[Dr. Isaiah Jones]

In the pre-flood world there was a canopy of water in the stratosphere. This is clearly documented in Genesis 1:6-8 which states:

"And God said, Let there be a firmament in the midst of the waters, and let it divide the waters from the waters. And God made the firmament, and divided the waters which were under the firmament from the waters which were above the firmament: and it was so. And God called the firmament Heaven. And the evening and the morning were the second day."

The water layer above the firmament had several important functions such as warm temperature, higher oxygen content and carbon dioxide in the atmosphere, and the blocking of ultraviolet radiation coming from the sun. This caused all plants and animals to grow much larger than they do today as it states in Genesis 6:4:

"There were giants in the earth in those days;"

Many secular scientists would probably try to refute this but at the same time they completely ignore the fact that this can be proven by a simple analysis.

First let's take a look at the bone structure of a kangaroo:



These are the bones of a normal Austrian kangaroo, not so much special about that… or is there?
Well, let's take a look at the following image:



Looks familiar? These are the bones of the Tyrannosaurus Rex dinosaur. According to secular science these "vicious" creatures roamed the earth "millions of years ago" before they ultimately became extinct following an "unexplained" catastrophic event.

However, if we look at the bone structures of these two separate animals we notice that they're almost completely identical. As you can see, this is a definite PROOF that the Tyrannosaurus Rex did not become extinct. It was actually just a giant kangaroo.

---- UPDATE ----

I have found some stunning evidence that further supports my theory regarding the Kangarosaurus:

Palaeontologists digging in northern Australia have found fossil evidence of several new species - including a "killer kangaroo".

A "killer kangaroo", huh... Sounds familiar?



It continues:

Professor Mike Archer said the dig had turned up "truly extraordinary material".

He said the killer kangaroos would not have been like the creatures of today.

"There were meat-eating kangaroos with long fangs, and galloping kangaroos with long forearms, which could not hop," he told The Australian newspaper.

Palaeontologist Sue Hand, who also participated in the dig, told Australian radio that other potentially frightening creatures were unearthed.

"Very big birds... More like ducks, earned the name demon ducks of doom, some at least may have been carnivorous," she said.

The team now plans to study the fossils in detail, to see what more they can learn about the species and what effect changing climate had on their development.

Take that, stupid non-believers!



- Dr. Isaiah Jones, Ph.D., Biblical Archaeologist

[Jack O'fagan]

Dr that is a fascinating piece of research. Do you believe that they jumped in the same way as the smaller surviving kangoroos? It would certainly explain the deep footprints that these creatures managed to make in solid rock.

YiC

Jack

[Dr. Isaiah Jones]

Originally Posted by Jack O'fagan

Do you believe that they jumped in the same way as the smaller surviving kangoroos? It would certainly explain the deep footprints that these creatures managed to make in solid rock.

Yes, of course. This also tells us that the T. Rex, just like the modern-day kangaroo, was not a carnivore. They were friendly vegetarians. It wouldn't surprise me if some pre-flood folks kept them in their homes as pets.

[Jack O'fagan]

Originally Posted by Dr. Isaiah Jones

Yes, of course. This also tells us that the T. Rex, just like the modern-day kangaroo, was not a carnivore. They were friendly vegetarians. It wouldn't surprise me if some pre-flood folks kept them in their homes as pets.

Maybe the pre-flood folk used them as we use domesticated horses today. Instead of sitting on their backs they may have sat in the kangaroos pouch? It would have been bumpy but totally feasible.

[Dr. Isaiah Jones]

Originally Posted by Jack O'fagan

Maybe the pre-flood folk used them as we use domesticated horses today. Instead of sitting on their backs they may have sat in the kangaroos pouch? It would have been bumpy but totally feasible.

That is a great possibility indeed. Dinosaurs were used for all kinds of purposes in those days.

[Brother Alex]

What an excellent research, Dr. Jones. I had no idea that the Tyrannosaurus Rex was a marsupial and not a reptile as secular scientists have stated in the past. This research might be a major scientific breakthrough. Praise Jesus!

[iamsmarterthanyou]

Originally Posted by Dr. Isaiah Jones

In the pre-flood world there was a canopy of water in the stratosphere. This is clearly documented in Genesis 1:6-8 which states:

"And God said, Let there be a firmament in the midst of the waters, and let it divide the waters from the waters. And God made the firmament, and divided the waters which were under the firmament from the waters which were above the firmament: and it was so. And God called the firmament Heaven. And the evening and the morning were the second day."

