February 2, 2022

Dinosauria Delusion

The truth is stranger than fiction and more remarkable than science fiction.

Guest Post by David P. Wozney

Dinosaurs: Science or Science Fiction?


When children go to a dinosaur museum, are the displays they see displays of science or displays of art and science fiction? Are we being deceived and brainwashed at an early age into believing a dinosaur myth? Deep probing questions need to be asked of the entire dinosaur business.

This article will discuss the possibility that there may have been an ongoing effort since the earliest dinosaur "discoveries" to plant, mix and match bones of various animals, such as crocodiles, alligators, iguanas, giraffes, elephants, cattle, kangaroos, ostriches, emus, dolphins, whales, rhinoceroses, etc. to construct and create a new man-made concept prehistoric animal called the dinosaur. This article does not claim that "dinosaurs never existed" or that "scientists just made up dinosaurs". Note the use of the words "possible", "possibly", "possibility", "may", and "could". There is an important difference, between claiming something is true, and claiming something is possible.

Where bones from existing animals are not satisfactory for deception purposes, plaster substitutes may be manufactured and used. Some material similar or superior to plasticine clay or plaster of Paris would be suitable. Moulds may also be employed. A 144-page book titled "Make Your Own Dinosaur Out of Chicken Bones” provides step-by-step instructions complete with detailed drawings and diagrams.

What would be the motivation for such a deceptive endeavour? Obvious motivations include trying to prove evolution, trying to disprove or cast doubt on the Christian Bible and the existence of the Christian God, and trying to disprove the “young-earth theory”. Yes, there are major political and religious ramifications.

The dinosaur concept could imply that if God exists, he may have tinkered with his idea of dinosaurs for a while, then perhaps discarded or became tired of this creation and then went on to create man. The presented dinosaur historical timeline could suggest an imperfect God who came up with the idea of man as an afterthought, thus demoting the biblical idea that God created man in His own image. Dinosaurs are not mentioned in the Hebrew Bible.

Highly rewarding financial and economic benefits to museums, educational and research organisations, university departments of palaeontology, discoverers and owners of dinosaur bones, and the book, television, movie and media industries may cause sufficient motivation for ridiculing of open questioning and for suppression of honest investigation.

Dinosaur Discoveries

Early Dinosaur Discoveries in North America provides revealing information about the first discoveries:

"The class Dinosauria was originally defined by Sir Richard Owen in 1842, in a two-hour speech that reportedly held the audience captivated. The original dinosaurs of this new group were Megalosaurus, Iguanodon and Hylaeosaurus. However, each of these animals was known only from fragmentary specimens. It wasn't until the discoveries of dinosaurs in North America in the mid-19th century that people began to get a clearer picture of what dinosaurs looked like."

"It is generally accepted that the first discovery of dinosaur remains in North America was made in 1854 by Ferdinand Vandiveer Hayden during his exploration of the upper Missouri River."

"Near the confluence of the Judith and Missouri Rivers (shown above) Hayden's party recovered a small collection of isolated teeth which were later described by the Philadelphia palaeontologist Joseph Leidy in 1856, in the Proceedings of the Academy of Natural Sciences of Philadelphia."

So, dinosaurs were described in 1842 before the discoveries in 1854 that were required to give a clear picture of what dinosaurs looked like! Were discoveries made or constructed to fit the descriptions?

"Dinosaur skeletons were found for the first time in abundance in the Garden Park area of Colorado and at Como Bluff, Wyoming, in the late 1870s. These specimens initiated the First Great Dinosaur Rush in North America, driven largely by the efforts of a Philadelphia palaeontologist, Edward Drinker Cope (on the left), and Othniel Marsh (on the right), a palaeontologist from Yale University."

"These two men started as friends but became bitter rivals in a feud of legendary proportions. The stories surrounding these two include tales of armed field parties, spies, and intercepting shipments of fossils intended for the other."

