Sunday, September 20, 2009


One thing that has brought me great amusement over the past year or so is the idea that there were dinosaurs on Noah's ark. I can't even begin to describe how ridiculous this is, perhaps some of you already know.

The dinosaurs died out 65 million years ago. Noah's supposed flood was around 6000 years ago. The scale of this error is huge, and is equivalent to saying that the distance from Auckland to Wellington is 60 metres.

But the gargantuan error in dates isn't the only problem with this idea. The whole idea of a global flood is equally laughable. The people who create arguments trying to 'prove' these ideas are either mentally deficient or insidious liars (or both). Their blatant rejection of well established facts and their complete rejection everything rational is all too common among YEC's (Young earth creationists). The way they go about spreading their deceitful ideas is retarding scientific progress and is a step too far in the wrong direction. YEC's would have us taken back to the dark ages if we left them to their own devices.

They don't even have a good reason for believing these insane ideas. The only reason they have is "because the bible says so", but as I have demonstrated in previous posts, the bible is not only unreliable and contradictory but also immoral and barbarous.
So, because some uneducated desert wanderer wrote on some scrolls that the whole earth was flooded (sounds just as absurd as other ancient mythologies), and animals that had been extinct for 65 million years were held on on a large wooden boat by the last remaining human man along with his family and friends, they believe it whole heartedly.

I just cannot understand the dogmatic adherence to an antiquated text.


  1. by the way dude... its not 'fact' that dinosaurs died out 65 million years ago... scientists have pulled wrong conclusions from data before and continue to do so...
    there is also lots of hardcore evidence for a global flood how can you seemingly 'blatantly reject; (to use your strong words) this evidence? what do you think the sudden catastrophe was that has caused the things that have been found all over the world, that point to death by sudden catastrophe? (such as dinosaurs in the middle of giving birth, fossilised, food unprocessed in the stomaches of many animals, etc.)
    im not sure who you have been having to do with, but in my experience, YECs and others who dont irrationally deny the evidence of a global flood, are not drawing their conclusions from an unsupported faith belief in the bible, but from hard scientific data and evidence.
    just a word of advice, if you want to provide arguments that sound believable, dont let emotion get in the way and make you sound like an angry ranting unreasonable person who wont let logic or evidence get in the way of his own staunch opinion - , or is that your aim of this site (to rant, or to soundly convince people you are right?)

  2. "its not 'fact' that dinosaurs died out 65 million years ago"

    Lets start there shall we. There are 4 main techniques used to determine the age of a particular fossil. The first is stratigraphy, which is more or less determined by how deep it is buried, and by which layer or 'period' the fossil is found in. I think even you can accept that deeper fossils were formed before others above them. The second method is radioisotope dating. The main chemical isotopes used to date dinosaurs are Uranium-235 (which has a half-life of 700 million years), and Potassium-40 (half life of 1.250×10^9 years). Carbon dating is NOT used to determine the age of dinosaurs, C-14 has a half-life of 5568 years, and is only accurate for organisms that are 60,000 years old or less. The fact that many many fossils exist which have untracable amounts of C-14 is evidence that the earth is not 6000 years old, because it shows they must be older than 60,000 years.
    Another Dating method is measuring the magnetic field in different layers of rock, which are left by fluctuations in the magnetic field of the earth over millions of years.
    The final dating method is the use of index-fossils.
    The entire scientific world is not part of some grand conspiracy theory to prove the bible wrong. Science is an honest search for the facts, and if the facts supported a young earth, and that dinosaurs walked with humans 6000 years ago, that would be the view science would have. This is not the case however, the evidence points to an old earth and universe.

    Continuing below.

  3. Everyone knows the dinosaurs died out because you touch yourself at night.

  4. YECs... are not drawing their conclusions from an unsupported faith belief in the bible, but from hard scientific data and evidence.

    Now this is just silly.

    From Answers in Genesis
    (probably the most popular Young Earth Creationist group):
    * We take the absolute truth and authority of the Bible to the world.
    * We teach the relevance of a literal Genesis to the mission fields of the world.
    * We obey God’s call for global evangelism for all ethnic groups in the world."

    Similar statements have been made by other YEC's some more explicitly stating their strong-held beliefs. I remember Ray Comfort saying something along the lines of 'I know this is true because it says so in the Bible, which I know is true because the Bible says so' in a video dialogue with Thunderf00t.

    I used to BE a YEC myself. I used to read creationist books, watch creationist videos by people like Kent Hovind (who is now in prison for tax fraud). My journey away from this position is described in a previous post so I won't go into that here, but my point is that I've heard all the 'arguments' and after reading their rebuttals, I realised they were fallacious.

    "unreasonable person who wont let logic or evidence get in the way of his own staunch opinion"

    You just described yourself buddy.

  5. Lol oh Anom how misguided are you really?

    I understand your concern with the quality of the scientific evidence which increase stereotyping or categorising certain things like dinosaurs however what KJ said is true though KJ could throw in some references to back up his claims so it is believable for the likes of you but he doesn’t have to because obviously he’s down some research.

    There are many theories on how the dinosaurs died, it could be global shifts, asteroids or comets colliding with the planet and that they were wiped out by diseases.
    Carbon dating have shown that the Dinosaurs were alive 65 Million years ago and Humans have only been around for 2million years. Religious creationist likes to dispute these claims saying that it happened 6,000 years ago because there bible is right and your belief in science is wrong blah blah

    But if we really look back into our past and examine it when can see that civilisation began probably 6,000years ago rather than the world was created and that’s the point of the blog I think.

