Crazy Awesome

Welcome to the antidote.

Matt Damon discusses the terrifying prospect of a “President Palin” October 4, 2008


Watch Matt Damon, on CBS, talk about how seriously frightening and absurd it is that Sarah Palin could end up being our next President.  If 72-year old cancer survivor McCain kicks the bucket, we’ll be stuck with someone who believes dinosaurs were around 4,000 years ago against the Vladimir Putins of the world.  I especially love Matt’s comment that it’s like we’re stuck in a really bad Disney movie where the hockey mom becomes president.  He’s right!  This is like Air Bud or something.  Why is this actually happening!?


12 Responses to “Matt Damon discusses the terrifying prospect of a “President Palin””

  1. suppose Says:

    Gee, I’ll bet the American people are sure worried about what some deep thinker like a Hollywood actor has to say about John McCain and US politics.
    He wouldn’t know the Constitution from second base.

  2. qejenn Says:

    Are you Kidding Matt Damon, some actor, who spends all his time memorizing lines has an original thought that we are to take seriously. Puhleeze Matt – stick with your scripts. What a joke!!

  3. Ok, you guys. I see your point that Matt Damon is an actor, but he’s making valid points. If anybody (you included, as you two seem to think you have something worthy of sharing) makes sensible, reasoned points, I like to listen.

  4. honeycat22 Says:

    I don’t like to speak for others, but from my perspective I don’t need anyone in Hollyweird spouting off their opinion to tell me how to vote. They are a celebrity, big deal. That doesn’t make them any smarter or any more informed than you, me or the other two blogger above. I’ve read the voting records of both candidates, i’ve seen the legislation they’ve sponsored, that tell’s me a whole lot more than what get said on the campaign trail when they are telling everyone what they want to hear.

  5. Dev Says:

    Ok, first I have to say this. Neither the video nor the blog entry is asking anyone to go with what Matt is saying. Also, let’s quit being elitist, as if you don’t listen to what other people are saying and take that into consideration. Just because Matt is able to say it on camera unlike others that cower or don’t even have a specific point, don’t hang him out to dry.

    With that in mind I think the point to the video is that Matt Damon (like every other liberal resident of the United States) is definitely afraid of the possible outcome of McCain/Palin winning. Instead of focusing on what Matt has to say, (and he is definitely not the only one who feels this way but, he has the opportunity to say so on camera) why don’t we focus our attention on the people running for office.

    So basically stop your whining, it was just a bloody remark. He has every right to speak his mind, just like you do!

    Geez, louise.

  6. honeycat22 Says:

    Oh, so when Matt Damon or any other Liberal states their opinion, it’s just a remark, but when a Conseravative makes a comment on it, that’s whining – fair and balanced, only when it’s coming from the left.

  7. I take it you’re a conservative?

    Also, I’m open to ANY debate on commentary on my page. But – like you, I feel like I have a right to my own opinion. This is not the Washington Post, it’s a personal blog. As such, I’ll make my views known.

    That being said, I’m of the opinion that heated discourse between people with DIFFERENT opinions raises the level of debate and the knowledge/awareness of all involved. So please – continue to bring your side to the table!

  8. honeycat22 Says:

    Conservative, but not to the extreme. I just don’t like the idea that people who have a large forum (actors, etc.) to address issues and instead of using intelligence, will result to insults. Matt Damon is a prime example of that. You can have an opinion that disagrees, but do you have to be disrespectful of someone while doing it? I just feel like when you do have a forum such as they have you should set a better example on how to have a more mature discourse. Hillary Clinton has been a very good example of what I mean, I don’t support her party’s platform, but she handles herself well in the public arena. I respect her for that.

  9. I agree with you that Hilary does a good job of treating people with respect in the public arena. That being said, she literally would not get voted for if she didn’t. Actors live in a different world, and while I do understand your point that they should make an effort to raise the discourse, I also have to say that some of his “insults” resound with me. I am a very open-minded and tolerant person, someone who respects others’ belief systems and values, but I have a really hard time thinking that people who think that dinosaurs and humans co-existed 4000 years ago aren’t just a little bit stupid. If not a lot. There is SO MUCH evidence to the contrary that it seems very provincial and, well, ignorant, to deny it. So in some ways, that type of “insult” to me is more of just a question – does she really believe that? The fact that people TAKE it as an insult indicates that they are defensive about it, which is usually a sign of self-doubt in my experience. If someone wholeheartedly believed in creationism, vs. evolution, they shouldn’t take comments like that poorly. Do you see what I mean? What specific insults were you referring to?

