Man and dinosaurs, when did we first know about them?

jmc007 said:
Apparently if you find an old dictionary pre 1946, in the description for Dragon we get: Now rare.
The word dragon is known to of been used to refer to a dinosaur.
Click to expand...

Why not just give your sources. Is it becuase you denied using creationism sites :rolleyes:you're fall of ****
 
jmc007 said:
Apparently if you find an old dictionary pre 1946, in the description for Dragon we get: Now rare.
The word dragon is known to of been used to refer to a dinosaur.
Click to expand...

My old Dictionary dated 1913 gives several definitions for the word Dragon...including a huge snake or serpent. Archaic for a Biblical Crocodile or Snake. Mythical Beast, a variety of carrier pigeon. A type of rare musket, a violent person, usually female. A constellation. A shooting meteor. And several others.....no dinosaurs or rare animals though...

I don't know which pre 1946 dictionary you have, but I doubt it states is is an actual rare animal in that context.

I'll see if I can dig up an online dictionary pre 1946....
 
Castiel said:
My old Dictionary dated 1913 gives several definitions for the word Dragon...including a huge snake or serpent. Archaic for a Biblical Crocodile or Snake. Mythical Beast, a variety of carrier pigeon. A type of rare musket, a violent person, usually female. A constellation. A shooting meteor. And several others.....no dinosaurs or rare animals though...

I don't know which pre 1946 dictionary you have, but I doubt it states is is an actual rare animal in that context.

I'll see if I can dig up an online dictionary pre 1946....
Click to expand...

Becuase its all crap and its just copy it from sites liek this and not refrence it, as he knows it would be torn to bits.
http://www.truthingenesis.com/2013/01/03/dinosaurs-and-the-bible/
 
Do you not think that many of these drawings of "dinosaurs" are simply artists drawing something they have had described to them? Those Pompeii drawings look remarkably like Africans surrounding crocodiles and hippos but just drawn by people who've never seen them.

Do you think that people could be drawing animals that are still here but are not dinosaurs?

Do you think?
 
What is Marco Polo describing here in "The Travels Of Marco Polo", The Venetian? :confused:


"Leaving the city of Yachi and traveling ten days into a westerly direction, you reach the Province of Karazan which is also the name of its chief city… Here are seen huge serpents, ten paces in length and ten spans in the girt of the body. At the fore-part, near the head, they have two short legs, having three claws like those of a tiger, with eyes larger than a fourpenny loaf and very glaring. The jaws are wide enough to swallow a man, the teeth are large and sharp and their whole appearance is so formidable, that neither man, nor any kind of animal, can approach them without terror. Others are met with a smaller size, being eight, six or five paces long; and the following method is used for taking them: In the day-time, by reason of the great heat, they lurk in caverns, from whence, at night, they issue to seek their food and whatever beast they meet with and can lay hold of, whether tiger, wolf, or any other, they devour; after which they drag themselves towards some lake, spring of water, or river, in order to drink. By their motion in this way along the shore, and their vast weight, they make a deep impression, as if a heavy beam had been drawn along the sands."

"Those whose employment it is to hunt them observe the track by which they are most frequently accustomed to go, and fix into the ground several pieces of wood, armed with sharp iron spikes, which they cover with the sand in such a manner as not to be perceptible. When therefore the animals make their way towards the places they usually haunt, they are wounded by these instruments and speedily killed. The crows, as soon as they perceive them to be dead, set up their scream; and this serves as a signal to the hunters, who advance to the spot and proceed to separate the skin from the flesh, taking care immediately to secure the gall, which is most highly esteemed in medicine. In cases of the bite of a mad dog, a pennyweight of it, dissolved in wine, is administered. It is also useful in accelerating parturition, when the labour pains of women have come on. A small quantity of it being applied to carbuncles, pustules or other eruptions on the body, they are presently dispersed; and it is efficacious in many other complaints. The flesh of the animal is also sold at a dear rate, being thought to have a higher flavour than other kinds of meat and by all persons it is esteemed a delicacy."
 
jmc007 said:
What is Marco Polo describing here in "The Travels Of Marco Polo", The Venetian? :confused:
[..]
Click to expand...

http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/The_Travels_of_Marco_Polo/Book_2/Chapter_49

Crocodiles fit the bill well enough, assuming that it's not a first hand account from someone who saw a live one up close, including the belief that bits of crocodiles have various medicinal uses.

Some people object to the idea that it's crocodiles because only two legs are mentioned. OK...so what large animals shaped somewhat like snakes but with legs have only two legs and only at the head end? Such an animal simply wouldn't work. Even the animals made up by creationists that they claim are dinosaurs that match the description don't match the description (and aren't real).
 
Did dinosaurs and humans coexist? No
Do i really want there to be secret dinosaurs living covert lives all over the world? Hell yes.

Off to loch ness, bbs.
 
Does anyone else find it a bit strange that for hundreds of millions of years there was not a sniff of man
then a big rock hit the earth 65 million years ago and that's about the same time that man started out.

And as for "Did dinosaurs and humans coexist" you want to meet my x mother in-law :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom