"But if ye have respect to persons, ye commit sin, and are convinced of the law as transgressors."
James 2:9
Dinosaurs and the Bible
Author:
Christopher J. E. Johnson
Published: August, 2009
Updated: Dec 14, 2013
Contents:
Why We Call Them Dinosaurs
Man and Dinosaur Together
Protecting Evolution Against All Odds
Did Noah Take Dinosaurs on the Ark?
What Happened to the Dinosaurs?
What is Behemoth?
Sightings of Living Dinosaurs Today
Final Thoughts & Additional Materials


Children love dinosaurs. I've never heard an argument to the contrary. The problem is that dinosaurs are being used by those worshipers in the evolutionary religion to lead people away from the truth of God's Word, and I want to make sure that both children and adults can get all the facts, instead of half-truth they'll normally receive in a textbook or from a museum.

A child's education starts at a very early age with large colorful pictures next to paragraphs of extensive evolutionary propaganda.
(See Heather Amery & Paul Harrison, T.Rex and Other Dangerous Dinosaurs, Arcturus Publishing, First Scholastic edition, June, 2010, ISBN: 978-0-545-21848-1)
The first words, as all children's books and textbooks use, say, "Millions of years ago," because in order to believe in the religious millions and billions of years, students must be conditioned from a very early age. Children have to believe in millions of years before they can believe in evolution, and since they are already attracted to dinosaurs, evolutionists find it easier to plant their religious seeds.

Textbooks will commonly ask the following question: "How did the dinosaurs become extinct?"
(See Holt Biology: Visualizing Life, 1994, p. 579, ISBN: 0-03-053817-3)

The above question is not designed to help students to think for themselves, but rather it is designed to tell them what to think. This question assumes that dinosaurs went extinct, but it is actually impossible to prove the extinction of anything. The real question that should be asked is "Did dinosaurs go extinct?"

The typical response from an evolutionist is a scoffing attitude that they would have found something that big a long time ago, but a recent discovery in Alabama shows us how little we actually see. An 11-year-old boy shot and killed a 1051-pound boar in the woods near his home.
"Jamison, who killed his first deer at age 5, was hunting with father Mike Stone and two guides in east Alabama on May 3 when he bagged Hogzilla. He said he shot the huge animal eight times with a .50-caliber revolver and chased it for three hours through hilly woods before finishing it off with a point-blank shot."
-FOX News, "Alabama Boy Kills 1,051-Pound Monster Pig, Bigger Than 'Hogzilla'," May 26, 2007, retreived Dec 14, 2013, [http://www.foxnews.com/story/2007/05/26/alabama-boy-kills-1051-pound-monster-pig-bigger-than-hogzilla/]; Mike Stone started website for this kill, [www.monsterpig.com]

No one in Alabama ever could have thought that something that big would live in their state, near their homes, and not have been seen. Just because we have not personally seen something, doesn't autmoatically mean it doesn't exist. (That's thinking we would typically expect from a 3-year-old child!)

Prove all things; hold fast that which is good.
-1 Thessalonians 5:21

Instead of looking at the evidence, most evolutionists prefer to ASSUME that dinosaurs are extinct because it is the only option that will support their geologic column, or in other words, if a dinosaur and man was found to have lived at the same time, it would destroy the evolution model. So let's put ourselves into investigative mode, and take a look at some facts that typically won't make it into your local church of evolution (museum).





The word 'dinosaur' was made up by Sir Richard Own in 1841, and has only been frequent in the average person's vocabulary in the past 100 years. You can see that this American English Dictionary did not even contain the word 'dinosaur' in 1891:

All throughout history, dinosaurs have been known as "dragons." Many evolutionists make complaint that dinosaurs are not mentioned in the Bible, but that is simply not true. Dragons are mentioned in the Bible 34 times. Here are a few examples:

Their wine is the poison of dragons, and the cruel venom of asps.
-Deuteronomy 32:33

Thou shalt tread upon the lion and adder: the young lion and the dragon shalt thou trample under feet.
-Psalm 91:13

In that day the LORD with his sore and great and strong sword shall punish leviathan the piercing serpent, even leviathan that crooked serpent; and he shall slay the dragon that is in the sea.
-Isaiah 27:1

It is true that today, not many dragons are seen, but that does not force us to conclude they went extinct millions of years ago. There are many ancient stories of dragons and sea serpents throughout the past few thousand years. Some evolutionists that believe dinosaurs went extinct 65 million years ago, will foolishly make the following statement:

"No human being has ever seen a live dinosaur."
-National Geographic, "Dinosaurs," January, 1993, Vol. 183, No. 1, p. 147

Does this author know that, or does he think that? He cannot possibly know that. There is no way he has spoken with every man that has ever lived. He is ASSUMING it, and then assuming he knows everything there is to know about the subject. Let's take a closer look at the evidence before we jump to conclusions.