Why were fossils being shipped to the discoverers and from whom? Are Cope and Marsh credited with "discoveries" that were not their own personal "discoveries"? If so, exactly who were really the "discoverers" and how trustworthy are they? 

Wayne Grady explains in his book The Dinosaur Project: 

"From Cope, Sternberg had learned cutthroat bone hunting. Cope and his arch-rival, Othniel Charles Marsh, professor of palaeontology at Yale University, had been engaged in what has been called 'the bone wars' throughout the 1870s and 1880s. It was a fierce scientific rivalry that entailed some of the most underhanded shenanigans in the history of science, but it also amassed stupendous collections of fossils. 

The Second Great Dinosaur Rush took place in the badlands of the Red Deer River in southern Alberta. Dinosaur remains had been known from this region as early as 1884 but it wasn't until 1910 that this region became an active collecting area. It was here that the second great collecting rivalry took place between Barnum Brown of the American Museum of Natural History in New York and C. H. Sternberg of the Geological Survey of Canada."

Why should various claims of people, who engaged in "some of the most underhanded shenanigans in the history of science", be believed?

Why were there no discoveries by native Americans in all the years previous when they roamed the American continents? There is no belief in dinosaurs in the native American religion or tradition.

For that matter, why were there no discoveries prior to the nineteenth century in any part of the world? 

According to the World Book Encyclopedia, "before the 1800s, no one ever knew that dinosaurs ever existed. During the late 1800s and early 1900s, large deposits of dinosaur remains were discovered in western North America, Europe, Asia, and Africa. Dinosaur deposits also lie in Belgium, Mongolia, Tanzania, West Germany, and many other parts of the world."

Why has man suddenly made all these discoveries? The land areas of Belgium, Mongolia, Tanzania, western Germany (and the Americas as well) were inhabited and very well explored for thousands of years and there were no discoveries until the nineteenth century. Why?

At Dinosauria: Fossil Record we learn that "The late 1800s were the 'golden age' of dinosaur palaeontology when many animals that you might be familiar with were discovered and named.

Today we seem to be in another 'dinosaur renaissance', with new information accumulating rapidly". At The Meaning of the Hadrosaurus Find: Proof That Dinosaurs Were Real we learn that people were allegedly becoming enlightened by the new discoveries. The impression that I receive is that people were possibly being deceived and that the discoveries were possibly "being made" as an effort to try to discredit the Bible.

The Meaning of the Hadrosaurus Find: Proof That Dinosaurs Were Real states:

"The First Real Proof of Dinosaur Existence Eight years after this reference book was published the first comprehensive skeletal form of a real dinosaur—Hadrosaurus foulkii —was unearthed in Haddonfield, New Jersey. Taller than a house, it had the pelvic structure of a bird, the tail of a lizard and, incredibly, it walked upright on two legs, foraging with arm-like forelimbs."

Were the bones of a bird and lizard and other animals used in the discovery? The presented "Haddonfield skeleton" did not prove "dinosaurs" ever were real living creatures.

Discoverers And Nature Of Discoveries

Most people have handled animal bones and would be able to notice the higher density and different colour or texture of most so-called fossilised bones. However, discoveries and excavations most typically seem not to be made by disinterested people, such as farmers, ranchers, hikers, outdoor recreationists, building construction industry basement excavators, pipeline trench diggers, and mining industry personnel but rather by people with vested interests, such as palaeontologists, scientists, university professors, and museum organisation personnel who were intentionally looking for dinosaur bones or who have studied dinosaurs previously. 

Do dinosaur "professionals", with vested interests, have some kind of well-kept secret about knowing where to search, that dinosaur "amateurs", without vested interests, are unable to figure out? The finds are often made during special dinosaur-bone hunting trips and expeditions by these people to far-away regions already inhabited and explored. This seems highly implausible.

