Palin Claimed Dinosaurs And People Coexisted

The LA Times reports:

Soon after Sarah Palin was elected mayor of the foothill town of Wasilla, Alaska, she startled a local music teacher by insisting in casual conversation that men and dinosaurs coexisted on an Earth created 6,000 years ago -- about 65 million years after scientists say most dinosaurs became extinct -- the teacher said.

After conducting a college band and watching Palin deliver a commencement address to a small group of home-schooled students in June 1997, Wasilla resident Philip Munger said, he asked the young mayor about her religious beliefs.

Palin told him that "dinosaurs and humans walked the Earth at the same time," Munger said. When he asked her about prehistoric fossils and tracks dating back millions of years, Palin said "she had seen pictures of human footprints inside the tracks," recalled Munger, who teaches music at the University of Alaska in Anchorage and has regularly criticized Palin in recent years on his liberal political blog, called Progressive Alaska.

The idea of a "young Earth" -- that God created the Earth about 6,000 years ago, and dinosaurs and humans coexisted early on -- is a popular strain of creationism.

Though in her race for governor she called for faith-based "intelligent design" to be taught along with evolution in Alaska's schools, Gov. Palin has not sought to require it, state educators say.

In a widely-circulated interview, Matt Damon said of Palin, "I need to know if she really think that dinosaurs were here 4000 years ago. I want to know that, I really do. Because she's gonna have the nuclear codes."

Comments

[maryatvan]

PALIN-TOLOGY 101: Sarah PALIN & the Young Earth Creationists contend that God made all creatures great and small. And all were brought forth after the flood which they say was 4ooo years ago, approximately making the age of the earth 6ooo years old. It is a literal biblical stand based on faith that does not contest or question the WHO, WHAT, WHEN, WHY, WHERE AND HOW THIS EARTH BEGAN. If she does not question this, will she also not take the time to learn about global issues that affect the future of the world. One must be present in mind to apply critical thinking. This one lack of discernment shows her naive and uneducated position to grapple world politics. On the other hand all the attention given this issue probably has brought many 'believers' out of the dark ages into a more enlightened.

[FormerReaganite]

Why are the Bible people trying so hard to 'convince' everyone that
the Bible teaches all of these things? The Bible is not a science book,
nor was it intended to be a science book while it was being written.
Instead, it is a book of human nature and moral teachings, not a scientific
journal. Creationists: please stop trying to forge the Bible into
someting that it isn't. GOD enlightened people to write books on science
in their proper time (now) For example: ancient people would have never
understood electrons or megabytes. But modern man does. And modern
man understands the Bible for what it is, a guide for getting along with
our fellow neighbor and living in peace. So quit with the junk science already.
The Bible does not 'prove' nor 'disprove' scientific theory, nor does
it try to. Neither should you.

[FormerReaganite]

By the way, ancient scripture writings do not constitute scientific proof

[FormerReaganite]

OK I'll bite on this one: if dinosaurs 'existed' along with humans within the prior 6000 years:

(A) WHY are there no dinosaurs now?

(B) HOW did they disappear?

(C) WHERE are bones found: under hundreds of feet of rock along with that flammable stuff
called coal or oil (which consists of dead dinosaurs and vegetation)

(D) WHEN did they live? at least 65 million years ago; no mammal fossils have been found
that are this old

(E) WHAT does the Bible itself say about dinosaurs?

(F) WHO is dreaming up all of this stuff?

And why do otherwise intelligent, educated people believe this? (Are they afraid of going
to h-e-L-L if they refuse?) If the 'fundamentalists' wish to make 'scientific' arguments, they
should be ready to back up their claims with sound empirical evidence. Conjecture, junk
science, and fairy tales are not going to work.

[rob c]

Would you like to see evidence that Dinosaurs and Humans coexisted?

Dinosaurs and the Bible
http://www.answersingenesis.org/Docs/2.asp

Fresh Dinosaur Bones Found (not fossilized)
http://www.answersingenesis.org/creation/v14/i3/dinosaurbones.asp

Ancient carvings depicting dinosaurs (dont look like anything else)
http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/2007/01/15/evidence-dinosaurs-angkor

Australian Aborigines paintings
http://www.answersingenesis.org/creation/v21/i1/aborigines.asp

Thunderbirds in Native American culture
http://www.answersingenesis.org/creation/v24/i2/thunderbirds.asp

I've also seen an article with authentic cave paintings of dinosaurs too (cant find it at the moment) - and since dino bones were not discovered until the 1800s, nobody before that would have drawn a creature that they'd seen that only bears resemblance to a brontosaurus...

and last but not least:
Dinos and human fossils within 500 years of each other? Does it take millions of years to form fossils? Did dinosaurs live before humans?

http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/am/v2/n3/are-you-evolutionized-facts

I simply ask that you consider this information with an open mind, as many claim to have. If you accept evolution as a possiblity, then you should be willing to accept other possibilities too. Scientists all agree that evolution is still a THEORY, which by definition is an UNproven idea. Remember your science classes, there is a big difference between a THEORY and a SCIENTIFIC LAW.