-See James B. Pritchard, The Ancient Near East, Princeton University Press, 1969, p. 93; See Also David H. Childress, Technology of the Gods, Adventures Unlimited Press, 1999, p.115, ISBN: 9780932813732


(See Paul S. Taylor, The Great Dinosaur Mystery and the Bible, published David C. Cook, 1998, ISBN: 9780781430715)

(See Marinus W. DeVisser & Loren Coleman, The Dragon in China & Japan, published Cosimo Inc, 2008, ISBN: 9781605204109)

(See Darek Isaacs, Dragons or Dinosaurs?, published Bridge Logos Foundation, 2010, p. 41, ISBN: 9780882704777; See also Phillip O'Donnell, Dinosaurs: Dead or Alive?, published Phillip O'Donnell, 2006, p. 14, ISBN: 9781600342622)

(Photo taken by Dr. DeLancy, 719 S. Main St, Perkasie, PA, 18944; His widow has the originals; See also George M. Eberhart, Mysterious Creatures: A Guide to Cryptozoology, published ABC-CLIO, 2002, Vol. 1, p. 135, ISBN: 9781576072837)

"The fact that some prehistoric man made a pictograph of a dinosaur on the walls of this canyon upsets completely all of our theories regarding the antiquity of man. Facts are stubborn and immutable things. If theories do not square with the facts then the theories must change, the facts remain."
-Samuel Hubbard, Honorary Curator of Archaeology of the Oakland Museum, "Discoveries Relating to PREHISTORIC MAN by the Doheny Scientific Expedition in the HAVA SUPAI CANYON, NORTHERN ARIZONA," Publish by the Oakland Museum of Oakland California with Curator and Paleontologist Charles W. Gilmore, Jan 26, 1925 [Expedition Oct-Nov, 1924; sponsored by E.L. Dhoeny], p. 5

(Now on display in the Creation Evidences Museum, owned by Dr. Carl Baugh @ 3102 FM 205, Glen Rose, TX; See also Trevor Ranges & Kris LeBoutillier, National Geographic Traveler Cambodia, published National Geographic Books, 2010, ISBN: 9781426205200)

(See Andrea Schulte-Peevers, Canada, published Lonely Planet, 2005, p. 191, ISBN: 9781740597739; See also John R. Colombo, Mysteries of Ontario, Dundum Press Ltd, 1999, p. 36, ISBN: 9780888822055)

(Now on display in the Creation Science Museum, owned by Dr. Kent Hovind, 5800 North W. St, Pensacola, FL, 32505, 1-877-479-3466)

"The first mention of these incredible stones is from a Spanish priest journeying to the Ica region in 1535. Father Simon, a Jesuit missionary, accopanied Pizarro along the Peruvian coast and recorded his amazement upon viewing the stones. In 1562, Spanish explorers sent seome of the stones back to Spain. The Indian chronicler, Juan de Santa Cruz Pachacuti Llamqui, wrote that at the time of the Inca Pachacutec many carved stones were foujnd in the Kingdom of Chincha, in Chnchayunga, which was called Manco."
-Dr. Dennis Swift, Secrets of the Ica Stones and Nazca Lines, published David Swift, 2006, p. 16-17

(This is me holding one of the genuine Ica Stones.)
(Now on display in the Creation Science Museum, owned by Dr. Kent Hovind, 5800 North W. St, Pensacola, FL, 32505, 1-877-479-3466)

