Closed Is it true that Dinosaur is exist before God?!

[Tiga]

lam nyo guys..sori sa nagpost ng topic na ito but i think mali ang topic..try to analyze guys. simple answer lang naman sa topic na ito and the answer is ISN'T TRUE. hindi po makain ng isip ang ganyang klaseng tanong..pano nman kase..existing of dinosour BEFORE God...pano yun? always remember..nothing existed before god im sori talaga kung msakit sa inyo ang reply ko. sori talaga.
[/QUO

Basta.. we know is God create us all

 

[Tiga]

Di pa umiiral ang islam sa panahon ni moises
Ang islam ay umiral 600 years after maitatag ang Kristiyanismo

So anong religion ang tinatag nung namatay ni Moises ng kanyang bayang Israel?

 

[Ace106]

So anong religion ang tinatag nung namatay ni Moises ng kanyang bayang Israel?

Wala pang relihiyon non, ang bayan nang Israel lang ang sinusubaybayan nang diyos dahil sinusunod nila ang kanyang utos

 

[Powered by Pancit Canton]

Nasagot na yong tanong mo

So anong religion ang tinatag nung namatay ni Moises ng kanyang bayang Israel?

 

[jannysimple]

Yes they used to exist but not before God.. kasi wala pa itong mundo na tinitirhan natin ngayon andyan na ang diyos. Kahit nga si Hesus andyan na nung ginawa pa ang mundo ng dios ama.
I'm sure maraming magtatanong, na bakit andyan na si hesus eh dun lang naman sya lumitaw nung ipinanganak siya ni Maria. Kung ganyan ang alam mo, MALI KA KAPATID.
Lets go back to the bible. May internet narin. wag na tayo papaloko sa mga dating turo lalo na sa catholic.
Maraming di itinuturo

 

[mturaji]

jannysimple...kalokohan pala ang mga dating turo ng catholic?

 

[zidedark]

Guys nag research ako dahil sa thread nato at may nakita akong
sagot... nag mention ang bible ng animals na wlang may alam
kung ano yun ito ay ang behemoth at leviathan


You do not have permission to view the full content of this post. Log in or register now.

 

[DonFakundo30]

God exist before anything. Siguro nga mas nauna pa sya sa time eh.

 

[bandwagon]

Ung paa kasi at pag lay ng eggs common nmn sa birds and reptiles now.. i think if i remember correctly ung nadiscover na fossil sa china ung pinagdidiscussan lately kasi ung dinosaur din had actual feather. So basically ang usapan now is if ung modern birds na existing now are evolved dinosaurs na nagsurvived sa supposed extinction or dinousaurs were actually "birds" and hence dinousaurs were never really extinct.

Hehehe

How can you connect details by details that dinosaurs were actually bird?

 

[Tiga]

How can you connect details by details that dinosaurs were actually bird?

May mga nag-su-suggest kasi na mga Scientist that as per them, they are genetically formed (evolution) in many million years of existing kaya sila nag-form na ganon paa nila pero makikita din naman natin na parang same talaga mostly sa mga eagles at condors.

Please see attached below:

 

[bandwagon]

May mga nag-su-suggest kasi na mga Scientist that as per them, they are genetically formed (evolution) in many million years of existing kaya sila nag-form na ganon paa nila pero makikita din naman natin na parang same talaga mostly sa mga eagles at condors.

Please see attached below:
View attachment 722807

Are we just speculating or just having semantic play of words. This is like, since we are made of flesh, hence we are related to animals etct etc..relatedness has.no problem with that. However, the question is in millions of years, HOW the big animala Dinosaurs eventually became birds in which theae birds are the birds we see.now? You can present me of diagrams or pictures..but where are the detailed transitory fossils in the past millions of years to prove that? Isnt this just a pure bold speculation?Is this even scientific? What if it happened millions of years? How evolution(Darwinism to be precise) in millions of years changed the animals like Dinosaur into bird??

 

[bandwagon]

May mga nag-su-suggest kasi na mga Scientist that as per them, they are genetically formed (evolution) in many million years of existing kaya sila nag-form na ganon paa nila pero makikita din naman natin na parang same talaga mostly sa mga eagles at condors.

