As that BBC article I posted up yesterday  pointed out, the evolution of the dinosaurs is bracketed by two extinction events:


About 250 million years ago, at the end of the Permian period, something killed some 90 percent of the planet's species. Less than 5 percent of the
animal species in the seas survived. On land less than a third of the large animal species made it. Nearly all the trees died.
http://science.nationalgeographic.com/science/prehistoric-world/permian-extinction/



This cataclysm had the effect of empotying the earth of almost all life, down to the microbes!
It 's sobering to think of, isn't it.
So much happened on our planet and so long before our existence.
However, this emptied planet formed the home of the dinosaurs, who evolved into an amazing variety of forms.
Some flying, some earthbound, some sea dwellers and some inhabited  fresh water sources.
All shared a common ancestry via the archosaurs.
Along the way, the families of the crocodiles and the avian species broke off and developed on their own, with rather interesting results.

The world of the dinosaurs is an marvel of variety.
It's really difficult to sum up just how many types of dinosaurs there were, especially as new fossils are found almost everyday.
The BBC has a series of videos on the subject, which I'll post up regularly.


All good things come to an end, though.
here, it was the K/T extinction event.
The K/T event killed of over 90% of the living creatures present at the
time, a true apocalptic event that left it's signature on the Earth, one actually
visible from space.

Here are two photos of visible remains of the K/T boundary, one from Tibet
http://www.icess.ucsb.edu/~alsdorf/Pages/personalme.html


Uploaded with ImageShack.us

Here's one taken from the ISS centre, by NASA.
It's from that wicked wiki source, but a great photo all the same!


Uploaded with ImageShack.us

Below this distinctive geological signature, there are  dinosaur fossils.
Above it, none.
Curiously enough, what we do find above the K/T Boundary are fossilised remains of the two families which
split off from the dinosaur family-crocodiles and birds!


Here's a Youtube video about the evolution of feathers.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L6kViYeDcmA&feature=related

It's a fascinating watch!

OLAADEGBU:

The first fraud is that the particle to human evolution does not occur as this shows in the fossil record.  What is the evidence that an amoeba can change into a man over millions of years?     

Well, it happened, O.

OLAADEGBU:
The onus is on you to tell us where all the millions of transitional fossils in the Precambrian and Cambrian layers are?

If you cannot show us where the millions of transitional fossils in the Precambrian and Cambrian layers are then show us examples of such intermediate fossils in museums.

Why the insistence on fossils in the pre-Cambrian and Cambrian layers, OLAADEGBU?
Are you admitting these eras existed?
I'd like to understand your reasoning there.

OLAADEGBU:
 ,  It is because you don't want to admit that God is in control of all things including yourselves is the reason why you persist on propagating this satanic indoctrination of evolution as an alternative to the creation account.  You will rather believe that you evolved from slime over million of years than to obey God.

Satanic indoctrination?
Too funny, even from OLAADEGBU.
Lots  of Christians are comfortable with evolution.
And why not, OLAADEGBU?

More repetition of outdated sources, more gibberish and , a variant of a Kent Hovind meme.
"From goo to the zoo to you"
You know what answersingenesis has to say about Kent, don't you?

Enigma, last but not least- by no means sweeping!
I realise that for many, the authorship of 2 Peter is a matter of dogma, which explains  the convoluted conclusions drawn by the sites we've both sourced.
What I found most interesting was the conclusion of one Bible scholar- that no church doctrine would be negated by denying Peter's authorship of 2 Peter.

OLAADEGBU:

The conclusion you have made in your statement does not follow from the initial section of said statement. There's nothing particularly big about pointing out that evolution does occur. Even if it were a "big claim", it still doesn't follow that one would need to have thousands and millions of proto-archosaur fossils to understand the evolution of dinosaurs.

The first fraud is that the particle to human evolution does not occur as this shows in the fossil record.  What is the evidence that an amoeba can change into a man over millions of years?

