Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Dinosaurs Swimming out of Necessity (article)
Institute for Creation Research ^ | April 26, 2013. | Timothy L. Clarey, Ph.D.

Posted on 04/26/2013 1:19:25 PM PDT by fishtank

Dinosaurs Swimming out of Necessity by Timothy L. Clarey, Ph.D. *

What's so fascinating about dinosaur tracks? Maybe it's because their many mysteries beg for solutions. For instance, because tracks in mud are so short-lived today, how did dinosaur tracks ever preserve in the first place? Newly described prints bolster biblical creation's explanation of dinosaur footprints.

Researchers working in China's Sichuan Province recently reported their discovery in the Chinese Science Bulletin.1 Their article documents several different types of dinosaur trackways, including two theropods (bipedal “lizard-hipped”), one sauropod (long-neck), and four ornithopods (duck-billed) all traveling in the same direction at about the same time.

The scientists determined at least one of the theropods was partly afloat as its feet swiped the underwater mud. Its fifty-foot trackway shows a number of tip-toe scratches and claw scrapings. A second theropod, walking in the same direction and on the same horizon as the first, was apparently wading in the water as it left more complete footprints. These scientists interpret the tracks were made as these dinosaurs crossed a river, possibly during a flood event.1

The study authors estimated both dinosaurs had hip heights of just under three feet—from sole to hip—but if they had similar leg height, why didn't they produce similar tracks? The evidence of both swimming and wading indicates rapid fluctuations in water depth.1 The first dinosaur was able to wade through the shallow water, while the second, same-sized dinosaur—apparently just moments later—had to swim as the water level rose quickly.

The parallel trackways of the sauropod and the ornithopods (all within several feet of one another) also indicate they had been wading through the water. The hip heights of these animals were higher than the two theropods, so they evidently had no need to swim.1

Creation scientists have suggested many animals swam to escape the Flood waters.2,3,4 These trackways in Sichuan confirm that water overwhelmed the dinosaurs and forced them to swim for their lives for as long as they could, clearly following the Flood events and timeline from the book of Genesis. This deluge created rapid fluctuations in water levels—its tsunami-like waves quickly covering the land surface, and then just as rapidly, draining off. In contrast to the Flood's grand-scale destruction and deposition, evolutionists call upon dinky, local river floods to explain these sites.

The consistent direction of the trackways also implies that all the dinosaurs were traveling in the same direction at the same time, trying to escape the approaching Flood water.

Researchers in Australia reported a similar situation occurred at a trackway site in Queensland, Australia.5 There, scientists found evidence of the same species of dinosaurs walking and wading, indicating similar rapid fluctuations in water depth.

The evidence for the Flood is found all over the world. Trackways of swimming dinosaurs on many continents confirm the global extent of the cataclysm. Dinosaur track formation clearly required abnormal and catastrophic circumstances. These desperate creatures ran, waded, and swam for as long as they could, but all succumbed to the overwhelming power of God's judgment as reported in Genesis.

References

Xing L., M. Lockley, J. Zhang, et al. 2013. A new Early Cretaceous dinosaur track assemblage and the first definite non-avian theropod swim trackway from China. Chinese Science Bulletin. April. doi: 10.1007/s11434-013-5802-6.

Morris, J. 2012. The Global Flood: Unlocking Earth's Geologic History. Dallas, TX: Institute for Creation Research; and Morris, J. and J. J. S. Johnson. 2012. The Draining Floodwaters: Geologic Evidence Reflects the Genesis Text. Acts & Facts. 41 (1): 12-13.

Oard, M. J. 2011. Dinosaur Challenges and Mysteries. Atlanta, GA: Creation Book Publishers.

Thomas, B. New Dinosaur Tracks Study Suggests Cataclysm. Creation Science Update. Posted on www.icr.org January 25, 2013, accessed March 1, 2013.