More believable is the case of the discovery of the first original Dead Sea scrolls in 1947, which were unintentionally discovered by a child, and which were all published by 1955. In some cases of discoveries of dinosaur bones by people, who do not work in a job related to dinosaurs, it was suggested to them by some dinosaur "professional" to look or dig in a certain area. 

In other cases, the "government" had considerable foreknowledge that dinosaur "amateurs" would be digging in a certain area. Also very interesting to note are special areas set aside and designated as dinosaur parks for which amateur dinosaur hunters are required to first obtain a dinosaur hunting license.

Take a look at Dilophosgurus Discovered and the discovery of Haddonfield's Dinosaur for some idea as to how this may have occurred.

Also, a multitude of bones and dinosaurs are strangely found in the same place, suggesting the possible planting of bones. The following three paragraphs are from The Seizure of Sue the T. rex.

"The Larsons are still working this find, which they called the Ruth Mason Quarry. The find contained the remains of at least two thousand beasts. There is only speculation as to the reason so many bones were in one place. The river system could have transported the bones a few at a time to a sandy coast at the edge of a receding Cretaceous sea. Or a great storm could have trapped and drowned a herd on a spit of land. A preponderance of the fossils was of Emontosaurus annectens a duckbilled dinosaur that migrated in flocks. Various carnivores teeth, including that of T. rex, were also found at the site, which could simply mean that these beasts were scavenging the remains. 'We're only guessing', said Pete."

"In July 1990, Maurice Williams, who had a ranch nearby, came by the quarry. He was fascinated by work and offered to let the palaeontologists search for fossils on his land. Pete told him he appreciated the offer and would do so at the earliest opportunity. On the morning of August 12, the team suffered a flat tire. Their spare was low and the pump was broken. Most of the crew decided to take the tires to Faith in another vehicle for repair. Susan Hendrickson, a Seattle archaeologist and amateur palaeontologist who was working with BHIGR that summer, decided to take a hike through Williams' land instead."

"She returned to the quarry several hours later finding the team back at work with three pieces of vertebrae. Pete thought immediately. Tyrannosaurus. The team saddled up and drove to the site she'd discovered, a 60-foot sandstone cliff jutting out of the prairie. At about eye level, a huge femur (thigh bone) protruded, along with several other bones. Pete immediately sought out Williams, who said. I've ridden by that place a hundred times. Never saw a thing."

It is unusually coincidental that a "commercial fossil collecting firm" would be the organisation to make the dinosaur find. Why was rancher Williams unable to find "Sue" after all his years of ranching? Don't you find this unusual? The article T-Rex bones on sale for a cool $32 million indicates that the business of being a "commercial fossil collecting firm" is potentially very lucrative!

People who work for museums often seem to be the ones associated with the really prolific finds:

A discovery in a remote area of Argentina is described: "In November 1997, Dr Luis Chiappe and Dr Lowell Dingus went to Patagonia with an expedition team and discovered a nesting site that contained thousands of dinosaur eggs, including fossilised embryos and fossilised skin. The concentration of eggs was so intense and rich that, in an area of roughly 100 yards by 200 yards, we counted about 195 clusters of eggs."

Compton's Encyclopedia lists some prominent palaeontologists and their prolific discoveries:

"Ameghino, Florentino (1854-1911) Argentinian palaeontologist who described 6,000 fossil species excavated by his brother, Carlos, in Argentina, thereby establishing Argentina's reputation as a fossil-rich area. Briefly the head of palaeontology at La Plata Museum, where much of his collection is displayed.

Douglass, Earl (1862-1931) American dinosaur hunter who, in Utah in 1909, found the fossil-rich beds now forming Dinosaur National Monument. Over his entire career, sent 350 tons of excavated dinosaur bones to the Carnegie Museum of Natural History, Pittsburgh."

Finds of huge quantities of fossilised bones in one area, or by one or few people, goes against the laws of natural probability and suggests a possible concentrated planting effort. Floods, volcanic eruptions, and landslides scatter bones far and wide. Dinosaurs in herds, or grouped together, would not have all died at the same place unless there was some kind of extremely rare and unusual event such as a sudden mass extinction. 

