by 
This is supposed to shock you. Get ready. Brace yourselves.
Gov. Sarah Palin believes that humans and dinosaurs coexisted on an earth that’s only about 6,000 years old.
Shocking, I know, since thousands of people have visited the Creation Museum. Check out this page on Wikipedia talking about polls on the topic of Creation and Evolution.
2007
- God’s Numbers The latest Newsweek poll shows that 91 percent of American adults surveyed believe in God—and nearly half reject the theory of evolution.
I can’t find the original article, but many Internet links say the same thing. So, the Huffington Post is laughing at Gov. Palin for something half of the people in America believe is true1.
So, what are they saying about their guy (Sen. Obama), and what are they saying about you and I that believe Evolution is false?
(Visited 16 times, 1 visits today)
- Oh, and I still haven’t figured out why Matt Damon needs to know whether this is true or not in order to “trust her with the nuclear codes.” [↩]
That’s a good thought; I hadn’t even considered that they’re not questioning Obama about this…Hmm…so apparently he goes to a church and believes in evolution…what???!
Lois Lane IIs last blog post..Faith of our fathers: SOAP No. 4
It’s all ridiculous. It’s the same old atheist, godless argument that anyone who believes in Creation and especially anyone who believes in a literal interpretation of Creation is an idiot and not worth their time and energy. I hope this attitude will come back to bite the more militant liberals in the behind.
Rachels last blog post..It’s a Bulleted-List Day
Evolution aside, If dinosaurs and humans roamed the earth at the same time, than the sun revolves around the earth. science is very clear in this regard.
Musicguys last blog post..Quote Monday
@Lois Lane II: That would be interesting to ask Obama what he believes in regards to creation.
@Rachel: Exactly my point. They believe that they’re mocking just some silly fundamentalists when they’re actually mocking half the nation.
@Musicguy: Talk about faulty logic. Not only is your If…Then clause without merit, but your closing statement is faulty. Science cannot prove that dinosaurs and humans never walked the earth at the same time, it can only comment on the evidence presented, and make suggestions. As late as July 2008, there is/was research being conducted in Mineral Wells, TX in regards to fossil evidence of humans and dinosaurs being around together.
Again, science can only judge evidence (when it comes to historical questions) and make conclusions based on a worldview. Should other evidence show up, that wouldn’t mean that science was wrong, just that the worldview applied was wrong.
You may like to read the Post on my website http://www.melmenzies.co.uk/blog/2008/09/is_faith_a_legitimate_subject_for_foolishness_falsehood_or_fun
which includes a paragraph on this subject. Do feel free to leave comments.
Min, that link had me ROTFL. First of all, the guy is a creationist through and through. Can you say biased much. Secondly, why don’t you bother looking for what the peer reviewed journals have said about this “find” (they’ve called it a hoax and a waste of time). But go ahead and present it as real science.
And in that same vain, I am now convinced that the sun revolves around the earth. i can;t feel the earth moving, and obviously see the sun moving around the earth. These people agree with me, cause after all, the bible says so!!!
http://www.fixedearth.com/
Junk science abounds. Thank Cher for the internets!
Musicguys last blog post..Quote Monday
@Musicguy: I wasn’t attempting to present the site as proof, only to illustrate my point, which you did not address. True science can only react to evidence and use processes to make a guess at history. Since that’s the case (we have no dinosaurs to conduct experiments with, which would also invalidate the comment that the did not live together), we either have to depend on the ages provided by scientists, or the records that exist not only in the Bible, but in other literature of the two living together.
Personally, I find the Bible and other literature more compelling to people that can be led to believe that a pig’s tooth was my ancient ancestor simply because it fits the narrative.
@minthegap – Hear, hear. To my mind, it takes more faith to believe in the tooth ancestor theory than it ever does to believe in God.
Alright, let’s address your points.
We don’t have evidence of human fossils/bones that are older than dinosaur fossils/bones. Therefore, the logical conclusion, based on the scientific method, is that the two did not exist at the same time. Could all of the human fossils/bones from the dinosaur era some how disappeared? Doubtful.
Sure, I can conveniently discredit carbon dating, or “create” my own fossils that claim to exist at the same time, but the facts at hand do not change.
But just as Ms. Palin laughs in the face of science and assumes that the two did exist at the same time, I can also say the sun revolves around the earth. Considering the available data on both fronts, my claim is equally as ludicrous as Ms. Palin’s.
Musicguys last blog post..Quote Monday
@Musicguy: The logical conclusion based on current evidence is that “We have no evidence to support the theory that they lived together.” However, arguing that because evidence has not been presented or found means that there is none or that it did not happen is arguing from silence.
You’re most certainly correct that the facts do not change. Of course, you don’t mean “carbon dating” (right?) because it only dates back 65,000 years and if the world really is 4.5 trillion years old, 65K is really pretty small. But in any case, dating methods are only as good as the science behind them. And we’re looking back assuming uniformity where there may not be any.
But regardless, there are a bunch of preconceived notions on the point of scientists (hence my reference to Nebraska man) where scientists believe that dinosaurs and man didn’t exist together, so they must not have. It has nothing to do with the facts. Unfortunately, whether it’s facts about Sen. Obama or dinosaurs, if we don’t want to find something or it doesn’t fit our template, we aren’t going to look very hard for other ideas.
Again, perhaps you should stick to a topic you’re better at. Arguing that Dinosaurs and Man didn’t exist together is arguing from silence, historically, and foolish contemporaneously. The reality is that there have been dinosaurs through the middle ages even to recent time. They just didn’t get the name dinosaurs (a rather late name, they were called dragons and had other names).