"The stones are covered with a fine patina of natural oxidation which also covers the grooves by which their age should be able to be deduced. I have not been able to find any notable or irregular wear on the edges of the incisions which leads me to suspect that these incisions or etchings were executed not long before being deposited in the graves or other places where they were discovered."
-Dr. Eric Wolf (geologist), Lima, Peru, June 8, 1967, from lab testing of 33 Ica stones requested by Dr. Javier Cabrera to Luis Hochshild, Secrets of the Ica Stones and Nazca Lines, published David Swift, 2006, p. 19
(Read "Are the Ica Stones real or fake?" here at creationliberty.com for more details)

(Now on display in the Creation Evidences Museum, owned by Dr. Carl Baugh, 3102 FM 205, Glen Rose, TX, 76043, 254-897-3200)

These are just a small portion of the many discoveries that have been made, but ignored and/or buried by evolutionists. So is it correct to say 'no human being has ever seen a live dinosaur?' Or is the author assuming the earth is millions of years old and therefore needs no man to have ever seen a live dinosaur to protect his theory?





-Prentice Hall Exploring Earth Science, published Prentice Hall, 1999, p. 111, ISBN: 9780134358741

It is taught uniformly all over the world that dinosaurs went extinct 65 million years ago. We just saw evidence of man and dinosaur being alive at the same time. According to the evolution theory, man did not appear on the earth until about 3 million years ago. Now the evolutionists have a serious problem because evidence of man and dinosaur living at the same time would prove their theory false.

Why do they have to ignore these findings? Why could they just not adjust the evolution theory based on the evidence? Because they have to protect the geologic column.

If any evidence found does not match their geologic column, the evidence is thrown out, never to be considered. This means that the evidence does not shape their theory, but rather, their preconceived theory shapes the evidence they will accept.
(Read The Carbon Dating Game here at creationliberty.com to get more information on how evolutionists selectively pick from a series of wild numbers to get the dates they want)

For example:
"About a year ago a photograph of the 'dinosaur' [pictograph of dinosaur drawn on rock walls] was shown to a scientist of national repute, who was then specializing in dinosaurs. He said, 'It is not a dinosaur, it is impossible, because we know that dinosaurs were extinct 12 million years before man appeared on earth.'"
-Samuel Hubbard, Honorary Curator of Archaeology of the Oakland Museum, "Discoveries Relating to PREHISTORIC MAN by the Doheny Scientific Expedition in the HAVA SUPAI CANYON, NORTHERN ARIZONA," Publish by the Oakland Museum of Oakland California with Curator and Paleontologist Charles W. Gilmore, Jan 26, 1925 [Expedition Oct-Nov, 1924; sponsored by E.L. Dhoeny], p. 9

See how the evolutionary bias gets in the way of real scientific research? He says "it is impossible," and therefore, you are not allowed to consider that could be a dinosaur because it conflicts with the preconceived evolution theory. This is another reason we can see why evolution is not science, but a religious worldview.
(Read Evolution: A New Age Religion here at creationliberty.com for more details)

There are many things have been claimed to be extinct millions of years ago, but then were recently discovered. For example, the coelacanth, a lobe-finned fish, was considered for many years to be a "missing link," in the evolutionary chain, but it was discovered to be alive as early as 1938.
(See Sally M. Walker, Fossil Fish Found Alive: Discovering the Coelacanth, published Carolrhoda Books, 2002, ISBN: 9781575055367)

Here's a photo of the coelacanth swimming off the coast of Australia:

Just as I mentioned at the beginning, how do you prove the extinction of anything? You have to be at all places, at all times, at the same time. We cannot prove the extinction of any creature, and as we do more research, we find the evolutionists claims of extinction to be false. Just as we cannot prove the extinction of the coelacanth, and it was later found to be alive, the same may be true of the dinosaurs.





Many evolutionists and skeptics say that Noah could not possibly bring all those species of animals on to a boat that size. Before we can analyze that claim, we need to consider a couple of questions:

1) How big was the boat? The boat was 2/3rds the size of the Titanic. (300x50x30 egyptian cubits = 1.54 million cubic feet) Also taking into consideration that there were no lavish ballroom, dining halls, 1st-class accomodations, engine rooms, etc, huge numbers of animals could be stored in a boat that size.

2) How many animals were there? The Bible does not say Noah had to get two of every species. The evolutionists use the word species, and then illogically apply their modern definition back in time to the Bible, and call the Bible wrong.
(Read Evolution: A New Age Religion here at creationliberty.com for more details)

The Bible says bring two of every "kind," so the question is how many kinds of animals did Noah take on the ark?

