Do Dinosaurs Live Today?
Skywise
Issue Date: July/August 2000
In March, 1962, five teenage boys rode a small boat to a partially
submerged
shipwreck off the coast of Pensacola, Florida. They planned to explore the
wreck with scuba gear. They encountered a storm that drove them off course
and when they got back near the shipwreck it was foggy.
Hearing some strange animal noises, they watched a large head with teeth
and
green eyes, appear out of the fog several feet above the water on a long
neck. As the "sea monster" moved closer, the boys panicked, grabbed their
swim fins and dove into the water to try to escape to the ship.
One of the boys, Edward B. McCleary, lived to tell how, one by one, his
buddies screamed in agony behind him as he swam for his life. McCleary made
it to the ship and was rescued the next day. The body of one of the boys
washed ashore several days later. He had drowned, but an intense search
found no trace of the other three. The final assumption was that they had
been eaten by the sea monster.
This is just one of many incidents related by Dr. Kent Hovind in his
Creation Science Evangelism video series.
</catalog/videos/creationseminar.asp> Hovind claims that there have been
over 20,000 sightings of "prehistoric" dinosaur type animals in the 20th
century. In his video #3, Dinosaurs and the Bible, he shows photographs of
other sea creatures that have been caught by fishing boats or washed
ashore.
He holds interviews with witnesses who describe, in detail, seeing
dinosaur-like animals. Natives in remote Amazon or African jungles have
been
shown pictures of dinosaurs and immediately pointed to ones they have
encountered and even killed.
Hovind questions the universal teaching that dinosaurs have been extinct
for
"millions of years." He says that the usual question asked in school is:
"What caused the dinosaurs to become extinct?" Instead, it should be: "Are
dinosaurs extinct?"
He points out that the Bible explains history from the beginning of
creation
about 6 thousand years ago. When a public school child is told, over and
over for years, that these fascinating creatures all died "millions of
years
ago," what chance does a Sunday school teacher have convincing him to trust
the Bible?
The word "dinosaur" is a relatively new word, coined in about 1850. Before
that, the common word was "dragon" and there are thousands of stories in
early history of men dealing with dragons. We have assumed that these were
mythological creatures, the stuff of fairy tales. But many of them are told
as serious history and primitive art is full of pictures of men fighting,
riding on and making beasts of burden of dinosaur-like animals.
Hovind contends that Noah carried some baby dinosaurs on the ark along with
all the other animals. After the flood, the climate changed and the large
ones, which depended on lush, swamp-like environment, could not survive.
Smaller ones became more scarce as man populated the earth and only
survived
in the ocean and large, deep lakes such as Lock Ness or remote swamps such
as the huge Likouala in equatorial Africa. Today, they are like the grizzly
bear, only a few are alive in remote wildernesses far from civilization.
Hovind points to biblical words such as "behemoth," "leviathan," and even
"dragon." The descriptions of these animals more accurately match dinosaurs
than any other known animal.
Hovind was a high school science teacher for 15 years. He became so
disturbed by the teaching of evolution that he quit to become an
evangelist.
He holds church services and seminars for schools where he shows that the
Bible is true.
He makes three main points: God created the earth about 6 thousand years
ago; 4400 years ago there was a world-wide flood; dinosaurs are not
millions
of years old but even exist today.
His 7-tape video set supports these points in extensive detail and
challenges Christians to get this information out to counter Satan's lies
about evolution and dinosaurs which create such confusion for school
children.
a.w. reijersen van buuren
Skywise <sky...@pldi.net> schreef in berichtnieuws
01c021bc$afd1bba0$ab54533f@vogmudet...
The beginning of creation 6000 years ago?
RUBBISH!!!
They wrote the first six parts of the bilbe during the time of
Tuth-Anch-Amon (Egypt).
A lot of stories are related to Tuth-Anch-Amon.
The beginning of creation mentioned in the bilbe is an inauguration of a
Pharaoh ( It took six days as far as I know ) !!
Due to censorship you can not find books about this matter.
The Noah Flood was nothing more than a local flood in Turkey!!!
The land in East Turkey is being pushed upwards! In earlier days it was more
or less at sealevel.
Bert rvb.
e-mail: a.w.reijerse...@hccnet.nl
http://home.hccnet.nl/a.w.reijersen.van.buuren
Skywise
If you're so smart, what's a 'bilbe'?
