-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
The 3 Earth Ages
- Thread starter Faithofchristian
- Start date
No such National Geographic movie ever existed. There were and are Creationist propaganda films that claim to show dinosaur tracks and human tracks occur together, but this is bogus.
I am a career scientist, geologist and soil scientist for more than 50 years. I have never studied genealogy in my life and would not qualify as a genealogist.
Genesis does not remotely square with the scientific evidence.
Faithofchristian
Well-Known Member
Faithofchristian
Well-Known Member
Skwim
Veteran Member
IT is not funny. If it is what you claim post a reference.
Faithofchristian
Well-Known Member
You can do that by putting in your search engine. National Geographic human footprints with dinosaur footprints
Some were found to be fake and some were real
Faithofchristian
Well-Known Member
I'm not going to dispute your claim as to who you are.
All I'm saying is that the dinosaurs bones, proves the fact that the earth is alot older than 6000 yrs old.
And that the dinosaurs bones proves there was a earth age, before this earth age,
that we live in came to be.
Skwim
Veteran Member
I did, but came up empty. I couldn't find any National Geographic movie showing dinosaur and human footprints occurring together. Please help.
.
Faithofchristian
Well-Known Member
If you have a computer you should get to things alot better than I do.
I don't have a computer, only on my phone.
You should get to national geographic and then search it out for the human footprints with dinosaur footprints
Thank you for your reply
Subduction Zone
Veteran Member
Let's try to keep it real here. If you can't support a claim you should not make one.
Subduction Zone
Veteran Member
Sorry, National Geographic has made some errors in the past but they never made one that big. Once again, if you can't support a claim you should not make it. I can't find this supposed movie of National Geographic's, nor have they ever made such a gross error since they know when man has been on the Earth and when dinosaurs were on the Earth. Do you have anything that supports this claim of yours?
Subduction Zone
Veteran Member
For the last time, you made the claim of the existence of such a movie. No one else can find it. It appears to be a very unlikely claim since they understand at least the basics of science at Nat Geo so they would not make such an error. If the movie does not exist we will not be able to find it. I know
Skwim
Veteran Member
I tried, but absolutely nothing. I even checked all NG videos listed on YouTube. I note that you said "That's quite funny, because I just got done watching it again." which was just a couple of hours ago, so I assume you did have access to a computer, and also assume you will have it again. When you get back to it I'd appreciate it you'd find the link and pass it on.
Thanks.
.
I found it! It is a Creationist site that misrepresents National Geographic articles concerning dinosaur track ways here: Human and dinosaur fossil footprints? - creation.com.
No National Geographic article nor film makes any such claim. Note the Creationist interpretations not found in National Geographic nor any of the scientists involved nor associated with the finds:
From: Human and dinosaur fossil footprints? - creation.com
"A creationist interpretation of this formation would be a primarily depositional environment under fluctuating water levels during the Flood, as discussed later."
"Some creationists have suggested that the elongated, indistinct depressions alongside clear dinosaur tracks are human footprints, based on morphological arguments (i.e. the resemblance to human footprints). The anatomical ratios (see table 1), when compared to modern humans, are not at all convincing. In fact all ichnites are much larger than the modern human foot.
Interesting impossible physics explanation on this one;
"Within a young-earth Flood scenario, such an unusual distribution is easy to explain. It is possible that larger dinosaurs like the sauropods did not have the opportunity to find temporary refuge from the floodwaters ‘on board’ floating mats. From a paleoenvironmental point of view, the dinosaur fossil record is mostly located within 200 km of the sea.20 Some isolated specimens were found in marine deposits (Alabama, Kansas, Montana, New Jersey, Alberta, Saskatchewan, England and France) or in hypersaline lagoons (France, Spain and Germany).20 Sometimes, dinosaurs are associated with marine fossils, suggesting nearby shorelines (Mexico, Tanzania and Texas). Even dinosaur fossils found at sites interpreted to be far away from the sea, like the Late Cretaceous ones in Mongolia, are believed to have been buried in sand dunes saturated in rain water.21 All this suggests that the vicinity of the sea, rather than their normal habitat, was where most dinosaurs were buried (with or without transport involved). This is consistent with a global catastrophic Flood scenario. As for the specimens found in marine deposits, while difficult to explain from an evolutionary, global-catastrophe-free scenario, they are perfectly consistent with the biblical Flood!"
No National Geographic article nor film makes any such claim. Note the Creationist interpretations not found in National Geographic nor any of the scientists involved nor associated with the finds:
From: Human and dinosaur fossil footprints? - creation.com
"A creationist interpretation of this formation would be a primarily depositional environment under fluctuating water levels during the Flood, as discussed later."
"Some creationists have suggested that the elongated, indistinct depressions alongside clear dinosaur tracks are human footprints, based on morphological arguments (i.e. the resemblance to human footprints). The anatomical ratios (see table 1), when compared to modern humans, are not at all convincing. In fact all ichnites are much larger than the modern human foot.
Interesting impossible physics explanation on this one;
"Within a young-earth Flood scenario, such an unusual distribution is easy to explain. It is possible that larger dinosaurs like the sauropods did not have the opportunity to find temporary refuge from the floodwaters ‘on board’ floating mats. From a paleoenvironmental point of view, the dinosaur fossil record is mostly located within 200 km of the sea.20 Some isolated specimens were found in marine deposits (Alabama, Kansas, Montana, New Jersey, Alberta, Saskatchewan, England and France) or in hypersaline lagoons (France, Spain and Germany).20 Sometimes, dinosaurs are associated with marine fossils, suggesting nearby shorelines (Mexico, Tanzania and Texas). Even dinosaur fossils found at sites interpreted to be far away from the sea, like the Late Cretaceous ones in Mongolia, are believed to have been buried in sand dunes saturated in rain water.21 All this suggests that the vicinity of the sea, rather than their normal habitat, was where most dinosaurs were buried (with or without transport involved). This is consistent with a global catastrophic Flood scenario. As for the specimens found in marine deposits, while difficult to explain from an evolutionary, global-catastrophe-free scenario, they are perfectly consistent with the biblical Flood!"
Last edited:
Faithofchristian
Well-Known Member
I can support my claim, but what would be the use, seeing you couldn't accept it.
Actually you cannot cite a National Geographic film, article nor blog that supports your claim. The claim is bogus. All you would need to do would be cite a source accessible on phone and computer, and you cannot do that.
I cited the Creationist source that unethically misrepresents National Geographic.
Faithofchristian
Well-Known Member
National Geographic has more than one film.
I gave national geographic, if you can't pull it up, that's no fault of mine.
Dishonest big time!!!!!
If you can pull it up on your phone you can give a reference for the internet. ALL the National Geographic films, articles and blogs are on the internet. There is absolutely no National Geographic source that supports your bogus dishonest claim.