Was the Flinstones a documentary : Young Earth Science

[rickymooston]

Many people in fact believe in the historicity of Fred.



Don Exodus II made a point a while ago that one way to falsify Darwin's theory of Evolution would be to find a poodle in the Cambrian.

Nobody has succeeded in that but Creationists have made numerous claims that evidence of dinosaurs co-existing with humans exists
-- legends of dragons and other monsters
-- biblical accounts of huge monsters such as behomoth in Job
-- foot prints of humans and dinosaurs

[Historicity]

Coincidentally I read some of their dragons are dinosaurs.

Pliny said there were dragons in India. Some 3rd century AD Roman said there were dragons all over India in his day.

This was convincing to them.  They never noticed that the Indians carved images of all the animals of India -- very realistically -- but no dinosaur images.

BTW, I've read Pliny's description of the dragon. It was a snake so big it could swallow an elephant.

How?  Y'see sometimes a boa constrictor tries to swallow a snake.  On rare occasion it makes the mistake of swallowing an elephant's trunk.  Then as it gets up the trunk it realizes it can't swallow an elephant but it has no means to let go; its teeth hook inwards.  Such an encounter ends when another elephant hauls the snake off and they all stomp it.

So a snake so big it seems to try to swallow an elephant was exaggerated to a snake that succeeded in swallowing an elephant.

[Noman Peopled]

It's still a mystery to me how anyone could just take myths at face value without even thinking about digging up some bones. Oh, that's right, they would but those science conspirators wouldn't accept it. Besides, we already have the bones. My cousin has them in his garage. Unfortunately he's lost his keys. Mysterious ways, eh? And yet scientists go on claiming there's no proof, can you believe the arrogance ...

[jetson]

Yes, legends.
Yes, biblical accounts.
Seriously, the footprint myth?

[violatedsmurf80]

Look at the Mahabharata epic, it talks about a Vimana's which type of flying craft. There are specifications on how one was built with-in another book. I seen the pictures before but I can’t quite find them now. Even the bible talks about King David flying on a magic carpet. But my point is there is a lot of myth out there some just has to be decipherer what is true and what is not. Creationists are like the UFO hunters which think I seen them or something so I know it is true

[screwtape]

Ricky,

Is there an argument in your OP somewhere?  It looks like you are just posting tidbits of semi-related facts. It would make for a better post if you wove it together to make a cogent point.  Do you agree or disagree with YECs?  Why or why not?  Do you give credence to legends as evidence?  Do you give credence to the bible for fabulous creatures?  What evidence exists for human and dinosaur footprints being found together? 

Put some effort into it.

regards,
Screwtape

[rickymooston]

I thought my sarcasm was obvious; aka the flinstone reference. There is a barrage of videos on the topic but couldn't find written links on carl jackson's stuff

The tidbits are the 20 second summary of creationist embellishments

Can legends be evidence of real events?
-- yes, but its hard to distinguish fact
from embellishment or make believe fantasy.

Are similar legends between cultures evidence of a common root:
Sometimes, others its evidence of universal experience.

Foot prints?
-- in at least one case the foot prints were real but the feet were apparently not human.
---  if real human and real dino foot rpints were found side by side, it could prove something

Other evidence creationist have cited?
--- blood. I have no idea what facts they
Are referring too

[Noman Peopled]

Even the bible talks about King David flying on a magic carpet. But my point is there is a lot of myth out there some just has to be decipherer what is true and what is not.

No amount of interpretation is going to tell you whether a text's content is the truth.

[violatedsmurf80]

Even the bible talks about King David flying on a magic carpet. But my point is there is a lot of myth out there some just has to be decipherer what is true and what is not.

No amount of interpretation is going to tell you whether a text's content is the truth.

If there is a common theme among the ancient people of the time

[Noman Peopled]

If there is a common theme among the ancient people of the time

I should have specified:
If the content of the texts is already known and in question, we cannot turn to the texts for further substantiation, just like we can't find out if Herodot was right about some king by reading more Herodot.
People do share the same basic brain architecture. You can find commonalities in mythology just as you can find them in art, architecture, clothes design, and perhaps most interestingly, language. Common themes are just that, common - not therefore true.
To find out if monsters are a shared fiction or a shared observation, looking at the texts harder will do no good whatsoever. What you'd need to do is find other old texts for crossreferencing, and even that takes a way back seat to trying to dig up some fresh monster bones. In crossreferencing, you'd ideally find two fully independent sources describing the exact same thing in some detail. I'm unaware of any striking similarities. Monsters and dragons look different and behave differently in myths all over the world.
Thus my position: since the texts are lacking as evidence, we need to look elsewhere.

[violatedsmurf80]

If there is a common theme among the ancient people of the time

I should have specified:
If the content of the texts is already known and in question, we cannot turn to the texts for further substantiation, just like we can't find out if Herodot was right about some king by reading more Herodot.
People do share the same basic brain architecture. You can find commonalities in mythology just as you can find them in art, architecture, clothes design, and perhaps most interestingly, language. Common themes are just that, common - not therefore true.
To find out if monsters are a shared fiction or a shared observation, looking at the texts harder will do no good whatsoever. What you'd need to do is find other old texts for crossreferencing, and even that takes a way back seat to trying to dig up some fresh monster bones. In crossreferencing, you'd ideally find two fully independent sources describing the exact same thing in some detail. I'm unaware of any striking similarities. Monsters and dragons look different and behave differently in myths all over the world.
Thus my position: since the texts are lacking as evidence, we need to look elsewhere.

Well, You are right when it comes to monsters and flying and stuff like that but if there is a common theme like the city of Troy and the Trojan Horse. Most of the archaeologist, before they found Troy, believed this to be a myth but it showed up in another text. Then one day they Schliemann followed the clues to find what they believe to be Troy.   

[Noman Peopled]

Well, You are right when it comes to monsters and flying and stuff like that but if there is a common theme like the city of Troy and the Trojan Horse. Most of the archaeologist, before they found Troy, believed this to be a myth but it showed up in another text. Then one day they Schliemann followed the clues to find what they believe to be Troy.

That's what I mean. Schliemann didn't content himself with pointing at the texts, he went out and looked for evidence. (He found no trojan horse though.) Texts shouldn't be flat-out ignored just because they're not self-confirming.
In this case we have some similarities between myths that are easily explained by psychology, but no hard evidence - just a claim.

[rickymooston]

Typical video summarizing these arguments