Conservapedia - An encyclopedia you can trust

my aunt believed they were too big to fit on the Ark.

Creationists cite a number of reasons to believe that dinosaurs have existed until relatively recent times, and perhaps still survive.

the construction of this sentence is amazing

gods pull dick moves all the time if holy books are to be believed -- "why are you hitting yourself? why are you hitting yourself?" --"that dude over there said your mom's a hooker" -- "does this halo make my ass look fat? ... HOW DARE YOU SAY I'M FAT, I WILL SMITE THEE WITH GREAT ANGER" etc.

gods pull dick moves all the time if holy books are to be believed -

LOL Exodus 4:24-26

More of a proverbs 1:26 gal myself.

on principle, would fully hit on somebody who said that to me at a bar

conservapedia should really put dinosaurs in the conservative bible to clear up any ambiguities.

And how blessed are the dinosaurs, for they shall be called some cool-ass names like "T Rex"

Egypt getting a plague of oviraptors would be pretty fucking bitchin'.

http://thedinosaurpark.com/images/S970505.jpg

I mean how awesome would Heston v these guys be?

was going to do a "best dinosaur" poll but holy hell are there a lot of them

Deuteronomy 14:4 These are the beasts which ye shall eat: the stegosaurus, the sheep, and the rhamphoryncus.

This revisionist bible is delicious.

And God sent His only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth on Him should have life everlasting, and not be eaten by dinosaurs.

gods pull dick moves all the time if holy books are to be believed -- "why are you hitting yourself? why are you hitting yourself?"

haha this is otm.

"hey guess what...you have to kill your only child to make me happy!! ....lol jk"

You just summed up Kierkegaard.

GIS for "rhamphoryncus" not what expected

PSALM 67 (original)

God be merciful unto us and bless us
And cause his face to shine upon us
That thy way may be known upon Earth
They saving health among all nations
Let the people praise thee, o God
Let all the people praise thee
O let the nations be glad and sing for joy
For thou shalt judge the people righteously
And govern the nations upon the Earth
Let the people praise thee, o God
Let all the people praise thee
Than shall the Earth yield her increase
And God, even our own God, shall bless us
God shall bless us
And all the ends of the Earth shall fear the coming dinosaur horde

Hahaha blonde longhair IS rhamphoryncus.

yeesss... that might not have been the right spelling.
anyway, http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Raptor%20Jesus

Dinosaur bible is like my favorite thing of all time today

And the earth was void, and without form, except for all the dinosaurs running around fucking shit up

TS: dinosaur Bible vs dinosaur Shakespeare

Serious question spurred by a silly thread: is there a common explanation that explains the prehistoric-to-classical era drawings of humans with dinosaur-like creatures? It seems unlikely that people would stumble upon a full fossil set ... but I don't know anything about anything.

Or, maybe Dinotopia is/was real?

Jesus leaves the ninety-and-nine anklyodons to go after the one.

Serious question spurred by a silly thread: is there a common explanation that explains the prehistoric-to-classical era drawings of humans with dinosaur-like creatures?

do you mean cave paintings?

http://i36.tinypic.com/a0lc2r.jpg

I will take any excuse to post this picture. The dinosaur just seems so content in the loving arms of the Lord. (Or else he is lulling Jesus in before making his attack.)

PSALM 23 of the Dinosaur Bible:

The LORD is my shepherd; I shall not want.
He maketh me to rend flesh in green pastures: he leadeth me beside the still waters.
He restoreth my soul: he leadeth me in the paths of savagery for his name's sake.
Yea, though I walk through the valley of the shadow of death, I will fear no evil: for thou art with me; thy rod and thy staff they comfort me.
Thou preparest a table before me of mine enemies: thou anointest my hide with oil; my fangs runneth red.
Surely wailing and screams shall follow me all the days of my life: and I will munch on the servants of the LORD for ever.

I think I'm gonna make that my fb pic xp

do you mean cave paintings?

Well ... I have seen a few. The two that are clearest in my memory are a pot or vase with a brontosaurus-like creature from Mesopotamian and a statue of a small t-rex-like creature from the Inca empire. I believe I saw both in National Geographic.

I found the statue:

http://www.genesispark.com/genpark/ancient/graphic/twanakusm.jpg

I want one.

My hypothesis is: humans have imaginations.

that's a burro

They were dragons, not dinosaurs. Dragons didn't go extinct till the 18th C.

