Nature

Main page | Jari's writings

When did the dinosaurs live?

 

 

The general understanding is that dinosaurs roamed the earth for over 100 million years, until they went extinct 65 million years ago. This idea is constantly highlighted in evolutionary literature and in TV programs, which is why it has so strongly been ingrained in the minds of people that dinosaurs lived millions of years ago. It is not seen as possible that these large (Size is relative. If we compare the modern blue whale to dinosaurs, we find the whale is much bigger than dinosaurs. It is considered to be the largest animal ever. A blue whale weighs about 130 tons, while the largest dinosaurs weighed only 70 tons, so the whale is almost double the size of the dinosaurs. If people were to find the skeleton of a blue whale today and the species had already become extinct, would we consider it as old as the dinosaurs? Possibly.) animals could have lived in the more recent past and simultaneously with humans. According to evolution, dinosaurs are presumed to have existed during the Jurassic -and Cretaceous periods, while the Cambrian animals are assumed to have lived far earlier and mammals were supposedly the last to appear on the planet. The evolutionary view of these animals’ non-simultaneous appearance on earth is so predominant in people’s minds that they believe it to be real science and the truth, although there are multiple issues that can be found in this theory.

This will be our next investigation. Several pieces of evidence suggest that dinosaurs existed not so long ago on the planet. This evidence will be viewed next.

 

GEOLOGICAL TIME CHART UNDER ANALYSIS. Before diving too deeply in the lives of dinosaurs, one should learn more about the geological time chart, which seems to be what determines the age of dinosaur fossils and the age of other fossils. From this chart, which was drawn up as early as in the 19th century, everyone can draw conclusions as to when dinosaurs existed. Therefore, if anyone finds a fossil, the fossil must be at least 65 million years old, because the chart tells us that that it is when they went extinct.

However, if evolution theory (the assumption that all life stems from the same original cell, which was born hundreds of millions of years ago) and the geological time chart associated with it, prove to be false assumptions, we can place the current placement of dinosaurs and other extinct organisms on the time scale into question. When discussing this topic, the following points should be considered:

 

No grounds. When building a house, it needs to have a proper foundation. If not, the house won’t stand for too long. Strong winds and stormy waves can easily bring it down.

What does the foundation of evolution look like? When evolution theory presumes that all living creatures have evolved slowly over time, there is a but: no one knows how life could come about by itself. Because rock-like lifeless matter won’t come to life by itself. Matter and energy cannot bring about life, as believed in evolution. Energy increase and decrease can only make matter change from solid to liquid and from liquid to gas, when exposed to temperature changes, but nothing else happens. This is not a way to generate life, as shown by experimental observations. People should accept this and not conceive imaginary theories about life coming to be by itself. It goes against science and common sense to think that hydrogen gas or any other lifeless substance could turn into a human, or some other life-form, by themselves.

We are going to look at a quotation relating to this. It is from an interview with Stanley Miller during his later years in life. Miller became famous for his experiments concerning the beginning of life. J. Morgan speaks in the interview:

 

He was indifferent about all suggestions about the origins of life, considering them “nonsense” or “paper chemistry”. He was so contemptuous about certain hypotheses that when I asked his opinion about them, he only shook his head, sighed deeply and sniggered – like trying to reject the madness of the human race. He admitted that scientists may never know exactly when and how life started. “We try to discuss a historical event that is clearly different from normal science”, he noted. (1)

 

No semi-developed senses or organs. Let’s for a second assume evolution theory is correct, meaning that dinosaurs, humans and other organisms evolved from the same original cell. Therefore, in the case where this is true, we should be able to see an abundance of organs and senses in development in fossils and in the current nature. This should be self-evident if we all stem from the same original cell.

What does practical evidence say? English scientist and author George Paulin noticed decades ago already that intermediate forms are missing from the fossil records, and that all the fossils are fully evolved. This suggest species have been in their fully evolved state all the time. The so-called Cambrian explosion also supports this observation. Cambrian organisms were complete and fully developed from the start, besides there are no traces of simpler predecessor forms beneath them in fossil materials. Every paleontologist who’s done a bit of research knows this.

 

George Paulin: According to Darwin’s own explanation, transitional forms were exceedingly more numerous than the fully developed forms. The incompleteness of geological evidence should be the same in both cases. It would be a downright miracle, if all the transitional forms were perfectly missing, and the fully developed forms were largely existent. But this is exactly the case… Pieces of geological evidence have gradually led us to know many more fully developed forms than were known during Darwin’s time, but when it comes to transitional forms, they are still tabula rasa, i.e. a blank slate… It is not possible to escape from the conclusion that if development has happened from lower forms to higher forms, it had to have occured so fast that it did not leave any marks behind. But, even the fastest possible development cannot provide an explanation that would even suggest the sudden occurrence of fully developed fishes, birds and mammals around different organisms. – These facts have had a major impact on me, on a person, who has believed in evolutionary theory throughout their whole life. If anyone were to ask me after this, to which conclusion I have come to, my only response would be that I know nothing. However, I have to honestly admit that the matter being like this, the circumstances speak crucially for those, who believe in special creational acts, like our fathers did. (2)

 

Below, there are a few other related comments. Stephen Jay Gould, who is perhaps one of the most famous fossil researchers, and his friend Niles Eldredge have denied the existence of visible gradual development in fossils. Basically, these findings mean that evolution is lacking the most crucial evidence for it to be a viable option for the past. If we cannot see any signs of gradual development in fossils, we cannot assume evolution is correct. This is true, despite how many million years there would have been. All the evidence favors the idea that species were separate from the beginning, as posed by the creation model:

 

Stephen Jay Gould: The extreme rareness of intermediate forms in fossil material continues to be the trade secret of palaeontologists. The evolution trees appearing in our textbooks include facts only at the heads and folding points of the branches. The rest is reasoning, no matter how reasonable it is, not evidence of fossils –- I do not want in any way to belittle the potential competence of the gradual evolution view. I want only to remark that it has never 'been observed' in rocks. (...) (3)

 

Niles Eldredge:  We palaeontologists have said that the history of life supports [a story about changes that promote gradual adapting], even though we know all the while that it does not.  (4)

 

Geological time chart and dating. Above, we addressed two issues problematic for the naturalistic evolution theory. They are:

 

• Life coming about by itself. The more we have studied the beginning of life, the more difficult it seems to be. Rock-like lifeless matter does not become alive by itself. On the other hand, not even a human, despite the intelligence, has been able to bring a rock or any other substance into life. If an intelligent human cannot achieve it, how could a lifeless unintelligent matter do it? This just does not make sense.

 

• There are no semi-developed senses nor organs. Our other observation was that fossil records do not contain any signs of gradual development or semi-developed senses and organs, but it does contain an abundance of fully evolved forms. A conclusion from this would practically cancel the whole evolution theory. If there are no signs of gradual development, there is no possibility our current life-forms evolved from the same original cell. Species must have been separate from one another, as in the creation model.

 

How do these points relate to the timing of different organisms, like the dinosaurs? To put it shortly, there is plenty of relevance.

First, we’ll address the beginning of life. If we do not know where, when, and how life began by itself, there is reason to doubt claims about knowing how long life has been on earth. These claims can be passed off as pure speculation, and not given too much value.

Secondly, we should look at the geological time chart, which determines the timing of dinosaurs, trilobites and other important fossils. This 19th century chart is based on the assumption that species have evolved from a “simple” original cell in the ocean over a course of hundreds of millions of years. According to this, there were only unicellular organisms in the beginning for hundreds of millions of years, then during the so-called Cambrian period, multicellular life, such as trilobites, started to appear at the bottom of the seas. After which we experienced the appearance of fish, then frogs and reptiles, followed by birds and mammals, and lastly humans. Evidently, the geological time chart is based on the assumption that these species have appeared on the planet at different time periods. It is not seen as plausible that they might have coexisted from the very beginning. This idea is being discarded, even though we experience the coexistence of fish, frogs, reptiles, birds, mammals, humans, unicellular organisms and life at the bottom of the sea even today. Moreover, species keep going extinct in the present day, like the trilobites and dinosaurs went extinct years ago.