  10. honeycat22 Says:

    The Disney comment, the creationism comment, and the tone. But I found your comment on dinosaurs and humans co-existing interesting and if you do believe in creationism, you would believe they did. I found a snippet of an article on-line. It’s a little long, sorry.

    The reason man can tame and/or live with even the largest and most vicious creatures on Earth is because God created man “higher” than the animals, and gave him the ability to “subdue” them and have “dominion” over them. If man, in the twenty-first century, can live with (and tame) such amazing creatures as the Komodo Dragon, the elephant, the blue whale, and the killer whale, as well as lions (“the king of all beasts”), tigers, and bears, it should not be difficult to accept the fact that man once lived and interacted with dinosaurs. James wrote: “For every kind of beast and bird, of reptile and creature of the sea, is tamed and has been tamed by mankind” (3:7).

    Most people likely are unaware that the word “dinosaur” was not coined until the 1840s. Thus, if these creatures lived alongside humans prior to that time (and the evidence indicates that they did—see Thompson and Harrub, 2003, pp. 197-226), they were not called dinosaurs. So what were they called? Dragons. Numerous cultures throughout the world possess ancient stories about “dragons” that closely resemble what we today would call dinosaurs (which is to be expected if dinosaurs and humans actually lived together). From ancient texts in Mesopotamia, China, and Europe, creatures with scaly skin, slender necks, and long tails are described.

    In far-eastern countries such as China, dragons often are described in ancient writings. Some of them are said to have been domesticated, and even were used to pull the chariots of Chinese rulers. Also, many of the ancient Chinese people are said to have used “dragon bones” for special medicines and potions. While visiting the continent of Asia in the 1200s, Italian explorer Marco Polo said that he saw long reptiles called Lindworms that easily ran as fast as a horse! In the British Isles, hundreds of dragon stories have come down to the present day. One account told of an animal with a crested head, teeth like a saw, and a long tail. Also, in 1449 in England, it was reported that two huge reptiles were seen fighting on the banks of the river Stour.

    The epic poem Beowulf describes a battle in Denmark between a man named Beowulf and a terrible monster called Grendel. Beowulf was a real person. He lived from A.D. 495 to 583, and was king of a group of people known as the Geatingas. Grendel was a bipedal creature that possessed large, powerful jaws, and had small, weak forearms. (Beowulf slew him, you may recall, by tearing off one of those arms.) As Bill Cooper inquired:

    Is there a predatory animal from the fossil record known to us, who had two massive hindlegs and two comparatively puny forelimbs? There is indeed…. I doubt that the reader needs to be guided by me as to which particular species of predatory dinosaur the details of his physical description fit best (1995, pp. 159,160).

    Could it be—Tyrannosaurus rex?! Why not? The description of Grendel, recorded sometime before the tenth century A.D. (over nine centuries before the relatively recent discovery of dinosaur fossils), more closely resembles a Tyrannosaurus rex than any animal alive today. (NOTE: There is no indication that either Beowulf or Grendel was mythical in nature.)

    If humans today can manipulate animals that are 100 times their own size (e.g., the elephant), that have a mouthful of 3-inch-long, dagger-like teeth (e.g., the killer whale), or that have claws that could be used to rip human beings apart (e.g., lions, tigers, and bears), why is it so difficult to believe that humans and dinosaurs once inhabited this Earth at the same time? Admittedly, many human lives likely were lost to certain species of dinosaurs for various reasons. But, for thousands of years, people also have lost their lives to animals that still inhabit the Earth today (like sharks, tigers, lions, poisonous reptiles, bears, elephants, etc.). Although we probably will never know exactly which details of the countless number of dragon stories are fact or fantasy, the simple truth is that the huge lizards in them sound very much like some of the dinosaurs we know once existed. Ancient paintings, figurines, rock carvings, and other such illustrations also have been found throughout the world that point to a time when dinosaurs and humans once roamed this Earth together. One cannot help but wonder, if they never did coexist (as evolutionists would have us believe), what logical explanation can be given for the existence of hundreds of dragon legends, and the thousands of artifacts that either describe or depict these creatures hundreds or thousands of years before modern man began learning about dinosaurs as a result of the fossil record?

    Sadly, however, it is not just evolutionists who take issue with the coexistence of humans and dinosaurs. In a book he authored in 1998 titled The Genesis Question, well-known progressive creationist Hugh Ross ridiculed the concept that the biblical creatures, behemoth and leviathan, were dinosaurs or dinosaur-like animals. According to Ross, “No creatures on Earth, alive or extinct, fit the literal descriptions” of the animals that God described to the patriarch Job in Job 40:15-41:34. Furthermore, “No dinosaur…ever breathed fire or smoke or had bones of iron and brass” (p. 48). Ross has chosen to believe that the magnificent creatures described by God in His second speech to Job were the hippopotamus and the crocodile.