The number of dinosaurs, that would have been in herds or grouped together at the time of some kind of sudden mass extinction event, would have been very tiny relative to all the dinosaurs that are alleged to have ever lived. Dinosaurs “were the dominant terrestrial vertebrates for over 160 million years,” according to Wikipedia, and the lifespans of individual dinosaurs are estimated to have been “about 75 to 300 years”, according to Walking With Dinosaurs.

The number of dinosaur fossils extracted from the Cleveland-Lloyd Dinosaur Quarry is listed in detail:

"More than 30 complete skeletons, 12,000 individual bones and several dinosaur eggs have come from this prolific fossil bed."

"Over the years, bones have been taken from the quarry representing at least 70 different animals and 14 species. Cast and original skeletons assembled from these bones are on display in over 60 museums worldwide."

"About 147 million years ago this area was a shallow freshwater lake with a muddy bottom. Plant-eating dinosaurs and the meat-eaters who preyed upon them occasionally became trapped in the mud. As the years passed, the skeletons of these animals accumulated until the site became a complex mix of bones."

"After the lake bottom dried up it was covered with volcanic ash, and rivers and shallow seas deposited thick layers of sand and mud on top. Meanwhile, the bones fossilised. Millions of years later water and wind eroded the layers to produce the topography seen today. The bones are now close enough to the surface to be recovered by scientific excavations."

I have difficulty believing that so many clumsy dinosaurs became stuck in the mud and that circumstances are just so that all these bones are now on or near the surface of the earth. Why do we have so many dinosaur fossils but few or none of the fossilised bones of many extant animals, such as the bison that roamed North America?

Dinosaur Display Preparation

Let's take a look at a description of how dinosaur bones are transported and prepared at Fossil Excavation, A Fossil's Trail - From Excavation to Exhibit.

"We now commonly use strips of burlap soaked in plaster to jacket over our finds. After applying a tissue separator to keep the plaster from direct contact with the surface of the bone, the soaked burlap strips are laid onto our pedestaled fossil until they cover it in a half shell. The end result is a bone totally encased in a protective mummy-like field]acket and ready for safe transport."

So preparers and transporters work with plaster all the time! Plaster lying around, therefore, does not draw questions or suspicion.

"Through mould making and casting we can totally fabricate limbs, ribs, vertebrae, etc. for the missing pieces of an articulated skeletal mount. Plaster, fibreglass and epoxies are often and commonly used. In reconstruction work on single bones, small to large cracks can be filled in with mache or plaster mixed with dextrin, a starch that imparts an adhesive quality and extra hardness to regular moulding plaster. We've also had success using epoxy putties. Large missing fragments can be sculpted directly in place with these same materials."

"Even fossils that are difficult, nigh near impossible to collect in the field, are harder still to prepare in the lab. Specimens that take from a day to a week to remove from their beds of stone can require months or even years to clean, consolidate, repair and reconstruct for study or display. This is an art and skill of the preparator (a term that appears to have first been used in North America)."

What exactly is taking months or years? Is the public being given altered versions of bones?

What exactly is going on? Is this science or art and science fiction? Is the public being deceived?

At The Changing Shape of Eladrosaurus foulkii we learn of an iguana skull being substituted for the skull of a dinosaur on display. Was the public told at the time? What are we not being told today?

"The original reconstruction of Hadrosaurus foulkii featured a creature in a kangaroo stance-- an animal that used its tail as a third leg. At the same time, while the excavated fossil was nearly complete, it lacked a skull. Because parts of its skeleton resembled those of an iguana, the skull of a modern iguana was used as a model for the skull created for the original display in 1868. That sculpted skull (above, right) is currently on display at the Academy of Natural Sciences in Philadelphia as a historical curiosity."