The LORD is my shepherd; I shall not want.
He maketh me to rend flesh in green pastures: he leadeth me beside the still waters.
He restoreth my soul: he leadeth me in the paths of savagery for his name's sake.
Yea, though I walk through the valley of the shadow of death, I will fear no evil: for thou art with me; thy rod and thy staff they comfort me.
Thou preparest a table before me of mine enemies: thou anointest my hide with oil; my fangs runneth red.
Surely wailing and screams shall follow me all the days of my life: and I will munch on the servants of the LORD for ever.

this is fucking A+ work btw

Dinosaur bible is like my favorite thing of all time today

new mountain goats record needs rerecording to take dinosaur bible into account

Okay. Apparently this stuff was a hoax:

There are reports of engraved stones from the area going back as early as the sixteenth century; however, the particular stones in question were "discovered" in the 1960s, when one Dr Cabrera brought them to public notice after he had bought thousands of the engraved stones from a farmer called Basilo Uschuya.
Arrested for selling antiquities, Uschuya confessed to faking the stones. On the one hand, it may be argued that if he had maintained that they were genuine, he'd have gone to prison. On the other hand, he must have done something to persuade the police that the artifacts were not genuine: it would be interesting to know what. Nor would fear of arrest explain why he should give an interview to a newspaper (Mundial, No. 6, January 17) in which he and his wife tell how they faked the stones using comic books, school books, and magazines as sources for their pictures, and aged them by leaving them in a chicken coop.

The stones have no archaeological provenance at all. They are supposed to have been found in a cave, but the location of the cave remains a secret. Offers by archaeologists to be taken there blindfolded have been rejected.

It is not possible to date the stones directly; nor is it possible to date them by studying the site where they were supposedly found, because, as noted, this is a secret. It is, however, possible to put a date on the clay figurines which have been produced along with the stones. Erich von Daniken sent one to the University of Zurich for dating and they reported that the figurine was modern. His colleague Johannes Fiebag sent two other samples to the University of Weimar who reported that the samples were “relatively young” and still contained water.

http://skepticwiki.org/index.php/Ica_stones

This means it's only a matter of time until Dan Akroyd bottles luxury vodka into replicas of them.

lol

The stones have no archaeological provenance at all. They are supposed to have been found in a cave, but the location of the cave remains a secret.

Why? That skepticwiki article has no cites whatsoever.

The stones have no archaeological provenance at all. They are supposed to have been found in a cave, but the location of the cave remains a secret.

new rolling stones backstory

Bwaha.

Anyway it wasnt a cave, it was a cavern.

Wait wrong dinosaurs.

thank you Abbott for the new name!

this conservapedia thing seems SKETCHY if you ask me

an investigation into the mystery of the LORD'S drunken mania:

Exodus 4:24-26: "And it came to pass on
the way, at the encampment, that the LORD met him and sought to
kill him. Then Zipporah took a sharp stone and cut off the fore-
skin of her son and cast it at Moses' feet, and said, 'Surely you
are a husband of blood to me!' So He let him go. Then she said,
'You are a husband of blood'--because of the circumcision."

PRELIMINARY ISSUES
Several questions come to mind when one reads these verses.
1. This passage seems to be an intrusion into the flow of the
chapter. It is abrupt as well as cryptic and difficult. Though these
verses form a unit, the question remains, What is the purpose of
this pericope?
2. The passage is marked by a lack of clear antecedents for
some of its pronouns or named objects for some of its verbs. Fur-
ther, many translations have inserted the name "Moses" in verse
25 where the Hebrew has only "his." Who did what to whom?
3. More significantly, the passage prompts the question,
Why? What possibly could have prompted the rage of Yahweh that
would have caused Him to want to kill Moses? This seems partic-
ularly inappropriate, since the initial "misunderstanding" be-
tween God and Moses had been settled (Exod. 4:1-17).
4. Why does the passage center on what for modern readers
are the distasteful and embarrassing subjects of circumcision,
blood, and foreskins?
5. What was behind Zipporah's action? How did she know
what to do? Why did Moses not act? After she cut off the foreskin of her son, whom did she touch with it, what did she touch with it, and why did she need to touch anything with it?
6. What is the meaning of Zipporah's words, "You are a
husband of blood to me," and to whom are they addressed?
7. What is the point of this passage?

Possible explanation: THE BIBLE IS A SHAM

Oh my god. Some of these questions could be answered if these people knew some scholarship about the Bible. EVEN RELIGIOUS/THEOLOGICAL SCHOLARSHIP.

(For instance, an entire set of Talmudic laws are derived from this passage in the last part of the first chapter of Mesechet Kedushim.)

oh my god, Andy Schlafly sounds like a muppet

http://www.ordinary-gentlemen.com/2009/12/conservatives-as-self-parodies/?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter