I’m having an arguement with my friend who believes that dinosaurs lived at the same time as men. He believes footprints of men and dinosuars and of course the Bible proves this.
What concrete evidence can I use to show him that dinosuars lived at no where near the same time?
Ask your friend to produce the scientific evidence. And no, the Bible doesn’t count as scientific evidence.
While your friend scambles to find the scientific evidence, begin your research here —> Dinosaur Valley State Park - Wikipedia
Yeah, I found good evidencwe debunking the footprint thing. But I couldn’t find anything concrete that proves that dinosaurs and humans didn’t live at the same time.
Try TalkOrigins.org
Petrification takes a few million years, generally. Have him point out to you a human bone that’s fully petrified (turned to stone, not just old). Or a dinosaur bone that isn’t, either way.
You could also ask for any human archeological site that has dinosaur remnants, or any dinosaur bones with human tools in them-spearheads or the like.
Working from here, it’s pretty easy to get to Duckster’s question: “Do you have any evidence at all?”
Also, be sure to ask him to quote the actual Bible passage that mentions men and dinosaurs living together (or for that matter mentions dinosaurs at all). It amazes me how many people will quote things like that without so much as looking it up.
But the real answer? Give up now; it’s pointless and you’ll never convince him.
And you can’t find anything concrete that proves that I can’t fly. Or that proves that the interior of the earth isn’t inhabited by aliens from Jupiter. Or that proves your friend isn’t an ax murderer.
The whole point is, the burden of proof isn’t on you because you can’t prove a negative. If he wants to make this sort of claim then he’s the one who needs to come up with the evidence. And as mentioned, the items he has so far submitted are not evidence at all (although I’d love to see the Bible passage that states humans and dinosaurs coexisted).
That’s really not a fair answer. I’m not being asked to prove a negative. I’m asserting that dinosaurs didn’t live along side humans and he’s claiming they did. The burden of proof is just as much on me as it is on him.
I’m awaiting his response on petrification now, TimeWinder. Thanks.
None, don’t even bother trying. People will always prefer their own beliefs to logic, reason and fact. Any fact you show him, he’ll just say that it was created that way by God.
**Peter **might be right. If your friend is a die-hard Creationist, there is nothing you can do to convince him. Try asking him if he’s open to be proven wrong and what type of evidence it would take to convince him. If he says “nothing”, or replies that the Bible is his only authority, then you might be up against an impossible task. But it would be helpful to know what parts of the Bible he thinks supports his claim.
We’ve had tons of threads on the subject of evolution vs creationism in the GD forum, btw. If you sign on as a paying member you can do a search and dig up some good info. Or maybe someone with good search skills will do it for you. 
Yeah, I’m wasting my time and it’s very frustrating. I asked him the question about petrified human bones, and his response was in the form of this link:
I guess he believes in that proof (petrified “giant” bones), but doesn’t believe in proof given by mainstream science.
Well, OK, theres multiple lines of proof which all point towards a remarkably consistent scenario:
Carbon and other radioactive dating. Dinosaur bones are routinely dated for several tens of millions of years ago. Human bones are dated a couple of hundred thousand.
Sediment layers. Fossils are deposited from the most recent to the most ancient downwards in a fossil layer (although a fossil layer may not neccesarily lie straight or be contiguous due to geographical movement). Human bones are universally found above dinosaur bones, much more above. The KT boundary marks a rather clear dividing line. No dinosaur bones are found above the KT line, no human bones are found below.
Bone fragments. Animals which lived in the same era as humans have recognisable markings on their bones from spears, human teeth markings and charring from fires. Dinosaurs have none of that.
We have no evidence of them living together. None at all.
I think you have inadvertently assumed some of the burden of proof, but that burden is not (or should not be) really yours; your position is characterised by an absolute absence of evidence - if you’re right, there should be no evidence of the coexistence of humans and dinosaurs, but generalised negative assertions like this cannot really be proven, because it can always be argued that you haven’t looked everywhere for evidence.
Your friend is the one making the positive assertion; your friend is the one who should provide evidence in support of that assertion.