But as discussed, if the evolution theory and gradual development prove to be wrong, as admitted by many paleontologists after studying fossils records, we can confidently criticize the idea that organisms appeared on the planet at different times. No one can prove that it really happened. Anyone claiming otherwise, goes beyond absolute information. Furthermore, the following points should also be considered:

 

Fossils do not come with age tags. When it comes to fossils that have been dug up from the ground, like dinosaur fossils, it is important to realize that we cannot determine their specific age. Fossils themselves don’t say anything, and they certainly do not come with age tags. If the fossil is completely fossilized into stone, it is impossible to run a dating measure through it, and no one can say with certainty that some fossil is older than another. The following quotation refers to this:

 

There is no man on this Earth who knows enough about rocks and fossils to be able to prove in any way that a specific type of fossil is truly essentially older or younger than another type. In other words, there is no-one who could truly prove that a trilobite from the Cambrian period is older than a dinosaur from the Cretaceous period or a mammal from the Tertiary period. Geology is anything but an exact science. (5)

 

All fossils are not completely fossilized, however. Some still have remaining original soft tissue and that tissue can be put through a radiocarbon measurement. These tests have provided some interesting results. Even the so-called Cambrian organisms and coal deposits have contained radiocarbon (C-14), despite both of them having been considered hundreds of millions of years old. This should not be possible, because the half-life of radiocarbon is only 5730 years. There should not be any left after 100 000-200 000 years. Radiocarbon still present in these organisms suggests that dating based on the geological time chart is not reliable.

 

In the early years of the invention, it was believed that all the preconditions needed to make accurate age measurements were now present. Researchers gathered all kinds of things to measure: items from the tombs of pharaohs and Neanderthals, teeth of sabre-tooth tigers and mammoths, fossils, crude oil, etc. Radiocarbon was found in all of them. These observations regarding age were published in Radiocarbon magazine. Many of the samples had previously been dated as being millions of years old. (6)

 

However, in the 1950s-70s authorities were cautious towards the estimates from radiocarbon dating. This was due to the discovery of 14C isotope remaining almost in all of the dated samples (over 15,000 samples) that were published in the Radiocarbon magazine by the year 1970. The obtained measurements were thought to be implausible, because there were many millions of years old fossils among the samples. The fossils’ age was determined according to an index fossil –chart, which had been considered reliable. (7)

 

Appearance at different times versus ecological niches. If we look at nature today, we can see that it has different zones. There is sea life with fish, clams, and other species that only live in the sea. Then we have life on the beaches and marshlands, where typical species include frogs, crocodiles and other animals that like to move in the water. Similarly, there are different ecological niches on land, depending on, e.g., rainfall and temperature (hot deserts, cold areas…). This observation is clear, when looking at our current environment.

Why don’t trilobites (creatures from the bottom of the sea), dinosaurs and humans usually appear, or cannot be found, in the same strata? Evolutionists’ explanation is that they existed at different periods on the planet, but there is another more logical answer: ecological niches. That is, while trilobites lived at the bottom of the oceans, we cannot expect that dinosaurs and humans shared the same habitat. It is impossible for us humans and other dry land animals to live under water for extended amounts of time. Similarly, it is unlikely that dinosaurs and humans lived that close to each other, as even today humans live fairly far away from forest animals (bears, lions, tigers…). The following quotation will elaborate further:

 

The trilobites of the Cambrian period are usually not found together with the dinosaurs of the Cretaceous period. Why is this? According to the theory of evolution, this is due to the fact that the trilobites became extinct millions of years before the dinosaurs developed. However, there is a much more plausible explanation: if trilobites and dinosaurs lived nowadays, it is not likely that they could be found in the same place. This is because they would live in different ecological zones. The dinosaurs are land animals, while the trilobites are inhabitants of the sea bed. (…) Therefore, there is no reason to reject the idea that all life forms buried in the strata lived almost at the same time but in different ecological zones. Catastrophism could be the explanation for the entire geological stratigraphic sequence, just as the founders of geology supposed. (8)

 

Geological layers – did they form slowly or rapidly? As stated, fossils do not have age tags. No one can determine the age of a fossil just by looking at it. It is impossible to know purely based on the fossil.

What we do know, however, is that every fossil must be a product of rapid formation, having been buried under layers of soil. Fossils do not form in any other way, since animals that die on the ground will quickly decay or they will be eaten by scavengers. More on this from a schoolbook:

 

Fossil formation requires some abnormal circumstances, since dead organisms usually decay fast in aerobic (oxygen rich) conditions. For fossils to form, the dead organism must rapidly be covered in soil. The majority of fossils come from organisms that have sunk onto seabed, and gotten rapidly buried into soft, oxygenless sediments. (Lukion biologia [High school biology], BI1, p. 70)

 

This is a good place to refer back to the geological time chart, which is based on the idea of slow strata formation over the course of tens of millions of years. This notion was brought public, e.g., by Charles Lyell in his book Principles of Geology, published in 1830, which was a work and an idea that, for example, inspired Darwin to create his theory. However, there is reason to doubt this slow formation process, due to the following reasons, for instance:

 

• If layers contain fossils – like dinosaur fossils – it indicates the layers were formed quickly. We are talking about few weeks only, or days even, but not millions of years. Otherwise there would not be any fossils. Layers also contain fossilized trees, which can go through more than ten layers. The only way these fossils can exist, is that layers of soil have rapidly gathered on top of them.

What does this rapid formation suggest? The most logical explanation would be a sudden catastrophe, which would explain both, the rapid formation of layers and fossils in them. This might happen during a great flood, for example. Interestingly, many researchers have started to accept the idea of major catastrophes in the past and abandoned the view that everything happened at a steady pace for millions of years. Evidence favors the idea of catastrophes, rather than a slow process. Well-known atheist paleontologist Stephen Jay Gould refers to Lyell’s research:

 

Charles Lyell was a lawyer… [and he] relied on two subtle tricks to regularise his uniformitarian views as the only correct geology. Firstly, he used the straw man fallacy… In fact, the supporters of catastrophism were a lot more experimentally oriented than Lyell. Geological evidence seems to really necessitate cataclysms: cliffs are fragmented and bent; entire groups of different organism types have been wiped out. To bypass this literal manifestation, Lyell replaced the evidence with his imagination. Secondly, Lyell’s ‘uniformity’ is a jumble of claims…

… Lyell was not a virtuous knight of truthful field work, but rather one, who deliberately spread a fascinating and extraordinary theory, which was anchored to a notion of stable state in the circulation of time. With his eloquence he tried to identify his parasitic theory with rationality and sincerity. (9)

 

• Another reason to take a more skeptical approach towards the slow layer formation for over millions of years, is that today we have been able to witness rapid formation of layers. This happened, for example, during the St. Helens eruption in 1980, when more than 100 meters of soil layers were gathered on top of each other in just a few weeks. It did not take millions of years, as different kinds of layers were building up in a matter of days. If this was able to occur during a current catastrophe, something similar might have happened in the past as well. It is estimated that, for example, one-meter-thick sandstone layer takes only 30-60 minutes to form (German Müller / Institut für sedimentforschung der Universitet Heidelberg 1980)

 

• It has, for a long time, been known that the geological time chart does not correlate with nature. There is a simple reason: nowhere in the world has anyone found a consistent chain of layers, but only parts of it. There are often ten-or -hundred-million-year periods missing entirely (according to evolutionary time scales). It is rare if even three or four layers from twelve (or thirteen) are on top of each other. For instance, only five out of twelve of the most important layers have been found in the Grand Canyon, which has often worked as an exemplary case. Geological time chart is incomplete over there, as it is in other places, and no place corresponds with the image presented in books. The perfect sequence only exists on paper and in books, but this artificial system is not visible anywhere in the world.

More significantly, layers that seem to be the oldest, may be situated rather close to the surface or high on the mountains, although according to the geological time chart, they should be tens of kilometers deep under ground. For example, dinosaur fossils can be found fairly close to the surface all around the world, and there are no other layers on top of them. Why is that?

What is more puzzling, is that the so-called Cambrian fossils (according to evolution they are ca. 500-600 million years old) can be found in high mountains. For instance, the famous Burgess fossil deposit was found in the Mountain Wapta area in Canada, although according to the geological time chart it should lie deep inside the ground. These kinds of discoveries show the inaccuracy of the geological time chart.

