Dinosaurs Lived With People

I'm going to primarily argue line-by-line this round. First, on BOP: Pro has to provide substantive evidence beyond a reasonable doubt that dinosaurs and humans coexisted. Circumstantial evidence does not cut it, since there have been depictions of all sorts of beings in art, like Bigfoot, aliens, and other mythological creatures. Scientific evidence needs to be given, and, as I have explained previously and will do again, science can explain the strata problem (though some new evidence I will bring up questions the integrity of the excavations). This means that all I have to do is give another plausible account. I do not need to delve into the probability, because Pro did not say that dinosaurs likely coexisted with humans, but that, positively, "Dinosaurs lived with people. " This means that he must provide exhaustive evidence, and not simply probabilities (which he does not have, anyway). I. Fossil dating differencesFirstly, it is unclear why my premises do not follow from the conclusion. Let me state this more elegantly: P1: The youngest radiometric date assigned to any dinosaur fossil is 65 million years. P2: The oldest radiometric date assigned to any human fossil is 195,000 years. C1: The fossil record demonstrates that there is no evidence that dinosaurs and humans coexisted. This is logically valid, and, if Pro has a problem with the logic, I would like him to explicate it. "Coelacanths live today! "Yes, but that does not mean that, before discovery of living coelacanth specimen, that the scientific community should default to their existence. If we are to follow Pro's logic, every extinct creature ever should be assumed to be alive, because a few thought-to-be-extinct species have been found. All I have to show is that there is no scientific evidence for their coexistence (that means fossil evidence), and I have done that. I obviously cannot say that dinosaurs and humans certainly did not exist, but I can (and have) demonstrated that there is no fossil evidence for their coexistence, which is all I need to do. II. Artistic depictionsPlease note that I am including the Job account in artistic depictions, since literature is a form of art. Since Pro has placed a surprising amount of emphasis into these depictions, I will spend more time refuting them as evidence. 1. Many of the depictions are hoaxes. Many depictions of "dinosaurs" in ancient art have been shown to likely be hoaxes, or have at least not been authenticated, including the Ica stones and the Chinese jade pig-dragon figurine mentioned by Pro[1]. Note that Pro only gives pictures, but not authentications of these artifacts. 2. Many of the depictions are ambiguous. I have already mentioned this earlier. Many of the depictions appear to be stylized versions of other animals, including: 1) The Book of Job account does not demonstrate a dinosaur, simply a large animal. I would like Pro to demonstrate how the Bible is both factually accurate and specifically suggestive of a dinosaur here. 2) The ancient Chinese jade stone that Pro claims to be a dinosaur is actually incredibly similar to Chinese pig-dragon, which tend to be elongated, and not at all suggestive of a dragon [1]. 3) The Cambodian "dinosaur" actually appears, as I mentioned, to be a rhinoceros, as noted by the Smithsonian Institute [2]. 4) The Spanish engraving looks much more like an alligator or crocodile than anything. This directly refutes my opponent's arguments about context, since the animals shown are likely based on real animals, not dinosaurs. 3. The remaining depictions are outdated, and likely either invented or misidentified. The line here is writing something down does not make it true. In that case, fiction would not exist As an example, old newspapers would publish stories purporting to demonstrate the reality of ghosts [3]. Of course, this does not mean ghosts are real, just that scientific understanding has reached a point that we now have better explanations. Moreover, there are depictions in fiction of Bigfoot. This does not mean they are real, just that the writer misidentified something, likely a bear, as a Bigfoot. Brief line-by-line refutations: "Egyptian gods aren't even real, but dinosaurs are. "We now know that to be true, but ancient Egyptians certainly believed that their gods were real. Pro is off-base here. "So this proves humans didn't live with helicopters. .. "No, only that humans have the ability to invent and imagine things without them actually having had existed. "Flying chariots were never described as something readers could verify. .. but dinosaurs [were]. .. "This is a pure assertion. Why would a flying chariot not be depicted as something real, but dinosaurs were? Where is the line, and what is the standard? Pro needs to give a better response here. "Are you suggesting all the likenesses of dinosaurs are mere coincidence? "Not exactly, but these likenesses are either imagined, not actually based on dinosaurs, or are hoaxes. III. Evidence from fossil strataPro does not understand my evidence regarding fossil turbulence. Fossil turbulence deals with the idea that objects that should be patterned in a certain way, be that current flow, galaxies, or, yes, fossils, can be affected by geologic and hydrological processes. The USGS document I mentioned uses this idea, but different terminology, with regards to the Ashley fossil beds. See earlier sources for confirmation of this. Moreover, if you take a look at this source [4], you will see that the archaic methods used by those involved with the excavation team, combined with the unique geology of this bed and similar forms, that the mixing is not actually reflective of their strata. The important note is that the fossils from the Ashley beds have not been radiometrically dated to be within the same age range, which is interesting, since such a discovery would transform science in a meaningful way. Now, to the line-by-line: "Why have palaeontologists found absolutely no Coelacanth fossils dating after 80 millions years ago, but plenty before? Do coelacanths only selectively fossilize? "First, again refer to my earlier argument that we should not default to assuming something exists without some evidence. Second, a more important issue needs to be raised here: my opponent has suggested that fairly recent and wide-ranging cultures worldwide have encountered dinosaurs. Yet, we only have found a few depictions, and no other evidence. This claim is markedly different than those of the Wollemi Pine and coelacanth, which have a small range. If dinosaurs existed worldwide, some evidence that meets scrutiny would have been found. "Worldwide legends of dragons, as well as lots of fossils in the Ashley Beds. "Sure, myths do often have some modicum of truth that inspires them. The Smithsonian has compiled a list of suspects, including fossils, reptiles, and, yes, imagination [5]. Secondly, the Ashley Beds are literally one place. This mixing would surely have been found in many more fossil beds, and not just one place. Why, then, do dinosaur fossils almost universally fit into strata reflecting their age, and are consistently dated to more than 65 million years ago? Thirdly, I have debunked the notion that this mixing is reflective of coexistence, as have the sources I have given. IV. Other refutation"Here is an artistic depiction of a pterosaur. .. "Judges, you can rule on this, but the two pictures given by Pro do not look similar enough to rule them as the same thing. Also, as has been the norm, this picture is given without source, meaning that, like the earlier depictions, it could very well be a hoax, a misidentification, or any number of other things. "Is Con deliberately closing his eyes ever time he scrolls past the photos of dinosaur art? No. Rather, Pro is ignoring any possible alternate explanations, because he is looking for evidence of dinosaurs. This is a classic case of confirmation bias. "Are you seriously arguing that updating the accepted scientific position is a bad thing? "Absolutely not. However, what caused science to accept the idea of living coelacanths and Wollemi Pines were living specimens, not just happenstance and speculation. Evidence is needed for such a huge reversal of the scientific status quo, evidence that Pro has not provided. As the Smithsonian said:"Either way, the temple carving can in no way be used as evidence that humans and non-avian dinosaurs coexisted. Fossils have inspired some myths (see Adrienne Mayor's excellent book The First Fossil Hunters), but close scrutiny of geological layers, reliable radiometric dating techniques, the lack of dinosaur fossils in strata younger than the Cretaceous, and other lines of evidence all confirm that non-avian dinosaurs became extinct tens of millions of years before there was any type of culture that could have recorded what they looked like. As scientist Carl Sagan said, "extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence", and in the case of modern dinosaurs the evidence just isn't there. " [2]. 1. . http://paleo.cc... 2. . http://www.smithsonianmag.com...3. . http://library.sc.edu...4.http://books.google.com...5.http://www.smithsonianmag.com...