Beginning at a very early age we are taught that we as humans evolved from apes. We are also taught that dinosaurs roamed the earth before us millions of years ago. While I have already addressed the many issues concerning the theory of evolution in my previous article "Evolution Exposed...," there is much to be revealed about dinosaurs as well. You probably imagine dinosaurs as being huge intelligent creatures that prey on every living thing that crosses their path. Movies such as Jurassic Park help to portray this image of dinosaurs very cunningly. What you might not know is that many of these depictions you see, including the ones in our text books, are very deceiving. There is much that scientists have learned about dinosaurs through their fossil record, but there is also much that they still do not know. Instead of emphasizing actual facts and informing us of what they believe might have happened, they present information to us in a biased misleading manner reporting their assumptions to be facts. Fortunately, there are enough scholars in the field practicing and writing books that we can learn what the majority of scientists do not openly tell us. Contrary to what you may have been told, some of the most low profile discoveries report that there actually exists archaeological evidence that dinosaurs and humans lived at the same time. You don't think so? Hopefully by the time you finish reading this article you'll be pleased to have learned information that you were never told existed.
What do scientists really know about dinosaurs?
This is a very tricky question that many assume is simple and straightforward, but this is not the case at all. Through the study of fossils paleontologist are able to discover much about dinosaurs such as how large they were, what was their stance, which ones were carnivores, herbivores or omnivores, and even how they reproduced. But there are questions that paleontologists aren't able to answer. Questions such as how many roamed the earth, how they became extinct, how fast they could run, what kind of habitat they lived in, and one of the most important questions to our perception of dinosaurs, were they warm blooded or cold blooded? These are all important questions that can help bring understanding to how we visualize dinosaurs and whether they could have co-existed with humans. For example, as quoted by scientists Thomas Svarney and Patricia Barnes-Svarney in their book The Handy Dinosaur Answer Book "if dinosaurs were cold blooded (similar to today's reptiles) they were probably mostly sluggish, with only occasional burst[s] of quickness. They probably would not have been very smart creatures… moving only to obtain more food, similar to modern crocodiles…If dinosaurs were warm blooded (similar to today's mammals) they were probably active, social animals. They would have been quick, alert, and intelligent." As you can see the two descriptions are very different. A person can imagine themselves outwitting and escaping the grasp of a crocodile, but to be in the grasp of a lion without a sufficient weapon is a much worse scenario. Yet, the idea is embedded in our minds by various sources that we could never stand a chance living at the same time as dinosaurs. Why is this when scientists don't know the answers to extremely important questions concerning dinosaurs' day-to-day life.
Wouldn't dinosaurs have eaten people if they lived together?
Of course there is obviously no fossil records that could address this matter, but I am sure that many would agree with me when I say yes. However, just because they possess the capability to eat humans doesn't mean that humans would have been their preferred prey. For example, lions, tigers, crocodiles, sharks, and snakes have all be documented as attacking and consuming humans, but are humans their preferred prey? No. More than likely humans have to enter one of these animals' domains to be attacked. If we avoid there domains then the chances we will be attacked are minimized. As stated earlier, scientists don't know the movement frequency, running speeds, or dinosaur habitats. They can try to infer an idea of their intelligence by comparing the size of their brain case to the size of their bodies, but they still would be absolutely no comparison to human interllect. In fact, if dinosaurs lived today they would be easily outwitted by a small mammal.
Where is the evidence that dinosaurs and humans co-existed?
What do scientists really know about dinosaurs?
This is a very tricky question that many assume is simple and straightforward, but this is not the case at all. Through the study of fossils paleontologist are able to discover much about dinosaurs such as how large they were, what was their stance, which ones were carnivores, herbivores or omnivores, and even how they reproduced. But there are questions that paleontologists aren't able to answer. Questions such as how many roamed the earth, how they became extinct, how fast they could run, what kind of habitat they lived in, and one of the most important questions to our perception of dinosaurs, were they warm blooded or cold blooded? These are all important questions that can help bring understanding to how we visualize dinosaurs and whether they could have co-existed with humans. For example, as quoted by scientists Thomas Svarney and Patricia Barnes-Svarney in their book The Handy Dinosaur Answer Book "if dinosaurs were cold blooded (similar to today's reptiles) they were probably mostly sluggish, with only occasional burst[s] of quickness. They probably would not have been very smart creatures… moving only to obtain more food, similar to modern crocodiles…If dinosaurs were warm blooded (similar to today's mammals) they were probably active, social animals. They would have been quick, alert, and intelligent." As you can see the two descriptions are very different. A person can imagine themselves outwitting and escaping the grasp of a crocodile, but to be in the grasp of a lion without a sufficient weapon is a much worse scenario. Yet, the idea is embedded in our minds by various sources that we could never stand a chance living at the same time as dinosaurs. Why is this when scientists don't know the answers to extremely important questions concerning dinosaurs' day-to-day life.
Wouldn't dinosaurs have eaten people if they lived together?