 

When it comes to fossils, we can see them appear in almost every imaginable sequence, and often in the most opposite order than presented by evolutionists. Nature acts in the most unorthodox way possible! The so-called Cambrian mountain layers, which often contain the simplest and most primitive organisms, are often situated at such mountain tops, which also contain fossils of animals that live in the high ground. – This applies to a wide area of rather untouched layers, making it redundant to suggest that natural disasters or shifts in tectonic plates may have disturbed the layers. It is not scientific, nor within common sense to discard earth’s clear evidence for the sake of upholding the evolution theory. (10)

 

When a geologist finds strata so that the one deemed the oldest is on the top, we must forgive him if he is not sure whether he is standing on his head or his feet. There are extensive areas in South Alberta, a national park in the United States, Canada, Germany, Russia, and in the Alps where the order of the strata is quite the opposite and also in many other places the strata are quite disorderly. (Sir Archibald Geikie, the former leader of the British Geological Research Society) (11)

 

• Another indication of geological time chart’s inaccuracy, is human fossil discoveries inside rocks and even in coal deposits (Glashouver, W.J.J., So entstand die Welt, Hänssler, 1980, pp. 115-6; Bowden, M., Ape-men-Fact or Fallacy?  Sovereign Publications, 1981; Barnes, F.A., The Case of the Bones in Stone, Desert/February, 1975, p. 36-39). Objects, like pots, belonging to humans have also been found in coal deposits. This proves that these layers cannot be tens or hundreds of millions of years old, but that geologically they have formed in the not so distant past.

   On the other hand, items made by humans have been found in the same layers as dinosaur remains (Michael Brandt: Vergessene Arhäologie, 2011). There have also been human skeleton discoveries. Uuras Saarnivaara provides more similar examples. Some human related findings come from the dinosaur era (according to evolutionary time scales), and others from 200 million years before that. If we take these latter findings as they are, we must conclude that humans existed before dinosaurs. Because such discoveries exist, it is clear that the geological time chart must be wrong and the layers must be much younger:

 

Bones of humans that very closely resembled the modern man were found around 55 kilometres (34 miles) southeast of Moab, Utah. They were buried around 5 metres (16 feet) below the ground level. Around 1,5 meter (five feet) of the soil on top of them was hard rock. The stratum in which the bones were found was estimated to be at least 100 million years old. Scientists of the University of Utah studied the finding.

   (...) Human and mastodon bones were found around 7 metres (23 feet) deep near Menlo Park around 45 kilometres (28 miles) south of San Francisco in a stratum that has been classified as a late Miocenic or around two to three million years old.

   Two human skeletons were found in a copper mine about 57 kilometres (35 miles) from Moab, Utah, also in a stratum classified as Cretaceous.

   Human footprints were found in Antelope Springs, Utah, in a stratum of trilobites. Trilobites were crustaceans that, according to the theory of evolution, became extinct during the Palaeozoic Permian period more than 200 million years ago.

   (...) A gold chain was found in a mineral coal stratum in Morrisville, Illinois. The stratum was classified as Carboniferous, i.e. as 300 million years old.

   (...) A slate wall with unknown but probably alphabetic writing on it was found in a mineral coal mine in Hammondsville, Ohio. It was classified as Carboniferous, i.e. as 300 million years old. (12)

 

What about human footprints inside strata? It has long been known that human footprints have been found inside strata that have been categorized as being very old. The following quotations will refer to this. The first tells us that humans should have existed on the planet as early as 200-300 million years ago, which is long before dinosaurs. These kinds of examples illustrate the shortages of geological dating:

 

If man (...) existed in any form as early on as in the carboniferous period, geological science is so completely wrong that all geologists should give up their jobs and take up truck driving. So, at least for the present, science rejects the tempting alternative of a man having left those footprints. (The Carboniferous Mystery, Scientific Monthly, vol. 162, Jan 1940, p.14)

 

Many known scientific facts evoke serious doubts towards geological deformational history of rock units and towards geological periods. One such example could be the discovery of coeval traces of humans and dinosaurs in Mexico, New Mexico, Arizona, Missouri, Kentucky, Illinois and in other areas of United States. These traces appear in a wide area and they are usually revealed after floods or after earthmoving constructions have taken place. Trustworthy paleontologists have carefully examined them and confirmed their authenticity, and they cannot be passed as fraud. Furthermore, images of dinosaurs drawn by humans have been found on the walls of caves and canyons in Arizona and the in former region of Rhodesia. (13)

 

WHEN DID DINOSAURS GO EXTINCT? Above, we brought up how the geological time chart has been the most important determinator in chronological dating. This chart tells people, when each species lived on the planet. Therefore, any found dinosaur fossil must be at least 65 million years old, because that is the time of their extinction, according to the chart.

We can draw conclusions from the nature and heritage knowledge, realizing that it is not possible for dinosaur extinction to have taken place millions of years ago in the past. Next, we are going to look at some discoveries. We will begin with dinosaur fossils.

 

DINOSAUR FOSSILS UNDER ANALYSIS. Dinosaur fossils act as proof that they did exist on the planet. Based on them, we can roughly make out their size, appearance, and the fact that they were real animals. There is no reason to doubt their place in history.

But placing them on a chronological timeline is a different story. Although, according to the geological time chart, dinosaurs went extinct 65 million years ago, we cannot draw the same conclusion purely based on their fossils. Fossils do not have age tags stating when they died. However, their good condition would suggest that we are looking at thousands of years, and not millions. Here is why:

 

Bones are not always fossilized. There have been discoveries of fossilized dinosaur bones, but there have also been bones that have not completely fossilized yet. Most people are under the impression that all dinosaur fossils are fossilized and therefore ancient. In addition, they think fossilization takes many million years to happen.

Fossilization can, however, be a rapid process. Scientists were able to produce a fossilized tree in a few days inside laboratory conditions. Bones can also fossilize in a matter of few weeks in the right conditions, like in hot mineral rich springs. These processes do not require millions of years.

Unfossilized dinosaur bones have thus been discovered. Some dinosaur fossils might still largely consist of the original bone and they might give out a rotten smell. An evolutionist paleontologist stated that “all Hell Creek bones smell”, when referring to a dinosaur fossil discovery site. How could bones still smell after millions of years?

Science -publication reports how C. Barreto with his team have examined young dinosaur bones (Science, 262:2020-2023) that have not been fossilized. Bones estimated to be 72-84 million years old, contained the same calcium and phosphorus ratio as new bones. The original publication reveals the bones’ well-preserved microscopical details.

Nordic areas, such as Alberta in Canada and Alaska, have also been home to some lesser fossilized bone. The Journal of Paleontology (1987, Vol. 61, No 1, pp. 198-200) tells about one such finding:

 

An even more impressive example was found on the north coast of Alaska, where thousands of bones have nearly entirely survived fossilization. The bones feel and look like some old cow bones. The discoverers did not for twenty years report their discovery, as they assumed them to be bison -, and not dinosaur bones.

 

A good question is, how could these bones survive for millions of years? During the dinosaur era, the climate was warm, meaning that microbes would have almost certainly destroyed the bones. The fact that these bones were pretty much unfossilized, well-preserved, and looked like new bones, is more indicative of short time periods than long periods.

 

Soft tissue. As noted, fossils don’t have tags stating their age. No one can say with certainty, when fossilized creatures lived on earth. This cannot be directly determined based on the fossils alone.

When it comes to dinosaur fossils, remarkably, many of them have stayed in rather good condition. For instance, Yle uutiset, a Finnish news outlet, reported on March 5th, 2007: “Dinosaurusten lihaksia ja nahkaa löytyi USA:sta.”[Dinosaur muscle and skin found in USA] This report is not the only of its kind, as there have been several similar findings and articles. According to one research report, soft tissue has been successfully extracted from approximately every other Jurassic (145,5 – 199,6 million evolutionary years ago) dinosaur bone (14). Well-preserved dinosaur bones pose a mystery, provided they are 65 million years old.

A good example is an almost perfect dinosaur fossil that was uncovered in a limestone layer in Pietraroia, South Italy, and was considered to be 110 million years old according to the theory of evolution, but whose liver, intestines, muscle, and cartilage tissues were still there. A surprising detail in this finding was a preserved intestine that still included muscular tissue. According to the researchers, the intestine looked as if it had just been cut! (tree, August 1998, Vol. 13, issue 8, pp. 303–304)

Another example is pterosaur (large flying reptiles) fossils found in Araripe, Brazil. These fossils were in excellent condition. Stafford House, a paleontologist from a London university, stated the following regarding these discoveries (Discover 2/1994):

 

If that creature had died half a year ago, was buried and dug up, it would look exactly like that. It is completely perfect in every aspect.

 

Dinosaur discoveries are thus not new to well-preserved soft tissue. These findings can be exactly like discovered mammoths, which are estimated to have gone extinct a few millennia ago.

