insightful, civil and great read.
first time visitor. in fact just dropped in as the list sounded like fun and ended up reading the whole discussion.
thanks jfrater, stewwriter and everyone else
63. Amy - November 3rd, 2007 at 8:54 am
Fossils do not have to be complete replacements; there are dino (and other) fossils which are still bone. There are a couple of researchers, (amazingly enough) working with preserved dino marrow which still has blood cells.
The ‘dinos go away’ theory also involves flood basalts in India known as the Deccan Traps. The eruptions of these basalts are believed (with evidence) to have negatively impacted the atmosphere around the world, as did the Chicxulub crater. The Mexican crater has gotten the most press, but huge meteor impacts are not as rare as it might seem.
Suggest anyone seriously interested in Einstein and faith consult the book Ideas and Opinions, which is all direct quotes, most of which attribute the source or context.
As to the fundies who are Biblical literalists– unless you are reading the good book in Hebrew or Aramaic, and are literate in those languages, all you are reading is a translation, and translation is a slippery art. Remember too, that the Pentateuch (and in fact all of the Bible) consists of the transcription of oral stories a hundred to thousands of years after the first telling. They didn’t have scribes or tape recorders or digital cameras at the time. Imagine playing “telephone” for 100 to 1000 years before writing down the message.
That being said, isn’t it a miracle that the Christian message of love is the same as that of Barney, obviously a descendant of the first Christian dinosaur? (there is a reason the two most common vestment colors in the Catholic Church are purple and green.)
64. ben - November 3rd, 2007 at 1:19 pm
i agree with jfrater. a toast to us!
65. Chess - November 3rd, 2007 at 7:15 pm
Very nice.
66. bathrobe - November 3rd, 2007 at 10:53 pm
Wow! Someone’s heard of Dalanzadgad! I’ve been there several times; never thought I’d find someone using the name though.
Just wondering. What were the ‘true dinosaurs’?
67. Atom - November 4th, 2007 at 4:45 pm
StewWriter, I know which quote you are refering to, but Einstein does not mean “religion” in the conventional sense.
Here is another quote from Einstein, sourced from “The God Delusion” by Richard Dawkins.
“It was, of course, a lie what you read about my religious convictions, a lie which is being systematically repeated. I do not believe in a personal God and I have never denied this but have expressed it clearly. If something is in me which can be called religious then it is the unbounded admiration for the structure of the world so far as our science can reveal it.”- Albert Einstien
Here are some other quotes from Einstein for which he received hate mail and heavy critism, some even going so far as to say Einstein gives reason for Hitler.
“I am a deeply religious nonbeliever. This is a somewhat new kind of religion.” -Einstein
“The idea of a personal God is quite alien to me and seems even naive.” -Einstein
68. Science Skeptic - November 5th, 2007 at 4:35 am
The scientific establishment is crumbling very fast. People have been deceived by this group of speculators and outright liars for too long. These are the same fakers that told us we’d drop dead of heart attacks from clogged arteries if we at too many eggs. And that there were flying dinosaurs.
“And eight out of ten doctors smoke Camels. Shouldn’t you?”
These are just a very few examples of lies from the phony gods of science.
69. gabrielAmerican - November 5th, 2007 at 7:15 pm
“The scientific establishment is crumbling very fast.”
Don’t sound so delighted. We (rationalists and scientific reasoners) gave you (self-proclaimed skeptics who actually seem quite credulous) Medicine, Tools, Math, Computers, Electric Power, Language, Writing, and pretty much everything that has helped mankind grow.
Regarding this particular “debate,” the PROOF that dinosaurs and humans are separated by millions of years is not simply an argument from authority. It is found in the volumes of scientific literature and life’s work of some of mankind’s most brilliant minds. People who presented theories and willingly had their peers attempt to find inaccuracies in those theories. That is how science works.
So, your childish attacks on scientists do nothing but expose your bias and complete lack understanding of both science and logic.
Indeed,it is sad that so many people don’t understand that the best and only framework designed to understand the world around us is the scientific method. Everything else is fairy-tale mumbo-jumbo designed to keep the masses ignorant and the elite in power.
70. MGK - November 8th, 2007 at 12:14 pm
ABOUT OUR BOUNDLESS IGNORANCE:
===============================
First of all, just for the sake of clarity, and for facilitating the reading of my comment correctly, I must inform you that I have a Ph.D. in Physical Chemistry, and that I am an enthusiastic scientist.