The water layer above the firmament had several important functions such as warm temperature, higher oxygen content and carbon dioxide in the atmosphere, and the blocking of ultraviolet radiation coming from the sun. This caused all plants and animals to grow much larger than they do today as it states in Genesis 6:4:

"There were giants in the earth in those days;"

Many secular scientists would probably try to refute this but at the same time they completely ignore the fact that this can be proven by a simple analysis.

First let's take a look at the bone structure of a kangaroo:



These are the bones of a normal Austrian kangaroo, not so much special about that… or is there?
Well, let's take a look at the following image:



Looks familiar? These are the bones of the Tyrannosaurus Rex dinosaur. According to secular science these "vicious" creatures roamed the earth "millions of years ago" before they ultimately became extinct following an "unexplained" catastrophic event.

However, if we look at the bone structures of these two separate animals we notice that they're almost completely identical. As you can see, this is a definite PROOF that the Tyrannosaurus Rex did not become extinct. It was actually just a giant kangaroo.

- Dr. Isaiah Jones, Ph.D., Biblical Archaeologist

The rex are from lizzard family and kangaroos are clearly not from lizzard family.,.. you sir need to restudy and get a real degree of something that is useful in today's world.

[Dr. Isaiah Jones]

Originally Posted by iamsmarterthanyou

The rex are from lizzard family and kangaroos are clearly not from lizzard family.,.. you sir need to restudy and get a real degree of something that is useful in today's world.

As my studies show, the theory that the T. Rex was a reptile is erroneous and outdated. It was a marsupial just like the kangaroos of modern times.

[True Disciple]

Originally Posted by iamsmarterthanyou

The rex are from lizzard family and kangaroos are clearly not from lizzard family.,.. you sir need to restudy and get a real degree of something that is useful in today's world.

How on earth can you know that this creature was a lizard? There are not any scales preserved, and the marsupial pouch doesn't contain hard parts, so it comes as no surprise that it leaves no fossil evidence for its existence. Which means that it might just as well have existed.

And anyway, how could you say that God didn't intelligently design the T-Rex as a kangaroo? God can do anything, so he can also give a reptile a pouch.

[Jack O'fagan]

Originally Posted by iamsmarterthanyou

The rex are from lizzard family and kangaroos are clearly not from lizzard family.,.. you sir need to restudy and get a real degree of something that is useful in today's world.

The process of modern science works through peer group analyses. A theory is suggested and then others try to disprove it. If it cannot be disproved this then becomes valid evidence.

Yes you are correct that it was previously thought that Kangasaurus was from the lizard family however Dr Jones's outstanding and thorough research has now disproved this theory and must be now accepted at valid information.

Buy the way, It's not 'lizzard', it's 'lizard', you sir need to get a dictionary or something that is useful in todays world.

YiC

Jack

[natureboyuk6]

How can you disprove the evidence that this is clearly a load of rubbish. It is not thorough analysis at all, it is looking at a picture and saying it looks a bit like something else. It is like saying that an eel is a snake that lives in water because both are cylindrical in structure.

If you researched more you would clearly find that bone structure is completely different for starters the skull i.e. T.rex have a Diapsid skull and kangaroos have a Synapsid skull. Another example can be the legs ... In a T. rex they are clearly not designed for jumping with their entire structure suggesting this! This is just a couple of the massive list that suggests that your theory on this is wrong.

[True Disciple]

Originally Posted by natureboyuk6

How can you disprove the evidence that this is clearly a load of rubbish. It is not thorough analysis at all, it is looking at a picture and saying it looks a bit like something else. It is like saying that an eel is a snake that lives in water because both are cylindrical in structure.

Why couldn't you say that? After all, the Bible confirms that there are snakes that live in the water:

Isaiah 27:1:
In that day the LORD with his sore and great and strong sword shall punish leviathan the piercing serpent, even leviathan that crooked serpent; and he shall slay the dragon that is in the sea.

If you researched more you would clearly find that bone structure is completely different for starters the skull i.e. T.rex have a Diapsid skull and kangaroos have a Synapsid skull.

Why does that matter? We are talking about pouches, not about the number of holes God intelligently designed their skulls with. Try to keep up.

Another example can be the legs ... In a T. rex they are clearly not designed for jumping with their entire structure suggesting this!

Again, you cannot say that. Did you ever see a live T-Rex? Of course not. Secular scientists draw their assumptions from ridges and grooves on individual bones, and then say: "this is how the muscles probably went, so these animals couldn't have jumped."

But these are just assumptions, not facts. We can never say with certainty what the muscular structure of a T-Rex was, because there is no muscle tissue preserved. This means that the musculature of the T-Rex might just as well have been one designed for jumping.