Of course there is obviously no fossil records that could address this matter, but I am sure that many would agree with me when I say yes. However, just because they possess the capability to eat humans doesn't mean that humans would have been their preferred prey. For example, lions, tigers, crocodiles, sharks, and snakes have all be documented as attacking and consuming humans, but are humans their preferred prey? No. More than likely humans have to enter one of these animals' domains to be attacked. If we avoid there domains then the chances we will be attacked are minimized. As stated earlier, scientists don't know the movement frequency, running speeds, or dinosaur habitats. They can try to infer an idea of their intelligence by comparing the size of their brain case to the size of their bodies, but they still would be absolutely no comparison to human interllect. In fact, if dinosaurs lived today they would be easily outwitted by a small mammal.
Where is the evidence that dinosaurs and humans co-existed?
Next, you might want to visit The Natural History Museum in Lima, Peru. Here you'll discover ancient ceremonial burial stones that were found in ancient Peruvian Tombs. One of the over 1100 stones that were discovered by Dr. Javier Cabrera in the 1960's clearly depicts a Triceratops with a man riding on it's back (keep in mind Triceratops were plant eaters). Along with Triceratops, other stones depict Sauropods, and even T-Rex looking creatures attacking men. Note that these depictions of dinosaurs on the Inca Burial Stone and the Cambodian temple are both of living dinosaurs. They do not portray the image of skeletons which would probably be the case if they had not seen real dinosaurs.
If you were to take a trip to the jungles of Angkor, Cambodia what you will find might amaze you. There is an ancient temple there that is dated to the 12th century and it is decorated with beautiful detailed sculptures that are embedded into the building's architecture. You will notice that some of the sculpting you see depicts many animals that you can still see today such as monkeys, deer, swan, and buffalo. Along with these animals you will probably be surprised to see a depiction of a Stegosaurus (an armored dinosaur distinguished by its back plates and tail spikes) which is said by scientists to have lived approximately 140 million years ago. How is it that the ancient people who built this temple in the 12th century know what a Stegosaurus looked like? The first nearly complete dinosaur skeleton wasn't discovered until 1858 by William Parker Foulke in Haddonfield, New Jersey. By these detailed carvings it is obvious that they had seen the Stegosaurus alive along with the other animals they depicted in their building's architecture.
The last place on the list that you'll want to visit is Laetoli in Tanzania. This site does not necessarily prove that dinosaurs and humans co-existed according to scientific standards, but it does illustrate the bias thinking that scientist have in regards to how long ago humans should be present in the fossil record. Because of that this site is much more controversial than the last two illustrations. The site is famous for it's footprint trail that is dated to approximately 3.5 million years ago. What is so the controversial about the trail is that the scientific community admits that the tracks look to have been made by humans, but human footprints can't be dated so far back. Consequently, the footprints are credited to the Australopithecus (an ancient ape claimed to be human-like). It gets more interesting because some scientist have openly said that even if the Australopithecus were bipedal (walked upright) it still would not have walked the same as humans. Unfortunately, this isn't the first time prehistoric footprints have been credited to an ape instead of the much more logical human. In fact, footprints aren't the only fossilzed evidence that has been stripped of human origin because humans are not suppose to have lived so long ago. An elbow bone called KP 271 dated about 4.5 million years old is also cast out as being human for the same reason. What is so awkward about this particular instance is that even anthropologist William Howells, along with the support of Bryan Patterson (Howell's assistant who discovered the bone), came public after evaluating the bone in 1981 and said "We suggested that it might represent Australopithecus because at that time allocation to Homo seemed preposterous, although it would be the correct one without the time element." Does that sound like a rational conclusion? Unfortunately, these discoveries are just a few examples that demonstrate the closed minded thinking that scientists have come accustomed to when investigating the prehistoric past regarding humans. There are more that I don't have the space to address.
Conclusion
It is not my intention to discredit everything that scientists have been able to do for humanity regarding information and technology. We would not be where we are without them. What I am trying to do is merely help people realize that even when evidence is found that support humans living in the same timeframe as dinosaurs, if the discovery conflicts with the evolutionary era then it will either be called a hoax, or manipulated to fit an explanation that coincides with evolution. Because of this the chances are you won't find a consensus in the scientific community that agrees that humans and dinosaurs lived at the same time. That would be a catastrophic embarrassment to scientists and an overwhelming amount of information would have to be re-evaluated. But at least you know now that there Is evidence that dinosaurs and humans co-existed.
It is not my intention to discredit everything that scientists have been able to do for humanity regarding information and technology. We would not be where we are without them. What I am trying to do is merely help people realize that even when evidence is found that support humans living in the same timeframe as dinosaurs, if the discovery conflicts with the evolutionary era then it will either be called a hoax, or manipulated to fit an explanation that coincides with evolution. Because of this the chances are you won't find a consensus in the scientific community that agrees that humans and dinosaurs lived at the same time. That would be a catastrophic embarrassment to scientists and an overwhelming amount of information would have to be re-evaluated. But at least you know now that there Is evidence that dinosaurs and humans co-existed.
Stegosaurus
Triceratops
Laetoli Footprints