In the context of this very hot and intriguing debate I would like nevertheless to ask all the enthusiastic Science fans and admirers on this forum to keep in mind a fundamental and unfortunately very often forgotten fact of life: Regardless of how fast science is progressing, and regardless of the amount of our knowledge (either at present or in the future), this knowledge will always be limited, it will always be bounded within FINITE BOUNDARIES. Beyond these finite and definable boundaries of our limited knowledge, there will always remain an infinite UNIVERSE which will remain beyond our reach. This “Infinite Universe” stands not only for the stellar and interstellar space, but also for its spiritual and intellectual intricacy and complexity.
Therefore, in sharp contrast with our LIMITED KNOWLEDGE, for as long as we will mange to continue to exist, i.e. before we become an extinct species (JUST LIKE THE DINOSAURS), we are destined to always remain with our BOUNDLESS IGNORANCE.
Keep this in mind my dear friends!
71. jfrater - November 8th, 2007 at 12:41 pm
gabrielAmerican: 10 points to you for that comment - excellent - thanks.
72. gabrielAmerican - November 10th, 2007 at 11:37 am
@ jfrater- glad you approve
@ MGK-
Well said. Perhaps, I wasn’t clear enough. I didn’t mean to imply that the scientific method can answer every question. There are certainly some things that are beyond the grasp of our finite understanding. Those mysteries are wonderful to behold. Our inability to explain them does not, I believe, require us to fill in the blanks with,”god did it.”
I’ve often heard, derisively said by anti-science types, “Oh, you’re one of those people who believes science can answer everything.”
I am not. True, I believe in science, more specifically the scientific method. But, I understand that NOTHING can answer EVERYTHING. I am not troubled by that one bit. In fact, I find the challenge of getting back up after failing to find the answer as a life-affirming act.
The pursuit, my friends, reveals the spirit.
Peace.
73. me - November 27th, 2007 at 5:08 pm
I just watched a documentary on Discovery channel a few days ago telling me that the crater you mention here was NOT the imprint of the asteroid that killed the dinosours. Silly.
74. Punjar - November 30th, 2007 at 11:54 pm
I was going to make some comment about dinosaur comics, but that jerk goshdarnitt beat me to it.
75. Science??? - December 8th, 2007 at 2:58 pm
I think I missed the part when “science” changed form testable and observable to theoretical and philosophical. I know that there are people on both sides of this debate but outside of faith I doubt anyone has a valid point. Evolution is a fantastic and wonderful explanation of the origin of the species and then again who could out do a God that created all things. My point here is that neither one of these arguments can be proven by science…not observable!!! It always bothers me when PhDs from either camp propose evidence for their views, because that is all they are is views. Science is fact and it can be tested, if there is no way of testing something it cannot be scientific, if it cannot be observed then all you have is speculation. I have a faith and I love science but I also value rational thought and common sense.
If I choose to believe that the evidence points to evolution then to me the scientific facts will support evolution, in the same way if I choose to believe ID the scientific facts will support ID. The issue is that fallacies seem to be the basis in either case. If evolution, I appeal to the authority of a particular field of study, example: geology which tells me that based on dating methods a particular artifact is so old because of the rock layer it was found. If I were to ask the scientist about the validity of radioactive dating methods they would point to half-lives and isotopes within a substance that is predictable in a laboratory at specific conditions.
If I choose to believe that God made everything in six literal days I am no more faith based than the “scientist” who says the earth is so many billion years old because that is the timeframe needed for evolution and then five years later needs to double the perceived age because of new data. If someone chooses to believe the Bible literally I see him as no more a fool than one who says “this is science” only to later amend what science supposedly had proved not long ago.
If you haven’t picked up on it Scientists suppose that things always happened on the earth like they do in a lab, said assumptions leads to validation of theories and evolutionary faith. Not to mention that transitional models do not exist today unless you want to believe (have faith) that a naturally reproducing organism with minor defects and slight differences form generation to generation means it is evolving with out any new developmental (genetic) information.
If you want to find a flaw in either argument it is this, you can not prove it so stop trying!…”Were you there?” is the only thing I want to hear because everything else is purely speculation. If you are a believer in evolution or ID you must forget about science to prove you are right and just be content to have the faith you have and believe what you believe. If this troubles you your faith is not very strong and you might want to rethink your position.
76. avi - December 16th, 2007 at 5:19 am
Stewriter: Behemoth could refer to a whole bunch of critters! For example, bigfoot ,the loch ness monster, or aliens. There’s also less familiar ones like the mongolian death worm, owlmen, the con rit, skyfish, thunder birds, living megalodons, or the canvey island monster
77. David - December 18th, 2007 at 5:27 pm
I visited the Smithsonian recently and I finally realized the difference between big lizards and dinosaurs….