    Like so many professed Christians who have tried to amalgamate the long evolutionary ages with the biblical account of Creation, Ross’s reservations to accept the likelihood of behemoth being a dinosaur and leviathan being a dinosaur-like, water-living reptile are not the result of a sensible, judicious exegesis of the biblical text. A man who believes that dinosaurs “dominated the Earth’s land and sea life from 250 million to 65 million years ago” (p. 48), and that “no credible evidence whatever suggests the coexistence of primates and the great dinosaurs” (p. 49), obviously will have a difficult time accepting that behemoth and leviathan (which existed at the same time as Job) were dinosaurs or dinosaur-like animals. [For additional information on the cohabitation of humans and dinosaurs, see Thompson and Harrub, 2003. For a discussion on the reality and the identity of behemoth and leviathan, see Lyons, 2001.]

    Two of the main reasons Ross gives for rejecting the dinosaur-like features of these creatures are: (1) “no creatures on Earth, alive or extinct, fit the literal descriptions;” and (2) “no dinosaur…ever breathed fire or smoke.” According to Ross, such “facts” present a problem when Bible students understand these creatures as being dinosaurs.

    We wonder if Ross could answer two questions for us. First, although admittedly no creature alive today fits the “literal descriptions” of leviathan and behemoth, how can Ross confidently assert that no extinct animal resembles the description of behemoth or leviathan? How does Ross know the description of every creature that has lived on the Earth? How does he know what feats they were capable of performing? Ross might suggest: “But common sense tells us that no creature had ribs of ‘iron’ or bones of ‘brass’ ” (cf. Job 40:18). True. But when God employed such metaphors and similes, any reasonable Bible student can understand that He was stressing the fact that behemoth’s bones were incredibly solid—like they were made of solid metal. Interestingly, although dinosaurs had the largest, most massive bones of any known animal that has ever walked the Earth (e.g., one fossilized Argentinosaurus vertebra was five feet high and five feet wide—see Meyer, 2002), and even though they are known to have the most massive tails of any animal ever known (e.g., the 40-foot-long tail of Diplodocus), which could reasonably be likened to a “cedar” (Job 40:17), Ross has chosen rather to believe that behemoth was a hippo—an animal with a tail shorter than many dogs and cats.

    A second question we would appreciate Hugh Ross answering for us is how he can be so certain that “no dinosaur…ever breathed fire or smoke.” By his own candid admission, Ross never has seen a dinosaur (since he believes they became extinct 65+ million years ago), and thus he obviously never has observed every dinosaur that walked on land (or dinosaur-like reptile that swam in the oceans). As Henry M. Morris observed in his book, The Biblical Basis for Modern Science: “To say that the leviathan could not have breathed fire is to say much more than we know about leviathans (or water dragons or sea serpents)” (1984, p. 359, parenthetical item in orig.). When a person considers that electric eels can produce enough electricity (500-600 volts) to stun a horse without ever shocking itself, that anglerfish and fireflies can manufacture “light,” that the Komodo dragon can store deadly bacteria inside its own mouth, and that bombardier beetles can produce a caustic, noxious fluid that can be expelled from their bodies at a temperature of 212 degrees Fahrenheit, it is not difficult to accept the possibility that certain dinosaurs or dinosaur-like, water-living reptiles were capable of expelling certain hot gaseous fumes that might ignite.

    Hugh Ross, it seems, has forgotten that all animals, including the dinosaurs, were designed and created by God on days five and six of Creation. If Jehovah wanted to create one or more dinosaurs that could expel fire, smoke, or some deadly chemical out of their mouths without harming themselves, He certainly could have done so. Bearing in mind the way that God described leviathan to Job in Job 41:18-21, and considering that many secular stories have circulated for millennia that describe “fiery dragons,” it is logical to conclude that He did create such creatures. It seems fitting to ask Dr. Ross the same rhetorical question God asked Abraham long ago: “Is anything too hard for the Lord?” (Genesis 18:14). Who is Hugh Ross to say that “no dinosaur…ever breathed fire”?