A good question is, how can we estimate dinosaur fossils to be much older than mammoth fossils if both are in the same condition? There is no other basis than the geological time chart, which has many times conflicted with natural observations. It is time to put this chart aside. It is very likely that dinosaurs and mammoths coexisted on the planet.

 

Proteins. Dinosaur remains have also contained such proteins, like albumin, collagen and osteocalcin. Easily breakable proteins, like elastin and laminin have also been successfully recovered [Schweitzer, M. and 6 others, Biomolecular characterization and protein sequences of the Campanian hadrosaur B. canadensis, Science 324 (5927): 626-631, 2009]. The issue with these findings is that these substances might have even already decayed from animal fossils that are from the present day. For instance, a mammoth’s bone sample that was estimated to be 13 000 years old, did not contain any collagen anymore (Science, 1978, 200, 1275). Whereas, collagen has been successfully extracted from dinosaur fossils. According to the Biochemist magazine, collagen cannot stay preserved for three million years, not even in the most ideal zero temperature conditions (15). The fact that these discoveries exist, suggests that dinosaur fossils are at most a few millennia old. Dating based on the geological time chart does not correlate with these new findings.

 

On the other hand, it is known that biomolecules cannot be preserved over 100,000 years (Bada, J et al. 1999. Preservation of key biomolecules in the fossil record: current knowledge and future challenges. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences. 354, [1379]).This is the finding of empirical science. The biomolecule of animal tissue is collagen, which is a typical structural protein, and it can usually be segregated from fossils. It is known that this protein in question decays quickly from bones, and you can detect its remains only after 30,000 years, excluding very dry special circumstances. It undoubtedly rains occasionally in the Hell Creek region. Thus, collagen should not be found from a “68 million” year-old bone, which has been laying around in the soil. (16)

 

If the observations regarding proteins, such as albumin, collagen, osteocalcin, and DNA, that have been separated from dinosaur bones are true – and we have no reason to doubt the researchers' carefulness – the bones must (based on these results) date back to 40,000- to 50,000 years at most, as this is the highest possible preserving time in nature for such materials. (17)

 

Blood cells. Another oddity in dinosaur remains is the existence of blood cells. Blood cells with their nucleus have been found, and scientists have also detected remaining hemoglobin. One of the most remarkable blood cell discoveries was already made in the 1990s by Mary Schweitzer. After which there have been other similar findings. A good question is, how can blood cells stay preserved for many millions of years, or might they perhaps be geologically newer than previously thought? Many findings like these clearly indicate that the geological time chart and the index fossil method are fully wrong. We do not need to trust them, because so many observations refer to short time periods:

 

When Mary Schweitzer was five years old, she announced that she would become a dinosaur researcher. Her dream came true, and at the age of 38, she was able to study an almost perfectly preserved skeleton of a Tyrannosaurus Rex, found in Montana in 1998 (Journal of American Medical Association, 17 Nov. 1993, Vol. 270, No 19, pp. 2376–2377). The age of the skeleton was estimated at "80 million years." As many as 90% of the bones were found and they were still intact. Schweitzer specializes in tissue research and calls herself a molecular paleontologist. She selected the thighbones and shinbones of the finding and decided to examine the bone marrow. Schweitzer observed that the bone marrow had not been fossilized and that it had been unbelievably well preserved. The bone was completely organic and extremely well preserved. Schweitzer studied it with a microscope and noticed curious structures. They were small and circular and had a nucleus, just like the red blood cells in a vein. But the blood cells should have disappeared from the dinosaur bones ages ago. "I got goose pimples, it was as if I was studying a modern bone sample,” says Schweitzer. "Naturally, I was unable to believe what I saw and I told the laboratory technician: “These bones are 65 million years old, how can the blood cells have been preserved for so long?” (Science, July 1993, Vol. 261, pp. 160–163). What is significant with this finding is that not all of the bones had been completely fossilized. Gayle Callis, a specialist researcher of bones, showed the bone samples in a scientific meeting where a pathologist incidentally saw them. The pathologist remarked, "Did you know that there are blood cells in this bone?"  This led to a remarkable thriller. Mary Schweitzer showed the sample to Jack Horner, a famous researcher of dinosaurs, who looked at the sample and said, "So you think that there are blood cells in it?", to which Schweitzer replied, "No, I don't."  "Well then, just try and prove that they are not blood cells,” Horner replied (earth, 1997, June: 55–57, Schweitzer et al., The Real Jurassic Park). Jack Horner presumes that the bones are so thick that water and oxygen have been unable to affect them. (18)

 

Radiocarbon. The most important method to date organic material is radiocarbon method. Because of this method, we know the half-life of radiocarbon (C-14) to be 5730 years, meaning that there should not be any left after ca. 100 000 years.

The reality is, however, that radiocarbon is constantly being found inside strata, in oil deposits, from Cambrian organisms, in coal deposits, and even in diamonds that should be “hundreds of millions of years old”. Since the half-life of radiocarbon is only a few thousand years, this should not be possible if the samples are from millions of years ago. The only option is that these organisms died much closer to our present day, which would be a few thousand years ago, rather than millions of years ago.

The same issue applies to dinosaurs. Usually, dinosaurs are not even put through the radiocarbon method, because they have been considered to be too old for that. However, a few dinosaur fossils have been tested with the method, and surprisingly, the results have shown some remaining radiocarbon. This, with the previous observations, suggest that these creatures did not go extinct millions of years ago.

The following quotation will further explain the issue. German research team made reports about dinosaur remains found in several different locations:

 

It is not common for fossils that are thought to be very old to get a carbon-14 dating, because they should not have any radiocarbon left. The half-life of radioactive carbon is so short that all of it has practically decayed in under 100,000 years.

In 2012 during August a group of German scientists in the convention for geophysicists reported carbon-14 dating measurements, which were made from many fossilized dinosaur bone samples. According to the measurements, the bone samples were 22,000-39,000 years old! The presentation can be seen in written form on YouTube. (19)

How were the measurements received? Two of the chairmen, who could not accept the measurements, deleted the abstract of the presentation from the conference website without mentioning it to the scientists. The measurements can be found here: http://newgeology.us/presentation48.html. This incident tells us, the impact of naturalistic paradigm. It is nearly impossible to be able to publish measurements conflicting it in the science community dictated by naturalism. It is more likely that pigs fly. (20)

 

DNA. One indication that dinosaur remains cannot be millions of years old is the discovery of DNA in them. DNA has been extracted, for example, from the bone material of a Tyrannosaurus Rex (Helsingin sanomat 26/9/1994) and from dinosaur eggs in China (Helsingin sanomat 17/3/1995). These DNA discoveries are extremely difficult for evolution, because even some old human mummies or mammoths have not contained DNA anymore, as it has already decayed. We can get a good example from Svante Pääbo’s examination of 23 human mummies’ soft tissue samples from the Berlin museum that he conducted in Uppsala. He was able to extract DNA from one mummy only, which shows the short lifespan of this substance (Nature 314: 644-645). The fact that DNA still exists in dinosaur remains, demonstrates that these fossils cannot be many million years old.

The matter is made even more difficult by the fact that after 10 000 years there should not be any DNA remaining (Nature, 1 Aug, 1991, vol 352). Similarly, a fairly new study from 2012 calculated that DNA’s half-life is only 521 years. This gives us a reason to abandon the idea of ten-million-year-old fossils. News (yle.fi > Uutiset > Tiede, 13/10/2012) related to this reported the following:

 

Survival time of DNA got solved – dreams of cloning dinosaurs shattered

 

Dinosaurs became extinct 65 million years ago. DNA does not survive nearly as long, not even in the ideal conditions, according to a recent study…

Enzymes and micro-organism start to break down the DNA of the cells right after an animal dies. However, the primary reason for this is thought to be the reaction caused by water. Because there is groundwater nearly everywhere, DNA should, in theory, decay at a steady rate. To determine this, however, prior to this date we were not able to find large enough amounts of fossils that still had DNA left.

Danish and Australian scientists have now solved the mystery, as they received 158 shinbones of the giant Moa bird in their laboratory, and the bones still had genetic material left in them. The bones are 600 – 8000 years old and originate approximately from the same area, thus they have aged in stable conditions.

 

Not even amber can provide DNA with extra resistance

 

By comparing the age of the samples and the decay rates of the DNA, scientists were able to calculate a half-life of 521 years. This means that after 521 years half of the nucleotide joints in the DNA have broken apart. After another 521 years this has also happened to half of the remaining joints and so on.