God told Noah to take two of each kind, and seven of some kinds (Genesis 7:2-3), and we can also determine that this did not include insects or fish. (Genesis 7:22) Where exactly is the line between each kind? Scientists have not yet determined the kind barriers for many creatures, but some have estimated there are around 8,000-10,000 basic kinds of animals on the planet, which is much more reasonable for Noah and his family to accomplish.
(See John Woodmorappe, Noah's Ark: A Feasibility Study, published Institute for Creation Research, 1996, ISBN: 9780932766410)

The next logical question is that if Noah had all these animals on the ark, how would he have room for all these huge dinosaurs?

Noah did not have to bring the biggest animals he could find. He could bring babies and it would be MUCH easier. There are all sorts of reasons why bringing babies would be more logical:

1) They are smaller.
2) They weigh less.
3) They eat less.
4) They sleep more.
5) They are tougher.
6) They will live longer to produce more offspring.

Some evolutionists will claim that the dinosaurs would have eaten the other animals and the 8-man crew of the boat, however God does not allow the eating of meat until after the flood. (Genesis 9:3) Before the flood, everything was vegetarian.

Under these conditions, it is reasonable for Noah and his family to complete this task. However, for evolutionists, the story of Noah's flood MUST be false, otherwise all the water would destroy their geologic column, which is a foundational model for their presupposition.





After the creatures got off the ark and spread out around the world, there is now competition for land, food, and general survival. In terms of mankind, there are many reasons why the dinosaurs would be hunted and killed off:

1) Dinosaurs were a threat. As mankind takes up residence in an area, he does not want ferocious creatures living next to his home. If a lion moves in next door to a tribal village, the village hunters gather together and hunt the creature that threatens their home. Lions and bears are killed off for this reason, and certainly a dragon would also be killed off for this reason.

2) Dinosaurs were meat. There is a large amount of meat in one brachiosaurus. It would be beneficial to the whole community to slay a dragon for food.

3) Dinosaurs were sport. Fisherman are put in record books for catching the biggest fish, hunters mount their kill's head over their fireplace, and if you could slay a big dragon, people would tell stories about you around campfires for generations.

This does not mean all dinosaurs were hunted and killed to the point of extinction. It just means that we do not typically see them anymore because most of them have been hunted and killed. There is the possibility of dinosaurs still being alive today.

Most reptiles never stop growing their entire life. Give a reptile all the food and space it needs to grow, and it could get really big.

(See Associated Press, Jakarta, Indonesia, updated Jan 8, 2004, 10:0023 AM ET, retrieved from World News on msnbc.com, Jan 3, 2011)


(See Bernard Heuvelmans, On the Tracks of Unknown Animals, published Hill and Wang, 1965, p. 166; See also International Society of Cryptozoology, The ISC Newsletter, Vol. 7-11, published The Society, 1996)

"The officials of the Brazil-Columbia Boundary Commission... in 1933... killed a 98 ft. (30m) snake 2 feet in diameter with a machine gun on the banks of the Rio Negro... [It weighed] two tons. Four men had been unable to lift its head."
-Bernard Heuvelmans, On the Tracks of Unknown Animals, published Hill and Wang, 1965, p. 306

"[He] saw a black boa constrictor the size of two passenger buses slither by... a 130-foot long serpent with a diameter of about 15 feet..."

"There were five witnesses present, and the rest of the 300 villagers felt the effect of this thing as it dragged itself along and dived into the river Napo,"
(See Reuters News Service, "Monstrous Boa Report by Terrified Villagers," Aug 20, 1997; See also Fortean Times, Issues 102-106, John Brown Publishing, 1997, p. 18)
There are some big creatures out there that are rarely seen, and though modern evolutionists claim certain things do not exist, they cannot know with certainty. These threatening creatures are driven off by mankind, and they are forced to lived in places where mankind does not often travel.

Again, the word 'dinosaur' means "terrible lizard." Though many were killed off, some dinosaurs may have been lizards that lived for hundreds of years, and grew to be enormous. Dinosaurs are not getting as big as they used to be, and we cover more on that in our seminar "The Garden of Eden," available free here at creationliberty.com.