    Although evolutionists are quick to discount anything that the Bible has to say about the coexistence of humans and dinosaurs, anyone who claims to be a Christian (and thus trusts the Bible to be God’s revelation to man) must accept whatever information they find in the Bible to be accurate. In regard to the coexistence of humans and dinosaurs, many modern-day “Bible believers” either have rejected what the Bible has to say on the subject, or else they never have given it much thought in light of various Bible passages. According to the Scriptures, the whole of God’s earthly creation was brought into existence within six days. Exodus 20:11 states: “For in six days the Lord made the heavens and the earth, the sea, and all that is in them, and rested the seventh day” (cf. also Exodus 31:17). The apostle John declared that “all things were made by Him, and without Him nothing was made that was made” (John 1:3). If God created the Earth, the heavens, the seas, and everything in them in six days, what does that omit? It omits absolutely nothing! [NOTE: Genesis 1:31 records that the Creation was “perfect,” and Genesis 2:1 states that it was “finished.”]

    The Genesis record goes on to inform us that no animals were created before day five, at which time God created sea-dwelling creatures and birds (Genesis 1:20-23). On the sixth day of Creation, Genesis chapters 1 and 2 indicate that God made all of the land animals, as well as the first two humans, Adam and Eve. According to Genesis 2:19-20,

    Out of the ground, the Lord God formed every beast of the field and every bird of the air, and brought them to Adam to see what he would call them. And whatever Adam called each living creature, that was its name. So Adam gave names to all cattle, to the birds of the air, and to every beast of the field. But for Adam there was not found a helper comparable to him (emp. added).

    God miraculously “brought…every beast of the field” to Adam in order that he might give them names, and also realize that his mate had not yet been created by God. A Christian cannot reasonably reject the view that dinosaurs (as land-dwelling animals) and humans once lived together, because Adam lived alongside dinosaurs. He even gave them names. Just as Adam lived on the Earth as a contemporary with such “intimidating” animals as lions, bears, rhinoceroses, hippopotami, and elephants, the inescapable conclusion is that he also lived with dinosaurs. [NOTE: Through the years, attempts have been made to introduce into the biblical record the concept of an old Earth so that evolutionary concepts (such as the separation of men and dinosaurs by millions of years) could be made acceptable to Bible believers. These attempts (generally known as the Day-Age Theory and the Gap Theory) have failed, because the premises upon which they were developed were false. For an in-depth refutation of these theories (and others), see Thompson, 2000.]

    Bible believers who question the possibility of humans being able to cohabitate the Earth with dinosaurs should consider the types of creatures with which Noah and his family cohabited for more than 365 days while on the ark. Genesis 7:13-16 states:

    On the very same day Noah and Noah’s sons, Shem, Ham, and Japheth, and Noah’s wife and the three wives of his sons with them, entered the ark—they and every beast after its kind, all cattle after their kind, every creeping thing that creeps on the earth after its kind, and every bird after its kind, every bird of every sort. And they went into the ark to Noah, two by two, of all flesh in which is the breath of life. So those that entered, male and female of all flesh, went in as God had commanded him; and the Lord shut him in (emp. added).

    Representatives of all kinds of the land animals of the Earth were on the ark. Earlier, God had instructed Noah, saying:

    And of every living thing of all flesh you shall bring two of every sort into the ark, to keep them alive with you; they shall be male and female. Of the birds after their kind, of animals after their kind, and of every creeping thing of the earth after its kind, two of every kind will come to you to keep them alive (6:19-20, emp. added).

    Similar to how God “brought” the animals to Adam centuries earlier in order to be named, He told Noah that all of the animals he was to take on the ark would “come to” him. Animals of all kinds migrated to where Noah lived, and joined him and his family on the ark. For a little over one year, Noah and his seven family members lived on a boat with bears, bats, alligators, gorillas, lions, tigers, and many other animals that humans normally try to avoid. Also included in this list of land animals would have been dinosaurs (since by definition dinosaurs are land-living animals). If dinosaurs were living during the time of Noah (and there is overwhelming evidence that they must have been, since humans after that time have encountered dinosaurs), the simple truth is that they were on the ark.

    Sadly, it is very unpopular to teach that mankind once coexisted with dinosaurs. The average person has been programmed by his or her environment to think that humans and dinosaurs never could have lived together. Not only are we told that dinosaurs became extinct over 60 million years ago, but the mindset of most people seems to be that even if this alleged 60-million-year gap of time did not exist, these creatures would have been far too dangerous for us to exist along with them. Even many Christians have a difficult time accepting the idea of humans and dinosaurs cohabiting the Earth at the same time. For some reason, when these Christians read the Creation account or rehearse the story of Noah and the Flood, they rarely consider these accounts in light of the many kinds of animals that have since become extinct.