Your little habit of throwing out red herrings and ignoring the content of one's post with obscure rants is disingenuous at best. In any case, what the fossil records do show is the shared homology between animals and the possible path taken to the evolution of currently living animals (including humans).

Having said that, the best - in my opinion - evidence for the theory of evolution isn't to be found in the fossil records, but in the study of genes. I have mentioned these two examples several times on this forum: the presence of chromosome No.2 in humans, and the findings linked to endogenous retroviral insertions.     

The onus is on you to tell us where all the millions of transitional fossils in the Precambrian and Cambrian layers are?

What do the Precambrian and Cambrian layers have to do with dinosaurs? You really don't know anything about this topic you're trying to argue against, do you? It would certainly explain your manic reliance on copy/pastes.

Where are "all the millions of transitional fossils in the Precambrian and Cambrian layers"? Probably in the same place that the millions of dodo fossils are to be found? I take it that because we haven't found millions of those, dodos didn't exist, either. That's Creationist logic for you. Anyway, there are thousands of fossils from those eras.

If you cannot show us where the millions of transitional fossils in the Precambrian and Cambrian layers are then show us examples of such intermediate fossils in museums.

For some examples see: http://www.fossilmuseum.net/Paleobiology/Precambrian-Fossils.htm
and: http://www.fossilmuseum.net/Paleobiology/CambrianExplosion.htm

Speculations and assumptions are now your evidence that dinosaurs were the descendants of Proterosuchus, did you see it happening or was it Darwin that observed it?  What has speculation and guess work got to do with science.

It's forensic science, not a religious dogma.

Picture of a fossil here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protorosaurus
Picture of another: http://fossils.valdosta.edu/fossil_pages/fossils_tri/r37.html

Are you saying that these are the intermediate forms in the Cambrian explosion if not can they be found in any of the museums?

Wait, what? What does anything I posted have to do with Cambrian explosion? I'm not even sure I understand what you're trying to ask. Look, mate, stop wallowing in ignorance and actually learn what the Cambrian explosion means. And, no, neither of the fossils are from the Cambrian explosion. They are precursors to dinosaurs.

I don't know what you mean by "in the process of evolving", but to forestall any misconceptions, you should know that evolution is not saltation. All animals are "in [their] complete form(s)".

The Cambrian Explosion and the lack of transitional forms shows that Darwinism evolution did not occur.

How do you figure? With your red herring?

I have posted quotes from reputable evolutionists who have attested to the contrary why should I trust you and your dodgy skeptical links?

No you haven't. What you've done, instead, has been to chop the words of several people out of context so as to dishonestly give a false impression. What's that about false testimonies again?

The quotes of those reputable evolutionists are self explanatory, they don't need your twist to be understood. 

Yes, they are self explanatory in context. However, dishonest Creationists have taken to removing contexts and pretending those quote-mined meant differently from what was originally written.

Take, for example, this quote mine:

"For over a hundred years paleontologists have recognized the large number of gaps in the fossil record. Creationists make it seem like gaps are a deep, dark secret of paleontology, " (Cracraft, in Awbrey & Thwaites, ["]Evolutionists Confront Creationists", 1984)

Tackled in quote 48, here: http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/quotes/mine/part1-3.html

'One wonders what is after the word "paleontology". Lets find out:

Without undertaking the detail morphological comparisons that are necessary to evaluate ancestor-descendent hypotheses, creationists dogmatically assert that these transitional forms do not exist, that there are gaps in the fossil record. From this they make the disingenuous conclusion that the fossil record supports creation and not evolution. If evolution were true, they imply, there could not be gaps in the fossil record. Now either the creationists are deliberately distorting science in an attempt to persuade a public not familiar with scientific arguments, or they are simply ignorant of the findings of modern paleontology. For over a hundred years paleontologists have recognized the large number of gaps in the fossil record. Creationists make it seem like gaps are a deep dark secret of paleontology, when just the opposite is the case. I have already noted one of the reasons for the gaps--the low probability of species being fossilized and then discovered. Correlated with this is the growing realization that most species probably arise very rapidly geologically speaking; morphology sometimes does not take as much time to transform as paleontologists once thought. Therefore, if morphological transformations take place over short periods of time (in a geological sense), then the probability of preserving that time interval in the sedimentary record is greatly diminished.