You can probably find books on the subjects you mention
in almost any bookstore. Try the 'science fiction' section.
Skywise
a.w. reijersen van buuren
the religious leaders use as a source so that you can read the
translation???
I did!!
Maybe the translation is not always as good as ought to be! Or they might
hold some information back!
I only want to know what is going on.
That what I wrote around RUBBISH, I published it years ago, in the open!!!
I am very content with going my own way!!
There are even some documentary films made in the middle east that give the
same evidence. So I wait.
Bert rvb
Skywise <sky...@pldi.net> schreef in berichtnieuws
01c02692$7203b460$ff53533f@vogmudet...
Skywise
a.w. reijersen van buuren <a.w.reijerse...@hccnet.nl> wrote in
article <8qonc6$2it$2...@news.hccnet.nl>...
> Did you ever read the sources of your translated bible?? I mean those
books
> the religious leaders use as a source so that you can read the
> translation???
> I did!!
>
I studied religion in college.
All religions, under microscopic scrutiny, devolve into a conglomerated
mess.
Religious scholars use the word 'faith' to explain what they cannot
completely explain. Religion -vs- Science is an age old conflict. The
two simply do not mix well. Neither explains many things to my
satisfaction. The great flood, the extinction of the dinosaurs, the
evolution of man, and many other theories are debated hotly in universities
around the world.
As with many things in the bible, the great flood cannot be exactly dated.
The evidence on the local flood in Turkey has scant evidence, at best,
as being the epic flood of Noah's time. There is more evidence worldwide
of larger floods that pre-date the Turkey flood. Greece, Egypt, and
Brazil,
to name a few locals, have much evidence suggesting a monumental
flood in their respective regions. But none can be linked timewise.
Indeed, thousands of years seperate the projected dates of these events.
For many years, the dinosaur extinction has been debated as well.
We were even taught they were nothing more than overgrown lizards.
Now many are saying the dinosaurs were warm blooded. We are
continually subjected to scientists explaining to us about dinosaurs.
I recently saw a program where the scientist told us what color a
dinosaur was, what it ate, how it raised it's young, how it behaved in
it's environment, and that it was a herd animal, all from examining
one small fossil. A single vertebrae is all he had to work with.
Rubbish, you said?
No kidding.
The evolution of man is another subject similarly treated.
We are continually told that man originated in the middle east region.
The oldest known 'human' remains comes from there.
Yet, there are remains of entire cities in south america that are at least
as old.
We are told that neanderthals are our prehistoric ancestors. Yet there
is much evidence that modern man lived right along side neanderthals.
Even in the same cave in one instance.
If people want to believe that Christ flies ufos, or that they evolved
from monkeys it's their own business.
Modern science, for all our 21st century technology, is in many ways
still in the dark ages. If a theory is not the 'accepted' version, it is
rejected totally. Too many scientists and scholars have closed minds.
The existance of bigfoot is treated with closed minds. Much the same
way as 'the earth is round' -vs- 'the earth is flat' was treated ages ago.
It's sad, really, and very frustrating.
> Maybe the translation is not always as good as ought to be! Or they might
> hold some information back!
This is certqainly the case.
>
> I only want to know what is going on.
As do I.
>
> That what I wrote around RUBBISH, I published it years ago, in the
open!!!
>
> I am very content with going my own way!!
>
> There are even some documentary films made in the middle east that give
the
> same evidence. So I wait.
>
> Bert rvb
>
Keep waiting, but don't hold your breath wating for universal agreement.
Peace.
Skywise
Steve Schaper
"a.w. reijersen van buuren" wrote:
>
> Did you ever read the sources of your translated bible?? I mean those books
> the religious leaders use as a source so that you can read the
> translation???
> I did!!
Legw Hellanisti. Ouk gnwseis Hellanisti.
Case closed.
>
> Maybe the translation is not always as good as ought to be! Or they might
> hold some information back!
>
No information is held back, Good critical editions are available with
all variant readings included.
> I only want to know what is going on.
Commendable.
> That what I wrote around RUBBISH, I published it years ago, in the open!!!
>
> I am very content with going my own way!!
That you are. . .
> There are even some documentary films made in the middle east that give the
> same evidence. So I wait.
Nonsense
Steve Schaper
Skywise wrote:
> I studied religion in college.
This is possibly a true statement.