    Draw a human standing next to a dinosaur (except for cartoonish purposes), and prepare to be ridiculed. Draw a human riding a small dinosaur, and you likely will be labeled eccentric. Few people seem to care that ancient art depicts Indians riding these creatures, or that certain ancient Chinese writings mention dinosaur-like creatures pulling the chariots of Chinese rulers. Even many “Bible believers” seem to dismiss the historical and biblical evidence of humans and dinosaurs living at the same time and within close proximity to each other. But draw a picture of a man riding on the back of a 20,000-pound elephant, and no one has a problem with it. Write an article about the woman you saw at Sea World riding on the back of an 8,000 pound killer whale, or about how she stuck her head inside the whale’s massive mouth, and everyone understands these stories as being acceptable observations of reality. Tell a friend about the man at the circus who has tamed lions, tigers, and bears, and that is nothing but old news. Just refrain from telling people about the evidence for man’s coexistence with dinosaurs, because “that is absurd”—or so we are told.

    If man can tame many types of dangerous and ferocious animals that live on Earth today, why is it so difficult to think of man being capable of surviving alongside dinosaurs? Ancient man was able to build pyramids that stood nearly 500 feet high. He constructed the Great Pyramid with over two million blocks of stone that had to be cut, transported, and assembled to create the almost six-million-ton structure. To this day, modern man still does not know exactly how the Egyptians built these great pyramids. More than one thousand years before astronomers discovered that the length of a year was precisely 365.2422 days, ancient man (without any help from computers or modern measuring devices) calculated the length of a year as 365.2420 days long. He also figured the orbital period of Venus to be 584 days, when current science shows it at 583.92 days. Our early forefathers were capable of tunneling through rock in order to mine precious metals from deep within the Earth (Job 28). Humans formed tools out of bronze and iron (Genesis 4:22). And a man named Noah even built an ark thousands of years ago that was larger than many ships of today (Genesis 6-8).

    Our forefathers were not the ignorant, unlearned nitwits that many evolutionists today make them out to be. Rather, our ancestors were intelligent individuals who were more than capable of surviving alongside dinosaurs. They were made in the image of God, and given dominion “over every living thing that moves on the earth” (Genesis 1:28)—including the dinosaurs.

    But if dinosaurs and humans did once live as contemporaries on Earth, why is it that human fossils have not been found alongside, near, or in the same strata as dinosaur fossils? If they lived together and died together, shouldn’t there be evidence from the fossil record of their coexistence?

    Admittedly, at times questions like these appear somewhat puzzling. We know from the biblical record that dinosaurs and humans coexisted. Furthermore, various ancient paintings, figurines, rock carvings, and historical references confirm they were contemporaries upon the Earth. Why, then, at first glance, does the fossil record seem not to corroborate this information?

    First, fossils are rare. Not every living plant, animal, or human fossilizes after death. In fact, it is extremely rare for things once living to fossilize. Dead animals lying in a field or on the side of the road do not fossilize. In order for something to become fossilized, it must be buried rapidly in just the right place. Consider as an example all the bison that were slaughtered and left to rot on the prairies of the Old West. In those days, you could buy a seat on a train, pull up to a herd of bison, and keep shooting out of the window until you were either out of bullets or your barrel overheated. When everyone had enough, the train would move on, leaving the dead and dying animals behind. By 1885, millions of bison had been reduced to just 500 (Jones, n.d.). What happened to all of their remains? We do not see them on the prairies today. Why? Because their bones and flesh were scavenged by worms, birds, insects, and other animals. The smallest portions were digested by bacteria, fungi, and enzymatic degradation until the buffalo remains were gone. Even oxygen plays a part in breaking down the chemicals that make up the living body. Evolutionary scientist James Powell described another situation where a rather large population of animals died. He wrote:

    [I]n the winter after the great Yellowstone fires of 1988, thousands of elk perished from extreme cold coupled with lack of food. Late the following spring, their carcasses were strewn everywhere. Yet only a few years later, bones from the great elk kill are scarce. The odds that a single one will be preserved so that it can be found 65 million years from now approach zero. At best we can expect to find fossil evidence of only a tiny fraction of the animals that once lived. The earth’s normal processes destroy or hide most of the clues (1998, p. xv).

    Normally, as Powell indicated, living things do not fossilize. Under normal conditions, living things decay and rot. It is atypical for plants and animals to fossilize, because they must avoid even the tiniest of scavengers, bacteria, fungi, etc. For bones to fossilize, they must be buried—the deeper and sooner the better. Fine sediments, like mud and silt, are good because they block out oxygen. In this “protected” environment, bones and teeth may last long enough to mineralize. But, normally, carcasses do not find themselves in such environments.