Romilio, A., R. T. Tucker, and S. W. Salisbury. 2013. Reevaluation of the Lark Quarry dinosaur Tracksite (late Albian–Cenomanian Winton Formation, central-western Queensland, Australia): no longer a stampede? Journal of Vertebrate Paleontology. 33 (1): 102-120.

* Dr. Timothy Clarey is Research Associate at the Institute for Creation Research.

Article posted on April 26, 2013.


TOPICS: News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: creation; dinosaurs; swimming

Image from article.

1 posted on 04/26/2013 1:19:25 PM PDT by fishtank
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: fishtank

When there were only a couple thousand people
on the earth, any rain for over a week was
considered a flood...


2 posted on 04/26/2013 1:23:43 PM PDT by tet68 ( " We would not die in that man's company, that fears his fellowship to die with us...." Henry V.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: fishtank

A single data point doth not a theory (or even a guess) make.

This is pure conjecture — I’ll wait for it to be in a scientific publication (of which there are none in the referenced articles).


3 posted on 04/26/2013 1:24:25 PM PDT by freedumb2003 (LBJ declared war on poverty and lost. Barack Obama declared war on prosperity and won. /csmusaret)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: fishtank

So.
How old do you reckon the Earth is?


4 posted on 04/26/2013 1:28:01 PM PDT by humblegunner
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: humblegunner

I knew you would be on this post.


5 posted on 04/26/2013 1:35:35 PM PDT by chesty_puller (Viet Nam 1970-71 He who shed blood with me shall forever be my brother. Shak.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: chesty_puller
DANG Chesty how the hell you been?!

AV relayed your greetings.

6 posted on 04/26/2013 1:36:48 PM PDT by humblegunner
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: humblegunner; fishtank
How old do you reckon the Earth is? WAIT -- don't answer yet!

OK, go ahead...

7 posted on 04/26/2013 1:37:11 PM PDT by freedumb2003 (LBJ declared war on poverty and lost. Barack Obama declared war on prosperity and won. /csmusaret)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: fishtank

I hate to be disrespectful, but this is a full crock...


8 posted on 04/26/2013 1:38:06 PM PDT by John Valentine (Deep in the Heart of Texas)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: humblegunner

Hard times buddy, but I’ll make it.


9 posted on 04/26/2013 1:39:37 PM PDT by chesty_puller (Viet Nam 1970-71 He who shed blood with me shall forever be my brother. Shak.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: fishtank

I don’t understand why it’s necessarily unreasonable to conclude local flooding was responsible for this observed phenomenon, when there are also plenty of sites where Dino bones are found where there is no evidence of flooding at all.

IOW, if the dinosaurs were all wiped out by a global flood, it stands to reason every site their bones are found would have evidence of flooding. (but the don’t)

If the underlying claim here is not that all dinosaur discoveries are evidence of a worldwide flood, then what independent reason exists to say everytime flooding is observed it must be evidence of a global flood not a local one?


10 posted on 04/26/2013 1:48:05 PM PDT by FourtySeven (47)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: chesty_puller

I know that if it can be done, you’re the old hand that’ll do it.

You get thought about and spoken about from time to time, ain’t forgotten.


11 posted on 04/26/2013 2:01:49 PM PDT by humblegunner
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: fishtank

Laughing and shaking head.


12 posted on 04/26/2013 2:27:32 PM PDT by albionin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: albionin

Stuff like this is embarrassing.


13 posted on 04/26/2013 2:57:20 PM PDT by Paradox (Unexpected things coming for the next few years.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: John Valentine

Why the Genesis Flood Matters The study of geology is a daunting task, especially when investigating ancient rock, strata, and fossils. What do the rocks and strata tell us about the geologic history of earth? How do fossils help us unlock the mysteries of the geological catastrophes of the past?

For some, the thought of a worldwide flood is ludicrous. But for serious scientists who research the various formations of the earth and the catastrophic processes that shaped the world we see around us today, the evidence of a global flood is indisputable. The Global Flood presents that evidence in a way that clearly demonstrates why the biblical account of the Flood matters to all of us who want to understand and communicate the truth of the Genesis Flood with confidence.