From your link (bolding mine):
'In June 1968, *William J. Meister, Sr., an evolutionist, was searching for trilobite fossils in the mountains of Utah. Splitting a piece of rock in two, he found inside a human footprint stepping on trilobites. The human was wearing a sandal!
Thoroughly shaken, he took other men back who confirmed it and found still more, including some with sandals stepping on trilobites.
As a result, Meister became a Christian…’
Note that only fundamentalist Protestant Christians believe in Creationism. So they are only interested in evidence that supports the Bible being literally true.
Any scientific evidence you quote just shows you are a Devil-worshipping Communist left-wing homosexual abortionist. Or (even worse) a Catholic.
Ditto.
Is your friend Ed Conrad? 
Also worth asking: “Suppose you’re right and dinosaurs and man really did coexist? So what?”
Sure, if genuine human fossils were found in cretaceous layers, it would be big news and it would raise lots of interesting questions - finding dinosaurs alongside human fossils in more recent layers would be somewhat less sensational news (although still a big discovery), but neither thing would cause the theory of evolution to become false overnight.
Equally, if someday we discovered a T. rex still alive in some unexplored jungle, that would say nothing about whether evolution is true or not (or about whether the Bible is true or not either, since T. rex is not actually mentioned in the Bible).
Bolding mine. What is “didn’t” if not a negative?
How would you propose to PROVE that pigs don’t fly? Have you seen every pig in existence? Have you watched them 24/7 to verify that they don’t pop out their hidden wings at 3:00 am and take off? Of course not. If someone wants to assert that pigs fly, the burden of proof is solely on him to produce solid evidence of such.
And since your contention that humans and dinosaurs did not coexist is supported (not proven, as it can’t be proven) by overwhelming evidence, just as my contention that pigs don’t fly is supported by overwhelming evidence, your point is made. If your friend wants to assert that humans and dinosaurs did coexist, or that pigs do fly, it’s up to him to provide the evidence.
Of course, as others have suggested, it’s likely that his mind is made up and that he will dismiss any evidence you present, while ignoring the flaws in any evidence he comes up with. But one sure bet is that he will not come up with any evidence for his assertion that is considered solid and acceptable by anyone other than creationists and the like.
Unfortunately, this isn’t true. Obviously, there are a lot of Catholic creationists. But there is also a huge creationist movement in Turkey, and growing interest in other predominantly muslim countries such as Pakistan.
I think the proper comment would be that the majority of creationists are religous fundamentalists who are threatened by science that contradicts a literal interpretation of their religous texts.
Under some unusual conditions it might be possible.
I’ts not me proving a negative just because my statement to you was phrased with the word “didn’t” in it. It could have been phrased this way “I’m asserting that dinosaurs lived long before humans and he is claiming they didn’t.” Now that the word “didn’t” is used in reference to him and not me, is it now him who is being asked to prove a negative?
How would you propose to PROVE that pigs don’t fly? Have you seen every pig in existence? Have you watched them 24/7 to verify that they don’t pop out their hidden wings at 3:00 am and take off? Of course not. If someone wants to assert that pigs fly, the burden of proof is solely on him to produce solid evidence of such.
[/quote]
Of course I agree with this, but this isn’t the same situation. We both believe in the existence of humans and dinosaurs; we just disagree on the time lines.
And since your contention that humans and dinosaurs did not coexist is supported (not proven, as it can’t be proven) by overwhelming evidence, just as my contention that pigs don’t fly is supported by overwhelming evidence, your point is made. If your friend wants to assert that humans and dinosaurs did coexist, or that pigs do fly, it’s up to him to provide the evidence.
[/quote]
As has been brought up in this thread, fossils found in the layers of the Earth and radiometric dating prove that humans and dinosaurs did not coexist, but creationists just claim that radiometric dating is inaccurate and that human prints were found with dinosaurs.
That’s what’s so frustrating. I like to think that I’m a fairly intelligent person, but not being able to provide a good arguement makes me doubt myself. I ended up bringing forth a pretty arguement though (with help from you guys), but of course it didn’t get me anything but a headache. When you start getting asked to “prove that radiometric dating methods are accurate”, I end up being the one doing all of the research and getting nowhere. Thanks guys.