    Second, although dinosaur graveyards have been discovered in various countries around the world (e.g., Tanzania, Africa; Jenson, Utah [USA]) where thousands of dinosaur bones are jumbled together (obviously due to some sort of catastrophe—e.g., a flood), most people are unaware of the fact that, in museums, “in spite of the intense popular and scientific interest in the dinosaurs and the well-publicized efforts of generations of dinosaur hunters, only about 2,100 articulated dinosaur bones (two or more aligned in the same position as in life)” exist (Powell, 1998, p. xv, parenthetical comment in orig.; see also Dodson, 1990, 87:7608; Lewin, 1990). Furthermore, in an article in the October 1990 issue of the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, Peter Dodson of the University of Pennsylvania reported that almost half (45.3%) of all dinosaur genera are based on a single specimen, and 74% are represented by five specimens or less (p. 7608). Even some of the most famous dinosaurs are based on a fraction of what they were originally. For example, the 120-foot-long Argentinosaurus replica (housed in the Fernbank Museum o Natural History in Atlanta, Georgia) is based on only 10 percent of its remains (a dozen backbone vertebrae, a few limb bones and part of the hips) [Meyer, 2002]. Truthfully, although dinosaurs have captured the attention of scientists for more than 150 years, their fossilized remains are not as prevalent as many would think.

    Third, humans make up an infinitesimal portion of the fossil record. Due to the number of drawings of our alleged human ancestors that appear in the news on a regular basis, one might get the feeling that hominoid and human fossils are ubiquitous. But such is not the case. More than two decades ago, in an article in New Scientist, John Reader wrote: “The entire hominid collection known today would barely cover a billiard table (1981, 89:802). One year later, Lyall Watson similarly stated: “The fossils that decorate our family tree are so scarce that there are still more scientists than specimens. The remarkable fact is that all the physical evidence we have for human evolution can still be placed, with room to spare, inside a single coffin” (1982, 90:44, emp. added). It is true, of course, that additional alleged hominid fossils have been discovered since Watson and Reader made their comments, but none qualifies as a legitimate human ancestor (see Harrub and Thompson, 2003, pp. 14ff.). In a conversation with James Powell, president and director of the Los Angeles County Museum of Natural History, renowned evolutionary paleoanthropologist Meave Leakey gave some insight into her frustrations in searching for hominid (or human) fossils when she described her “nearly futile hunt for human bone in a new field area as four years of hard work producing only three nondescript scraps” (see Powell, 1998, p. xv, emp. added). More recently, David Begun concluded an article in Science titled “The Earliest Hominins—Is Less More?,” by admitting: “[T]he level of uncertainty in the available direct evidence at this time renders irreconcilable differences of opinion inevitable. The solution is in the mantra of all paleontologists: We need more fossils!” (2004, 303:1479-1480, emp. added). Although hominid/human fossils are the most sought-after fossils in the world, scientists readily admit that few such fossils have been found.

    As you can see, the question “Why don’t we find dinosaur and human fossils together?” is extremely misleading. The truth is, fossils themselves are rare. And, of all those things that do fossilize, it appears that less than 1% are vertebrates (fish, amphibians, reptiles, birds, or mammals) [see Snelling, 1991, p. 30]. Furthermore, human fossils make up a microscopic part of the fossil record. Searching for one is like trying to find the one proverbial needle in a haystack. The real question then, is not, “Why don’t we find dinosaur and human fossils together?,” but, “Where are all of the human fossils?”

    Simply because human fossils apparently have not been found with dinosaur fossils does not make the case for the coexistence of dinosaurs and humans any less credible. Think about it. Where are the human fossils that have been found with the recently extinct Pyrenean Ibex? Can we prove that Dodo birds and humans once lived together by observing their fossilized remains together in a particular layer of rock? We know that they once coexisted, but can a person point to the fossil record for such information? The chance of finding human fossils is rare. The chance of finding exactly the combination of fossils for which one is searching (in this case, dinosaurs and humans) is even less likely.

    Fourth, considering that sedimentary rocks (the sort of rocks in which fossils are most likely to be found) cover two-thirds of the continents and are over a mile thick on average, even if there are dinosaur and human remains fossilized in the same rock, the chance of them being exposed, discovered, recognized, and reported together is very improbable. They might be exposed somewhere in the world today (like in a mine, road cutting, or a cliff), but unless they are discovered before the wind, Sun, and rain reduce them to dust, such exposure is useless to scientists.

