Many evolutionist and scientist try to say that the human prints are just degraded dinosaur prints. Where two toes of the dinosaur foot have been eroded away and this is what makes these prints look human. But what about the other set of prints that cross the human looking prints and you can tell they are dinosaur prints? They have no explanation for this. If two toes from one set of prints, "in the exact area", eroded away from one print, the other prints should have done the same, or at least close to the same. But they did not, and the dinosaur tracks have the three toes visible! How could two different sets of foot prints, in the same exact area, dried up in the same water bed, at the same time, some even intersect one another, have different erosion? Their claims don't fit the visible facts. But they will still argue it though.
I'm still waiting to see that dinosaur with human feet.... Anyone?
Taylor Tracks Continued
Here's a photo of the tracks where water was being blocked to make them more visible. Any work like this, or removal of rock to find anymore evidence, was fought by eviromentalists. They said that it "Hurt" the river. So a "hurt the river law" was passed to keep anymore evidence from being found. Funny that there are many more tracks that lead under a slab of rock that is untouched and unweathered. Human tracks with more dinosaur tracks. These would be in well defined shape that could not be argued. But will never be looked at. Hmmm.... Makes you wonder don't it?
Is science really interested in finding the truth? It's right under the slab of rock where both a track of dinosaur and human foot prints end. And if the rock could be pulled up, we would have the truth. Science will climb the highest mountain to obtain the missing link, but will leave a slab of rock in a river bed that could reveal our true origins. Why? Do I really have to answer that question? Unlike those who e-mailed me wanted me to remove certain information. I believe the readers who come here can make up their own minds about what has really happened here. The evidence is really overwhelming as to the bias of what science will go to, to cover up what they don't won't you to see. But yet they will argue that science never lies or deceives, that it is the YEC who have to lie.
So my question would be: Why not remove that slab of rock. O, because there's a law. Well laws can be challenged. And I can guarantee you if the missing link was under that slab, how quick would that law been challenged and shot down to get to it? Well, The slab is still there. And I don't see one of those so called scientist's that always says: Where's your proof. Or, we would accept your proof if it were scientifically acceptable. What's under that slab of rock meets all that you require. What's holding you back? The truth that evolution is wrong, and that there is really a God? That's a scary thought for a scientists. I imagine some will even have nightmares after reading this.