“The Global Flood helps to meet a great need today. It is comprehensive. It is aimed at those who are not experts in earth sciences. People everywhere need to understand the true significance of the year-long, mountain-covering Deluge that buried and fossilized trillions of marine and land animals and plants only a few thousand years ago. Over 95 percent of these fossils — even within sedimentary strata seen in the highest mountains of the world — are marine creatures! We don't need to stretch the creation week of Genesis 1 to allow for this. The fossils were formed after, not before, Adam! Without the enormous hydrodynamic work of the Flood, we could not know this. Now the Christian world has no excuse — if they ever had any — for adding millions and billions of years to earth history.

“May God be pleased to use The Global Flood to enlighten and encourage His people everywhere, in this day of confusion and compromise, to understand as never before some of the basic realities of Flood geology.”

— from the Foreword by Dr. John C. Whitcomb

14 posted on 04/26/2013 4:13:37 PM PDT by fishtank (The denial of original sin is the root of liberalism.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: John Valentine

Before John Morris wrote “The Global Flood”, he was the Civil Engineering department head at Virginia Tech.

“Scientists” are wrong about global warming,

and I think they’ve been wrong about catastrophicism,

the age of the earth

and the origin of species.


15 posted on 04/26/2013 4:16:39 PM PDT by fishtank (The denial of original sin is the root of liberalism.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: fishtank
“The Global Flood helps to meet a great need today. It is comprehensive. It is aimed at those who are not experts in earth sciences. People everywhere need to understand the true significance of the year-long, mountain-covering Deluge that buried and fossilized trillions of marine and land animals and plants only a few thousand years ago. Over 95 percent of these fossils — even within sedimentary strata seen in the highest mountains of the world — are marine creatures! We don't need to stretch the creation week of Genesis 1 to allow for this. The fossils were formed after, not before, Adam! Without the enormous hydrodynamic work of the Flood, we could not know this. Now the Christian world has no excuse — if they ever had any — for adding millions and billions of years to earth history.

“May God be pleased to use The Global Flood to enlighten and encourage His people everywhere, in this day of confusion and compromise, to understand as never before some of the basic realities of Flood geology.” Hmm, so let's deconstruct this "argument" BOTH theologically and scientifically.

The Global Flood helps to meet a great need today. It is comprehensive. It is aimed at those who are not experts in earth sciences.

So, we use hand waving to distract those who are ignorant. Not only does God demand Truth, but He demands the Truth be complete. Genesis was a summary to explain the relationship between God and Man. The physical aspects are irrelevant to the clear demarcation: God is Thy Lord and has created everything. For you. Not a bunch of people -- YOU.

People everywhere need to understand the true significance of the year-long, mountain-covering Deluge that buried and fossilized trillions of marine and land animals and plants only a few thousand years ago. Over 95 percent of these fossils — even within sedimentary strata seen in the highest mountains of the world — are marine creatures!

At one time most of the Earth was covered with water (think Pangaea and Continental Drift). The Earth started with mostly water and continues to be so today. The "flood" probably happened but was a local event (people settle where there is water, water floods very frequently). There is no scientific basis that says "flood plains in Egypt match with flood plains in the Amazon."

Now the Christian world has no excuse — if they ever had any — for adding millions and billions of years to earth history.

So we circle back: how old is the world? And how do you explain the billions of data points (including physics and relativity) that state pretty clearly the world is many billions of years old.

I am still enjoying my popcorn awaiting your response.

16 posted on 04/26/2013 5:09:40 PM PDT by freedumb2003 (LBJ declared war on poverty and lost. Barack Obama declared war on prosperity and won. /csmusaret)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: fishtank
But for serious scientists who research the various formations of the earth and the catastrophic processes that shaped the world we see around us today, the evidence of a global flood is indisputable.

Right here we have a perfect example of why i called this a "full crock".

There is truly NO serious scientist - and I mean that NO - who sees indisputable evidence of a global flood.

