Being able to locate tissue inside of a bone and some ancient works of art are hardly what I would call "overwhelming." While I certainly don't know enough about dinosaurs to say too much more about tissue and bones, there are anumber of ways to explain the amount of drawings, such as simple artistic creativity, or perhaps a popular trend of a monster. A simple drawing of something does not mean it exists.
For example, if humanity were to be wiped out today, and an alien species were to find our ruins not long thereafter, they might very well find hundreds of depictions of something such as Godzilla, or the Loch Ness Monster. Are either of these things real? No; however, despite being fictional, they have made their way into hundreds of artistic depictions. The fact that dinosaurs were drawn with humans is no more proof that dinosaurs coexisted with humans than the film King Kong is proof that giant monkeys lived in our society.
Also, using the Ica Stones as evidence to support your argument is more than a little flimsy.
Runa216 said:
Stopped reading here. The second you use the term "Evolutionist" in a derogatory manner, not a single word henceforth uttered from your mouth is to be taken seriously. This is one of the many indicators that you have absolutely nothing of value to say. Unless of course this is satire, mocking the religious (but what I Saw when I skimmed didn't give it that look or feel.) |
And this, boys and girls, is how to keep an open mind and encourage debate among others.
If you're going to accuse someone of having nothing of value to say simply because they criticize a viewpoint that you hold to, you're just as bad as anyone you claim shouldn't be taken seriously.
If you find an argument that you believe is faulty, dissect it and figure out why it is, and then point that out to the person making the argument. The only way people move from wrong ideas to the correct ones is by thoughtful debate and correction. Calling people stupid and then leaving accomplishes nothing.