It’s in the legs, the dinsaurs’ legs were under their bodies as opposed to lizards’ legs, which are more out to the side..
78. JJ - December 22nd, 2007 at 12:24 am
rdog: scientist have looked into the “world wide flood” story from the bible and there is no evidence what so ever that the entire world was flooded , so I guess that proves god does not exist or at least the story of Noah is exagerated
79. JJ - December 22nd, 2007 at 12:35 am
StewWriter: that article you posted is pure bullshit dinosaurs and humans did not coexist,, a few points ,,, 1: no dino and human skeletons in the same layers of sediment they are seperated by a huge distance,,2 no proof of a global flood going all the way back to the age of dinos,,,3 no ancient paintings of creatures that look even close to dinos( if ancient man painted deers bears even mammoths anotomicaly correct why not dinos and no paintings of dragons look like dinos),,4 if we did coexist with dinos we wouldnt be here now we are no match for a t-rex or any of the other predators
80. Justin Giroux - December 26th, 2007 at 1:54 am
Come off it JJ. The scientists and Gov’t are so built up you’d believe every word they say.
There’s no real way in the world anyone can honestly confirm that there was no ancient paintings of dinosaurs in the world. Have you been to every cave in the world?
Didn’t think so……..err, maybe a scientist blabbed this so you believe this pencil pusher.
81. Drogo - December 26th, 2007 at 4:16 am
Hey, I had a dinosaur. It would go to work with me every day. It was a big, huge, ugly 1978 Buick LeSabre.
‘ever see one of those? Sheesh, what a dinosaur!
82. Fiffla - January 10th, 2008 at 4:50 am
The book of job says in chapter 40: vs 17 that the behemoths tail is like a cedar. A little big of a tail for a mammoth or elephant or hippo
83. JonnyB - January 13th, 2008 at 12:43 am
Dinosaurs and humans did not exist at the same time. There is a quote that i like (may be on a list on this site) “All thinking men are atheists.”
If you would stop and actually think about issues like this and logically view the scientific evidence in front of you instead of dismissing it as conspiracies, I think you will realize how absurd you sound. The Bible should not be taken literally. How can anyone believe the Earth is only 6,000 years old?
Are you telling me that you can believe that the entire earth was flooded, that a man could heal blindness, that a single being created everything around us today, that a man walked on water, or that in coming years, four horsemen will descend upon the earth and only the people who believe in this crap will be saved, but you refuse to believe that dinosaurs and humans never coexisted?
Face it, religion is just an excuse to dismiss everything you want to be false. There is no scientific proof of a god. There is no scientific proof that Jesus actually performed a single miracle or that he even existed. They’re all just stories. There is, however, scientific proof that humans did not coexist with dinosaurs and that evolution does exist. The only argument that you have is, “It’s a matter of faith.” If no one had ever mentioned the bible or god to you, you wouldn’t care about it at all today.
My point, dinosaurs did not exist alongside humans and god never existed outside of fairy tales.
84. Shakespeare’s Girl - January 17th, 2008 at 8:48 pm
Johnny B-
Are you asking me not to believe it? I believe that StewWriter was stating beliefs that he holds, not asking you to believe them.
And as to your other questions, why shouldn’t I believe the Bible literally? If it’s my belief, I’m not hurting anyone by believing it, then I see no problems. And there are several creation theories that theorize that the earth is possibly older than 6000 years old, more like 8000. (Please note my sarcasm). I have also heard of several secular scientists who have admitted that a young Earth is possible.
In addition, you have just asked how we can believe the Bible, and then not believe the Bible in one sentance. The Bible gives evidence that humans and dinosaurs co existed, so to believe that they never did would be to contradict our previous statement of faith.
As to your claim that religeon is an excuse to “dismiss everything you want to be false”, if it is, then Christianity is the most widespread excuse that’s ever been thought up, dating back centuries. There may not be proof that there is a God, but there is no proof that there is’t, is there? And as to your elementary assumption that there is no proof that Jesus existed, there are several documents used for record keeping that document his existance, even assuming he wasn’t the Son of God.
As a final note, the Bible may not be true, but it is not a fairy tale, as a fairy tale follows a certain structural form, and that form is not found in the Bible. Call it a fiction, a metaphor, a story, a lie, all those things are correct, but I don’t believe you will find any elements of Fairy Tales in the book.