17 posted on 04/26/2013 5:49:03 PM PDT by John Valentine (Deep in the Heart of Texas)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: tet68; kitchen-cook
When there were only a couple thousand people on the earth, any rain for over a week was considered a flood...

Not likely so few, nor the Flood so unremarkable as to be subsequently retold and/or recorded.

Figuring on the Flood year, ~1656 A. C. (After Creation) on the Hebrew calendar, and accounting for greater antediluvian human longevity, a reasonable estimate would give about a million and a half, to about two million people present.

Also, dinosaurs at that time did not eat animal flesh, only herbiage. (Just keep away from their hoofs when you're in their way, eh?)

BTW, how long did dinosaurs have to live to get that big? Were they like reptiles today, or did they exhibit a plateau of "adult" size?

And weren't they created to live forever, as were Adam and Eve, originally? So did they eat other animals before death came into the Creation because of The Sin? And are there any complete dinosaur (or other) skeletons now that are demonstrated to have been isolated at death, which had crunched bones in their tummies when they died? Any bones with giant tooth-marks on their surface? Hmmm?? (etc, etc)

Lots of speculations in this material.

18 posted on 04/26/2013 8:04:08 PM PDT by imardmd1 (Let the redeemed of The LORD say so, whom He hath redeemed from the hand of the enemy. (Ps. 107:2))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: John Valentine
There is truly NO serious scientist - and I mean that NO - who sees indisputable evidence of a global flood.

Well, I am a somewhat seriously trained scientist, and earned my way in life doing practical investigations for many years, and I call you out on this.

The Mt. St. Helens' observable event proved your opinion and that of most gullible sedimentary geologists absolutely wrong. Look it up.

Furthermore, explain to me the presence of a tree trunk (petrified) extending vertically through several feet of horizontally laid sedimentary laminae, and turned to rock, found both at Mt. St. Helens and elsewhere on earth sites.

Prove how layers of coal were formed, with the plant leaves and branches never having rotted--many feet thick, and all over the globe, without sudden deposition of both matted plants covered subsequenrly and soon with massive sedimentary overburden.

Come on, if you're not a crock full of it, you can do it. You are a "serious" scientist, are you?

There's a lot more without the running dinosaurs little concurring factoid, but just take on the above situations, OK?

Oh, and while you're at it, you might want to work on the practical science of Robert Gentry et alia on coalification of wood, as well as his work on polonium halos in coal, as well as in granite.

Gentry is not well liked, and often mocked, but his explanations have substance, and his polonium halo theory never disproved.

You might also want to ruminate on the writings of Walt Brown, another serious scientist and young Earth theorist, especially for his hydroplate theory, which confutes the tectonic plate drift suppositions, and whose explanations for radioactive decay have not been refuted.

You will find many of the counter-reasonings at You might find many of your opposing arguments voiced by Matt Tiscareno at "Is There Really Scientific Evidence for a Young Earth?", but however detailed and voluminous, they do not and cannot discharge the disputation that exists.

Why? Because The God has arranged things such that:

"... without faith it is impossible to please Him, for he that cometh to God must believe that He is, and that He is a rewarder of them that diligently seek Him" (Hebrews 11:6). This is an immutable and eternal spiritual precept and prerequisite.

The human attempting to approach God through systematically proving, temporally and materially, that He is, and on no other basis, will never find Him. That is the route chosen by theistic evolutionists, and it can never succeed. Its termination is in the Lake of Fire.

My approach is by faith in the Word of God, and in Christ and His faithfulness, rather than in my intelligence and logicality. So far, so good. How about you?

19 posted on 04/26/2013 10:54:18 PM PDT by imardmd1 (Let the redeemed of The LORD say so, whom He hath redeemed from the hand of the enemy. (Ps. 107:2))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: imardmd1

Sadly, you are not a serious or even a semi-serious scientist.

You are a man of faith, and unfortunately yours is faith in utter nonsense. You are too far gone to be reachable by reason. I wish you well in your fantasy world.