The Book of Job mentions a creature called Behemoth. Let's take a closer look at the six major descriptions given in the Bible about behemoth that will help us find out what kind of creature it is:

Behold now behemoth, which I made with thee; he eateth grass as an ox.
-Job 40:15

1) Job could see a behemoth.
God would not say, "Behold now behemoth," if Job could not behold behemoth.

2) Behemoth eats grass like an ox.
So this is obviously a land dwelling creature that eats like an ox.

Lo now, his strength is in his loins, and his force is in the navel of his belly.
-Job 40:16

3) Behemoth has a big belly.
Some Bible footnotes jump to conclusions and say this may be an elephant or hippopotamus.
(See Job 40:15, New International Version, International Bible Society, retrieved from Blue Letter Bible, 1996-2011, Jan 4, 2011)

Before drawing conclusions, let's read all the description:

He moveth his tail like a cedar: the sinews of his stones are wrapped together.
-Job 40:17

4) Behemoth has a massive tail, like a cedar tree.
These tails look less like a cedar tree and more like a twizzler.
What about this creature? A brachiosaurus fits the description so far.

Remember, the Bible TEXT is the Word of God, not the footnotes.

His bones are as strong pieces of brass; his bones are like bars of iron.
-Job 40:18

5) Behemoth has big, strong bones.

He lieth under the shady trees, in the covert of the reed, and fens.
-Job 40:21

reed: the straight stalk of any of various tall grasses growing in marshy places
fens: low land covered wholly or partially with water; boggy land; a marsh
(See 'reed' and 'fens', Random House Dictionary, Random House Inc, 2010; See also Collins English Dictionary, 10th Edition, William Collins Sons & Co, 2009)

6) Behemoth lives in swamp-like areas.
The Likouala is about 55,000 square miles of 85% unexplored territory. There are many very dangerous creatures in the jungle, including killer bees, crocodiles, and many harsh, uninhabitable conditions for mankind.
(See Herman A. Regusters, Mokele-mbembe: An Investigation Into Rumors Concerning A Strange Animal in the Rupublic of the Congo, published California Institute of Technology, 1982)

Considering the near impossibility to bring camera film and electronic equipment on expeditions due to the high humidity levels and extreme traveling conditions, it is no wonder why it remains unexplored, but some are attempting the trip into the unforgiving jungle to find a strange creature reported to live there.

Roy Mackel, an evolutionary biologist and professor of zoology, raised a quarter of a million dollars to go on an expedition into the Congo jungle to find a creature referred to by the surrounding inhabitants as, mokele-mbembe. He came back from that expedition, and wrote a book called: A Living Dinosaur? The Search for Mokele-Mbembe.

When the pygmies in those regions are asked to describe mokele-mbembe, they drew an outline in the sand of a brachiosaurus:
Mokele-mbembe means 'stopper of rivers'. Though the behemoth is not as large as it used to be, it can, according to the locals, get large enough to enter a small river and stop it from flowing.

"The white flowers... [f]ruit and leaves of the Malombo plant. This alleged food plant of the Mokele-mbembe has been described by French and German botanists and is widely distributed throughout the Likouala swamps."
-Roy P. Mackal, A Living Dinosaur?: In Search of Mokele-mbembe, published Brill Archive, 1987, p. 58, ISBN: 9789004085435

There are many accounts of people claiming to have seen mokele-mbembe in the Congo:

"Many members of the expedition had seen the creature and heart it making noise... Herman saw it. Kia saw it and they saw it on several occasions and they heard it making this tremendous roar... Many other members of the expedition, and this includes government officials from the Republic of the Congo, saw it and heart it. It's not just two people from Pasadena who have seen it. It's a number of people."
(From Associated Press Article; See also Herman A. Regusters, Mokele-mbembe: An Investigation Into Rumors Concerning a Strange Animal in the Rupublic of the Congo, published California Institute of Technology, 1982)

"Reports of strange giant creatures living in the Congo's rivers and swamps have circulated for centuries among the pygmies. Ancient pictographs from nearby areas depict an animal remarkably like the Mokele-Mbembe, the legendary long-necked dinosaur that is believed by the natives to live in the area around Lake Tele."
-Dr. Marc Miller, Far-Out Adventures: The Best of World Explorer Magazine, published Adventures Unlimited Press, 2001, p. 21, ISBN: 9780932813794

The Bible describes a creature such as the brachiosaurus, and there is some evidence to suggest they are still living in the Congo. They are not as big as they used to be, but many people, from pygmies to government officials, have gone on record and reported they have seen it. Just as evidence and sightings of Behemoth have been reported, there are also reports of other strange creatuers from around the world.





