Dinosaurs on Mars?
 

While reading an report titled "NASA Rover Finds Surprising Evidence for Mars' Watery Past" I came upon the following quote - "Unless we find a dinosaur bed, we're not going to be able to [find signs of past life] in situ very easily," Craddock said. Instead, samples would need to be returned to an Earth lab for more study, he said.

It got me thinking, what if we did find evidence of dinosaurs existing on Mars. Not just any sort of life, but specifically dinosaurs. Would that change anyone's opinion on evolution?

Re: Dinosaurs on Mars?
 

Why would it? I'm not aware of a lot of middle ground on the subject. You either believe it or don't, facts don't really come into play.

Re: Dinosaurs on Mars?
 

[ QUOTE ]
Why would it? I'm not aware of a lot of middle ground on the subject. You either believe it or don't, facts don't really come into play.

[/ QUOTE ]

What do you mean - there are no facts for evolution?

Re: Dinosaurs on Mars?
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Why would it? I'm not aware of a lot of middle ground on the subject. You either believe it or don't, facts don't really come into play.

[/ QUOTE ]

What do you mean - there are no facts for evolution?

[/ QUOTE ]

No, I mean the people who don't believe in evolution generally don't disbelieve it because there isn't enough data to support it. They tend to disbelieve on religious grounds. While some will say the same thing about those who believe in it, more facts that support it won't make them believe in it less.

Re: Dinosaurs on Mars?
 

My thought process is that both the Earth and Mars probably had very similar conditions several billion years ago. The fact the similar life forms 'evolved' would in my mind be further proof of evolution. There is no mention of life on other planets, no mention of dinosaurs in the Bible. To have the same creature 'created' by God on two different planets without mention seems to offer less proof of a religious explanation.

Re: Dinosaurs on Mars?
 

Wait, you mean actuall the "same" dinosaurs as on Earth? That would be like the Babblefish, so improbable as to be proof of God.

Re: Dinosaurs on Mars?
 

Yeah, if we found actual T-rexes and velociraptors on Mars, that would be a gigantic strike at the bedrock of evolution. It would also be really, really cool.

Re: Dinosaurs on Mars?
 

[ QUOTE ]
While reading an report titled "NASA Rover Finds Surprising Evidence for Mars' Watery Past" I came upon the following quote - "Unless we find a dinosaur bed, we're not going to be able to [find signs of past life] in situ very easily," Craddock said. Instead, samples would need to be returned to an Earth lab for more study, he said.

It got me thinking, what if we did find evidence of dinosaurs existing on Mars. Not just any sort of life, but specifically dinosaurs. Would that change anyone's opinion on evolution?

[/ QUOTE ]

They forgot to mention it in the bible, but they meant to say that if we find evidence of dinosaurs existing on Mars, then God just put it there to test us.

In any case, if there were dinosaurs on Mars, they would have got in there spaceships and visited us already. [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img]

Re: Dinosaurs on Mars?
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
While reading an report titled "NASA Rover Finds Surprising Evidence for Mars' Watery Past" I came upon the following quote - "Unless we find a dinosaur bed, we're not going to be able to [find signs of past life] in situ very easily," Craddock said. Instead, samples would need to be returned to an Earth lab for more study, he said.

It got me thinking, what if we did find evidence of dinosaurs existing on Mars. Not just any sort of life, but specifically dinosaurs. Would that change anyone's opinion on evolution?

[/ QUOTE ]

They forgot to mention it in the bible, but they meant to say that if we find evidence of dinosaurs existing on Mars, then God just put it there to test us.

In any case, if there were dinosaurs on Mars, they would have got in there spaceships and visited us already. [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]

No dice. Short little arms.

Re: Dinosaurs on Mars?
 

If dinosaur fossils are found on Mars, it will be because God put them there to test our faith. Just like on Earth.

Re: Dinosaurs on Mars?
 

[ QUOTE ]
If dinosaur fossils are found on Mars, it will be because God put them there to test our faith. Just like on Earth.

[/ QUOTE ]

Well, obviously maybe...

I like that they said dinosaur beds instead of fossil beds. Their PR's improving.