> All religions, under microscopic scrutiny, devolve into a conglomerated
> mess.
This is a false statement.
> Religious scholars use the word 'faith' to explain what they cannot
> completely explain.
That is false, that definition of faith only dates back to the 19th
century. Prior to that it encompasses the semantic domains of trust and
fidelity, still does in actual Christian and Jewish theology.
> Religion -vs- Science is an age old conflict. The
> two simply do not mix well.
Again, this is nonsense. Science is a -product- of Christianity. Read
the secular scholars like Whitehead, Kuhn and Polanyi on that.
> As with many things in the bible, the great flood cannot be exactly dated.
True.
> The evidence on the local flood in Turkey has scant evidence, at best,
> as being the epic flood of Noah's time. There is more evidence worldwide
> of larger floods that pre-date the Turkey flood. Greece, Egypt, and
> Brazil,
> to name a few locals, have much evidence suggesting a monumental
> flood in their respective regions. But none can be linked timewise.
> Indeed, thousands of years seperate the projected dates of these events.
This is possible, but the jury is still out, it could be a model to
investigate with.
> Modern science, for all our 21st century technology, is in many ways
> still in the dark ages. If a theory is not the 'accepted' version, it is
> rejected totally. Too many scientists and scholars have closed minds.
> The existance of bigfoot is treated with closed minds. Much the same
> way as 'the earth is round' -vs- 'the earth is flat' was treated ages ago.
> It's sad, really, and very frustrating.
>
Thomas Kuhn describes this in great detail in his _The Nature of
Scientific Revolutions_ as do Pearcey and Thaxton in _The Soul of
Science_. Recommended reading. While science is a -very- valuable tool,
scientists are humans, subject to the passions, biases and politics that
humans are subject to.
Skywise
Steve Schaper <ssch...@uswest.net> wrote in article
<39D373FA...@uswest.net>...
> > I studied religion in college.
>
> This is possibly a true statement.
Guess you will have to take my word for it, huh?
>
> > All religions, under microscopic scrutiny, devolve into a conglomerated
> > mess.
>
> This is a false statement.
Wrong.
See and ask any college proffessor who endevors in this subject.
>
> > Religious scholars use the word 'faith' to explain what they cannot
> > completely explain.
>
> That is false, that definition of faith only dates back to the 19th
> century. Prior to that it encompasses the semantic domains of trust and
> fidelity, still does in actual Christian and Jewish theology.
Wrong again.
This definition dates back about 7000 years.
See: ancient Egypt, ancient Greece, etc.
>
> > Religion -vs- Science is an age old conflict. The
> > two simply do not mix well.
>
> Again, this is nonsense. Science is a -product- of Christianity. Read
> the secular scholars like Whitehead, Kuhn and Polanyi on that.
Fact.
Science is not a product of Christianity.
This is utter arrogance and and an outright falsehood.
Many of the earliest known scientists were not christians.
There is a multitude of evidence of science in ancient Egyptian
and ancient Mayan culture. What are the odds of these scientists
being christians?
Read only one point of view and that's where your opinions will
tend to go as well. Hate to tell you this, but......the earth is not
flat......
>
>
> > Modern science, for all our 21st century technology, is in many ways
> > still in the dark ages. If a theory is not the 'accepted' version, it
is
> > rejected totally. Too many scientists and scholars have closed minds.
> > The existance of bigfoot is treated with closed minds. Much the same
> > way as 'the earth is round' -vs- 'the earth is flat' was treated ages
ago.
> > It's sad, really, and very frustrating.
> >
>
> Thomas Kuhn describes this in great detail in his _The Nature of
> Scientific Revolutions_ as do Pearcey and Thaxton in _The Soul of
> Science_. Recommended reading. While science is a -very- valuable tool,
> scientists are humans, subject to the passions, biases and politics that
> humans are subject to.
>
True enough.
But.....
These are some of the same 'scholars' who continue to deny and turn
their backs on many things. Only because they are hard headed
and close minded. No matter what the evidence is or how overwhelming
the evidence is, it is very hard for these people to admit that they are
wrong.
Skywise
Skywise
Steve Schaper <ssch...@uswest.net> wrote in article
>
> Legw Hellanisti. Ouk gnwseis Hellanisti.
>
> Case closed.
Brilliant.
> > Maybe the translation is not always as good as ought to be! Or they
might
> > hold some information back!