When evolutionists hear that someone has seen a creature resembling that of a dinosaur, the reports are immediately dismissed as a fake. While there are some fakes and hoaxes out there concerning sightings of strange creatures, that does not mean they are all hoaxes. Many sightings, by very intelligent and well-known people, have been reported.

Lockness Lake is about 24 miles long, 1.5 miles wide, and up to 900 feet deep depending on the location. It is very secluded, surrounded by mountain ranges on all sides. Prior to 1933, anyone wanting to visit this area had to climb over the mountain range, or row up-river about seven miles.

In 1933, a road was built going through the mountain to make the lake a tourist attraction. That same year, many sightings of a strange creature were reported.

"There were 52 separate sightings in 1933 alone by individuals or groups who were willing to go on record as having seen something big and unidentifiable in the loch."
-Alan Landsburg, In Search of Myths and Monsters, published Corgi, 1977, p. 52, ISBN: 9780552105392

Today, there are over 11,000 reported sightings of the lochness monster. It would be illogical to say that all 11,000 people (and the thousands more who did not go on report a sighting) over the past 80 years were all involved in an elaborate hoax.

So why, after so many people claiming they have seen this creature, do evolutionists fight against it? It's not because they are "skeptics" looking for the truth, but rather because of the danger it causes to the evolution theory. The people who have seen this creature report that it looks exactly like a plesiosaur dinosaur, which is claimed by evolutionist to have gone extinct anywhere from 70-200 million years ago. (It depends on who you're talking to, but it's all imaginary anyway so it doesn't matter.)

(See Kathryn V. Frederick Louv, Mysterious Creatures, Time-Life Books, 1988, ISBN: 9780809463329; See also Tim Dinsdale, Loch Ness Monster, 1961, p. 97, SBN: 7100-1279-9)

Sir Peter Scott, member of Parliament and founder of the World Wildlife Fund, and his wife, both reported that they have seen the creature at lochness lake. Why would reputable people like this go on record and say they have seen "Nessie?" Probably because they have seen it.
(See International Society of Cryptozoology, The ISC Newsletter, published The Society, 1989, Winter Vol. 8, No. 4)

"I had a splendid view of the object. In fact I almost struck it with my motorcycle. It had a long neck and large oval shaped eyes on top of a small head. The tail would be from five to six feet long and very powerful; the curious thing about it was that the end was rounded off: it did not come to a point. The total length of the animal would be 15 to 20 feet. Knowing something of natural history I can say that I have never seen anything in my life like the animal I saw. It looked like a hybrid. I jumped off my cycle and followed the animal, which had entered the loch with great speed. There was a huge splash and from the disturbance of the surface it had evidently made away before I reached the shore."
-Arthur Grant, quoted by William Gibbons, Missionaries and Monsters, 2nd Edition, Coachwhip Publications, 2006, p. 10, ISBN: 9781930585249; See also Peter Costello, In Search of Lake Monsters, Garnstone Press, 1974, p. 46, ISBN: 9780855114008


There have been many attempts to locate or photograph this creature, but the task is almost impossible with our current technology. The muddy water of Lockness Lake is nearly pitch black when after going down so many feet, and the bottom of the lake is wrinkled up like a raisen, with multiple caverns going up inside the mountain range. "Nessie" could hide in any wide number of places where we could never find her, but there have still been a few interesting photographs taken of this similar-looking creature.

