Everyone is buzzing about the Ken Ham, and Bill Nye debate. In the aftermath though, there are always things left unaddressed, unchanged, and you find each side claiming that they won, but who is the real winner? Well the evidence is going to fill in the rest of the story, and it is with that, we can declare a winner.
Ken Ham makes the assertion that Bill wasn’t there. Well, guess who else wasn’t there? Ken Ham, nor was his book with the claim of creation. No, in fact no one living was there, the books written later weren’t there, and assumptions being made, are not facts or evidence. So we have to rely on evidence for the rest of the story.
Did man and Dinosaurs really live togehter?
No. How do we know this? Besides the lack of any human remains in the fossil record, right next to any dinosaurs, and Dino saddles, and human encampments the record leaves other evidence that contradicts Ken ham with a forceful degree.
Let’s look at the Dinosaurs. T-Rex for example. He weighed about 14,000 pounds. Stood about 15 feet tall, and was about 30 foot long. Now that doesn’t really refute anything, but the next part does. Ken Ham makes the claim that before the fall, dinosaurs were vegetarians. Nothing could be farther from the truth with T-Rex. His razor sharp teeth not only carry serrations on both sides, but he had a feature we find in modern sharks. They lost a tooth when it broke off, or was pulled out during biting. Why? Because vicious predators can’t eat with broken and missing teeth. He also had jaws like modern predators with the muscle concentration being on the force of the bite, which explains his massive jaws, and the bone that forms the lower jaw. T-Rex was built with a deadly bite.
Couldn’t this have happened after the fall? No, because there would have been no need. Why would T-Rex suddenly need to be a carnivore? If he was a vegetarian, he could have stayed it, there were other herbivores which were far more sizeable than him.
Wouldn’t someone have to eat those other vegetarians? Yes, but then T-Rex would have never been a T-Rex before the fall. He wouldn’t have had to exist, because, if he did, it is like anticipating a event that hasn’t happened yet.
Why does that matter? Well, we see in herbivores that they have very different teeth and jaws. Their teeth are made to chew, and crush in a repetitive manner, as compared to meat eating dinosaurs. herbivores had spoon like teeth, peg like teeth, and even a dental battery, which consisted of up to 30 teeth grown together. Not only didn’t they lose them like carnivores, the teeth kept growing, so that as they chewed them down, they would continue to have more tooth, so they could keep chewing.
What about Dinosaurs having been ridden by humans?
I am not sure where such an idea arose, but it is far from even accurate. Modern rhinos, which are close to the body shape of an ornathician dinosaur have never been ridden, and can’t be tamed. If everything that is alive today was alive back then, people could have just trained camels and horses, there would be no need for a dinosaur to be ridden, but there are more reasons.
Triceratops and other dinosaurs didn’t have the brains that modern mammals do. T-Rex had one built to smell, most of the mass of his brain was in the olfactory sensory area. Triceratops, and other herbivores had small brains, small and not well evolved brains. One look at modern horses will tell you, that they have a good sized brain, and still aren’t fully tame and docile. Now imagine something about 5,000 pounds and not highly evolved.
Triceratops would have been good for riding, because they were territorial, they would have had high degrees of fight or flight, especially with predators around. They developed 3 horns and a skull plate which protected their neck. Had a human tried to approach them, they would have been gored.
But what about babies? Couldn’t humans have raised them? No, and the reason is, that dinosaurs were protective of their young, if a human had tried to take a baby, they would have been killed. Even if they did manage to get a baby, it would have needed hundreds of pounds of food a day, just to sustain it. More than a flock of sheep, and a herd of horses. Triceratops had to eat all day long, every day.
But you weren’t there? No, but the fossil record was there, it was being laid down over billions of years. There is nothing which even suggests that Ken Ham is right, just because he makes claims. Especially when he tries to use the bible as evidence for the claim, because the bible wasn’t there. Any and all versions of the modern bible didn’t exist until 200-400 years post the common era. Which means that even the claim wasn’t there, and no claim can be used as evidence for the claim.
It is simple, Ken Ham doesn’t have a leg to stand on and a dinosaur to ride. He simply makes claims based on his own cognitive bias with no evidence to back them up. He simply is not basing anything he says in reality or truth. He is trying to tell the world that the claims of one man, and one book outweigh the evidence from around the world, and thousands of scientists, working for hundreds of years. While he claims to be the man with the truth and the ultimate source, the facts all pile up against him. Ken Ham is just another victim of the creation delusion.