Researchers noted that even if the bone rested in an ideal temperature, all the joints would have broken apart no later than after 68 million years. Even after one and a half a million years, DNA becomes unreadable: there is too little information left, because all the essential parts are gone.

 

If DNA has stayed preserved in dinosaurs, when its half-life is measured in hundreds of years only, we should be able to realize something. Either DNA tests are not reliable, or dinosaurs did not live millions of years ago. It would seem the latter is more plausible, because other dating methods also indicate young ages, rather than million-year ages. This science is based on measurements, and by ignoring them, we are leading ourselves astray.

 

THE END OF DINOSAURS. When we think about dinosaur’s extinction, we often believe it happened millions of years ago, at the end of the Cretaceous period. It is believed other animal -and plant species, like ammonites and belemnites, also faced extinction in the same decimation. It is assumed the disaster wiped out the majority of Cretaceous animals. The prime cause has always been blamed on a meteorite, which would have caused an enormous cloud of dust. This dust cloud would have covered the Sun for a long time, which would have killed many plants, causing animals eating those plants to starve to death.

 This meteorite theory and slow climate change concept have one problem, however: they do not explain fossils inside hard rocks and mountains. Dinosaur fossils can be found all around the globe inside hard rock materials, which is peculiar. Peculiar in the sense that large animals like dinosaurs – perhaps even 20 meters tall – cannot go inside rocks. Time won’t help us in this dilemma either, because even if we waited millions of years for some animal to be buried in the ground and fossilize, it would decay completely before that, or some other animals would eat the carcass. In fact, whenever we do come across dinosaur -and other fossils, it is expected they got buried fast under mud and soil. There is no other way for fossils to form:

 

It is apparent that if the formation of strata were to take place at such a slow tempo, no fossils could be preserved, since they would not be buried under soil before being decomposed by water acids, or before being destroyed and broken into pieces by rubbing and hitting against the bottom of a shallow sea. They can be covered in sediment only in an accident in which they are buried quickly. (Geochronology or the Age of the Earth on grounds of Sediments and Life, Bulletin of the National Research Council No. 80, Washington D. C., 1931, p. 14)

 

In conclusion, these globally found dinosaurs must have been buried quickly under mud -and silt slides. Wet silt has first covered them, after which it has hardened like cement. This is the only way to explain dinosaur -, mammoth -and other animals’ fossils. It is a phenomenon that could easily take place during the Flood.

We are going to look at a description that gives us the right idea. It tells how dinosaurs can be found inside hard solid rocks, signifying that they must have been buried under wet soil. This soil has then hardened around them. We could expect something like this to happen in the Flood, but not in the natural cycle of nature (the quote also refers to how whirlpools may have gathered dinosaur bones). Boldface was added later to the text to clarify the idea:

 

He went to the deserts of South Dakota, where there are bright-colored red, yellow, and orange cliffs and rocks. Already in a few days, he found from the cliff some bones he assumed to be what he had gone to search for. When he dug the rock around the bones, he noted that the bones were the skeleton of an animal. They were not together, as the bones of dinosaurs often are. Many of these piles seemed as if created by a powerful whirl of water.

   These bones were now in blue sandstone that is very hard. The sandstone had to be removed by a road scraper and loosened by explosives. Brown and his assistants made a hole of almost seven and a half meters deep to get the bones out. Getting one large skeleton out took them two summers. By no means did they remove the bones from stone. They transported these blocks of stone by train into the museum where the scientists were able to chip the stone material away and set up the skeleton. This tyrant lizard now stands in the exhibition hall of the museum. (p. 72, Dinosaurs / Ruth Wheeler and Harold G. Coffin) 

 

OTHER EVIDENCE FOR THE FLOOD. The fact of the matter is that dinosaur remains can be found inside solid rocks, from which they are difficult to get out of. The only way they might have ended up like that, is that wet mud has quickly covered them and then solidified around them into hard rock. It is possible something like this could occur during the Flood. However, human history contains mentions of these large animals even after the Flood, meaning that they did not all die in the Flood.

Is there other evidence to support the Flood? We are going to discuss some of them here. What is being explained by millions of years or with multiple catastrophes in the geological time chart, may have been caused by one and the same catastrophe: the Flood. With that we can explain the extinction of dinosaurs and other geological phenomena.

Strongly evidencing the Flood is, for example, the fact that oceanic sediments are common all around the world, as seen in the following comments. The first one comes from 200 year ago from a book by James Hutton, who is often referred to as the father of geology:

 

We have to conclude that all the layers of earth (...) were formed by sand and gravel that piled up on the seabed, crustacean shells and coral matter, soil and clay. (J. Hutton, The Theory of the Earth l, 26. 1785)

 

J.S. Shelton: On mainland, oceanic sediment rock foundations are far more common and wider than all the other sediment rock foundations combined. This is one of the simple facts that requires explanation, as it is in the core of everything that is associated with humans’ continuous efforts to understand the changing geography of the geological past. (21)

 

Another indication of the Flood is the appearance of coal deposits all over the world, which we know have formed in the water. Moreover, the presence of fish – and marine fossils indicates that the deposits cannot be a result of any slow decay in any given swamp. Instead, it would be more logical if water had carried plants to where coal deposits have formed. The force of water has ripped plants and trees by their roots, gathered them into large piles and also mixed marine animals’ remains with terrestrial plants. This kind of development is only possible in a disastrous flood, like the one in the Bible.

 

When forests were for some reason buried in silt, mineral coal strata were generated. Our current machine culture is partially based on these strata. (Mattila Rauno, Teuvo Nyberg & Olavi Vestelin, Koulun biologia 9, p. 91)

 

Under and above the mineral coal seams there are, as has been said, regular layers of clay stone, and from their structure we can see that they have been stratified from water. (22)

 

The evidence overwhelmingly suggests that mineral coal was generated quickly when large forests were destroyed, layered and then quickly buried. There are huge lignite strata in Yallourn, Victoria (Australia) that contain plenty of pine tree trunks – trees that do not currently grow on marsh land.

   The sorted, thick strata that contain up to 50% of pure pollen and that are spread over a huge area clearly prove that the lignite strata were formed by water.  (23)

 

Children are taught at school that mineral coal is slowly generated from peat even though such generation cannot be seen anywhere in the modern world. With evidence such as the extensive mineral coal fields, the different types of plants and the multilayered tree trunks in upright position, it seems that the mineral coal strata have been generated from huge drifting masses of plants during a very large flood. Plenty of burrows made by marine life forms can also be found inside these carbonized plant fossils. Fossils of marine animals have also been found in mineral coal strata (“A note on the Occurrence of Marine Animal Remains in a Lancashire Carbon Ball”, Geological Magazine, 118:307,1981) (...) Major strata of marine animal shells and fossils of the sea creature Spirorbis have also been found in the mineral coal strata. (Weir, J., ”Recent Studies of Shells of the Carbon Measures”, Science Progress, 38:445, 1950). (24) 

 

Prof. Price presents cases where 50- to100 mineral coal layers are one top of each other and between them there are layers including fossils from deep sea. He deems this piece of evidence so strong and convincing that he has never tried to explain these facts on grounds of Lyell’s uniformity theory. (25)

 

Third indication of the Flood is marine fossils appearing high up in the mountains, like in the Himalayas, the Alps and Andes. Here are some examples from the works of scientists and geologists:

 

While travelling on the Beagle Darwin himself found fossilized seashells from high up on the Andean Mountains. It shows that, what is now a mountain was once under water. (Jerry A. Coyne: Miksi evoluutio on totta [Why evolution is true], p. 127)

 

There is reason to look closely at the original nature of the rocks in the mountain ranges. It is best seen in the Alps, in the lime Alps of the northern, so-called Helvetian zone. Limestone is the main rock material. If we were to scale the steep slopes of some mountain or peak – if we had the energy to climb up there – we would find fossilized remains of marine creatures. They are often badly damaged, but it is possible to find recognizable pieces. All those fossils are lime shells or skeletons of sea creatures. Among them are spiral twisted ammonites and many bivalves. (…) The reader might wonder at this point what it means that mountain ranges hold so many sediments, which can also be found stratified in the bottom of the sea. (p. 236,237 "Muuttuva maa", Pentti Eskola)

 

Harutaka Sakai from the Japanese University in Kyushu has for many years researched these marine fossils in the Himalayan Mountains. He and his group have listed a whole aquarium from the Mesozoic period. Tender sea lilies, relatives to the current sea urchins and starfishes, were found on cliffs over three kilometres above sea level. Ammonites, belemnites, corals, and plankton fossils are found in the rocks of the mountains. (…)