Re: Dinosaurs on Mars?
 

I wonder if monkeys are living inside the astroids.

PairTheBoard

Re: Dinosaurs on Mars?
 

People seem to think only the Bible or evolution can be right. Their are millions of other possibilities.

Re: Dinosaurs on Mars?
 

[ QUOTE ]
People seem to think only the Bible or evolution can be right. Their are millions of other possibilities.

[/ QUOTE ]

LOL. This is a really funny criticism. There are either infinite other possibilities, or really pretty much a handful. No idea how you can figure 'millions.'

Re: Dinosaurs on Mars?
 

Why do people say dinosaur bones are put in the ground by god to test the faith of believers?

Seems to me you're making all sorts of assumptions about the possible relationships between dinosaurs and humans.

Re: Dinosaurs on Mars?
 

Look up the dates when dinosaurs ruled the world, look up dates when humans were supposed to develop, look up the age of the Earth according to the most conservative creationists.

Re: Dinosaurs on Mars?
 

[ QUOTE ]
Look up the dates when dinosaurs ruled the world, look up dates when humans were supposed to develop, look up the age of the Earth according to the most conservative creationists.

[/ QUOTE ]

lol?

And how old do you think most "conservative creationists" think the Earth is?

Re: Dinosaurs on Mars?
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Look up the dates when dinosaurs ruled the world, look up dates when humans were supposed to develop, look up the age of the Earth according to the most conservative creationists.

[/ QUOTE ]

lol?

And how old do you think most "conservative creationists" think the Earth is?

[/ QUOTE ]

"the"

Re: Dinosaurs on Mars?
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Look up the dates when dinosaurs ruled the world, look up dates when humans were supposed to develop, look up the age of the Earth according to the most conservative creationists.

[/ QUOTE ]

lol?

And how old do you think most "conservative creationists" think the Earth is?

[/ QUOTE ]

"the"

[/ QUOTE ]

To quote a great plastic space ranger:

You are a sad, sad little man.

Re: Dinosaurs on Mars?
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Look up the dates when dinosaurs ruled the world, look up dates when humans were supposed to develop, look up the age of the Earth according to the most conservative creationists.

[/ QUOTE ]

lol?

And how old do you think most "conservative creationists" think the Earth is?

[/ QUOTE ]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Young_Earth_creationism

6k years.

Re: Dinosaurs on Mars?
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Look up the dates when dinosaurs ruled the world, look up dates when humans were supposed to develop, look up the age of the Earth according to the most conservative creationists.

[/ QUOTE ]

lol?

And how old do you think most "conservative creationists" think the Earth is?

[/ QUOTE ]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Young_Earth_creationism

6k years.

[/ QUOTE ]

Right, and the dino bones are there to test our faith why? Because they're believed to be 400 million years old?

Well the problem with that, is they're dated by the strata level they're found in, but the strata is dated by the bones that are found in it. Seems like a pretty goofy dating system to me.

Re: Dinosaurs on Mars?
 

So it's not the bones that are put there to test our faith, it is the carbon?

Re: Dinosaurs on Mars?
 

[ QUOTE ]
So it's not the bones that are put there to test our faith, it is the carbon?

[/ QUOTE ]

Please don't start to tell me you're going to carbon date 400 million year old dinosaur bones. =/

I'll pretend you didn't mention it and you can re-think your answer.

Re: Dinosaurs on Mars?
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Look up the dates when dinosaurs ruled the world, look up dates when humans were supposed to develop, look up the age of the Earth according to the most conservative creationists.

[/ QUOTE ]

lol?

And how old do you think most "conservative creationists" think the Earth is?

[/ QUOTE ]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Young_Earth_creationism

6k years.

[/ QUOTE ]

Right, and the dino bones are there to test our faith why? Because they're believed to be 400 million years old?

Well the problem with that, is they're dated by the strata level they're found in, but the strata is dated by the bones that are found in it. Seems like a pretty goofy dating system to me.

[/ QUOTE ]

Fine. Young Earth Creationists don't believe that dinosaur bones were placed in the Earth to test our faith. In reality, they believe that dinosaurs and humans co-existed 6000 years ago.

