Dinosaurs Heads Held High…?

Whatever position you take, that position should be able to stand on its own, right?

Recently there’s been talk about how dinosaurs with long necks actually held their necks. Did they hold them high or stretched out? The concern is that holding a long neck very high might put more strain than is reasonable to expect from what we know of their heart and blood systems.

The second two links appear to give dissenting views and they’re here just because it’s good to have more than one perspective on an issue.

But, if it’s true the strain was too great and our biological predictions (heart strain) don’t match up with our habitual predictions (eating from the tops of trees with necks held high), then there might be an area here connected with creationism.

It’s been well noted in science that in the far past things seemed to be able to grow to gargantuan size. Not just dinosaurs but plants, too. Musquitos could even be freakishly large.

Perhaps more subtely, the bible tells us mankind used to live quite long ages, 900+, years before the flood. But as soon as the flood occurs, lifespans drop dramatically.

Is it possible the pre-flood earth had a fundamental difference with our current earth which would allow for gargantuan plants and animals and also for dinosaurs to have no problem at all holding their necks high?

Creationists have long theorized about something being fundamentally different that would cause what we observe today.

This is an area that, with some astute scientific thinking, could be built upon and a reasonable model for what might have occurred during the flood could be developed. It would predict what environment contributed to plants and animals so large and, if the model were true, it would tell us what we would be observing today that would support the model.

God’s Word is fascinating and awe-inspiring.

If you’re a believer, try starting from the presupposition that the bible is the truth and, if that’s the case, than science should prove it to be so – if you’re not already in that mindset. Secular and popular science will never lend any credit willingly to faith-based ideas, though, so you’ll need to keep marching past the immediate results that tell you the bible is wrong. It’s too easy to stop there. Anyone and everyone can and does do that. You need to start from the idea that God actually might be telling the truth. When you retain that thought, keep plugging away at the research and eventually you will find the scientifically sound answers you’re looking for. It just takes someone to give God some credit…

If you don’t believe in God or the bible, try seeing if any of the ideas that the bible presents (a global flood, long lifespans pre-flood, short lifespans post-flood) might actually lend support to popular topics, like the dinosaur necks, assuming for the moment that the bible is true. I think you should find some interesting tid bits even if you don’t end up believing the biblical account.

The important thing is to analyze an issue using all possible data without being married to a belief, whether that’s current secular or popular belief or a faith, to a point that it actually detracts from your original position.

Whatever position you take, that position should be able to stand on its own, right?

6000 Years.org

Facts are approached from different angles…

Now, this site I’m about to present looks a little amateurish but I want you to take this as an exercise in how to extract truth from resources that might be questionable.

Some claims are extraordinary and the old saying goes extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.

So, visit 6000years.org, peruse what’s there and, in spite of your inclinations to recoil at what looks amateur, continue on and check everything out. If you’re really interested in the truth, you’ll keep searching. Any claims can easily be squashed by a google search so you’ll know right away what’s right and what’s wrong.

I think when you approach hard facts like this you’ll begin to see them for what they are: Facts. And facts are approached from different angles. Is it possible fact A could be part of evolution? Yes? Is it possible fact A could be part of creation? Yes? What would that mean if fact A was present in a case where creation was true? What would that mean for you? It should mean something significant. It should mean creation has some evidence to back it up. And, if it does, that’s a game changing.

Genesis 1 (What’s it like to read the entire bible? How about we find out?)

Trust God’s Word. Trust God’s Word not because it says so, but because it says so and because it welcomes any and all skepticism with a voracious appetite.

I’m a few chapters into Genesis already but I’ve been finding it difficult to write about what I’ve already read. I had read Genesis 1 and actually had a huge piece written up but it wasn’t really what I wanted it to be. I went real long and in-depth about the importance of the first verse, about cosmologies, creation and evolution, and about approaching Genesis from another angle (which has produced some novel ideas from others). It didn’t feel right, though.

If I’m going to write about reading the bible, I don’t want to get caught up in detailed explanations, theories, wild-goose chases or other tangents. I really want to show readers the best parts, the parts that most show the bible as the solid truth that it is and that most reflect glory upon God.

So let me just get this whole ball rolling…

  1. Genesis 1:1 Is there any more simple, pragmatic way the book could open than this? “In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.” It’s the perfect introduction to history. There was a beginning to all of this and God was there creating all of it and us.
  2. Origins of the Universe. Look up Russel Humphreys and read up on Starlight and Time. His theory may not stand the test of time but others will take inspiration from his novel approach to the text of Genesis 1.
  3. Creation/Evolution. It may seem to you like there’s no evidence for creation. Mainstream media will rarely report anything to do with creationism, less still in a flattering light, so how would we know? It’s up to every believer to be familiar with the massive field of creationism. Many thousands of believers have spent their lives understanding the Genesis account of creation and going about showing that it is true. Answers in Genesis is an organization which I find provides solid, well-reasoned, rational answers to many of the questions we have about what mainstream science is telling us and what the bible is telling us. Their Get Answers section may help you if you, like many, ask why a biblical creation even matters.
  4. God created you and I, male and female, to have not only amazing relationships with each other, but to know our creator personally. God wants to know you and He wants you to know Him. You just wait. You’re going to learn incredible details about the character of God just by reading His Word.

The bible is jam-packed with goodness but I feel I would detract from it by writing too much so I’ll stop here and give you these points and links to ponder. Let me just say one more thing that came up just now.

As we begin reading the bible I do want to give you one bit of advice. Google is your friend. Wikipedia is your friend. Firefox is your friend. Googlepedia is your friend. Neither of these things has a Christian bent. In fact, Wikipedia can easily lead a weak Christian astray. But let me tell you what just happened while I googled the wiki article for Answers in Genesis, where I knew I was likely to find not only positive views but also criticisms.

What I found was a very unflattering portion of the wiki article entitled Controversy over interview with Richard Dawkins. It painted a very unsavoury picture of Answers in Genesis. Had I stopped right there, I would probably have dismissed Answers in Genesis forever after. But you know there’s always two sides to a story. And you know you have a brain forĀ  a reason. So I went to the Answers in Genesis website and searched for “dawkins response” and their own search results gave me Skeptics choke on Frog, a response to critics about the controversy of the interview.

I hope the lesson is clear. You really need to have more than one side of a story before you can form your own positions.