In a museum reconstruction of some supposed past living creature, bones or "fossilised bones" from different types of creatures should never have to be knowingly mixed together in some public display of the reconstruction. Bones from modern animals should not be sculpted by someone and used in the museum reconstruction of some purported ancient creature.

From the elementary school curriculum, we learn that, in elementary schools, they're teaching students how to make their own fossils and what palaeontologists do. Do palaeontologists make their own fossils too?

Known Bone Sculpture & Bone Carving Activities

The possibility exists that key dinosaur bones on display have been artificially modified through sculpture and carving. Bone sculpture is not an unknown human activity. Many cultures participate in creating man-made objects out of existing bones, totally unrecognisable from the original shape. Is the dinosaur industry a customer of this sort of business?

Is it possible that dinosaur skeleton replicas are secretly assembled or manufactured in private buildings out of public view, with bones artificially constructed or used from a number of different modern-day animals? Why bother having any authentic original fossils at all if alleged replicas can please the public?

Credibility Of Dinosaur Displays And Artistic Impressions

Many displays and drawings of dinosaurs appear to be an absurdity, showing a two-legged animal that would be totally off-balance, with the weight of head and abdomen much greater than weight of tail, which is supposed to act as a counter-balance.

Is the dinosaur industry a case of science trying to meet public desires or expectations? The movie Jurassic Park is an example of showing dinosaurs much larger than any current displays in museums. After the movie came out, it is interesting to note that many articles were written asking "Is this possible?". I recall a report of dinosaur DNA being discovered preserved in amber, which later turned out to be false.

At a description of Mill Canyon Dinosaur Trail we learn of dinosaur tracks being given credibility. Do you not find it rather difficult to believe that erosion and weathering would not destroy prints that are allegedly millions of years old?

Archaeopteryx, the ever-popular transitional form, is no real fossil evidence for evolution. "But, Sir Fred Hoyle, the prominent British scientist, in his book Archaeopteryx the Primordial Bird, "a case of fossil forgery," says that someone took a small fossil, put cement on it, and pressed a modem feather into the cement to create a forgery. The person then sold it to the British Museum for 36,000 gold marks, a hefty sum in 1861."

Radiometric Dating

The original living material, and the material that is used to produce its fossil, are often two different things, and thus the ages of both are different as well. Most alleged ancient fossils are found near the surface of the Earth and are dated by the age of the rocks near where they are found. If a modern-day animal was to die and its remains found in the same location, would it be dated the same age as the alleged ancient fossil?

According to Dr Margaret Helder in her book Completing The Picture, A Handbook On Museums And Interpretive Centres Dealing With Fossils, "Scientists used to be very impressed with the potential of radiometric for coming up with absolutely reliable ages of some kinds of rocks. They do not feel that way anymore. Having had to deal with numerous calculated dates which are too young or too old compared with what they expected, scientists now admit that the process has many more uncertainties than they ever would have supposed in the early years. 

The public knows almost nothing about uncertainties in the dating of rocks. The impression that most people have received is that many rocks on earth are extremely old and that technology exists to make accurate measurements of these ages. Scientists have become more and more aware however that the measurements which the machines make, may tell us nothing about the actual age of the rock."


Margaret J. Helder continues to explain: "Under what circumstances did whole organisms remain intact long enough to be fossilised? In most cases it seems, these victims were rapidly buried in great loads of sediment, which quickly hardened into rock. Not only did these situations require catastrophic burial but also the sediment involved had to be very fine-grained in order for such exquisite preservation of detail to come about. Geologists generally interpret silt beds as the result of fine particles settling gradually out of still water. If that had happened in these instances, the corpses would have decayed long before burial and lithification (turning to rock) could occur."

The replacement process is supposed to involve calcium phosphate, or calcium hydroxylapatite, in skeletal material being replaced, atom by atom, by silica, calcite, pyrite, dolomite, etc., over a long period of time. This goes against the natural law of increasing disorder. How are all these dead atoms intelligent enough to know what to do and where to go to produce the finished fossil?

