[ClearCase_guy]

I found footprints! Now I know:

That the footprints are 165 million years old.
This footprints went from land into water.
This dinosaur was 6 feet tall.
This dinosaur ate meat.
This dinosaur is an ancester of birds.
This dinosaur was born on a Tuesday.

I'm not just guessing here. This is all testable and verifiable. I may be mad, but I am a scientist.

[kjam22]

And the dinosaur died when 3 comets hit the earth at one time.... right after the polar ice cap melted.

[SquirrelKing]

Ow. A kick in the testables.

[Junior]

That the footprints are 165 million years old.

Tested by radiometric dating.

This footprints went from land into water.

Evidenced by the wave patterns fossilized in the same matrix as the footprints.

This dinosaur was 6 feet tall.

Deduced from the stride distance of the prints themselves.

This dinosaur ate meat.

Three-toed dinosaurs discovered to date have been carnivores.

This dinosaur is an ancester of birds.

Nope. The article said it had "bird-like characteristics." However, from previous experience with you on these threads it is apparent your reading comprehension skills leave much to be desired.

This dinosaur was born on a Tuesday.

There is only about a 14 percent chance you are right. Of course, you did just pull this out of your ass, which is about right for you. I'm not just guessing here. This is all testable and verifiable. I may be mad, but I am a scientist.

Well, actually, in the case of the last two points you were guessing. That you neither know nor care to know how science actually works speaks poorly of you. That you parade your willful ignorance in public compounds the perception.

[Sols]

I'm confused. Do you not understand how scientists could have come to these conclusions (a few books could rememedy your own inadequacy in this matter) or do you understand the methods involved but disagree with how they were applied in this case? Or are you just pissing in the wind?

That you seem confused how they could know it eats meat of all things is telling.

[Stultis]

Well, how would you explain that the tracks become less deep and in the end only claw marks. You seem to consider it dubious to infer that the animal was bouyed up by water. Are you saying we should consider the hypothesis that it was wearing anti-gravity generators?

[Stultis]

BTW, I used to hang out around the Paluxy River near Glen Rose, TX quite a bit, and often checked in on Carl Baugh and other "man track" touting creationists there. Even Baugh and other creationists would point out certain tracks to visiting fundamentalists taking the Creation Evidences Museum tour and confidentially assert, "that's a carnosaur trackway".

BTW, Junior, there are some non-carnosaur three-toed prints -- e.g. iguanodon type -- but they look very different from the carnosaur tracks (e.g. big fat toes with heavy foot pads, claw marks rare, etc).

[finnigan2]

"That the footprints are 165 million years old.
This footprints went from land into water.
This dinosaur was 6 feet tall.
This dinosaur ate meat.
This dinosaur is an ancester of birds.
This dinosaur was born on a Tuesday."

- According to information provided by Poster #3, they also had flat feet and wore baseball caps.