Happy now? Sorry for misrepresenting your beliefs.

Re: Dinosaurs on Mars?
 

[ QUOTE ]

Fine. Young Earth Creationists don't believe that dinosaur bones were placed in the Earth to test our faith. In reality, they believe that dinosaurs and humans co-existed 6000 years ago.

Happy now? Sorry for misrepresenting your beliefs.

[/ QUOTE ]

Now explain to me why this is a problem without resorting to an MSpaint of people running in terror from a rampaging T-Rex.

Re: Dinosaurs on Mars?
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

Fine. Young Earth Creationists don't believe that dinosaur bones were placed in the Earth to test our faith. In reality, they believe that dinosaurs and humans co-existed 6000 years ago.

Happy now? Sorry for misrepresenting your beliefs.

[/ QUOTE ]

Now explain to me why this is a problem without resorting to an MSpaint of people running in terror from a rampaging T-Rex.

[/ QUOTE ]

You've convinced me. Obviously all of the dinosaurs drowned in the great flood. I guess they didn't fit on the Ark. Makes perfect sense. I can't believe I didn't see it before.

Re: Dinosaurs on Mars?
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

Now explain to me why this is a problem without resorting to an MSpaint of people running in terror from a rampaging T-Rex.

[/ QUOTE ]

You've convinced me. Obviously all of the dinosaurs drowned in the great flood. I guess they didn't fit on the Ark. Makes perfect sense. I can't believe I didn't see it before.

[/ QUOTE ]

Why wouldn't dinosaurs fit on the ark?

What do you know about the ark that I don't?

Why can't you answer a relatively simple question without resorting to patronistic sarcasm?

Re: Dinosaurs on Mars?
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Look up the dates when dinosaurs ruled the world, look up dates when humans were supposed to develop, look up the age of the Earth according to the most conservative creationists.

[/ QUOTE ]

lol?

And how old do you think most "conservative creationists" think the Earth is?

[/ QUOTE ]

"the"

[/ QUOTE ]

To quote a great plastic space ranger:

You are a sad, sad little man.

[/ QUOTE ]

because there's no meaningful difference between "the most conservative creationists" and "most conservative creationists"?

edited to say "creationists"

Re: Dinosaurs on Mars?
 

[ QUOTE ]

Why wouldn't dinosaurs fit on the ark?

[/ QUOTE ]

I guess I'm wrong again. Obviously the ark was large enough to fit every species on Earth, including the dinosaurs. They must have sawed holes in the ceiling so that the Sauropods and Brachiosaurs could keep from bumping their heads.

So what do you believe happened to the dinosaurs once they left the Ark? I'm genuinely curious.

[ QUOTE ]

What do you know about the ark that I don't?


[/ QUOTE ]

I'm sure I know exactly as much about the ark as you think you do.

[ QUOTE ]

Why can't you answer a relatively simple question without resorting to patronistic sarcasm?

[/ QUOTE ]

It's hard not to be patronizing when debating with bible literalists. The amount of self-delusion that is required to believe the things that you do is mind-boggling. To wilfully ignore multiple areas of scientific knowledge in order to believe what you do is a method of thinking that I cannot relate to.

Re: Dinosaurs on Mars?
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

Fine. Young Earth Creationists don't believe that dinosaur bones were placed in the Earth to test our faith. In reality, they believe that dinosaurs and humans co-existed 6000 years ago.

Happy now? Sorry for misrepresenting your beliefs.

[/ QUOTE ]

Now explain to me why this is a problem without resorting to an MSpaint of people running in terror from a rampaging T-Rex.

[/ QUOTE ]lol...this post is very funny on a number of levels. DUCY?

Re: Dinosaurs on Mars?
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
So it's not the bones that are put there to test our faith, it is the carbon?

[/ QUOTE ]

Please don't start to tell me you're going to carbon date 400 million year old dinosaur bones. =/

I'll pretend you didn't mention it and you can re-think your answer.