In summary, creationists have characterized the evolutionary process as being slow, gradual, and uniform, whereas virtually all modern evolutionary biologists recognize the fact that rates of evolution can be highly variable. Some evolutionary events are apparently extremely rapid so that frequent gaps in the fossil record are to be expected. Nevertheless, numerous examples of morphologically intermediate taxa--transitional forms--have been described from the fossil record, and that record indisputably falsifies the creationist view of the history of life.

So we see that the gaps in the fossil record aren't a deep dark secret. That while there are gaps, there aren't as many as the creationists believe, and are in some cases to be expected.

- Jon (Augray) Barber'

Do you see?

Feel free to address and denounce the apparent dishonesty of your ilk in your own time.

Here is what some of the reputable and established evolutionists had to say when trying to answer where dinosaurs came from:

What, like the ones you posted previously who were either Creationists or ID'ists? I can't find the contexts for the quote-mines here, so a cursory response will have to suffice

"The question of the origin of dinosaurs is one that has puzzled paleontologists for many years."

The Illustrated Encyclopedia of Dinosaurs, Dr. David Norman, 1985, p. 186. (Dr Norman is a lecturer in Zoology)

However, findings, prior to, and after 1985 have shed light on their possible origins.

This is another quote from an authoritative book in the field of the evolution: The Natural History Museum Book of Dinosaurs, 1998, p.12

"Where did dinosaurs come from?  That apparently simple question has been the subject of intense debate amongst scientists for over 150 years, . . ."

Yes, it has been a subject of intense debate amongst scientists. What's wrong with that?

What book or journal have you published that would make anyone take you serious?

The Bible.
 

The cartoons illustrate how the Word of God is certain and surer than your evolution that has no foundation.

They do no such thing.

"But they deliberately forget that long ago by God's word the heavens existed and the earth was formed out of water and by water" (2 Peter 3:5).

The Bible says here that people like you "deliberately forget" that God created the universe from nothing, you forget that God spoke it all into existence and the reason you guys forget is sin and that you don't want to admit that a powerful, Infinite uncreated God created you.  It is because you don't want to admit that God is in control of all things including yourselves is the reason why you persist on propagating this satanic indoctrination of evolution as an alternative to the creation account.  You will rather believe that you evolved from slime over million of years than to obey God.

There are more theists - many, Christians - that accept the theory of evolution than atheistic ones

PA1982:
macayub-


The Sun precedes the Earth by a long, long time, so this 'darkness' is a human construct, not factual.

Every religion has their own particular creation myth and the OT is neither more nor less mythical than any other.
In fact, the OT creation myths differ among themselves, depending on which OT book you read.


Surely, in the 21st century, we have moved on from this sort of mythos, as we have moved on from believing the Sun circles the Earth.
Or that the Earth is flat.
Or that the stars 'hang' in the sky.

Who needs to believe such stories are literally true?

what is sky and what is tethering the heavenly bodies in it?

Do you see anything they are resting on?

ramalot:
@HISchild
Since you somehow know that the dinosaurs perished during the flood of noah, i guess it is safe to ask you:

1- why did Noah choose to abandon the poor dinosaurs to drown?
2- why did God allow his creation (dinosaurs) get wiped out during this said flood?

keep in mind dinosaur fossils predate the timeline of creationism.

the different seasons started after the flood, which incidentally was also the first time rain fell on the earth. There is no record of rain before that.

I dont know if larger reptiles such as dinosaurs ( if present), would be able to cope with the variations in seasons since their metabolism is regulated by the weather and their outside environment.