Chapter 7

Life In Motion

The Fifth and Sixth Days

DINOSAURS

There is much written on dinosaurs from both the secular and the creation science points of view. Dinosaurs have fascinated people since their discovery in 1822 when English doctor, Gideon Mantell and his wife, in Sussex, England found some large fossilized teeth and a few bones. They named the creature, "Iguanodon," (iguana tooth). The Reverend William Buckland of England published a description of a fossil jawbone with blade like teeth he found near Oxford in 1824. He named the creature, "Megalosaurus" (great lizard). It was the anatomist Sir Richard Owen who coined the term, "Dinosauria," (terrible lizards) in 1842 [15].

The Bible mentions a creature that could have been a remnant of a dinosaur. God said to Job, "Behold now Behemoth, which I made with thee; he eateth grass as an ox. Lo now, his strength is in his loins, and his force is in the navel of his belly. He moveth his tail like a cedar: the sinews of his stones are wrapped together. His bones are as strong pieces of brass; his bones are like bars of iron. He is chief of the ways of God: . . Behold, he drinketh up a river, and hasteth not: he trusteth that he can draw up Jordan into his mouth" (Job 40:15-19a, & 23). Behemoth is another transliteration whose root is behemah %/%v which means "mute" or "dumb," and is used for any number of large animals. Some translate it as a hippopotamus or elephant, but this creature has a tail as large as a cedar tree, which neither of those animals have. This description could be of an Diplodocus (dip-LAHD-oh-kuss), which used to be called a Brontosaurus until it was discovered that the scientist deliberately added a head that was found three or four miles away. The skeleton was from a Diplodocus while the head belonged to an Apatosaurus (Ah-PAT-oh-SOR-us). Because these fossils were assumed to be reptiles, they also assumed that they were cold blooded.

Secular paleontologists now believe that they were warm blooded creatures for several reasons. The main reason that secular scientists believe that dinosaurs were warm blooded is because they believe that they are descendants of modern birds. Many (not all) dinosaurs are known to lay eggs like birds and other reptiles. But the link to birds hinges mostly upon the fossil Archeopteryx.

This fossil of a bird called, "Archeopteryx," is believed to have lived 140 million years ago. The theory that dinosaurs were ancestors of modern birds was first promoted by English biologist Thomas Henry Huxley in 1861 when he noted the similarity between the tiny dinosaur, "Compsognathus" (elegant jaw) and the Archeopteryx which were both found in Bavarian limestone deposits. The bird has left an imprint of wings with bird feathers but a skeleton unlike birds and more like dinosaurs (see illustration) [16]. We know that God created this creature on the fifth day with all the other fowl of the air.

If the dinosaurs were warm blooded, then that would be another reason for their eventual demise. Under the hyper baric air pressure of the canopy, the oxygen rich air would sustain the large sizes of the dinosaurs. With the reduction of air pressure after the destruction of the canopy, even the infant dinosaurs that Noah placed on the ark would have died since warm blood requires more oxygen to burn to generate body heat. The fossils show that the dinosaurs didn't have the lung capacity for the needed additional oxygen [17].

The secular concept of these fossil remains has indelibly engraved potentially erroneous ideas concerning these creatures. As stated in an chapter three, great artistic liberty is taken in fleshing out the fossil bones of these animals. No one no knows what they really looked like. All they have are bones - many times only a single bone - yet they assure us that this is what the animals were really like. Imprints in limestone give more accurate information of what they looked like as well as frozen creatures and tar pit creatures found with bodies intact. But even with that information, much is assumed that they really can't prove. Consider these assumptions.

l. All dinosaurs were huge.

It is true that there are giant creatures, dinosaurs included, but there were many small creatures as well. The Saltopus (SALT-oh-puss) was no bigger than a house cat [18] . Museums rarely display the small finds because the large dinosaurs are much more impressive. It probably took the large dinosaurs a long lifetime to reach their great heights. Under the canopy people lived almost a millennium. Mammals have secondary centers of ossification in the growing ends of the bones which limit the height of the mammal. Most reptiles, however, don't possess these bone inhibitors and can grow as long as they continue to live [19]. So dinosaur height would depend on its age. It is probable that the animals enjoyed long lives, too. It is noteworthy that these huge dinosaurs had small brains. The 29 foot Stegosaurus had a brain the size of a walnut [20].