> >
>
> No information is held back, Good critical editions are available with
> all variant readings included.
Brilliant.
Again.
ALL variant readings?
I recently talked with 2 professors at my university.
One is a priest.
The two men togeather have over 50 years of biblical study.
And the study of religion all over the globe.
"No information is held back," ?????
This statement of your is the most ridiculus thing you
have said yet. Very much is held back. Very much
is interpreted differently. Hence the many offshoots
in the christian religion.
Dude, you have no clue.......
Obviously I could debate you on this subject all day, but
I learned long ago that debating with someone who's closed mind
is made up is pointless.
Signing off on this.....I hope.....
Skywise
a.w. reijersen van buuren
>
>
It is not that bad to see people walking around in a swamp covered with mud
and smell like a bigfoot.
For those who will see one of the documentary films:
I asked a dutch tv station the name of a documentary film which years ago
they broadcasted.
It is shot in Africa. A nature film. Then everyone can see what it is.
The people on that tv station still do have the hiccups.
If they give me the name I shall send a newsletter with the name of it into
this groop.
Bert
NOYB
Skywise wrote:
>
> Steve Schaper <ssch...@uswest.net> wrote in article
> >
> > Legw Hellanisti. Ouk gnwseis Hellanisti.
> >
> > Case closed.
>
> Brilliant.
His point was, oh open minded one, that he had read the translation. Try
to read more carefully.
>
>
> > > Maybe the translation is not always as good as ought to be! Or they
> might
> > > hold some information back!
> > >
> >
> > No information is held back, Good critical editions are available with
> > all variant readings included.
>
> Brilliant.
> Again.
> ALL variant readings?
This is no more of an extreme statement that your brilliant comment that
"all religions devolve into a conglomerated mess" ... "ask any
university professor". Yeah, that's a really sound basis to make such
an all-encompasing statement and cursory conclusion brushing off an
extremely important aspect of man's existence. I bet you have never
studied any single religion, have you? If so, just because YOU didn't
get anything out of it, don't brush it off as a "conglomerated mess"
simply because you are too dense to gain any insight out of it.
> I recently talked with 2 professors at my university.
> One is a priest.
> The two men togeather have over 50 years of biblical study.
> And the study of religion all over the globe.
Is this a sentence? What is your point?
> "No information is held back," ?????
> This statement of your is the most ridiculus thing you
> have said yet.
This is quite amusing, YOU accusing Mr. Schapner of making a "ridiculus"
[sic] comment.
Very much is held back. Very much
> is interpreted differently. Hence the many offshoots
> in the christian religion.
> Dude, you have no clue.......
Skywise, quite frankly, have no idea how big a fool you are making of
yourself as it really appears that it is YOU who have no clue.
> Obviously I could debate you on this subject all day,
That would be quite amusing if you are going to rely on such
authoritative bases as a college course in "religion" and conversations
(I doubt more than 20 hours worth of "conversation", probably FARRRRR
LESSSS) with two professors. You don't even appreciate how flimsy a
grounding in religious understanding that is, do you? You truly don't
have a clue about religion, do you?
but
> I learned long ago that debating with someone who's closed mind
> is made up is pointless.
Incredible irony. Incredible. Think about it, are you capable of
looking at yourself? You'd be far better off just admitting you know
nothing about this topic and preserve your credibility with regard to
something you may know something about, e.g., bigfoot.
> Signing off on this.....I hope.....
I imagine you do hope so. Don't make these incredibly dense comments
about something you obviously know very little about, and you won't get
into discussions for which you are ill-prepared to engage in.
> Skywise
Skywise
NOYB <NO...@nowhere.net> wrote in article
<39D639CE...@nowhere.net>...
> His point was, oh open minded one, that he had read the translation. Try
> to read more carefully.
I got his point.
Even though it was poorly stated.
My point was, and is, that I have read the same translation, plus four
others.
ALL FOUR have different conclusions based on the SAME 'facts'.
>
> This is no more of an extreme statement that your brilliant comment that
> "all religions devolve into a conglomerated mess" ... "ask any
> university professor". Yeah, that's a really sound basis to make such
> an all-encompasing statement and cursory conclusion brushing off an
> extremely important aspect of man's existence.
Well, it's the truth.
If you had ever studied on the subject. you might have a clue.
You, in your inglorious ignorance, misquoted me. You must
work for the liberal press.