    Furthermore, it may very well be the case that these bones have been discovered together in times past, but for at least two reasons, were not reported. First, someone who might have found these bones in a quarry, could react by saying, “Hey look guys, it’s a bunch of old bones. But quick, pass me another stick of dynamite so we can get the next ton of coal out of here.” The proof that men and dinosaurs were fossilized together may have gone up in smoke years ago. Second, it may be possible that human bones have been found by scientists alongside dinosaur fossils, yet simply have not been reported widely. By saying this, we do not mean to accuse evolutionary researchers of dishonesty. Rather, we simply believe they are afflicted with presuppositions that have affected their judgment. It is evolutionary geologists and paleontologists who are doing most of the research in this area. If they did happen upon human fossils and dinosaur fossils in the same strata, is it not possible that they would think to themselves, “Oh, these human fossils are an anomaly; they cannot have actually existed in this time period because evolution is true”? If evolutionists can “confuse” a dolphin’s rib for a human collarbone (Anderson, 1983, p. 199), or an extinct pig’s tooth for a human tooth (e.g., Nebraska Man; see Harrub and Thompson, 2003, pp. 88-89), then similar mistakes could easily be made concerning human and dinosaur fossils. If one ever has been found with another, scientists could have misinterpreted the “anomaly.” Because (from an evolutionary perspective) human fossils “shouldn’t be where they are,” they might very well not get reported as being where they are!

    Additionally, we find a number of evidences in the fossil record which clearly refute the evolutionary notion that humans and other large mammals were not present during the “age of the reptiles.” Evolutionary timelines present mammals as having evolved from reptiles. Raven and Johnson, in their college text, Biology, wrote: “During the Mesozoic Era, the reptiles, which had evolved earlier from the amphibians, became dominant and in turn gave rise to the mammals and the birds” (1989, p. 432). George Gaylord Simpson and his co-authors contended that no “advanced mammals” were present during the age of the dinosaurs. Why not? The dinosaurs allegedly became extinct in the Cretaceous Period, and the only mammals that had evolved up to that point were “small, mostly about mouse-sized, and rare” (1957, p. 797, emp. added). This is a logical explanation if one contends that mammals evolved from reptiles, because that scenario require mammals to appear much later in the picture.

    But therein lies the problem. A significant discovery, reported in the January 13, 2005 issue of Nature, has challenged everything evolutionists have ever maintained regarding the cohabitation of dinosaurs and mammals. The Associated Press noted:

    Villagers digging in China’s rich fossil beds have uncovered the preserved remains of a tiny dinosaur in the belly of a mammal, a startling discovery for scientists who have long believed early mammals couldn’t possibly attack and eat a dinosaur (Verrengia, 2005).

    Not only is there substantial proof of large mammals coexisting with dinosaurs, but now we also have scientific evidence of a large mammal eating a dinosaur! Scientists discovered the fossil remains of two different mammals. One (Repenomamus giganticus) was 50% larger than mammals previously considered to be living alongside dinosaurs. The other, Repenomamus robustus, was fully intact—and had a dinosaur in its stomach. Yaoming Hu and his co-authors wrote in Nature:

    During preparation of the specimen, a patch of small bones was revealed within the ribcage, on the ventral sides of the posterior left thoracic ribs and vertebrae, where the stomach is positioned in extant mammals. Unduplicated dentition [teeth—EL/BT], limb bones and phalanges [bones of the toes or “fingers”—EL/BT] in the patch confirm that these bones belong to a juvenile individual of Psittacosaurus, an herbivorous dinosaur that is common in Jehol Biota. The serrated teeth in the patched skeleton are typical of juvenile Psittacosaurus. The skull and most of the skeleton of the juvenile Psittacosaurus are broken, disarticulated and displaced, in contrast to the preservation of the R. robustus skeleton, which is essentially in its original anatomical relation. Although fragmentary, the bones of the Psittacosaurus are packed in a restricted area. These conditions indicate that the juvenile skeleton ofPsittacosaurus is the remaining stomach contents of the mammal (Hu, et al., 2005, 433:151).

    In discussing this amazing find, Nature writer Anne Weil observed: “Discoveries of large, carnivorous mammals from the Cretaceous challenge the long-held view that primitive mammals were small and uninteresting. Have paleontologists been asking the wrong question?” (2005, 433:116, emp. added). Maybe a better question would be: Have paleontologists been analyzing the data via evolutionary presuppositions?

    It may be that dinosaur and human fossils will never be found together. But, regardless of whether they are or not, the evidence for the coexistence of humans and dinosaurs at one time in the past is undeniable to the unbiased truth seeker. Human footprints in coal veins that are allegedly 250 million years old, human artifacts buried in limestone dated at 135 million years old, clay figurines of dinosaurs from an ancient civilization in Mexico, ancient dinosaur petroglyphs, and much, much more, all point to a conclusion that evolutionists will not accept—dinosaurs and humans once lived on Earth together.

    Anderson, I. (1983), “Humanoid Collarbone Exposed as Dolphin’s Rib,” New Scientist, April 28.

