Did Carnivores Exist Before the Flood of Noah's Day?

[Pudgy]

In the interests of clarity, I can authoritatively tell you that all canine teeth were DESIGNED to eat meat ..... although I have been known to clean my teeth with an occasional raw carrot.

[Srecko Sostar]

5 hours ago, Dmitar said:

Is that not the topic of this thread, or have we moved on to another topic? You state, "at the time of their creation" as a point of reference.

You're right. But one topic cannot do without another. Trying to elaborate on the topic of animals and their diet before and after the Flood is difficult without trying to find out their original state, ie the relationship between all species of animals and the type of diet in the initial stage of existence. If I may remind you of my older comment on this (as well as on many other topics); We can only speculate.  

[Srecko Sostar]

6 hours ago, Dmitar said:

11 hours ago, Srecko Sostar said:

Let say this way. If we assumed that God expected Adam and Eve to do something in life, be it physical, intellectual, emotional or ideological/theoretical, then it cannot be under the burden of a “curse”.  Adam and Eve had to deal with the same “program of work” regardless of the change in their status before God. It is obvious that God made it difficult for them to carry out his own original plan. 

How does this square with the fact man was made perfect. Had man continued to be perfect in the Garden, how would they know what plants had illicit use? Then, there would be no such sinful placement upon man with such cursed ideology.

According to the WTJWorg interpretation, Adam and Eve along with their descendants lived long after their expulsion from Paradise. So they did not die the day they sinned. Various ideas about how long a biblical "day" lasts add to the confusion. We might speculate that their long life is a legacy of the remaining traces of “perfection”.

WTJWorg’s next idea is that Adam and Eve were aware of each of their actions. If so, then at the time of creation they already knew what to eat and what not. Or do you think that by being expelled from Paradise they became demented and forgot what could be eaten.  

It is difficult to understand God, especially after so many interpretations of him generated by religious leaders.  

 

[Patiently waiting for Truth]

I think the information in the Scriptures is for a purpose and that purpose is not to tell us everything, but to tell us what we 'need' to know. 

13 hours ago, Srecko Sostar said:

It is difficult to understand God, especially after so many interpretations of him generated by religious leaders.  

I've stopped listening to 'religious leaders' and prefer to believe what God's word says about Him. 

[Dmitar]

19 hours ago, Srecko Sostar said:

According to the WTJWorg interpretation, Adam and Eve along with their descendants lived long after their expulsion from Paradise.

I would you much rather you quote scripture and not some organization you have a problem with.

19 hours ago, Srecko Sostar said:

If so, then at the time of creation they already knew what to eat and what not. Or do you think that by being expelled from Paradise they became demented and forgot what could be eaten.

How does this relate to scripture and carnivores, since Genesis is clear about the vegetation? Can we then think, God made faulty beings?

[Pudgy]

Coprolite

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

  (Redirected from Corprolite)

 

 

Jump to navigation Jump to search

For fossilized feces in archaeological contexts, see Paleofeces.

Part of a series on
Paleontology

Fossils

Natural history

Organs and processes

Evolution of various taxa

Evolution

History of paleontology

Branches of paleontology

Paleontology Portal Category

v t e

 

A large coprolite of a carnivorous dinosaur found in Harding County, South Dakota, USA. Photo courtesy of the Poozeum

 

A large Miocene coprolite from South Carolina, USA.

 

A large coprolite (fossilized feces) from South Carolina, USA.

 

Age: White River Oligocene; Location: Northwest Nebraska; Dimensions: Varies (25 mm X 20 mm); Weight: 8-10 g; Features: Many small inclusions and one has a complete toe bone from a small deer called a leptomeryx.

A coprolite (also known as a coprolith) is fossilized feces. Coprolites are classified as trace fossils as opposed to body fossils, as they give evidence for the animal's behaviour (in this case, diet) rather than morphology. The name is derived from the Greek words κόπρος (kopros, meaning "dung") and λίθος (lithos, meaning "stone"). They were first described by William Buckland in 1829. Prior to this they were known as "fossil fir cones" and "bezoar stones". They serve a valuable purpose in paleontology because they provide direct evidence of the predation and diet of extinct organisms.^[1] Coprolites may range in size from a few millimetres to over 60 centimetres.

Coprolites, distinct from paleofeces, are fossilized animal dung. Like other fossils, coprolites have had much of their original composition replaced by mineral deposits such as silicates and calcium carbonates. Paleofeces, on the other hand, retain much of their original organic composition and can be reconstituted to determine their original chemical properties, though in practice the term coprolite is also used for ancient human faecal material in archaeological contexts.^[2][3][4]

Contents

• 1 Initial discovery
• 2 Research value
• 3 Recognizing coprolites
• 4 Coprolite mining
• 5 See also
• 6 Notes
• 7 References