[/ QUOTE ]

Sorry, let's skip how the creationsists dismiss radiocarbon dating and change my quip to:

So it's not the bones that are put there to test our faith, it's the entire theory of geological columns that is.

The carbon quip is better and just as valid at pointing out how silly a young earth creationist theory is.

Re: Dinosaurs on Mars?
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
So it's not the bones that are put there to test our faith, it is the carbon?

[/ QUOTE ]

Please don't start to tell me you're going to carbon date 400 million year old dinosaur bones. =/

I'll pretend you didn't mention it and you can re-think your answer.

[/ QUOTE ]

Sorry, let's skip how the creationsists dismiss radiocarbon dating and change my quip to:

So it's not the bones that are put there to test our faith, it's the entire theory of geological columns that is.

The carbon quip is better and just as valid at pointing out how silly a young earth creationist theory is.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm pretty sure he was mocking you not based on how radiocarbon dating is BS to him, but based on the fact that you can't carbon-date a 400 million year old object. Or even a 200,000 year old object.

Re: Dinosaurs on Mars?
 

No, he supports dino's and human's living together later in the thread, he was mocking the idea that saying dino bones test faith because of their age is wrong. I wasn't aware of the limitations of carbon dating when I made the quip. It's still a better quip, the truth of it not withstanding. Which is the same reasoning YECs use...

Re: Dinosaurs on Mars?
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
So it's not the bones that are put there to test our faith, it is the carbon?

[/ QUOTE ]

Please don't start to tell me you're going to carbon date 400 million year old dinosaur bones. =/

I'll pretend you didn't mention it and you can re-think your answer.

[/ QUOTE ]

Sorry, let's skip how the creationsists dismiss radiocarbon dating and change my quip to:

So it's not the bones that are put there to test our faith, it's the entire theory of geological columns that is.

The carbon quip is better and just as valid at pointing out how silly a young earth creationist theory is.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm pretty sure he was mocking you not based on how radiocarbon dating is BS to him, but based on the fact that you can't carbon-date a 400 million year old object. Or even a 200,000 year old object.

[/ QUOTE ]

Presumably you can use carbon dating to show that some things are >>6kyears old.

Re: Dinosaurs on Mars?
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
So it's not the bones that are put there to test our faith, it is the carbon?

[/ QUOTE ]

Please don't start to tell me you're going to carbon date 400 million year old dinosaur bones. =/

I'll pretend you didn't mention it and you can re-think your answer.

[/ QUOTE ]

Sorry, let's skip how the creationsists dismiss radiocarbon dating and change my quip to:

So it's not the bones that are put there to test our faith, it's the entire theory of geological columns that is.

The carbon quip is better and just as valid at pointing out how silly a young earth creationist theory is.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm pretty sure he was mocking you not based on how radiocarbon dating is BS to him, but based on the fact that you can't carbon-date a 400 million year old object. Or even a 200,000 year old object.

[/ QUOTE ]

DING DING!

We have a winner.

You cannot accurately carbon date anything more than a few thousand years old. And it has many weaknesses due to carbon "pollution" that is introduced in so many environments.

Re: Dinosaurs on Mars?
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
So it's not the bones that are put there to test our faith, it is the carbon?

[/ QUOTE ]

Please don't start to tell me you're going to carbon date 400 million year old dinosaur bones. =/

I'll pretend you didn't mention it and you can re-think your answer.

[/ QUOTE ]

Sorry, let's skip how the creationsists dismiss radiocarbon dating and change my quip to:

So it's not the bones that are put there to test our faith, it's the entire theory of geological columns that is.

The carbon quip is better and just as valid at pointing out how silly a young earth creationist theory is.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm pretty sure he was mocking you not based on how radiocarbon dating is BS to him, but based on the fact that you can't carbon-date a 400 million year old object. Or even a 200,000 year old object.

[/ QUOTE ]

DING DING!

We have a winner.

You cannot accurately carbon date anything more than a few thousand years old. And it has many weaknesses due to carbon "pollution" that is introduced in so many environments.

[/ QUOTE ]

How many is a 'few?'

