• MuchPineapples@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    34
    ·
    1 month ago

    So their proof is that ancient Chinese dragon depictions look like dinosaurs? Well, no shit Sherlock. Ancient people find a huge dinosaur skull fossil, of course they start making up dragons.

    • Blue_Morpho@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      18
      ·
      1 month ago

      It’s worse than that. Read the fine print.

      They claim that all Chinese pottery was built wrong. The article says (sic) “If you Photoshop the handles to reverse the head, it looks like a Triceratops instead of a classic Chinese dragon.”

      Seriously. The evidence they claim is that if you digitally alter the photo, it looks like a dinosaur.

      • mPony@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        1 month ago

        using that logic, if you plant evidence of a crime in someone’s home they are immediately guilty and then you can shoot them

  • Veraxus@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    27
    ·
    1 month ago

    “If we digitally alter this thing then if you squint really hard and take these lead supplements for a few months then it maybe kinda looks like something else!”

    • Blue_Morpho@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      1 month ago

      It’s hilarious that they come out right and say it.

      “If we Photoshop this vase, it looks like a dinosaur.”

  • uebquauntbez@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    14
    ·
    1 month ago

    So true, and society back then used wireless devices to communicate, as we neither found copper nor fiber optic cables. And dinosaurs (or humans back then) were time trallelers, as almost no dinosaur or human was found in the same ground layers. See? Evidence, lotsa evidence!

  • ArbitraryValue@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    10
    ·
    1 month ago

    It’s funny how about twenty years ago creationism was a big deal on the internet, but now the creationists are still doing their thing but the internet doesn’t care anymore.

    • protist@mander.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      12
      ·
      edit-2
      1 month ago

      Creationists handily lost that argument, because it’s so obviously wrong and deeply unpopular. They’ve since moved on to issues they think are more exploitable, eg dehumanizing trans folk

      • AggressivelyPassive@feddit.de
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        1 month ago

        Nah, it’s just not extreme enough and actually not that unpopular.

        A frighteningly large percentage of the US population doesn’t “believe” in evolution, creationism is not that weird for them.

        But for the rest: creationism is not that weird compared to flat earthers hunting down child sex trafficking pizza joints and Jewish Space Lasers.

    • NABDad@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      1 month ago

      I could never understand how believers refused to believe in evolution. Even if you believe in an all-Knowing, all-powerful deity, why would you want to believe they wouldn’t use all the tools at their disposal?

      Having evolution at your disposal and still manually creating every living thing would be like using a pencil and paper to sum the columns in an Excel spreadsheet.

      In other words, if you believe in God and don’t believe in evolution, you believe in a dipshit god. Your God probably failed out of deity school.

      • OneWomanCreamTeam@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        1 month ago

        It’s because that would contradict a literal interpretation of the Bible (not all Christians subscribe to a completely literal interpretation of the Bible, but most creationists do).

        • mPony@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 month ago

          it doesn’t even fully contradict all interpretations; it just fully contradicts the loudest most obnoxious proponents of a particular interpretation. but those arseholes can go pound sand, for they are deeply wrong.

  • VindictiveJudge@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    8
    ·
    1 month ago

    Fun fact: The Catholic Church, of all things, officially says the ‘let the earth bring forth’ bit of one of the bible’s two creation stories is a poetic way to reference evolution.

  • Guadin@k.fe.derate.me
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    8
    ·
    1 month ago

    Yes, because dinosaurs and dragons shirley can’t be from imagination or stories. Please hand me a bible so I can wrap my arms around it.

  • LANIK2000@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    8
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 month ago

    Nobody show this psycho a bloody anime mug or something. God knows what story they would come up with.

  • NeptuneOrbit@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    1 month ago

    I’m not easily finding this piece of art online. Is it some Han dynasty vase with a dragon on it and the Creation museum has gone Full It’s a Dinosaur They Lived Among?

      • FiniteBanjo@lemmy.today
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        1 month ago

        The Dinosaur Bones are Fake Crowd has fallen off in recent years, they were most prominent from the 1860s to the 1980s when the fossil record was less complete and reliable than it is today. They used to cite Charle’s Darwin quotes about lacking evidence religiously, quite ironically. They are always looking for some new quotes from evolutionary biologists today like Mark Ridley quoted saying we lacked enough transition fossils in 1981 but since then he’s already renounced that argument and brought attention to the many new transition fossils found since then such as tiktaalik.

        The problem with Dinosaur Bones are Fake arguments is that the people who make the arguments know nothing of fossils because in the process of learning about fossils they realize they were wrong. Sometimes I see a stray “Carbon Dating only goes back 50,000 years reliable and doesn’t work on surface exposed objects” as if radiology would only work on specific carbon isotopes lmao.

        • Tar_Alcaran@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 month ago

          They used to cite Charle’s Darwin quotes about lacking evidence religiously, quite ironically.

          I still have the passage bookmarked in my copy of Origin of Species. The local JWs used to cite it a lot when I mentioned evolution, but they’ve stopped, unfortunately.

          Maybe the finally read the rest of the paragraph? Who knows.

          • Flying Squid@lemmy.worldOP
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            6
            ·
            1 month ago

            I have a Darwin quote for them:

            I cannot persuade myself that a beneficent and omnipotent God would have designedly created the Ichneumonidae [a family of parasitoid wasps] with the express intention of their feeding within the living bodies of caterpillars.

  • Dave@lemmy.nz
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 month ago

    But if humans and dinosaurs lived together, then where are the dinosaurs now? Doesn’t this theory imply “things are as they always have been”, therefore God?

    • Flying Squid@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      1 month ago

      Depending on which ones you ask, they either were wiped out in the Great Flood or survived, but were recorded as dragons and died out later.

  • YurkshireLad@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 month ago

    I thought she was implying they’d found evidence of pottery made by dinosaurs and given to, and used by, people.