And not all reputable scientists buy into the theory of evolution...

[ManhattanMC]

Rob

Notice that all your 'evidence' comes from one source-
answers in genesis-a biased and disreputable website.

I followed all your links-the 'evidence' therein runs mostly to conjecture, circular reasoning (the bible says its so-so it is so) and gross misrepresentation of data.
I invite you you to spend a little time at this site-

aigbusted.blogspot.com

Each of the claims made in each of your links is preposterous-

"....not all reputable scientists buy into the theory of evolution"

I assume you refer to the 'Discovery' Institutes famous list of 700 who 'question' natural selection.
I had occasion to vet some of that list-it included dentists, architects and a couple of park rangers.
Even so-roughly 99.05% of scientists have no problem with natural selection at all.

expand your information sources my friend.

[LaughingAussie]

">Scientists all agree that evolution is still a THEORY">

Yes Einstein, that is why it is called "Evolutionary Theory". What are you going to tell us next, "Scientist all agree that the sun is very hot".

I bet most scientists agree that the bible is the highest selling work of fiction in history. And besides which 27% of all statistics are made up on the spots and I"m guessing you are in the 50% of the population demographic with below average IQ.

I can find a website that "proves" the existence of alien beings visiting earth, psychokinetic abilities, Magic, pixies, fairies, Santa Clause and any other pseudo science, quackery or childish superstition.

Even a website that proves water is a dangerous toxic: http://www.dhmo.org/
(this is a hilarious website!)

The irony in all of this creationist gibberish is that ID theory itself has undergone transformation by natural selection ¦ a corner stone of evolution! And thus has been defined by an evolutionary process! Here"s the proof on your beloved answers-in-gensis website:

Arguments we think creationists should NOT use
http://www.answersingenesis.org/home/area/faq/dont_use.asp

Go and cite some reputable peer reviewed journals that "prove" humans walked with Dinosaurs and then we (people who can think for themselves) may take you seriously.

[Slapandrun]

"Scientists all agree that evolution is still a THEORY, which by definition is an UNproven idea." Wrong. I'll quote Wikipedia here as I am too lazy to write it out all on my own;
"In scientific usage, a theory does not mean an unsubstantiated guess or hunch, as it can in everyday speech. A theory is a logically self-consistent model or framework for describing the behavior of a related set of natural or social phenomena. It originates from or is supported by rigorous observations in the natural world, or by experimental evidence (see scientific method). In this sense, a theory is a systematic and formalized expression of all previous observations, and is predictive, logical, and testable"
In other words, a scientific THEORY is something with substantial evidence behind it, something that is accepted by the general scientific community, and something that can be proved. Definitely not, as you said, "an UNproven idea" . (Next time, please try to cite some better sources :( )

[Rad1234]

What I want to know is, Why hasn't anyone in the media flat out asked her how old she believes the earth is?

[kulenski]

Wow, that's just sad!!!!

[Triceretops77]

She says Dino's and humans existed together, intelligent design is considered for a curriculum and her father was a public school science teacher???

Thats, it!! I want to take Palin to the American Museum of Natural History and show her the timelines next to the dinosaur bones.

Next, the New York Public Library Astor Reading Room where I'd pull out the "T" volume of the Oxford English Dictionary to show her that the word "Theory," as defined in a colloquial context, has a different meaning than the word "Theory," as defined scientifically.

Palin can't believe what she's been seeing. She's sobbing cats and dogs now. Her face is wet, her clothes are wet, even her fine leather go-go boots are drenched. Something is wrong!

For our final destination, I take her by the hand. Board the downtown subway to the Eye and Ear Infirmary Emergency Room where she is prescribed an antibiotic eye drop."Think antibiotics are based on mere speculation?" I ask. They wouldn't exist w/out the Theory of Evolution. Next time you have an eye infection, would you be equally receptive to trying an antibiotic based on the alternative theory of Intelligent Design?"

See, what I re

[LaughingAussie]

You can lead a horse to water but ....

[DonDavis]

At Debate, Palin Admits a Candidate is Not Viable at Five Weeks
http://satiricalpolitical.com/?p=3739

[iceangel49]

Come on Dems, lets stay on topic.

Just the facts please. And the Washington Post and Huffington, the ladies on The View, or the Obama Campaign are not primary, authoritative, or credible sources to cite when trying to defend your candidate.

[research]

You deny Palin accepts creationism and 6000 years of existence and Jesus coming again in her lifetime?

[iceangel49]

These are just two examples of serious credibility issues with Obama and the people who have insulated him from any questions that might reveal the real Obama, one not selective as a Harvard Law Review President based on the same selection process of the previous 104 year history of of Harvard Law Review. If Obama's grades where not a factor in his service as president of the Law Review, why not release them. Is Obama hiding behind his admission being
a result of affirmative action or were his grades from Columbia really good enough to win him admission to Harvard.