Initial discovery

British fossil hunter Mary Anning noticed as early as 1824 that "bezoar stones" were often found in the abdominal region of ichthyosaur skeletons found in the Lias formation at Lyme Regis.^[5] She also noted that if such stones were broken open they often contained fossilized fish bones and scales as well as sometimes bones from smaller ichthyosaurs. It was these observations by Anning that led the geologist William Buckland to propose in 1829 that the stones were fossilized feces and name them coprolites. Buckland also suspected that the spiral markings on the fossils indicated that ichthyosaurs had spiral ridges in their intestines similar to those of modern sharks, and that some of these coprolites were black with ink from swallowed belemnites.^[6]

Research value

By examining coprolites, paleontologists are able to find information about the diet of the animal (if bones or other food remains are present), such as whether it was a herbivore or a carnivore, and the taphonomy of the coprolites, although the producer is rarely identified unambiguously,^[7] especially with more ancient examples.^[8] In some instances, knowledge about the anatomy of animal digestive tracts can be helpful in assigning a coprolite to the animal that produced it, one example being the finding that the Triassic dinosauriform Silesaurus may have been an insectivore, a suggestion which was based on the beak-like jaws of the animal and the high density of beetle remains found in associated coprolites.^[9] Further, coprolites can be analyzed for certain minerals that are known to exist in trace amounts in certain species of plant that can still be detected millions of years later.^[10]

Conclusion by Pudgy the 2d Cartoon Dog

Animals have been herbivores, Omnivores and Carnivores since the very beginning, BILLIONS of years ago, or at the very least, many hundreds of millions of years ago, and there is HARD evidence to prove beyond any shadow of a doubt that this is true ....

UNLESS, of course your neurons are agenda driven programmed to the contrary, or you are as deliberately and willfully stupid as ...uh... Coprolite.

[Dmitar]

@PudgyCan you explain, with your presentation, accidental digestion of a smaller animal inside dense vegetation by a larger animal? What scientific proof can you offer? I see the focused has changed from Creation of the animal kingdom to before the Creation of man. 

[Srecko Sostar]

13 hours ago, Dmitar said:

I would you much rather you quote scripture and not some organization you have a problem with.

Scriptures have their advantages, but they also have their disadvantages. It is not a book on natural sciences, geology, biology, zoology, etc. For many of the things we are discussing we will never find a biblical quote. Or do you think it's possible?
If possible, then let’s say, who in this JW Open Club can quote some biblical passage that supports the thesis of JW Christians that blood components and fractions are that what they are not, or that they are not what they are? 

Many have a problem with WTJWorg, not just me. Loyal members have a bigger problem, because they are inside and I am outside :)) The fact that we are in the JW Open Club and that we are developing various discussions under this platform shows that you are not quite right in that assessment.

 

[Dmitar]

2 hours ago, Srecko Sostar said:

Scriptures have their advantages, but they also have their disadvantages. It is not a book on natural sciences, geology, biology, zoology, etc. For many of the things we are discussing we will never find a biblical quote. Or do you think it's possible?

Since the topic seems to relate to a biblical event, you would think it's best looked at through the eyes of scripture. Archorolgy has a different approach. Therefore, scripture can be found. Perhaps not to anyone's satisfaction here, but it can be applied.

2 hours ago, Srecko Sostar said:

Many have a problem with WTJWorg, not just me. Loyal members have a bigger problem, because they are inside and I am outside :))

I don't consider anyone disparaging their own faith loyal. However, that would be for a different topic. I also don't see where it would make a difference on this topic.

[Pudgy]

14 hours ago, Dmitar said:

@PudgyCan you explain, with your presentation, accidental digestion of a smaller animal inside dense vegetation by a larger animal?

I can do better than THAT!

Being a Cartoon Carnivore I can authoritatively state as an expert that Cartoon Herbivores such as artists' renditions of Cartoon Rabbits, that they can be caught in an elevated upside down box trap baited with a photograph of a carrot.

...... moral of the story is this:

.... silly questions may be legitimately answered with silly answers.

[Dmitar]

12 hours ago, Pudgy said:

.... silly questions may be legitimately answered with silly answers.

https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/when-herbivores-arent-poor-chicken-got-eaten-cow-180951115/#:~:text=Lal the cow’s behaviour might be motivated by,of behaviour that we’re only beginning to document.

Do cows ever eat meat? Herbivores eat plants and carnivores eat meat, and then there are a few oddball omnivores that eat both. Cows are probably the best-known ruminants (and have been witnessed eating birds). Yet even animals from this highly plant-specialized group will eat meat when given the chance.

The answer you seem to draw your remark from is with the word accidental. This just means, as you imply, low IQ when it comes to not understanding a simple question. However, I noticed you draw your strength from being rude and obnoxious. Is this a Jehovah Witness trait? Or have you recently be removed from that organization you adamantly disparage to a point, you don't care what people think of your organization. Is this your intent?

[Patiently waiting for Truth]

55 minutes ago, Dmitar said:

Or have you recently be removed from that organization you adamantly disparage to a point, you don't care what people think of your organization. Is this your intent?

1. I don't think he liked the 'hpocritical discipline' of the JW Org's elders.

2. I think he may have had a problem which led to him being d/fed. 

3. I could be wrong on both counts above.