Another alleged mode of preservation is permineralisation, whereby porous bone structures are supposed to become denser by the deposition of mineral matter by groundwater. The more porous the bone, the more susceptible it is to destruction. In Speed and Conditions of Fossilisation, we learn that "secondary mineralisation, remineralisation, leaching of bone mineral, and biologically-induced mineralisation begin very rapidly after the bone is exposed to the environment. 

If the bone is not buried or underwater within 1-2 years of defleshing, it will literally become dust in the wind. The bone fragments may persist for several more years, but they are unrecognisable as to species." What percentage of land animals' bodies die near water and then fall into that water?

“Hypersaline environments in which carbonates are precipitating favour bone remineralisation and secondary mineralisation. Saline environments also are good, but there the processes are slower." Are not dinosaurs supposed to have lived in a relatively non¬saline freshwater environment? Inducing mineralisation under ideal laboratory conditions is one matter, but completely different from real-world natural processes that tend to dissolve, not precipitate, bone mineral. Once the internal part of a decaying bone fills up with saline water from a sea, I am unaware of any reason why it should be a preferred location for mineral precipitation compared to the rest of the sea bottom.

Fossilisation is also discussed at Evolution versus Creation, where we learn that "there are no fossils being formed today on a large scale like they did many years ago ... when a fish dies, it doesn't sink to the bottom of the ocean and become a fossil, it merely decays and is eaten by other fish or animals. Even today, there is hardly a trace of the millions of buffalo that once existed, but were slaughtered all over the plains just a couple of generations ago. (Some herds were big enough to cover a whole state)."

Size and Lifestyle Paradox

Dinosaurs and the Expanding Earth discusses the paradox between the dinosaurs' size and lifestyle.

"The dinosaurs' large size has presented palaeontologists with an interesting paradox. Calculations of the structural dynamic stresses within the bones of the largest dinosaurs indicate that they were too large to move fast without injuring themselves. Contrary to this view is the fact that detailed biomechanical reconstructions indicate that they were agile, active creatures."

"Depending on the arguments used, a particular dinosaur can be reconstructed in two ways, slow and lumbering, or fast and agile, with both sides of the argument appearing equally valid."

Dinosaurs and the Expanding Earth also discusses the structural dynamics of dinosaurs.

"One method of finding out more about Dinosaurs is to study their structural dynamics. This method considers the loads and forces acting on the structure of their skeleton as they moved. The dinosaurs' structural dynamics indicate that the loads acting on their skeletons were much greater than that of present-day animals. In some cases, because of the Dinosaurs' large size, calculations indicate that the bones of the largest Dinosaurs were likely to buckle and crack under their own immense weight. These calculations were responsible for promoting the idea that the Dinosaurs must have moved very slowly to prevent sudden shocks to their skeleton."

"This idea of slow-moving animals does not agree with the bio-mechanical analysis of dinosaurs, which indicate that the Dinosaurs were agile, active creatures. This is the paradox between the Dinosaurs size and lifestyle."

Dinosaurs and the Expanding Earth also analyzes the biomechanical aspects of dinosaurs.

"One method of discovering more about Dinosaurs is to perform a biomechanical analysis. This method considers how the Dinosaurs must have moved and acted in order to survive. It relies on comparing the structures of today's living animals with those of the Dinosaurs in order to establish how Dinosaurs moved and acted. This method indicates that the Dinosaurs must have been agile, active creatures."

"The idea of active animals does not agree with the study of the structural dynamics of the Dinosaurs, which indicates that if the Dinosaurs moved as fast as present-day creatures they would injure themselves. This is the paradox between the Dinosaurs size and lifestyle."

There is a simpler solution to these paradoxes other than having to reduce Earth's gravity!