20 posted on 04/27/2013 3:48:45 PM PDT by John Valentine (Deep in the Heart of Texas)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: John Valentine
Noted, John. Remember that one of the views I pointed you to was a comprehensive review of the young-Earth view from a typical natural philosophical stance, to five proportion. Perhaps you might examine Paul's admonition about persons who assume that adeptness in logical reasoning will give them wisdom:

"But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned. But he that is spiritual judgeth all things, yet he himself is judged of no man" (1 Corinthians 2: 14-15)(suggest to check the broader context to highlight the church training in which the passage is a key for identifying truly wise disputers).

Your haste in judging others is not an uncommon habit, but perhaps it might be working here to your disadvantage.

21 posted on 04/27/2013 7:05:26 PM PDT by imardmd1 (Let the redeemed of The LORD say so, whom He hath redeemed from the hand of the enemy. (Ps. 107:2))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: imardmd1; John Valentine

Sorry, not “five” but “give” — a mistype.


22 posted on 04/27/2013 7:08:48 PM PDT by imardmd1 (Let the redeemed of The LORD say so, whom He hath redeemed from the hand of the enemy. (Ps. 107:2))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: imardmd1

I am not judging YOU, I have no basis for doing so.

I am only pointing out that your particular beliefs in this case are nonsense, and that fact that this does not bother you, or cause you to reexamine them in a more critical light stems from the fact that your beliefs stem from your faith.

In this case, we may see the persistence of belief in that which we must know to be untrue, but which we cannot admit without dislodging other even more fundamental beliefs. That’s the effect of faith in one thing distorting the perception of another aspect of reality entirely.


23 posted on 04/28/2013 5:57:16 AM PDT by John Valentine (Deep in the Heart of Texas)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: John Valentine
From your Post #20: "Sadly, you are not a serious or even a semi-serious scientist."

From this Post #23: "I am not judging YOU, I have no basis for doing so."

You are doing exactly so, and furthermore indicating that I am both deluded and a liar, while protesting that you are mot; even while speaking in the same breath otherwise.

Leaving that issue aside for the moment, let me ask for your brief and to-the-point reasoning on a related issue:

Is it possible that a healthy human male could be tortured to death, with confirming coupe de grace (administered by spearing the dead body's pericardial sac to release the fluids causing gross edema); allowed to lie unattended without treatment for approximately 34 hours; then abruptly rise alive, and spend about forty days walking around, conversing and seen with over 500 disciples?

I am interested in what you think of this, as recorded in the New Testament.

24 posted on 04/29/2013 3:14:04 AM PDT by imardmd1 (Let the redeemed of The LORD say so, whom He hath redeemed from the hand of the enemy. (Ps. 107:2))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: imardmd1

I intended to engage in a debate about the age of the earth and the process of geologic change.

I do NOT intend to be drawn into a pointless discussion regarding your faith in the literal truth of any specific book.

You go your way, as I am sure you will, and I’ll go mine.


25 posted on 04/29/2013 4:28:38 AM PDT by John Valentine (Deep in the Heart of Texas)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: John Valentine
That's what I thought, John, and why I asked. There are not two ways, only two faiths -- both joined in the past and in the future, only different in perception .

The discipline of science is not the sum of knowledge, only a fragment--and that sharply limited. The debate you wanted is just as dependent on faith as--actually much more irrational than--the extension which I proposed.

Even so, you haven't given your answer to the questions I asked you about Mount St Marys sedimentation, coal, squashed polonium halos, the hydroplate postulate, and radioactive decay.

If you're done, I'm done.

26 posted on 04/29/2013 9:24:15 AM PDT by imardmd1 (Let the redeemed of The LORD say so, whom He hath redeemed from the hand of the enemy. (Ps. 107:2))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: fishtank

For instance, because tracks in mud are so short-lived today, how did dinosaur tracks ever preserve in the first place?


Now that is a real question.


27 posted on 04/29/2013 9:28:29 AM PDT by PeterPrinciple
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson