“Yes, this was basically my point.”
It wasn’t clear. I won’t bother re-posting your comments but they are there for anyone else to.
There are many animals that exist today, even dangerous ones that are not mentioned specifically in the Bible. It could easily be argued that dinosaurs are. From the Behmoth to the Leviathan. In any case your assessment that it is a “strong indication that they were not there” is not really very scientific, now is it?
From the looks of it you’re an educator or a writer or possibly both. I just don’t see the reasoned logic in this argument. Help me out a little please?
Thanks.
How can Creation Museum put up characters riding dinosaurs with saddles when there is no mention of that in the bible?
I think that the Behemoth situation has been pretty well described historically, biblically and linguistically by other commenters. Leviathan was also mentioned, but not discussed as thoroughly. Was it another term for whale? I don’t know. Then of course there is the well known Loch Ness Monster that has received a lot of press. Is it real, or someones mistaken imaginings. I find it at least as credible as Leviathan which is not saying much.
I have tried to make my comments at least as scientific as those from the Discovery Institute and its supporters. You are using the old “absence of evidence is not evidence of absence” argument. Nevertheless, if dinosaurs had been around I find it hard to believe they would not have been mentioned.
There is more evidence for the tooth fairy than there is for dinosaurs existing 6000 years ago.