    Begun, David (2004), “The Earliest Hominins—Is Less More?,” Science, 3003:1478-1480, March 5.

    Clayton, John N. (1990), Dinosaurs—One of God’s More Interesting and Useful Creations (South Bend, IN: Privately published by the author).

    Clayton, John N. (1991), Does God Exist? Christian Evidences Intermediate Course Teacher’s Guide (South Bend, IN: Privately published by the author).

    Cooper, Bill (1995), After the Flood (Chicester, England: New Wine Press).

    Dodson, Peter (1990), “Counting Dinosaurs: How Many Kinds Were There?,” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 87:7608-7612, October.

    Harrub, Brad and Bert Thompson (2003), The Truth About Human Origins (Montgomery, AL: Apologetics Press).

    Horner, John R. and Don Lessem (1993), The Complete T. rex: How Stunning New Discoveries are Changing Our Understanding of the World’s Most Famous Dinosaur (New York: Simon & Schuster).

    Hu, Yaoming, Jin Meng, Yuanqing Wang, and Chuankui Li (2005), “Large Mesozoic Mammals Fed on Young Dinosaurs,” Nature, 433:149-152, January 13.

    Jones, Alvin T. (no date), “The American Bison,” [On-line], URL: http://www.texasbi

    Lewin, Roger (1990), “Science: Dinosaur Count Reveals Surprisingly Few Species,” New Scientist Archive, 128[1745], December, [On-line], URL: secure/article/article.jsp?rp=1&id=mg 12817452.700.

    Lyons, Eric (2001), “Behemoth and Leviathan—Creatures of Controversy,” Reason & Revelation, 21:1-7, January.

    Meyer, Pedro (2002), “Does the Original Matter?,”, [On-line], URL:

    Morris, Henry M. (1984), The Biblical Basis for Modern Science (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker).

    Powell, James Lawrence (1998), Night Comes to the Cretaceous (New York: Harcourt Brace & Company).

    Raven, Peter H. and George B. Johnson (1989), Biology, (St. Louis, MO: Times Mirror/Mosby College Publishing), second edition.

    Reader, John (1981), “Whatever Happened to Zinjanthropus?,” New Scientist, 89:802, March 26.

    Ross, Hugh (1998) The Genesis Question (Colorado Springs, CO: Navpress).

    Simpson, George Gaylord, C.S. Pittendrigh and L.H. Tiffany (1957), Life: An Introduction to Biology (New York: Harcourt, Brace & Company).

    Snelling, Andrew (1991), “Where are All the Human Fossils?,” Creation Ex Nihilo, 14[1]:28-33, December 1991-February 1992.

    Thompson, Bert (2000), Creation Compromises (Montgomery, AL: Apologetics Press), second edition.

    Thompson Bert and Brad Harrub (2003), Investigating Christian Evidences (Montgomery, AL: Apologetics Press).

    Verrengia, Joseph (2005), “Fossils Show a Mammal Turned Tables, Devoured Dinosaur for Last Meal,” [On-line], URL: http://www. 112/g011204A.html.

    Watson, Lyall (1982), “The Water People,” Science Digest, 90[5]:44, May.

    Weil, Anne (2005), “Living Large in the Cretaceous,” Nature, 433:116, January 13.


    Copyright © 2005 Apologetics Press, Inc. All rights reserved.
    This document may be copied, on the condition that it will not be republished in print unless otherwise stated below, and will not be used for any commercial purpose, as long as the following stipulations are observed: (1) Apologetics Press must be designated as the original publisher; (2) the specific Apologetics Press Web site URL must be noted; (3) any references, footnotes, or endnotes that accompany the article must be included with any written reproduction of the article; (4) textual alterations of any kind are strictly forbidden; (5) Some illustrations (e.g., photographs, charts, graphics, etc.) are not the intellectual property of Apologetics Press and as such cannot be reproduced from our site without consent from the person or organization that maintains those intellectual rights; (6) serialization of written material (e.g., running an article in several parts) is permitted, as long as the whole of the material is made available, without editing, in a reasonable length of time; (7) articles, in whole or in part, may not be offered for sale or included in items offered for sale; and (8) articles may be reproduced in electronic form for posting on Web sites pending they are not edited or altered from their original written content and that credit is given to Apologetics Press, including the web location from which the articles were taken. Further, documents may not be copied without source statements (title, author, journal title), and the address of the publisher and owner of rights, as listed below.

    For catalog, samples, or further information, contact:

    Apologetics Press
    230 Landmark Drive
    Montgomery, Alabama 36117
    Phone (334) 272-8558

  11. suppose Says:

    I guess he told you. With footnotes, yet.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s