The term Dinosaur Fossils" comes from three Latin words: Deinos, meaning "great;" Sauros, meaning "lizard;" and Fossilis, meaning "dug up." Therefore, dinosaur fossil literally means "great lizard that was dug up

 

This is downright illiterate. Although the term "fossil" was originally applied to anything which is dug out of the ground, it is now used only to refer to the petrified remains of living organisms.

 

British anatomist Sir Richard Owen (1804-1892) coined the word "dinosaur" in 1841.

 

 

 

A British fossil finder and ecclesiastic, William Buckland (1784-1856), discovered the first dinosaur fossil remains of our modern times.

 

Not quite. He described Megalosaurus, but didn't discover it

 

In 1819, Buckland discovered the Megalosaurus Bucklandii (Buckland's Giant Lizard) in England. It was given its name in 1824. Prior to this, Reverend Plot had found a huge femur bone as early as 1676 in England. It was thought to belong to a giant. R. Brookes published a report on Plot's find in 1763. Authorities suggest it may actually have belonged to a dinosaur.

 

They though that it was a giant human scrotum, and called it "scrotum humanum". Note that Buckland was not the discoverer

 

However, with the discovery of giant human skeletal remains ranging from 8 feet to 12 feet-tall around the world in the last few hundred years, many believe the Plot femur may have belonged to a very tall human.

 

Nobody with any knowledge of science believes this! There is no evidence whatsover for the existence of such giant humans.

 

1838, William Parker Foulke found the first (nearly) complete dinosaur fossil remains in New Jersey, USA. Since Buckland's original discovery in 1819, approximately 330 different dinosaur genera have been discovered thus far.

 

 

 

Dinosaur fossils, as with other fossils, are found throughout earth's sedimentary layers.

 

A flat falsehood. They are found only in Mesozoic rocks (if one excludes modern birds)

 

To date, approximately 95.0% of all earth's fossil remains are marine invertebrates, 4.74% are plants, 0.25% are land invertebrates (including insects), and 0.0125% are vertebrates. Of the vertebrates, the majority are fish. Moreover, 95% of all land vertebrates found consist of less than one bone. However, billions of fossils have been found. Up to as many as 1,200 dinosaur skeletons have been discovered thus far.

 

 

 

Sedimentary rock (sandstone, siltstone, shale, limestone, etc) is primarily laid down by moving water layer upon layer,

 

Most fossil-bearing sedimentary rocks were not laid down by moving water.

 

, in a process known as hydrologic sorting

 

Hydrologic sorting is not the process by which sedimentary layers are deposited. It is the process which sorts particle size in moving water.

 

Animals whose fossil remains are found must have been caught in this running water to have been buried and preserved

 

Most fossil vertebrates, especially those which are well-preserved are the product of environments in which there was little water movement.

 

The remains would be sorted by density just as the rocks were .

 

This is utter nonsense! Fossils are not "sorted by density".

 

If not buried, the carcass would rot or be scavenged .

 

...and we have extensive evidence for caracases rotting and being scavenged!

 

Fossil remains of clams (found in the closed position, indicating they were buried alive) have been found atop Mt. Everest. Sedimentary layers and fossil remains seem to be a testimony to a past marine cataclysm .

 

Rocks and the fossils they contain have been formed under a wide range of different conditions, and very rarely as a consequence of a cataclysm of any kind.

 

There are nearly 300 surviving Flood Legends passed down by ancient civilizations .

 

Which is completely and utterly irrelevant.

 

Some suggest Noah's Flood .

 

..but nobody who doesn't have a religious axe to grind.

 

Dinosaur fossils were once thought to be millions of years old .

 

They are known to be millions of years old because several different strands of evidence point that way.

 

This age was based upon the geologic column.

 

The ages of rocks are determined by a number of different methods.

 

The geologic column dates fossils by the rocks in which they are found, and dates rocks by the fossils they contain .

 

Absolute dates are determined by a range of different methods. The geological column is a theoretical concept which organises their relative dates.

 

Critics insist this is circular reasoning .

 

Only "critics" ignorant of basic geology.

 

The intelligent layman has long suspected circular reasoning in the use of rocks to date fossils and fossils to date rocks"" (J.E. O'Rourke, ""American Journal of Science,"" 1976, 276:51).

 

This is called "quote-mining". It proves nothing. Incidentally, the last couple of paragraphs from this rather poor and rambling article read as follows:

 

The charge of circular reasoning in stratigraphy can be handled in several ways. it can be ignored, as not the proper concern of the public. It can be denied, by calling down the Law of Evolution. Fossil dates rocks, not vice-versa, and that's that. It can be admitted, as a common practice. The time scales of physics and astronomy are obtained by comparing one process with another. They can be compared with the geologic processes of sedimentation, organic evolution, and radioactivity. Or it can be avoided, by pragmatic reasoning.
The first step is to explain what is done in the field in simple terms that can be tested directly. The field man records his sense perceptions on isomorphic maps and sections, abstracts the more diagnostic rock features, and arranges them according to their vertical order. He compares this local sequence to the global column obtained from a great many man-years of work against his predecessors. As long as this cognitive process is acknowledged as the pragmatic basis of stratigraphy, both local and global sections can be treated as chronologies without reproach.

 

MISREPRESENTATION

 

Furthermore, the geologic column assumes uniformity ,

 

It does nothing of the sort.

 

, which has come to be disproved by such geologic features as poly-strata fossils ,

 

...which were explained by geologists over a century ago

 

misplaced fossils ,

 

...which seem mysteriously to disappear when evidence for their existence is demanded

 

missing layers ,

 

...which are absolutely no problem for geologists to explain...

 

and misplaced layers

 

...whatever that might mean ...

 

(such as layers in reverse order, or "ancient" layers found several layers above "modern" layers ).

 

...which are explained by the observable processes of tectonic plate movement

 

Most recently, advocates of an "Old Earth "

 

...by which they mean "scientists"...

 

" turn to Radiometric Dating to prove dinosaurs to be ancient. Though they cannot date the dinosaur remains themselves, they can date rocks buried near the dinosaur remains. This is not accepted by many authorities as valid ,

 

It is by everyone not blinkered by religious dogma and who is familiar with the evidence.

 

as Radiometric Dating is based upon controversial assumptions

 

The only "controversial assumption" is that the universe behaves in a consistent and coherent way - which is the same assumption of every other field of science.

 

held to be erroneous by many scholars ,

 

Those who question the validity of radiometric dating are not "scholars". They are motivated only by relious dogma, not sicence

 

as indicated by empirical research .

 

There is no such "empirical research".

 

Dinosaurs are assumed to be millions of years old .

 

That dinosaurs are millions of years old is a conclusion formed from numerous strands of evidence.

 

Many now propose they died off in recent times and are responsible for the myriad of dragon myths .

 

No serious scientist with a knowledge of the field has ever proposed such an idea.

 

This has come to be a popular theory with such discoveries as the Ice Stones ,

 

He means the "Ica stones" - which have been exposed as a crude forgery

 

the Glenn Rose tracks , etc.

 

...which are such an obvious forgery that even some creationist sites are trying to distance themselves from the claims made for them

 

In addition, human remains have been found buried with dinosaur remains on more than one occasion .

 

No such discovery has ever been made.

 

It may be that man hunted dinosaurs to extinction .

 

Oh , brother!