Evolultion Debunked By Archeology [Spirituality & Religion]

@Pikachu Also a big flaw is where are the skeletons of the giants in the geological record? They were supposed to have ruled at one point and ate everything on earth. Especially around Canaan. Also would giants even be considered human?
I know someone will also raise the verse of Behemoth. But the word is of Egyptian origin and simply refers to beasts. Kind not specified. But probably not a dinosaur as the passage states that is can take shade under a tree which gives an upper limit of how big it can be. No tall rainforest trees in the middle east.
Also what is referred to as its tail can actually be considered a euphemism for it's penis. As the Hebrew word for "move" is also the word for "to extend." This view is also reinforced in the next verse where it talks about it stones being tied together with sinews. The term stones to refer to testes is also used in Lev 21:20 and Deut 23:1 The Latin Vulgate uses the word testiculorum. Giving credence that the verses are indeed referring to reproductive organs. Also it fits the context of the passage as a strong penis would be a sign of power, masculinity and virility. It fits the verse well.

@canusernamebemyusername

lol interesting. Hand't heard the explanation that they're talking about its junk before.

@Pikachu I don't know where i originally heard it but I remember someone said tail used to be used as slang for it. lol

@Pikachu @canusernamebemyusername [quote]Hand't heard the explanation that they're talking about its junk before.[/quote]

Would you like to tell them that?

@GodSpeed63

Actually i'd be more interested in seeing if you acknowledge the immediately demonstrated inaccuracy of the video you shared.

@Pikachu [quote]Actually i'd be more interested in seeing if you acknowledge the immediately demonstrated inaccuracy of the video you shared.[/quote]

Figured you might give an excuse like that. You go to Texas and you tell those men what you think of their scientific findings.

@GodSpeed63

There's no excuse, there's an explanation which more parsimoniously accounts for the trackway.
I suggest you actually follow the link i sent you for more information.
That is, if you're prepared to have your conclusions challanged.

And again, even Answers in Genesis -a website offering numerous apologetics and arguments for a young earth or against evolution - concedes that the Paluxy trackway is not legitimate evidence of man co-existing with dinosaurs.

I don't know what to tell you, man.
Even the people who are on your side are not on your side for this one.

@Pikachu [quote]Answers in Genesis[/quote]

Answers in Genesis agree with the Word of God. Just go to Texas and find out for yourself.

@GodSpeed63

[quote]Answers in Genesis agree with the Word of God[/quote]

Yes they do. But they also agree that this trackway is not evidence of it.
Do you understand? They continue to assert that the earth is young and that men and dinosaurs co-existed. They just agree that the Paluxy trackway is not evidence of this.
Observe:

[quote]Creation scientists from various organizations have investigated the Paluxy River fossils. Given the ambiguity of the evidence and the fact that much of what may have once been present is no longer available for study, we do not believe those claims of coexisting human and dinosaur prints are wholly supportable. Dr. John Morris in 1986 reported similar conclusions, deciding “it would now be improper for creationists to continue to use the Paluxy data as evidence against evolution”1 unless further research brings new facts to light.
[/quote]

https://answersingenesis.org/dinosaurs/footprints/paluxy-river-tracks-in-texas-spotlight/


You're coming off as very close-minded here. You're not even willing to [i]look[/i] at evidence which might prove you wrong. You might consider this the next time you're wondering why someone is calling you dishonest.
Just a tip.

Well i've given you the information. The rest is up to you. Good luck!🙂👍

@Pikachu [quote]Yes they do. But they also agree that this trackway is not evidence of it.[/quote]

Talk to the men in Texas, not me.

@GodSpeed63

That, my friend, is a cop out and an obvious one at that.
If you don't stand behind the content you posted then remove it.
If you DO stand behind it then [i]stand behind it[/i].

So what's it going to be? Integrity or cowardice?

@Pikachu [quote]That, my friend, is a cop out and an obvious one at that.[/quote]

Won't wash.

[quote]You're coming off as very close-minded here. You're not even willing to look at evidence which might prove you wrong. You might consider this the next time you're wondering why someone is calling you dishonest. Just a tip.[/quote]

Now that is a cop out. Cowardice seems to be your trait, not mine.

@GodSpeed63

Cowardice it is then.
Imagine my surprise.

@Pikachu "...evidence of that "fact" that dinosaurs and humans coexisted"

Hey! And what about The Flintstones?
If that´s not serious evidence, what are we debating here?

@CharlieZ

Oh good point. I'd forgotten about that doc lol

@Pikachu Next time that serious scientific evidence is asked for, I´ll post The Flinstone movie!
(Sponsored by the Dyscovery Institute, of course)

You are warned!🧐

@GodSpeed63 @Pikachu @canusernamebemyusername
Evolution [u]upheld[/u] by:
Genetics
Molecular biology
Biochemistry
Paleobotany
Geochemistry
Zoology
Comparative anatomy
Geophysics
Embryology
Mycology
Ichthyology
A working brain

@CookieLuvsBunny Ah noooooooooo!
That list is all about Scientific reasearch. Totally unfair!!!

Fix it right now!
THIS is decent evidence!

[image deleted]

@CharlieZ A hot pink dinosaur cannot be wrong!

@CookieLuvsBunny Pink Sauropods are the best friends of man. Ya know.

@CharlieZ True that