2. There are hundreds of different kinds of dinosaurs.

Like the paleontologists' effort to convince us that there were many evolutionary links to man, so, too, is the evidence flimsy for an abundance of dinosaur types. Consider these:

• Arctosaurus has been imagined from only one vertebra.
• Colonosaurus has been fabricated from only a jaw which could be either from a bird or sea lizard.
• Diplotomodon has been built up from a single tooth.
• Paronychodon is another creature imagined from one tooth found in Montana.
• Chienkosaurus has been created from only four teeth. It is possible that the teeth are from a prehistoric crocodile.
• Embasaurus came from just a few pieces of bone.
• Macrodontophion is only one round-topped tooth.
• Dystrophaeus has just pieces of bone from an arm, hip, or shoulder. From a big dinosaur, it's probably another dinosaur and not a new species.
• Aepisaurus came from one arm bone found in France [21].

3. There were carnivorous dinosaurs like the Tyrannosaurus Rex.

While it is true that there are many carnivorous animals today, the biblical record suggests the contrary. God said, "To every beast of the earth, and to every fowl of the air, and to everything that creepeth upon the earth, wherein there is life, I have given every green herb for meat" (Gen. 1:30). That certainly includes the dinosaurs. There was no death until Adam's fall, and then it occurred by the hand of man. Nowhere in the antediluvian story does the Bible say that animals killed other animals. One could argue that the sharp teeth and claws is sufficient evidence to say that some dinosaurs were flesh eaters. But that doesn't have to be so. Sharp teeth and claws could be used to tear bark off of trees, or for digging roots out of the ground. Deer have antlers, but they are herbivorous. Should we assume that they used their antlers to kill other animals for food? Of course not. Yes, it is true that they fight over territories, but these observations of life today are a part of post-flood conditions.

Hollywood has made the Tyrannosaurus Rex the staple of dinosaur ferocity. Yet the research shows the opposite. First of all, since the Tyrannosaurus walked in a stooped over position it probably waddled like a duck. Second, their teeth were poorly rooted and would probably snap off easily in a real battle. Third, its arms were too short to grab an enemy, nor could they even reach its mouth for simple feeding. Fourth, if it did kill other dinosaurs, then there would be tooth wear on the fossils, yet the tips and the delicate edge serrations of their teeth have been found in perfect condition. And, lastly, genuine meat eaters in the animal kingdom of today are smooth and sleek like the tiger, lion, polar bear, and the wolf. These animals can move quickly with nothing on their bodies to be caught or hung up in a fight. The dinosaurs were awkward in shape which would be ineffective as carnivores. If they were carnivorous, then they were probably scavengers provided by the grace of God due to the introduction of death after Adam's sin.

C. S. Lewis makes a very poignant observation concerning animal behavior in his book, "The Problem of Pain." He states that we as believers tend to view animals from the atheistic point of view.

With this view, the dinosaurs and all the other animals that God created on the sixth day, were tame before the sin of Adam and the Fall of mankind occurred. When did the animals become wild? Perhaps near the end of the Flood when the iniquity of man perverted all creation and God had to bring judgment. If so, it may have been only a few animals that became wild. The tameness of the animals probably lasted until Noah, since he apparently had no difficulty gathering up pairs of animals for survival after the Flood. It is probable that baby dinosaurs and eggs were taken aboard the ark. After the Flood, when the fear of man was put on the animals (Gen. 9:2), animals became wild. What few dinosaurs that survived by the ark were probably hunted by man.