‘Course that means you’d actually have to be open minded about what’s being seen today, and not rule out the possibility based on your own preconceived notions and worldview. Not many can get outside the box like that.
MIn, you should beware any “research” that has had Carl Baugh’s fingerprints anywhere near it (referring to your first link). Even other creationist sites (such as your beloved AiG) have warned against his “evidences”. Barring that, the whole story is more than a bit suspect in many ways.
Another thing (this irks me to no end because I see it nearly daily on talk.origins): creationists seem to be fond of mentioning fraudulent fossil “finds” such as Piltdown and Nebraska… but it wasn’t creationists who discovered the hoaxes in the first place. It was – get this – scientists… doing exactly what science does best. Those examples in reality are only black marks against the perpetrators and not science in general. In regard to science, they ought to serve as shining examples that science actually works exactly as it should.
As for depending on ages given by scientists versus ages given in the Bible, I’ll trust scientific dating methods… thank you. Dating through isotopic decay is mathematically simple and elegant (remind me to explain it sometime), and if it was untrustworthy as creationists would have me believe, then a ginormous chunk of accepted physics and chemistry is equally flawed. The ramifications for all sorts of things you take for granted daily, were this the case, would be huge. Think about it.
IAMBs last blog post..Sending Out the Love
@IAMB: Thanks for the warning, IAMB. Many of these things are suspect, and (as I’m sure you’re aware) I was not attempting to link to it as proof, but rather food for thought. To say that “because I haven’t found it” doesn’t mean that it doesn’t exist.
As for fraudulent finds and the corrections, you’re absolutely correct. Science has “righted” itself often. My main problem here is that the original find is front page news “proving evolution” and the correction is back page news (if at all) and the general populace never hears it. Reminds me of what’s going on with mudslinging in politics right now.
That there are scientists out there willing to stretch credibility in order to prove their point should be a word of caution, however, to anyone.
What I still have a main problem with in this topic is the concept that there are facts and then there are measurements done based on the facts, and interpretations done on those facts (the basic things that under-gird some of the conclusions that are made). To me, there are certain things that we’ll never be able to say conclusively about history because of the very uncertain nature about it. That being a discussion for another time (as would be your mathematical explanation of isotopic decay (which we’ll have to get to eventually, I’m sure)).
What really bothers me about this whole issue, however, is when people like Damon decide that this issue (how the Earth was formed) has some kind of relationship with whether or not someone should “have the nuclear codes.” I can totally understand someone saying “I don’t want a Christian to have the nuclear codes” or “I don’t want a fundamentalist to have the nuclear codes”, but unless this is just a not-so-subtle dig at this (and I can understand why invoking a religious test could be more provocative than what he said), it’s absolute absurdity.
As for classifications of dinosaurs in the modern era, what are your thoughts? Is it possible that the dragons were actually dinosaurs (since the term is relatively recent) and/or that some modern discoveries could point out that they were/are not all extinct after all?
I mean, I know it’s not a problem for Evolutionism if they are still around– I’m just gathering your opinion.
My main problem here is that the original find is front page news “proving evolution” and the correction is back page news (if at all) and the general populace never hears it. Reminds me of what’s going on with mudslinging in politics right now.
I’ll grant you that science reporting is abysmally poor, and the media’s desire for sensational news generally relegates corrections to a mere footnote. That annoys the [heck] out of me as well. The cure is simply using popular media as a pointer and then heading for the primary literature when something catches your attention. Even if you don’t have a subscription to e journals (which tend to cost ridiculous sums), it’s likely that any local university library will have at least a few of the major publications.
I take science journalism the same way I take wiki (except in the case of Carl Zimmer… he’s quite good actually): good for pointing the way but don’t make the mistake of using it for an official reference.
Onto another topic…
As for the dragon thing, I’ll grant that it is possible. However, I think it’s unlikely given the vast differences in what a “dragon” is from one culture to the next and the many rational explanations as to where dragon mythology came from. We’ll have to discuss that one of these days as well… mythology (in the anthropology sense of the word… not the fairy tale one) of any sort has long fascinated me.
IAMBs last blog post..Sending Out the Love
Min, I’m certainly open minded to the fact that humans and dinos lived together. Show me the peer-reviewed scientific data and I’ll be all over it. Right now, you have nothing save some possible mentions in literature. There are also mentions of the the earth being the center of the universe (in your Bible), but we’ve all come to the realization that is not at all the case.
In any case, the dinos died off long before 4000BC. The earth existed long before 4000BC. Someone with the nuclear codes should not believe our planet is a mere 6000 years old when all scietific data points to a much older age. That’s Damon’s argument, and I totally agree with it.
Musicguys last blog post..Quote Monday
@IAMB: There’s a lot to talk about out there, that’s for sure. Thanks for your input. I appreciate your perspective.
@Musicguy: It’s you that has nothing, unfortunately. Your whole argument that they do not lies on “nothing”. That’s part of what it means to argue from silence. That there are writing is literature (other than the Bible, for though the Bible claims God made all things, and there are some references to animals we’re not totally sure what they are, like in the book of Job) to things that could qualify as dinosaurs (see my discussion with IAMB on dragons) and modern day discoveries, in my mind there’s a better chance that it is the case that they existed together, though not in the Jurassic Park type way that we like to envision.
You have no proof that they died before 4000 BC. Again, you can say that all the dinosaur remains that we classified as such have a radiometric dating of older than 4000 BC, but you cannot state as fact something that we have no data.
And there’s no logical bridge between nuclear weaponry and the age of the Earth that you’ve provided. Merely stating “I agree with the argument” doesn’t cut it. There has been no argument proffered. It’s foolishness. Make an argument for why it’s a problem, then we can discuss it. Otherwise, you’re as absurd as he is.