  6. I just noticed somethin upon re-reading your comment Anonymous creationist.

    "such as dinosaurs in the middle of giving birth"

    I'm not sure you knew this, but dinosaurs do not 'give birth'. Dinosaurs were reptiles and laid eggs instead.

  7. facts that are hardly proven wrong > believing in something so much that you think it is real

    science > religion

  8. Just to chime in on the anon bashing:
    You're right. Scientists make mistakes and get things wrong all the time. But they have this system where they get other scientists to double and triple check their work for them and if they make a mistake they go back, take another look, and come up with an answer that stands up to peer review.
    YEC's on the other hand look at their answer, the bible, and then try and force the world to fall in with this delusion.
    Since the existence of god cannot be proven one way or the other how about we look at it this way: If the bible is gods word as written down by a bunch of bronze age guys and the universe is gods work which will you trust? The translation of a translation of the scribblings of some people who heard voices in their heads or the hard, concrete evidence that we can see, hear, feel and taste?

    If there is a god and he put all this effort into making a universe as complex, diverse and amazing as the one we live in you're only doing him/her/it a disservice by closing your eyes and choosing not to see.

  9. I don't know those voices can be be pretty convincing sometimes...

  10. Also didn't those kimono dragons survive where the dinosaurs didn't?

  11. There is also an assumption that the Noahs Ark story was literal. Im not convinced that it was a literal event - even though im a christian.

  12. There doesn't seem to be any evidence from the text itself to suggest that it isn't meant to be taken literally, but I hold it on the same standard as most other ancient cultures various mythologies. I.e. did the Maoris really believe Maui fished up the north island and holds the sun in place? Likewise, did the ancient Jews really believe that Yahweh flooded the earth, and created man out of dust? It's something that I havn't yet investigated, perhaps it is due some thought.

  13. hasnt the 'its not ment to be taken literally' argument been bashed to death already? Why would the men who wrote of Noah decide to change the story and add fictional elements? This would only make the story less easy to believe and is pointless - the bible was not a document intended to teach children who need simplified concepts. Even people 1000 years ago should not have required a simplified story. And how can u not take this myth seriously - A giant boat made by Noah, with two of every animal on board is pretty specific. Can you really say this story cant be taken literally because instead Noah took all the animals to the top of mount everest so they didnt drown? The fact of the matter is with something this specific, it either happened as it was described by the APPERENTLY TRUE bible or it didnt.

  14. I get the feeling that the people who concede to a metaphorical interpretation of the bible know that the bible is horseshit, but they are too scared to let go of what they believe.
    I could be wrong, but it's what I was like before I finally decided to throw it all away and I imagine there are many others who are right on the edge.

  15. It is very tough to let go of a hard held belief, especially one that has been hammered into you since you were a small kid.

    Sadly, this is fairly common. Kids will innately believe everything they are told (within reason) if it comes from their parents, or someone who their parents seem to trust also. So religion taught from a young age shapes the person's mind to believe that religion because they have always been taught it. From the other perspective, a child in an atheist household will be told (most likely) and believe blindly that a god (or gods) doesn't exist.

    Personally if I ever procreate, I hope to find a middle ground with the kid. As a (relatively) new agnostic atheist, I still struggle mightily with kids being taught religion, because I remember vividly how it warped my perception of the universe. But I also feel that totally shielding the child from religious concepts will breed intolerance. I can't claim to have originated this concept (read it on someone else's blog a while back) but it seems like a good idea to me:

    Teach the child about both aspects, gnostic and atheist, and then let the kid make up their own mind. This seems to be a critical point to me, because it reinforces in the child from an early age that it is important to make critical judgments based on all available information, and to not blindly believe everything they are told. Bias must be avoided at all costs, so as not to influence the child.

    We all know this from having been children ourselves, and when around them... they will follow the opinion of their parents or a similar authority figure not because it makes sense logically, but because they wish to align themselves with that person's ideas and beliefs. They have a need to emulate these people in their lives. So to give them the best chance in the real world, we must show them the most important parts of being a critical thinker:

    Skepticism and Logic.

    Armed with these, a child will almost certainly make the decision to not believe the religious concepts. They wont do this because they think it is what their parents want, but because when viewed objectively (which is how the child would be in this situation - they haven't been told what they should believe by anyone ideally) there is no reason the child would pick the story that requires you throw away logic.

    Anyway, this got a bit off topic lol, but the central idea was a response to what KJ said in his last comment about how people have trouble conceding the whole story is stupid. When a kid hasn't had the chance to think anything else, your brain doesn't like to let go of it, even though you *know*, you really know it, that it's just all a bit too much. You will do all these mental backflips and tricks to try and make the story work within your greater understanding of the world... and for some people, that will work. But for many, it all eventually spills over, and you come to the realisation that your entire belief in this concept was just a shallow shell that all made sense because it was hammered into you as a kid.

    Keep on keeping on critical thinkers, and to those who are having trouble letting go of it all, I urge you to consider reading some books that will help to solidify your doubts. When it comes down to it, knowing all the available information before you make a decision really does make sense! Good luck!