Please see attached below:
View attachment 722807

Darwinism borders that of myth and fact. There is no problem for evolution per se. However, unguided evolution(preached by NeoDarwinist) runs into deep trouble.

 

[Tiga]

Are we just speculating or just having semantic play of words. This is like, since we are made of flesh, hence we are related to animals etct etc..relatedness has.no problem with that. However, the question is in millions of years, HOW the big animala Dinosaurs eventually became birds in which theae birds are the birds we see.now? You can present me of diagrams or pictures..but where are the detailed transitory fossils in the past millions of years to prove that? Isnt this just a pure bold speculation?Is this even scientific? What if it happened millions of years? How evolution(Darwinism to be precise) in millions of years changed the animals like Dinosaur into bird??

Not literally Big Dinosaur, it is small Dinosaur like this:
Isn't this is Dinosaur?

However, big Dinosaur like T-Rez or Diplodocus is so large not to survive on what coming of the asteroids.
Only this animal, Crocs, Turtles and some other animals that lived today.

 

[bandwagon]

Not literally Big Dinosaur, it is small Dinosaur like this:
Isn't this is Dinosaur?

However, big Dinosaur like T-Rez or Diplodocus is so large not to survive on what coming of the asteroids.
Only this animal, Crocs, Turtles and some other animals that lived today.
View attachment 722829

Did you.not even ask yourself if this alleged picture of prehistoric animal really existed? Is this fact or hoax?

One theory is that the link between the great lizards.and birds were the archeopteryx(showm above) and pterodactyls. However, what's the evidence that archeopteryx really existed?

 

[Tiga]

Did you.not even ask yourself if this alleged picture of prehistoric animal really existed? Is this fact or hoax?

One theory is that the link between the great lizards.and birds were the archeopteryx(showm above) and pterodactyls. However, what's the evidence that archeopteryx really existed?

I think they have fossils that could be evidence. That's why they brought this somewhat a real and physical prehistoric that existed before.

 

[bandwagon]

I think they have fossils that could be evidence. That's why they brought this somewhat a real and physical prehistoric that existed before.

It does not follow that few fossils lead to the proof that unguided evolution is true. Artistic depiction of fossils isnt evidence. These few fossils were belong to different kind of animals. Archeopteryx is.even questionable if it is true. Even if it is true that it existed, it doesnt mean that a certain line of dinosaur decided to evolve to archeopteryx. It is a different animal in the grand scheme of things. Also, where are these numberless teansitory fossils that proves dinosaur descended to arheopteryx to birds? We only speculate and this is we call science?

 

[bandwagon]

I think they have fossils that could be evidence. That's why they brought this somewhat a real and physical prehistoric that existed before.

I am not anti-evolution per se. It is NeoDarwinism (natural selection/unguided evolution) that I am questioning. NeoDarwinism is the belief that biological beings evolved from natural selection mechanism. In short, blind/unguidedevolution. It is different from guided evolution. Guided evolution is an another theory on the origin and taxonomy of biologocal beings.

 

[fabbriche]

There is no such thing as "guided" evolution. Evolution is a completely natural optimization process. Theistic evolution and its permutations (e.g. Intelligent Design, Creationism) are pseudoscience which aim to reconcile outdated religious fairytales with modern science, but the two can never mix.

 

[bandwagon]

There is no such thing as "guided" evolution. Evolution is a completely natural optimization process. Theistic evolution and its permutations (e.g. Intelligent Design, Creationism) are pseudoscience which aim to reconcile outdated religious fairytales with modern science, but the two can never mix.

Of course this is purely rhetoric.

Fairy tales are some of NeoDarwinists claims.

As if you were the one advocating the principles of science and the other competing theories were.not.

I don't deny evolution per se. Unguided evolution like dinosaur turning into birds or whale/sea creatures turnning into land walking hominid bipeds is more of fairy tale which tries to delude the unthinking masses.

 

[PHC-BobTaylor]

Hindi totoo yan