4. Dinosaurs lived millions of years ago when man did not exist.

First of all, the Bible declares that man and all animals were created on the sixth day. Therefore, even if there was no proof, we as Bible believers must categorically dismiss that doctrine as false. It has already been discussed in an earlier chapter that the geologic chart which places dinosaurs in the Jurassic period of 186 million years ago is faulty in design since it is based on circular logic, i.e., the fossils are predetermined in age by evolutionary doctrine and the rock strata are given ages based upon the fossils they contain. But more importantly, there is evidence of humans and dinosaurs existing at the same time.

In Glen Rose, Texas there is a state park called "Dinosaur Valley State Park" on the Paluxy River. It has been set aside for the public because of the dinosaur tracks that are easily seen crossing the river. During the summer when the river is low, tourists can view these tracks that are marked for easier visibility. Since it is a state park, the evolutionary view is given concerning the dinosaur tracks. No mention is made of the many human footprints that cross dinosaur tracks further downriver on private property (see illustration). The human tracks were well known as early as the 1900's. Casts were made and sold as a tourist trade.

Skeptics debunked the casts as carved items and called them fakes. Yet much analysis has been done proving the human tracks to be real depressions and not carvings. Some of these human footprints are 14 inches long [23]! Not only have footprints been found near the dino prints, but a human finger and several human teeth have been found near the Paluxy river. Further down river (about 20 miles) a man named "Bull" Adams found a skeleton of a 7 foot woman and an infant (that might have caused her death in childbirth) in Panther cave [24]. Not only have human and dinosaur tracks been found together in Glen Rose, but the same have been found in S. E. Turkynenia, Russia [25].

DRAGONS

Cultures all over the world speak of creatures called dragons in their myths and legends. To the Sumerians the dragon was Mushussu [26], and as a goddess Tiamat [27]. To the Polynesians he was Mo-ko [28]. To the Chinese he was Ying-lung [29]. To the Japanese he was P'an-lung [30]. To the Greeks he was Draco, which is where our English heritage gets its word, "Dragon." The dragon was a creature feared by all cultures, and have looked upon them as greedy creatures who hoarded wealth, fair damsels, and had control over nature: especially water. To slay the dragon was to establish one's self as a hero. So the Sumerian hero Ea slew Tiamat, and took on the dragon's power. In India it was the warrior god Indra who slew the dragon. In Celtic myth the dragon came to the goddess Bridget, from which we get our English word "bride," and the association of dragons capturing fair damsels. Could the fossil remains that paleontologists call dinosaurs actually be the dragons of legendary fame?

The Bible describes the dragon in Job 41, but calls him Leviathan [31]. But a thoughtful consideration of the chapter will reveal a description of the traditional concept of a dragon. God is speaking to Job and rhetorically asks him:

In describing the power and strength of the dragon God asks:

Then the Lord points out the tightness of its scales that protect it from harm:

God describes the "fire" that comes out of its mouth:

These verses imply that there was a creature that lived during Job's lifetime that tradition calls a dragon. There is no way that we can know what the bones of dinosaurs looked like. The skull of a dolphin won't show what the fleshy part above the skull is. Without seeing a real dolphin you wouldn't know that the sonar tissue of the dolphin ever existed.

But this chapter in Job is also metaphorical. Verses 3 & 4 says:

Who speaks softly to make supplications and wants us to serve him? The fire that comes out of his mouth has a parallel in James:

It is a fire of slander, accusations, and lies. Who is the father of Lies? Indeed, the last verse of Job 41 sums up the character of this dragon:

Clearly, the dragon of Job 41 is a metaphor for Satan:

All the myths of the dragon slayers are types of Christ and his victory over Satan.

For God to have created a fire breathing creature that we call a dragon is not without precedent. The summer nights are frequently visited by fireflies, whose chemical fluids light up. The sea has electric eels, and the ground has the bombardier beetle. This beetle has glands in it's rear end that produce chemicals that are harmless when separated, but turn into a noxious spray of burning benzoquinones at a scorching 212 degrees F [32]! If these modern creatures can chemically emit light and fire, couldn't there have been a larger creature that did the same?