Job 40:17

Some people point to Job 40:17 as evidence that dinosaurs are mentioned in the Bible. They state that only dinosaurs could fit the description of having a "tail like a cedar".
He moveth his tail like a cedar: the sinews of his stones are wrapped together. (Job 40:17, KJV)

However, Bible translations other than the King James version clearly reveal that alternative understandings are possible for what this verse is actually stating.
He doth bend his tail as a cedar. The sinews of his thighs are wrapped together. (Job 40:17, YLT)

Job 40:17 could be stating that the behemoth bends his tail with the same ease and speed that he bends a cedar tree, such as would be required in clearing land. Indeed, this is consistent with his strength and force (Job 40:16) and suggests his usefulness as being a beast of burden for man.
God made the behemoth with man. (Job 40:15)
His tail sways like a cedar; the sinews of his thighs are close-knit. (Job 40:17, NIV)
He makes his tail stiff like a cedar; the sinews of his thighs are knit together. (Job 40:17, RSV)

Alternatively, Job 40:17 could be stating that the tail of a behemoth sways in the same manner that a cedar tree sways, or that the behemoth makes his tail as stiff as a cedar tree.

The behemoth could very well be the elephant. The elephant is a beast of burden for man in that it is used to move tree logs, such as cedar logs, with its trunk and tusks (Job 40:17). The elephant can move these logs around like it moves its tail. In India and some other Asian countries, elephants are used in the logging industry. An elephant can move a log that weighs 600 pounds. It lifts smaller logs with its tusks and holds them with its trunk. An elephant can knock down a tree 30 feet high that has a diameter of two feet. Elephants eat grass, shrubs, leaves, roots, bark, and branches. Wild elephants drink up to 40 gallons of water daily. The Matthew Henry Commentary on Job 40 concurs with the idea of the behemoth being the elephant.

Since other logical explanations are available for what the behemoth is, other than the "dinosaur", there is no requirement for Christians to consider the behemoth of Job 40 to be the dinosaur or to even believe in dinosaurs.

Abiogenic Origin of Petroleum

Petroleum is often referred to as "fossil energy", however, Thomas Gold has claimed that hydrocarbons are found in many locations where a biogenic origin is improbable or impossible, such as in the earth at great depths below any biological debris, and on asteroids, comets, the planets Jupiter, Saturn, Uranus, Neptune, Pluto, and their various moons such as Titan and Triton.

Meteorites have been found containing coal and polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs). PAHs are found in coal and petroleum, according to this pdf document. Numerous other arguments against a biological origin for petroleum exist, such as the claim that hydrogen-saturated hydrocarbons are unlikely to have been derived from any biological debris. A theory exists that petroleum is not a "fossil fuel" with a surface origin. Therefore, one could believe that the alleged past existence of dinosaurs (or the alleged past existence of any other ancient living material) is not necessary to explain the origin of petroleum.


"Dinosaur" bones sell for a lot of money at auctions. It is a profitable business. There is pressure for academics to publish papers. Museums are in the business of producing displays that are popular and appealing. Movie producers and the media need to produce material to sell to stay in business. The mainstream media loves to hype alleged dinosaur finds. Much is to be gained by converting a bland non-dinosaur discovery, of a bone of modern origin, into an impressive dinosaur find, and letting artists' interpretations and imaginations take the spotlight, rather than the basic boring real find. There are people who desire and crave prestige, fame and attention.

There is the bandwagon effect and crowd behaviour. And then there are people and entities pursuing political and religious agendas.

During the nineteenth century, a new world view of evolution was being pursued by then influential people such as Darwin and Marx. During this era of thought, the first dinosaur discoveries were made. Were these discoveries "made" to try to make up for inadequacies in the fossil record for the theory of evolution?

