Well let's see. It doesn't have four spikes on it now does it?
No. Can you admit it is not a rhino tail?
And while you're at it how about you tell me which dinosaurs are carved above and below the "stegosaur".
If you believed every drawing you should believe unicorns, bunyups and phoenixes existed too.
Each relief or drawing is taken on a case by case basis. The relief in question may not have leaves on its back, but the person carving it may have been drawing what was actually on the animal. It might be leaves, too, but the artist was talented enough to make that less likely. Regardless, you can admit that, no?
If you think an ambiguous carving tips the scale "ever so slightly" in the YEC position, feathered dinosaurs and the sheer number of layers of rock showing long time periods should break the scale in favor of old earth and evolution.
There, you see? Feathered dinos are evidence for common descent. It's weak evidence, but it's there.
How you consider rock layers as evidence for long ages is mind boggling. It's clear evidence for short ages (even only weak evidence if you so choose) and only someone that won't look at the evidence could believe otherwise.
You seem to have some kind of idea that there SHOULD be evidence for YEC. Have you ever considered the fact that if you're wrong, every piece of "evidence" you're holding up is simply a misunderstanding?
Sure I could be wrong. But then again, so could you be. However, if we apply the same standard of how convincing the evidence is for each side of the argument, the YEC side wins by a great deal.
The only way it wouldn't be this way is if you apply a different standard of how convincing the evidence is based on what you want to believe. That's why I'm right and you are wrong. I apply the same standard to both sides, while you apply one standard for feathers on dinos, while applying a different standard for what makes a rhino tail on a relief.
I was once a YEC when I was younger and even then I struggled with the obvious inconsistencies of YEC. If every creature was once alive at the same time, why aren't they buried together in every possible combination?
I was once an old earth creationist when I was younger. But when I got older and wiser I looked at the evidence and allowed it to go where it lead. Which would lead one, which it did me, to switch to YEC.
And your comment about "why aren't they buried together in every possible combination?" simply exposes your ignorance about what flood geologists say about the flood. That's called "not looking at both sides." This, again, highlights why I give points to the common descent side of the debate... because unlike you I look at both sides.
If YEC were true you shouldn't have to find a handful of human/dinosaur tracks, you'd find dinosaurs and rhinos, elephants, deer, dimetrodon, giant arthropods, sabretooth cats, horses and everything else mixed together in a wonderful jumble.
Yeah, like the Ashley Phosphate beds. And don't forget, anyone that finds OOParts will either lose their career or be discredited because they don't have the relevant career to lose.
But we don't find that. Instead there's a clear pattern, showing descent. And that pattern is confirmed by DNA, anatomy, biogeography, continental drift etc.
Except that it shows there is no pattern of common descent when we compare DNA to homology, biogeography, and geography that shows continental drift is wildly different than common descent needs to be even a hypothesis.
You mean this ridiculous carving?
Really, that's what you want to hang your hat on?
:chuckle:
It's not what I hang my hat on, but at least it is evidence of a real human foot print with a real dino foot print. Does a CT scan show compressed mud in the correct places for a human track or not?
The level of ridiculousness . . . You accept something so obviously fake and reject the mountains of fossil evidence we have. It's actually quite sad.
Here's a discussion of the carvings
Maybe you should tell us which fossils you think are fake. :chuckle:
The level of ridiculousness you accept for something so obviously not a rhino is actually quite sad.
The discussion didn't even address the issues raised by the CT scans. This is what I'm talking about. You should admit there is evidence for YEC, weak as you might consider it, but you can't even do that because you have to keep the echo chamber of your belief in common descent air tight so as to not destroy its delicate nature.