I'm interested in your "Science rules when its on my side" explanation for why the conventional 50,000 year upper limit (and thats conservative) is faulty.

Re: Dinosaurs on Mars?
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

Why wouldn't dinosaurs fit on the ark?

[/ QUOTE ]

I guess I'm wrong again. Obviously the ark was large enough to fit every species on Earth, including the dinosaurs. They must have sawed holes in the ceiling so that the Sauropods and Brachiosaurs could keep from bumping their heads.

So what do you believe happened to the dinosaurs once they left the Ark? I'm genuinely curious.

[/ QUOTE ]

Now why would anyone take a fully grown animal when an adolescent would do just fine? They're smaller, they require SIGNIFICANTLY less food, and they are more resistant to any number of ailments that older animals are not.

Let me ask you this, Mr. Evolutionist:

Can you please explain to me how a 45 ton, 90 foot long, 45 foot high Brachiosaurus can take in enough oxygen through nostrils the size of a modern day horse? Have you ever tried breathing for any length of time out of a straw only 2 mm in diameter?

Think about that, and you've got a much larger problem on your hands than fitting a dinosaur on a boat.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

Why can't you answer a relatively simple question without resorting to patronistic sarcasm?

[/ QUOTE ]

It's hard not to be patronizing when debating with bible literalists. The amount of self-delusion that is required to believe the things that you do is mind-boggling. To wilfully ignore multiple areas of scientific knowledge in order to believe what you do is a method of thinking that I cannot relate to.

[/ QUOTE ]

I fully respect your opinion.

However, look at it from my point of view. You think I'm diluded to believe in a "God" who can create a universe by merely speaking it into existance. And yet the entire basis of your theory is that the first amino acids formed by accident in a puddle of runoff of some rocks that were rained on for a few billion years on a planet that materialized out of nothing. You have absolutely no proof for any of this, just as I have absolutely no proof that "God" exists.

The difference between our two religions is that yours is government subsidized by my tax dollars for the indoctrination of unsuspecting school children.

Re: Dinosaurs on Mars?
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

DING DING!

We have a winner.

You cannot accurately carbon date anything more than a few thousand years old. And it has many weaknesses due to carbon "pollution" that is introduced in so many environments.

[/ QUOTE ]

How many is a 'few?'

I'm interested in your "Science rules when its on my side" explanation for why the conventional 50,000 year upper limit (and thats conservative) is faulty.

[/ QUOTE ]

Science is not the enemy. Scientific zealots hell-bent on discrediting the bible no matter how ridiculous their claims are the enemy.

I rather enjoy science.

Re: Dinosaurs on Mars?
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

DING DING!

We have a winner.

You cannot accurately carbon date anything more than a few thousand years old. And it has many weaknesses due to carbon "pollution" that is introduced in so many environments.

[/ QUOTE ]

How many is a 'few?'

I'm interested in your "Science rules when its on my side" explanation for why the conventional 50,000 year upper limit (and thats conservative) is faulty.

[/ QUOTE ]

Science is not the enemy. Scientific zealots hell-bent on discrediting the bible no matter how ridiculous their claims are the enemy.

I rather enjoy science.

[/ QUOTE ]


So...you agree that a 'few' is 50 and that the Biblical account of a 6-10k year Earth is entirely incompatible with science? Since science isn't the enemy, after all.

Re: Dinosaurs on Mars?
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

Fine. Young Earth Creationists don't believe that dinosaur bones were placed in the Earth to test our faith. In reality, they believe that dinosaurs and humans co-existed 6000 years ago.

Happy now? Sorry for misrepresenting your beliefs.

[/ QUOTE ]

Now explain to me why this is a problem without resorting to an MSpaint of people running in terror from a rampaging T-Rex.

[/ QUOTE ]

You've convinced me. Obviously all of the dinosaurs drowned in the great flood. I guess they didn't fit on the Ark. Makes perfect sense. I can't believe I didn't see it before.

[/ QUOTE ]

Actually I read an interpretation that Dino's were on Noah's Ark. [serious]

I'd imagine it went down something like this...
http://i163.photobucket.com/albums/t.../noahsark2.jpg