   At an altitude of two kilometres above sea level, the geologists found markings the sea had made. There was a wavelike rock surface, similar to that which is formed by waves on sand in low water. Yellow stripes of limestone have been found even on the peak of Mount Everest, formed from innumerable remains of marine creatures under water. ("Maapallo ihmeiden planeetta", p. 55)

 

The fourth indication of the Flood is all the flood stories, which according to some estimates, there are nearly 500 of them. The universal nature of these stories can be regarded as very affirmative evidence for the Flood:

 

Around 500 cultures – including indigenous peoples of Greece, China, Peru and North America – are known in the world where the legends and myths describe a compelling story of a large flood that changed the history of the tribe. In many stories, only a few people survived the flood, just like in the case of Noah. Many of the peoples considered the flood to have been caused by gods who, for one reason or another, got bored with the human kind. Perhaps the people were corrupt, like in Noah’s times and in a legend by the Native American Hopi tribe of North America, or perhaps there were too many and too noisy people, like in the Gilgamesh epic. (26)

 

If the world-wide Flood was not real, some nations would have explained that frightening volcanic eruptions, large snow storms, droughts (...) have destroyed their evil ancestors. The universality of the story of the Flood is therefore one of the best pieces of evidence of its truthfulness. We could dismiss any of these individual legends and think it was only imagination, but together, from a global perspective, they are almost indisputable. (The Earth)

 

Dinosaurs and mammals. When reading biology books and evolutionary literature, we are often met with the idea that all life evolved from one simple original cell into the diverse nature we have today. Part of this evolutionary notion contains the idea that fish became frogs, frogs became reptiles, and that mammals came only at the end of dinosaurs. We cannot forget, however, that dinosaur bones have been found among bones that resemble horse -, cow -, and sheep bones (Anderson, A., Tourism falls victim to tyrannosaurus, Nature, 1989, 338, 289 / Dinosaurus may have died quietly after all, 1984, New Scientist, 104, 9.), which means that they must have coexisted.

The following quotation also addresses the issue. It talks about how Carl Werner decided to test Darwin’s theory in practice. He conducted 14 years of research and took thousands of photographs. His research reveals that an array of mammals and birds coexisted with dinosaurs:

 

Without any specific prior knowledge about living fossils, American paramedic doctor Carl Werner decided to put Darwin’s theory under a practical test… He conducted extensive 14-year research on fossils from the dinosaur era and the possible species that might have coexisted with them… Werner familiarized himself with professional paleontology literature and visited 60 natural history museums around the world, where he took 60 000 photographs. He only focused on fossils that were dug up from the same strata, as dinosaur fossils can be found (Triassic -, Jurassic -, and Cretaceous periods 250-65 million years ago). He then compared the thousands of equally old fossils he had found in museums and seen in the literature with current species and interviewed many experts in the field of paleontology and other professionals. His result was that the museums and paleontology-based literature displayed fossils from every group of species that currently exist…

We have been told that mammals began to slowly develop during the “prime era” of dinosaurs, that the first mammals were “small shrew-like creatures living in hiding and only moving during the night in fear of the dinosaurs.” In the professional literature, however, Werner discovered reports of squirrels, opossums, beavers, primates and platypuses that had been dug up from dinosaur strata. He also referred to a work published in 2004, according to which 432 mammal creatures have been found in the Triassic -, Jurassic -, and Cretaceous strata, and almost a hundred of them are complete skeletons

In Werner’s video interview the administrator of Utah’s prehistoric museum, Dr Donald Burge, explains: “We find mammal fossils in almost all of our dinosaur excavations. We have ten tons of bentonite clay containing mammal fossils, and we are in a process of giving them to other researchers. Not because we wouldn’t find them important, but because life is short, and I am not specialized in mammals: I have specialized in reptiles and dinosaurs”. Paleontologist Zhe-Xi Luo (Carnegie Museum of Natural History, Pittsburgh) stated in Werner’s video interview in May of 2004: “The term ‘dinosaur era’ is misleading (misnomer). Mammals constitute a significant group that coexisted with dinosaurs and then survived”. (These comments are taken from the book: Werner C. Living Fossils, p. 172 –173). (27) 

 

Thus, based on fossil records, the term dinosaur era is misleading. Regular modern-day mammals have coexisted with dinosaurs, which is at least 432 mammal species.

What about birds, which we think evolved from dinosaurs? They have also been found in the same strata as dinosaurs. We are talking about the same species as today, such as parrots, penguins, eagle owls, sand pipers, albatrosses, flamingos, loons, ducks, cormorants, avocets… Dr. Werner has accordingly stated that “Museums don’t showcase these modern-day bird fossils, nor draw them in images depicting dinosaur environments. It is wrong. Essentially, whenever a T. Rex or a Triceratops is being showcased in a museum exhibition, they should also showcase ducks, loons, flamingos, or some other modern-day birds that have been found in same strata as dinosaurs. But we don’t see that. I have never seen a duck with a dinosaur in a natural museum, have you? Or an owl? Even a parrot?”

 

Dinosaurs and humans. Evolution theory considers it impossible that humans could have lived as early as the dinosaurs have. It is not accepted, although, we know of other mammals that coexisted with dinosaurs, and despite some discoveries even suggesting that humans might have existed before the dinosaurs (items and human fossils in coal deposits etc.).

However, there is clear evidence for the coexistence of humans and dinosaurs. For instance, descriptions of dragons can be considered as such. In the past people talked about dragons, and not dinosaurs, a term that was not coined until the 19th century by Richard Owens.

 

Stories. One proof of dinosaurs having lived in the immediate past is seen in many stories and descriptions of large dragons and pterosaurs. The older these descriptions are, the more truthful they likely get. These descriptions – that may be based on old traditions – can be found in many different nations: they are mentioned in English, Irish, Danish, Norwegian, German, Greek, Roman, Egyptian, and Babylonian literature. The World Book Encyclopedia (Vol. 5, 1973, p. 265) describes these stories:

 

The dragons in legends are, strangely enough, just like real animals that lived in the past. They resemble large reptiles (dinosaurs) that ruled the land long before man is supposed to have appeared. Dragons were generally regarded as bad and destructive. Each nation referred to them in their mythology. (The World Book Encyclopedia, vol. 5, 1973, s. 265)

 

Since the beginning of noting history, dragons have appeared everywhere: in the earliest accounts of Assyria and Babylon about the development of civilization, in Jewsish history according to the Old Testament, in the old texts from China and Japan, in the mythology of the Greeks, Romans and the early Christians, in the allegories of ancient America, and in the myths of Africa and India. It is difficult to find a society that would have not included dragons in their legendary history…Aristotle, Pliny and other writers from the classical times claimed that tales about dragons were based on facts rather than imagination. (28)

 

Finnish geologist Pentti Eskola wrote decades ago about dragons’ resemblance to dinosaurs in his book Muuttuva maa [The changing world]:

 

The varying forms of lizard-like animals seem so funny to us because many of them resemble – in a distant and often caricature-like way – modern mammals living under similar conditions. However, most dinosaurs were so very different from the modern life forms that the nearest analogues can be found in the depictions of dragons in legends. Strangely enough, the authors of the legends had naturally not studied petrifactions or even knew of them. (29)

 

Another example indicating that dragons might have actually been dinosaurs, comes from the Chinese zodiac. It is known to be centuries old. The system is based on twelve animal signs that are repeated in 12-year cycles, hence the involvement of twelve different animals. Eleven of them are also known today: rat, ox, tiger, rabbit, snake, horse, sheep, monkey, rooster, dog and pig. Whereas, the twelfth animal is a dragon, which no longer exists. We should be asking, why would the dragon be the only exception as a fictional creature, when the rest are real. Wouldn’t it be more reasonable to assume it used to live with the humans in the past, but later went extinct like countless of other animals have? It should be kept in mind that the name ‘dinosaur’ was invented in the 19th century by Richard Owen. Before that people used to call them dragons:

 

Here are some other observations worth mentioning:

 

• Marco Polo told about enormous animals he saw in India and that were regarded as gods. What were these animals? Had they been elephants, surely, he would have known them by name.

Interestingly, an 800-year-old temple in Cambodian jungle has revealed an engraving that looks like a stegosaurus, which is a type of dinosaur. (From Ta Prohm temple. Maier, C., The fantastic creatures of Angkor, www.unexplainedearth.com/angkor.php, 9 February 2006.)