(See Henry H. Bauer, The Enigma of Loch Ness: Making Sense of a Mystery, University of Illinois Press, 1986, p. 23, ISBN: 9780252012846)

(See Kathryn Walker, Mysteries of Water Monsters, Crabtree Publishing Company, 2008, p. 8, ISBN: 9780778741466; See also George M. Eberhart, Mysterious Creatures: A Guide to Cryptozoology, published ABC-CLIO, 2002, Vol. 1, p. 354, ISBN: 9781576072837)

(See Charles H. Hapgood, Mystery in Acambaro, Adventures Unlimited Press, 1999, p. 12, ISBN: 9780932813763; See also Richard Ellis, Monsters of the Sea, published Globe Pequot, 2006, p. 69, ISBN: 9781592289677)

Many evolutionists claim the creature they pulled on board the Zuiyo Maru was just a basking shark because when the protein was analyzed, it was 96% similar to a basking shark. However, there are some problems that evolutionists are ignoring to make this claim:

No one has seen plesiosaur protein to know what it is supposed to look like. Human and chimps have a 95% similarity in their DNA sequencing, but they are VERY different creatures. Snowcones and jellyfish are 98% similar in their water content, but that does not mean they are the same thing.
(Read The Incredible Edible DNA here at creationliberty.com for more details)
2) The fisherman on board who saw the creature said it was not a basking shark.
3) The marine biologist onboard the Zuiyo Maru said it was not a basking shark.

(See Bill Cooper, After the Flood: The Early Post-Flood History of Europe Traced Back to Noah, 1995, p. 140, ISBN: 9781874367406)

Is it a plesiosaur? I do not know. I was not there. However, this is not a situation where the evidence does not point to this being a plesiosaur, rather, it is a situation where the evolutionists need the evidence to fit their geologic column. According to the evolutionists, this creature CANNOT be a dinosaur because it would destroy their precious theory, and because of that, we can see clearly that evolution is a hindrance to real scientific investigation.

(Now on display in the Creation Evidences Museum, owned by Dr. Carl Baugh @ 3102 FM 205, Glen Rose, TX)

(See Randall Reinstedt, Shipwrecks and Sea Monsters of California’s Central Coast, Ghost Town Publications, 1975, p. 167, ISBN: 9780933818026)

"My examination of the monster was quite thorough... It had no teeth. Its head is large and its neck is 20 feet long. The body is weak and the tail is only three feet in length from the end of the backbone... with a bill like it possesses, it must have lived on herbage and undoubtable inhabited a swamp. I would call it a type of plesiosaurus."
-E.L. Wallace, President of the Natural History Society of British Columbia's 1925 eye-witness analyzation of the creature, quoted by Skin Diver Magazine, November, 1989

"Another witness, Judge W.R. Springer from Santa Cruz, felt the creature was from a prehistoric age. He added his observation: 'evidence of two short feet or flippers, and probably swam with its head high above the water.'"
-Skin Diver Magazine, quoting Judge W.R. Springer, November, 1989






I want to state Creation Liberty's position clearly: I don't know if there are dinosaurs still alive or not, because I have not personally seen one, but to say "no human has ever seen a live dinosaur" is such an arrogant stretch of imagination.

If these people all claim to have seen a dinosaur-like creature, why is that so hard to believe? Because it disrupts a preconceived evolution theory. Not only is evolution a very illogical and dangerous religion, but keep in mind, it's a now multi-billion dollar tax-supported industry. If a dinosaur was found to be alive today, it would force the rewriting of every book in the business, and no one wants to forfeit their large paychecks and fame status.

For the love of money is the root of all evil:
-1 Timothy 6:10

If there are dinosaurs (aka dragons) still alive today, that is absolute empirical scientific evidence that man and dinosaur have indeed always lived together, and that agrees perfectly with the Bible. However, there are many atheists and evolutionists that are at war against God's Word. It is for that reason that the few examples in this article, among thousands of others, are being shut down quickly by the evolutionary establishment.

If you enjoyed this article, please make an effort to send the link to your friends and family, so that they can also see through the lies of the evolutionary religion.





If you would like to get more information on this topic, here are some suggested materials to help you get started:

Dinosaurs and the Bible, CLE Seminar, Christopher J.E. Johnson
(Watch free here at creationliberty.com)

Dinosaurs and Creation, Donald B. DeYoung
Baker Books, 2000, ISBN: 9780912986197 (Uses NIV for reference, but still has a lot of a good material.)

Mokele-Mbembe: Mystery Beast of the Congo Basin, William J. Gibbons
CoachwhipBooks.com, 2010, ISBN: 9781616460105

CLE Only

Google+ Facebook
Facebook Facebook