In response to whoever said that the heliocentric theory was contradictory to Christianity, that’s not true, it was only contradictory to Catholocism, which is generally considered to be a separate form of Christianity.
In case anyone wondered, I was raised in a Christian home and am currently trying to decide what exactly I believe about the Bible. I do know that it is bad reasoning to discredit an argument based on a false assumption about a source.
Also, kudos to whoever mentioned AiG. They have some great Creationist material on their website, which is linked elsewhere on this page. Anyone wondering–truly wondering–about Creation vs. Evolution would do well to take a look at www.answersingenisis.org. And I’d be happy to answer any well thought out questions for anyone who wants to know my views on this whole matter.
85. avi - February 11th, 2008 at 5:15 pm
why shouldn’t you beleive the bible literally? simply because it is not supposed to be taken literally. the bible is to teach theological lessons by arranging events in no particular order
86. avi - February 12th, 2008 at 6:41 pm
it is entirely possible dinos still exist. i dont think so, but its possible.
87. travis reece - February 14th, 2008 at 11:23 pm
1. the bible does not give evidence that man and dinos lived together, so stop saying it. Its a BIG stretch to take big animals to immedeatly mean dinosaurs.
2. Jesus was real. Im not sure if he was the son of god/part of the trinity or whatever. but to say that there is no proof that he existed is ignorant. there are ancient sources.
3.Noah’s ark… come on people. even my old catholic school teahers were like, yeah its probably not litteral. PROBABLY???? there is nooooo way noah collected not just one but TWO of every species. there are millions of them, hundreds of thousands in the rainforests alone. the boat would have to be the size of the united states. and if noah only took a fraction of the animals, where did all the new ones come from? they must have evolved i guess. the story is symbolic, not true.
I was raised catholic, and i still believe i am. Catholics accept that evolution is a possibility. when i was taught these stories, i was not taught that they are literally true, i was told about the symbolic meaning represented within.
88. travis reece - February 14th, 2008 at 11:53 pm
oh, and i just thought of this out of nowhere. with noahs ark and the 40 day flood, there is a big thing missing. WHAT ABOUT THE PLANTS!!! are we supposed to believe that all of these plants survived being inundated, completely flooded with water? every plant on earth would have died unless noah took all the plants on board too. and dont say god only said bring animals, so god must have protected the plants. that would be a total cop out
89. Eric Baldwin IV - March 2nd, 2008 at 6:56 am
StewWriter: The Bible also states that God had a completely different time perspactive to Humans, so one day could be like 1,000,000,000 years for example. And also, the Bible dose not say HOW humans were created, for example. Prehaps that is Gods way of creating humans? Nobody can be sure.
90. travis - March 16th, 2008 at 4:44 pm
the bible does say how humans were created, out of clay, by god’s hand. and women was made from a mans rib.
91. shrpshootr - March 16th, 2008 at 4:52 pm
JonnyB: There is also another quote that I saw somewhere that I like, “Religion is the downfall of man”, or something like that
92. Lisa - May 15th, 2008 at 6:59 pm
no offence but what dorks!!!!
93. Rusty - May 19th, 2008 at 4:47 am
RE: Einstein and God (#57):
Bloomsbury Auctions sold on Friday 16 April 08 for US$404,000! a handwritten letter by Einstein to philosopher Eric Gutkind in January 1954, a year before Einstein’s death. In it, Einstein said that:
“the word God is for me nothing more than the expression and product of human weaknesses, the Bible a collection of honorable but still primitive legends which are nevertheless pretty childish.”
http://www.usatoday.com/tech/s.....tein_N.htm
94. Malfore - June 28th, 2008 at 11:07 pm
I honestly dont know who would think any of those so calle dmyths were true
95. colin - July 3rd, 2008 at 4:33 am
i love dinosaurs…i wish we knew for sure what did them in though…
96. nelson - July 30th, 2008 at 7:56 am
great list and the bible the worst book in human history why people continue to belife in nonsense
97. Mike from Ottawa - August 2nd, 2008 at 9:41 pm
Folk who might be interested in pterosaurs should read David Unwin’s ‘Pterosaurs: From Deep Time’ for up to date information on a class of animals that were far more interesting, different and sophisticated than their general public image. It’s both highly accessible and accurate and is the kind of book other paleontologists wish someone would write about the animals they study.
98. Jackaloo - August 18th, 2008 at 6:44 am
I’m a bit of a dino buff along with all the others pterosaurs etc etc and the biggest pterosaur that was the quetzacoatalus (probably spelt wrong.