This is just a couple of the massive list that suggests that your theory on this is wrong.

Why don't you bring on the rest, then?

[Two-Dollar Bill]

This is a most interesting revelation and one that will certainly open up further scientific study. I for one started to think about other marsupials and how their skeletons also appear similar to dinosaur skeletons. Granted this is not my area of expertise but is it not possible that, say, the stegosaurus is but a giant opossum? Or that another upright walking dinosaurus was merely a large wallaby?

As for the post by natureboyuk6, I think their first sentence should end in a colon rather than a period.

[Dr. Isaiah Jones]

Originally Posted by natureboyuk6

How can you disprove the evidence that this is clearly a load of rubbish.

My research is based on Biblical FACTS and the Holy Bible, my dear unsaved friend, is infallible.

2 Timothy 3:16 All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:

It is like saying that an eel is a snake that lives in water because both are cylindrical in structure.

Except that eels actually ARE snakes just like the T. Rex is, in fact, a kangaroo. The Bible refers to (giant) pre-flood eels as sea serpents or leviathans.

Isaiah 27:1 In that day the LORD with his sore and great and strong sword shall punish leviathan the piercing serpent, even leviathan that crooked serpent; and he shall slay the dragon that is in the sea.

If you researched more you would clearly find that bone structure is completely different for starters the skull i.e. T.rex have a Diapsid skull and kangaroos have a Synapsid skull.

I can't see any difference except that the skull of the T. Rex is, of course, much, much bigger.

Another example can be the legs ... In a T. rex they are clearly not designed for jumping with their entire structure suggesting this!

How would you know? Do you hold a doctorate in Biblical archaeology and pre-flood animal anatomy? Didn't think so.

[natureboyuk6]

It is not a snake. Nothing about it is similar to a snake!

Where is the proof that they had pouches if tissue etc. is not still here? There foot and leg structure would not allow for significant jumping nor would the size of the tail which would be needed for balance! Surely either way what your suggesting supports evolution? - loss of teeth, head structure etc.?

Why have we got an appendix if evolution isn't happening?

[ashley_mulcahy]

Originally Posted by Dr. Isaiah Jones

In the pre-flood world there was a canopy of water in the stratosphere. This is clearly documented in Genesis 1:6-8 which states:[INDENT][COLOR=Sienna][I]"And God said, Let there be a firmament in the midst of the waters, and let it divide the waters from the waters. And God made the firmament, and divided the waters which were under the firmament from the waters which were above the firmament: and it was so. And God called the firmament Heaven. And the evening and the morning were the second day."

Dr Isiah Jones, Please remove yourself from the church of landover. Your mention of the stratosphere rejects the flat earth beliefs that must be expressed on this website.

[Jack O'fagan]

Originally Posted by ashley_mulcahy

Dr Isiah Jones, Please remove yourself from the church of landover. Your mention of the stratosphere rejects the flat earth beliefs that must be expressed on this website.

Clearly the doctor was talking about the stratosemishere that covers the Earth. Sometimes we may use terms such as stratosphere because these are common terms even they may not be factual correct, in the same way that we may use the word 'Mediterranean', nobody thinks it is the middle of the Earth any more.

YIC

Jack

[Dr. Isaiah Jones]

Originally Posted by ashley_mulcahy

Dr Isiah Jones, Please remove yourself from the church of landover. Your mention of the stratosphere rejects the flat earth beliefs that must be expressed on this website.

Cosmology isn't my field and has absolutely nothing to do with my research. Please stay on topic or I'll have to wield the banhammer.

[ashley_mulcahy]

Originally Posted by Dr. Isaiah Jones

Cosmology isn't my field and has absolutely nothing to do with my research. Please stay on topic or I'll have to wield the banhammer.

I apologise and appreciate your respectful reply, as compared to some other people on this forum, however, could I please ask one more question based on this biblical quote. you said:

Gen 1, 6-8
"And God said, Let there be a firmament in the midst of the waters, and let it divide the waters from the waters. And God made the firmament, and divided the waters which were under the firmament from the waters which were above the firmament: and it was so. And God called the firmament Heaven. And the evening and the morning were the second day."

Based on your argument can I just confirm that you are suggesting that heaven was once inside our stratosphere? Based on your argument, i interpret it as heaven was a part of the stratosphere which was in between 2 layers of water? one below us and one above heaven.
Is this correct?

[Faith_Machine]

Originally Posted by ashley_mulcahy

...i interpret it...

First mistake, friend! There is absolutely no need to "interpret" the Bible, unless you're trying to help some poor idiot who doesn't speak American understand what it says.