A History Of Evolutionary Thought lists some of the influential people setting the stage for the evolution way of thinking:

"Preludes to Evolution

Jean-Baptiste Lamarck (1744-1829)
Thomas Malthas (1766-1834)
Georges Cuvier (1769-1832)
William Smith (1769-1839)
Etienne Geojfroy St. Hilaire (1772-1844)
Adam Sedgwick (1785-1873)
Patrick Matthew (1790-1874)
Mary Anning (1799-1847)
Sir Richard Owen (1804-1892)
Louis Agassiz (1807-1873)

Natural Selection

Alfred Russel Wallace (1823-1913)
Thomas Henry Huxley (1824-1895)
Ernst Haeckel (1834-1919)
Edward Drinker Cope (1840-1897)
Henry Eairfield Osborn (1857-1935)"
The pro-evolutionary bias is evident with this organisation promoting dinosaur discoveries.

The majority of governments in the world today operate on some basis of a government that uses a political philosophy other than that found in Romans 13:1, Colossians 1:16-17 and 1 Timothy 1:17. As one example, the ''...government of the United States of America is not in any sense founded on the Christian Religion...”, according to Article 11 of the Treaty of Peace and Friendship, signed at Tripoli on November 4, 1796, and passed by the United States Congress.

Article VI, Clause 2 of the U.S.A. Constitution states: "This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land”.

State funding of organisations that promote the dinosaur concept could be considered strategic psychological warfare against a state that uses a Christian doctrinal basis for government since the Christian Bible comes complete with the account of God’s creation in the book of Genesis and the genealogy of Jesus. State-funded organisations claim that “dinosaurs went extinct some 64-66 million years ago” while Christians claim that the “Bible says the world is about six thousand years old”. According to Tom Demere, San Diego Natural History Museum, “Fossils are the remains and/or traces of prehistoric life. The critical factor is age. Fossils have to be older than 10,000 years, the generally accepted temporal boundary marking the end of the last Pleistocene glacial event.”

As mentioned earlier, motivations for the possible invention of the dinosaur include trying to prove evolution, trying to disprove or cast doubt on the Bible and the existence of God, and trying to disprove the “young-earth theory”.


The following issues raise red flags as to the integrity of the dinosaur industry and cast doubts as to whether dinosaurs ever existed:

(1) dinosaur fossilised bone discoveries having occurred only within the last two centuries and in huge unusual concentrated quantities going against the laws of nature and probability;

(2) dinosaur discoverers generally, and most typically, not being disinterested parties without a vested interest;

(3) the nature of public display preparation, calling into question the integrity and source of fossils and allowing for the possibility of tampering and bone substitution, and the possibility of fraudulent activities on a systemic basis;

(4) existing artistic drawings and public exhibits showing off-balance and awkward postures that basic physics would rule out as being possible;

(5) very low odds of all these dinosaur bones being fossilised but relatively few bones of other animals;

(6) implications of dinosaur discoveries to the theory of evolution and the belief that man was created in God's image, suggesting possible hidden and subtle political or religious agendas served on a naive and unsuspecting public; and,

(7) a lack of funding for organisations and people questioning or being sceptical of each and every discovery and public display.


The possibility exists that living dinosaurs never existed.
"Jesus said unto him, If thou canst believe, all things are possible to him that believeth." (Mark 9:23)

The dinosaur industry should be investigated and questions need to be asked. I am unaware of any evidence or reason for absolutely believing dinosaurs ever were alive on earth. The possibility exists that the concept of prehistoric living dinosaurs has been a fabrication of nineteenth and twentieth-century people possibly pursuing an evolutionary and anti-Bible and anti-Christian agenda.

The past existence of living dinosaurs has not yet been proven. Questioning what is being told instead is a better choice rather than blindly believing the dinosaur story. Issues should be carefully considered for the sake of good science. "O Timothy, keep that which is committed to thy trust, avoiding profane and vain babblings, and oppositions of science falsely so-called" (1 Timothy 6:20).

The choice between believing the word of man, the evolutionists, or the word of God, the Bible, is a matter of faith.

Written by David P. Wozney