 

• Descriptions and stories about dragons are very ordinary in China; there are thousands of them. They tell how dragons laid eggs, how sometimes they had wings, and how they were covered in scales. In a Chinese story a man called Yu faced dragons as he drained swamps. This happened after a large world-wide flood.

In China dinosaur bones have for centuries been used as traditional medicine and to heal burns. The Chinese name for dinosaurs (kong long) simply means “dragon bones” (Don Lessem, Dinosaurs rediscovered p. 128-129. Touchstone 1992.). Chinese are also told to have used dragons as domestic animals and in imperial parades (Molen G, Forntidens vidunder, Genesis 4, 1990, p. 23-26.)

 

• Egyptians have portrayed the dragon Apophis as an enemy of their King Re. Similarly, descriptions of dragons can be found in Babylonian literature. The famous Gilgamesh is also said to have killed a dragon, a large reptilian like creature in the cedar forest. (Encyclopedia Britannica, 1962, Vol. 10, p. 359)

 

• Greek Apollon is said to have killed a Python dragon at the Fountain of Delphin. The most notable dragon killer in the myths of the ancient Greek and Romans was a man called Perseus.

 

• A poetry story from 500-600 AD tells about a brave soul called Beowulf, who’s mission was to cleanse Danish straits from both, flying creatures and under water monsters. He was known for the heroic act of defeating the Grendel monster. This creature was said to have large hindlegs and small front legs, and it was said to be able to bare many hits form the sword. It was also said to be slightly larger than humans. It moved in an upright position very swiftly.

 

• Roman author Lucanus has also talked about dragons. He directed his words to an Ethiopian dragon: “You gold shimmering dragon, you make the air soar high and you kill great bulls.

 

• Descriptions of flying snakes in Arabia by Greek Herodotos (ca. 484–425 B.C.) have been preserved. He quite aptly describes some pterosaurs. (Rein, E., The III-VI Book of Herodotos , p. 58 and Book VII-IX , p. 239, WSOY, 1910)

 

• Plinius said (Natural History) during the first century BC, how the dragon is “in a constant war with the elephant, and it is so humongous that it wraps the elephant inside its skin folds and twists it into a ball inside it.”

 

• An old encyclopedia History Animalium mentions that there still were "dragons" in the 1500s, but that they had diminished considerably in size and were rare.

 

• An old English chronicle from 1405 refers to a dragon: “Near the town Bures, around Sudbury, a dragon was recently detected, which could be a great danger for the countryside. It is enormous, has hair on its head, its teeth are like saw blades and its tail never ends. After slaughtering the shepherd, it devoured many sheep.” (Cooper, B., After the Flood-The early post-Flood histort of Europe traced back to Noah, New Wine Press, West Sussex, UK, pp. 130-161)

 

• Italian scientist Ulysses Aldrovanus has accurately described a small dragon in one of his publications. Edward Topsell wrote, as late as in the year 1608, the following: “There are many different kinds of dragons. Different kinds are distinguished partly by their habitat, their size and their characteristics.”

 

• Dragon symbols were common amongst several troops. It was used, e.g., by the emperors of eastern Rome and English kings (by Uther Pendragon, king Arthur’s father, Richard I during the 1191 expedition, and by Henry III whilst at war with Wales in 1245), and it also served as a national symbol in the royal family’s seal in China.

 

• Dinosaurs and dragons are a part of the folklore of many nations. In addition to China, this has been common among the nations of South America.

 

• Johannes Damascene, the last of the Greek Church Fathers, who was born in 676 A.D., describes dragons (The Works of St. John Damascene, Martis Publishing House, Moscow, 1997) in the following way:

 

Roman Dio Cassius (155–236 A.D.), who wrote the history of the Roman Empire and Republic, depicts the fights of Roman consul Regulus in Carthage. A dragon was slain in the battle. It was skinned and the skin was sent to the Senate. By order of the Senate, the skin was measured and it was 120 feet in length (ca. 37 meters). The skin was kept in a temple on the hills of Rome up to the year 133 B.C., when it disappeared as the Celts occupied Rome. (Plinius, Natural History. Book 8, Chapter 14. Plinius himself says to have seen the trophy in question in Rome).  (30)

 

Drawings. There are also drawings, paintings and statues depicting dragons that are almost identical in anatomical detail throughout the world. They can be found in almost every culture and religion, just as stories about them are common. Images of dragons have been recorded, e.g., on war shields (Sutton Hoo) and in church wall ornaments (e.g., Ss Mary and Hardulph, England). A gate in the ancient town of Ishtar in old Babylon depicts dragons among bulls and lions. Early Mesopotamian Cylinders depict hugging dragons, which’ necks are almost as long as their tails (Moortgat, A., The art of ancient Mesopotamia, Phaidon Press, London 1969, pp. 1,9,10 and Plate A.). More dragon-dinosaur related images can be seen, e.g., here https://www.biokemia.fi/Dinosauruslegendat.htm

It is also interesting that there are drawings of these animals even on walls of caves and canyons. Such findings have been made at least in Arizona and near the former Rhodesia (Wysong. R.L., The Creation-evolution controversy, pp. 378, 380). For example in Arizona in 1924, while studying a high mountain wall, it was noted that pictures of different animals had been carved on the stone, such as elephants and steenboks, but also an obvious picture of a dinosaur (Thoralf Gulbrandsen: Puuttuva rengas, 1957, p. 91). There is also a relief sculpture from the Mayan Indians that has stayed preserved, and it seems to depict a bird that looks like the Archaeopteryx lizard bird (31). According to evolution it should have lived with the dinosaurs.

Also, evidence of the pterosaurs whose wingspan may have been more than 15 meters and are believed to have become extinct tens of millions of years ago has been preserved. The description below refers to these creatures and how drawings of them have appeared even on pottery:

 

The largest of the flying lizards was the pterosaur whose wingspan may have been more than 17 meters. (…) In the Bbc Wildlife Magazine (3/1995, Vol. 13), Richard Greenwell speculated about the existence of the pterosaur today. He quotes research A. Hyatt Verrill, referring to some Peruvian pottery he found. A lizard very much like the pterodactyl was depicted on the pottery.

   Verrill thinks that the artists have used fossils as their models and writes:

 

For centuries, accurate descriptions and even drawings of the pterodactyl fossils have been passed over from one generation to another, as the forefathers of the Cocle people lived in a country where there were well preserved remains of the pterosaurs.

 

Also, the North American Indians were familiar with the thunderbird, whose name was borrowed for a make of car as well. (32)

 

In the Bible, the Book of Job, Behemoth, and Leviathan seem to refer to dinosaurs. As for Behemoth, it is said that it had a tail like a cedar, close-knit sinews and bones like tubes of brass.  These depictions perfectly fit the characteristics of dinosaurs, such as the sauropod, which were able to grow up to 20 meters tall. Similarly, the habitat of behemoth in the safety of reeds and marshlands fits well with dinosaurs, because most of them lived near coasts.

As far as the cedar tail that behemoth stretches out is concerned, it is worthwhile to note that no great animal is known nowadays whose tail would fit this description. Herbivore dinosaurs’ tail could have been 10-15 meters long and weigh up to 1-2 tons. We don’t know any animals these days fitting these criteria. Some Bible translations have translated behemoth as the hippopotamus (and Leviathan as a crocodile), but characterization of a cedar like tail does not fit the hippo at all.

We can find an interesting comment made by distinguished and now late fossil researcher Stephen Jay Gould, who was an atheist Marxist. He stated that the animal fitting the characteristics of the Bible’s behemoth is the dinosaur (Pandans Tumme, p. 221, Ordfrontsförlag, 1987). As an evolutionist, he believed that the writer of Job must have gathered his knowledge from fossils. However, this Book that is one of the oldest in the Bible, clearly refers to a living animal (Job 40:15: Behold now behemoth, which I made with you…). 

 

- (Job 40:15-23) Behold now behemoth, which I made with you; he eats grass as an ox.

16 See now, his strength is in his loins, and his force is in the navel of his belly.

17 He moves his tail like a cedar: The sinews of his thighs are tightly knit.

18 His bones are as strong pieces of brass; his bones are like bars of iron.

19 He is the chief of the ways of God: he that made him can make his sword to approach to him.

20 Surely the mountains bring him forth food, where all the beasts of the field play.

21 He lies under the shady trees, in the covert of the reed, and fens.

22 The shady trees cover him with their shadow; the willows of the brook compass him about.

23 Behold, he drinks up a river, and hastens not: he trusts that he can draw up Jordan into his mouth.

 

Leviathan is another interesting creature mentioned in the Book of Job. This creature is said to be the king of animals and it is described how it spews fire out of its mouth. (The so-called bomber beetle that can spew hot – 100 degrees Celsius – gas directly on an attacker, is known in the animal kingdom). It is possible that many stories about dragons that can blow fire from their mouths stem from this.