As I mentioned earlier, these are just two of the things that should cause a little concern, like many of the legitimate questions, that bounce right off him. Who is this man? Where did he come from? Why doesn't he wear the lapel pin like every other member of the U.S. Legislator? (the US flag) Why doesn't he place his hand over his heart during he national anthem? Frankly, with the number of baby boomers beginning their sojourn into senior citizen status, I am dumbfounded that this large demographic would feel comfortable looking towards retirement and senior medical bills/perscriptions with Barrack Obama leading this nation.

[research]

Fishing much?

[iceangel49]

How about in 2000 when Obama came under attack by his constituents when a compromise verison of anti-crime Safe Neighborhoods Act in his home state which Obama supported failed by just five votes and Obama had made the controversial decision to not return from Christmas break to vote on this critical piece of legislation. Obama and family were in Hawaii on an annual trip to his grandmothers when Obama's eighteen month old daugher became ill with the flu and Obama felt, "felt duty bound to remain with her rather than return." Adding,

"I cannot sacrifice the health or well-being of my daughter for politics," Obama told reporters. "I had to make a decision based on what I felt was appropriate for my daughter and for my wife. . . . If the press takes my absence as the reason for the failure of the Safe Neighborhoods bill, then that's how the press is going to report it. . . . I have the track record of someone in Springfield who takes his legislative duties seriously." (OBAMA DEFENDS DECISION TO MISS ANTI-CRIME VOTE, Chicago Tribune-January 17, 2000 Author: David Mendell, Tribune Staff Writer.)

For me this is a pretty serious statement, will Obama make our country and the American people his number one priority while in office?

[research]

So? What di this act provide? And you want to compare that to McCain's voting record?

Sad.

[iceangel49]

Why isn't the mainstream media reporting any of the numerous contradictions of and speculation into Obama's political record, political and personal agenda, patriotism, judgment or decision-making skills. Aren't there just too many unanswered questions about these things. With Palin, we can apply the experience rational, "yeah she is a Washington outsider," and just doesn't have the political history at the national level to have to many areas or issues that she really has flipped flopped on over the years. Palin believes and reflects that she serves at the pleasure of the people and every single day can express their pain and frustration, because in some manner or another she is experiencing the exact same issues as the average American.

Obama on the other hand has numerous areas in his polictical history that reflect his character as a statesman, both in his home state legislature and the U.S legislature. For example, why the Obama's campaign silence on the request for Obama's Harvard transcripts. Obama is heralded as the first African American Harvard Law Review president, yet fails to mention that Harvard Law Review changed the selection system from one based on grades, the president being the student with the highest academic rank to one chosen by fellow students after a special writing competition. Previous Law Review Presidents were held to a much higher standard than in Obama's tenure, where the selection system reflected the desire to insure more minority students became editors of the Law Review.

[research]

Fishing. Give a link that proves Obama tried to stop the Harvard transcripts.

Since you GOP are compulsive liars,

The Ball is in your court.

[iceangel49]

Poor poor Democrats, are you ever in for a wake-up call in November. Perhaps if the dems had not attacked Palin so merciously your candidate might have gotten elected. Governor Palin's performance at the debate solidify the McCain-Palin victory. Americans are not stupid, they see right through and are tired of the dull, unsubstantied, repetitive rumor making machine aka as the Obama campaign.

Huffington, and other "elite" Americans, why don't you start telling the truth about Obama.

[joeyfoto]

One thing is certain, one of us is in for a big surprise in November.

"Perhaps if the dems had not attacked Palin so merciously your candidate might have gotten elected." Are you kidding? This pathetically unqualified candidate has not been "attacked;" she's been unmasked. There is a difference between someone who gives answers that I don't like and someone who is too ignorant to give an honest answer to a direct question. The only thing Sarah Palin "solidified" in this debate was the terrible truth that Senator McCain would sell out his country to get elected President, by nominating someone who is dangerously unqualified; someone who could not conceivably do the job for which he nominated her. By putting her obvious ignorance and unfitness in the harsh glare of the world stage, John McCain only embarrassed Governor Palin; he disgraced himself.

[iceangel49]

McCain would sell this country? What color is the sky in your world? This man fought and was tortured for six years for this country. The only candidate selling out his country is Barack Hussein Obama, with how much money from Fannie & Freddie, $126,349; how much in foreign campaign contributions, perhaps millions? Paid how much by ACORN? Eight years old when he met Bill Ayers and paid how much by ACORN Was he eight years old then too?

You folks need to get a clue, Barack Hussein Obama has stopped wearing the traditional American flag pin worn by most legislators in DC, doesn't even acknowledge our flag, National Anthem as most Americans have done for 100 years, Michelle Obama is for the first time in her life, "proud to be an American," could these two people be more non-patriotic.

Congressional Black Caucus Swearing In Ceremony: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=usvG-s_Ssb0

http://www.homelandsecurityus.com/node/644

Obama knew in 2005 that Fannie Mae was in trouble, yet he still took the money, who is selling out the American people?

[JudyKR]

This is almost as bad as Biden saying FDR went on tv to talk to the people when the stock market crashed. Prob, no tv and FDR wasn't prez.