The statement was "All religions, under microscopic scutiny, devolve into
a conglmerated mess." You left out the 'microscopic scutiny' part. But
that made
you feel better about your flame, didn't it?
I bet you have never
> studied any single religion, have you?
Well, I have a degree from a university.
If so, just because YOU didn't
> get anything out of it, don't brush it off as a "conglomerated mess"
> simply because you are too dense to gain any insight out of it.
>
>
Well, I have a degree from a university.
What do you have?
Besides an opinion and a big mouth?
Go to college.
Open a book on the subject.
So something except what your Sunday school teacher tells you
persuades your perception.
> Is this a sentence?
Yes.
>What is your point?
You couldn't see if it poked you in the ass.
>
> This is quite amusing, YOU accusing Mr. Schapner of making a "ridiculus"
> [sic] comment.
I'm so very glad you thought it was funny.
>
> That would be quite amusing if you are going to rely on such
> authoritative bases as a college course
The word is 'degree', not course.
>in "religion" and conversations
> (I doubt more than 20 hours worth of "conversation", probably FARRRRR
> LESSSS) with two professors. You don't even appreciate how flimsy a
> grounding in religious understanding that is, do you? You truly don't
> have a clue about religion, do you?
I think it is YOU who should read more carefully.
You have misquoted me, (not an accident, I'm sure)
Plus, you don't know the total score.
I have two college degrees, ONE is religion based.
I have over 100 course hours of study on the subject.
I think that more than qualifies me to have an opinion.
What do you have, by way of qualifications?
Steve, we know, has read a few BOOKS.
What makes YOU an 'expert'?
If I have offended you by somehow questioning or threatening
your 'faith', well......tough.
You are so like so many others in this country.
When others do not blindly see your beliefs, (or religion, if you prefer)
and you cannot make them see it your way, you condemn them.
Then you forgive them.
You are right, they are wrong. But you forgive them.
You are smart, they are ignorant, but you forgive them.
Your belief is the only right one, (because, it's 'yours'), and all the
hundreds of other religions in the world, are wrong. And all those who
practice in those religions, all are going to hell, but you forgive them.
Sound familiar?
Yes, I know what you are.
I spent countless hours debating with the likes of you in school.
I hate to burst your superority bubble, but all those millions of people
don't want or need your forgiveness. You only forgive them so you
can sleep better at night.
>
> Incredible irony. Incredible. Think about it, are you capable of
> looking at yourself?
I do it all the time.
It's a process called self analysis.
Technical term for someone in my field.
>You'd be far better off just admitting you know
> nothing about this topic
So would you, obviously.
> I imagine you do hope so.
I do.
Because this is not a religion study/debate newsgroup.
>Don't make these incredibly dense comments
You and Steve should take this advice.
And run with it.
> about something you obviously know very little about, and you won't get
> into discussions for which you are ill-prepared to engage in.
I know what my degree and over 100 hours of college courses on the
subject taught me. I know what my college proffessors believe.
I know what I was taught.
My degree says I am well prepared to engage in discussions on
religion. I'll stack it up against your Sunday school lessens any time.
Skywise
a.w. reijersen van buuren
It is only the begining of a scientific research!!!
Ttry this: There is a film "Fire in the Sky" of Robert Lieberman (USA 1993)
it is about 6 woodcutters that encountered
a UFO in Arizona (USA). There is a similarity with the way this UFO look
or shows itself and
the cloud above Moses and the people
of Isreal in the dessert in the Middle East!!!
I believe that those persons that wrote the first six parts of the bible
were graverobbers too. And that for them it was a parttime job.
( The whole world taken by the nose by graverobbers!!! )
Archeaologycal findings strongly point in that direction.
( Something awful happened in the neighbourhood were I do live. Therefore
I'm very upset shocked and out of balance.
This is the reason I react just now on this letter ).
Case closed??? For an amateur archeaologist - astronomer???
Lately religious leaders only say 'sorry for the behaviour in the past' but
science findings are correct and we were
wrong.
MAMMOTHS ARE STILL ALIVE!!!!
Around 1944 in Siberia a person saw Mammoths alive!
MAMMOTHS ARE STILL ALIVE!!!!
Bert rvb.
Steve Schaper <ssch...@uswest.net> schreef in berichtnieuws
39D372E3...@uswest.net...