Some Bible translations have translated Leviathan as a crocodile, but who has seen a crocodile that makes you crumble at the sight of it, and who can bite through iron like its hay, and who is the king of all majestic animals? In all likelihood, it is also an extinct animal that no longer exists, but was known during the time of Job. The Book of Job says the following:

 

- (Job 41:1,2,9,13-34) Can you draw out leviathan with an hook? or his tongue with a cord which you let down?

2 Can you put an hook into his nose? or bore his jaw through with a thorn?

9 Behold, the hope of him is in vain: shall not one be cast down even at the sight of him?

13 Who can discover the face of his garment? or who can come to him with his double bridle?

14 Who can open the doors of his face? his teeth are terrible round about.

15 His scales are his pride, shut up together as with a close seal.

16 One is so near to another, that no air can come between them.

17 They are joined one to another, they stick together, that they cannot be sundered.

18 By his neesings a light does shine, and his eyes are like the eyelids of the morning.

19 Out of his mouth go burning lamps, and sparks of fire leap out.

20 Out of his nostrils goes smoke, as out of a seething pot or caldron.

21 His breath kindles coals, and a flame goes out of his mouth.

22 In his neck remains strength, and sorrow is turned into joy before him.

23 The flakes of his flesh are joined together: they are firm in themselves; they cannot be moved.

24 His heart is as firm as a stone; yes, as hard as a piece of the nether millstone.

25 When he raises up himself, the mighty are afraid: by reason of breakings they purify themselves.

26 The sword of him that lays at him cannot hold: the spear, the dart, nor the habergeon.

27 He esteems iron as straw, and brass as rotten wood.

28 The arrow cannot make him flee: sling stones are turned with him into stubble.

29 Darts are counted as stubble: he laughs at the shaking of a spear.

30 Sharp stones are under him: he spreads sharp pointed things on the mire.

31 He makes the deep to boil like a pot: he makes the sea like a pot of ointment.

32 He makes a path to shine after him; one would think the deep to be hoary.

33 On earth there is not his like, who is made without fear.

34 He beholds all high things: he is a king over all the children of pride.

 

What about Bible descriptions of dragons? The Bible is filled with metaphors depicting doves, savage wolves, cunning snakes, sheep, and goats, which are all animals that be found in the nature today. Why would a dragon, which is mentioned several times in the Old and New Testaments, and in old literature, be an exception? When the First Book of Genesis (1:21) tells how God created large sea animals, sea monsters (the revised version) (Gen 1:21 And God created great whales, and every living creature that moves, which the waters brought forth abundantly, after their kind, and every winged fowl after his kind: and God saw that it was good.), the original language uses the same word “tannin”, which equates to dragon elsewhere in the Bible. The following verses, for instance, refer to dragons:

 

- (Ps 104:26) There go the ships: there is that leviathan, whom you have made to play therein.

 

- (Job 7:12) Am I a sea, or a whale, that you set a watch over me? (the revised version: sea monster, in Hebrew tannin, which means dragon)

 

- (Job 26:12,13) He divides the sea with his power, and by his understanding he smites through the proud.

13 By his spirit he has garnished the heavens; his hand has formed the crooked serpent.

 

- (Ps 74:13,14) You did divide the sea by your strength: you brake the heads of the dragons in the waters.

14 You brake the heads of leviathan in pieces, and gave him to be meat to the people inhabiting the wilderness.

 

- (Ps 91:13) You shall tread on the lion and adder: the young lion and the dragon shall you trample under feet.

 

- (Isa 30:6) The burden of the beasts of the south: into the land of trouble and anguish, from where come the young and old lion, the viper and fiery flying serpent, they will carry their riches on the shoulders of young asses, and their treasures on the bunches of camels, to a people that shall not profit them.

 

- (De 32:32,33) For their vine is of the vine of Sodom, and of the fields of Gomorrah: their grapes are grapes of gall, their clusters are bitter:

33 Their wine is the poison of dragons, and the cruel venom of asps.

 

- (Neh 2:13) And I went out by night by the gate of the valley, even before the dragon well, and to the dung port, and viewed the walls of Jerusalem, which were broken down, and the gates thereof were consumed with fire.

 

- (Jes 51:9) Awake, awake, put on strength, O arm of the LORD; awake, as in the ancient days, in the generations of old. Are you not it that has cut Rahab, and wounded the dragon?

 

- (Jes 27:1) In that day the LORD with his sore and great and strong sword shall punish leviathan the piercing serpent, even leviathan that crooked serpent; and he shall slay the dragon that is in the sea.

 

- (Jer 51:34) Nebuchadrezzar the king of Babylon has devoured me, he has crushed me, he has made me an empty vessel, he has swallowed me up like a dragon, he has filled his belly with my delicates, he has cast me out.

 

 

 

 

 REFERENCES:

 

1. J. Morgan: The End of Science: Facing the Limits of Knowledge in the Twilight of Scientific Age (1996). Reading: Addison-Wesley

2. Thoralf Gulbrandsen: Puuttuva rengas, p. 100,101

3. Stephen Jay Gould: The Panda’s Thumb, (1988), p. 182,183. New York: W.W. Norton & Co.

4. Niles Eldredge (1985): “Evolutionary Tempos and Modes: A Paleontological Perspective” teoksessa Godrey (toim.) What Darwin Began: Modern Darwinian and non-Darwinian Perspectives on Evolution

5. George Mc Cready Price: New Geology, lainaus A.M Rehnwinkelin kirjasta Flood, p. 267, 278

6. Kimmo Pälikkö: Taustaa 2, Kehitysopin kulisseista, p. 927.

7. Kimmo Pälikkö: Taustaa 2, Kehitysopin kulisseista, p. 194

8. Pekka Reinikainen: Unohdettu Genesis, p. 173, 184

9. Stephen Jay Gould: Catastrophes and steady state earth, Natural History, 84(2):15-16 / Ref. 6, p. 115.

10. Thoralf Gulbrandsen: Puuttuva rengas, p. 81

11. Toivo Seljavaara: Oliko vedenpaisumus ja Nooan arkki mahdollinen, p. 28

12. Uuras Saarnivaara: Voiko Raamattuun luottaa, p. 175-177

13. Scott M. Huse: Evoluution romahdus, p. 24

14. Many dino fossils could have soft tissue inside, Oct 28 2010, news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2006/02/0221_060221_dino_tissue_2.html

15. Nielsen-March, C., Biomolecules in fossil remains: Multidisciplinary approach to endurance, The Biochemist 24(3):12-14, June 2002; www.biochemist.org/_bio/02403/0012/024030012.pdf

16. Pekka Reinikainen: Darwin vai älykäs suunnitelma?, p. 88

17. Pekka Reinikainen: Dinosaurusten arvoitus ja Raamattu, p. 111

18. Pekka Reinikainen: Dinosaurusten arvoitus ja Raamattu, p. 114,115

19. http://creation.com/redirect.php?http://_

www. youtube.com/watch?v=QbdH3l1UjPQ

20. Matti Leisola: Evoluutiouskon ihmemaassa, p.146

21. J.S. Shelton: Geology illustrated

22. Pentti Eskola: Muuttuva maa, p. 114

23. Carl Wieland: Kiviä ja luita (Stones and Bones), p. 11

24. Pekka Reinikainen: Unohdettu Genesis, p. 179, 224

25. Wiljam Aittala: Kaikkeuden sanoma, p. 198

26. Kalle Taipale: Levoton maapallo, p. 78

27. Mikko Tuuliranta: Koulubiologia jakaa disinformaatiota, in book Usko ja tiede, p. 131,132

28. Francis Hitching: Arvoitukselliset tapahtumat (The World Atlas of Mysteries), p. 159

29. Pentti Eskola: Muuttuva maa, p. 366

30. Siteeraus kirjasta: Pekka Reinikainen: Dinosaurusten arvoitus ja Raamattu, p. 47

31. Scott M. Huse: Evoluution romahdus, p. 25

32. Pekka Reinikainen: Dinosaurusten arvoitus ja Raamattu, p. 90

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Jesus is the way, the truth and the life

 

 

  

 

Grap to eternal life!