Friday, January 1, 2016

Why 2016 Will Be The Year Of The Christian (Conservative) Revival In America

All quotes and images used via the Fair use act.

By David Wilson

As a Christian, I am loath to use the phrase, "the stars are aligning", but it's a common enough expression that people use innocently enough and it's good news so I will use it here: the stars are aligning for 2016 to be the beginning of an extremely rapid Christian revival in America of the sort not otherwise seen in our lifetimes.  It's true, and not so difficult to predict.

WHY, EXPLAINED. Click the links for evidence from reputable organizations


Islamic terrorists have helped Christians put their own faith into a practical perspective. For decades Christians have listened to secular media popularists demand we "turn the other cheek" but never remind us that Jesus used a whip of cords to drive out the money changers. They tell us to love thy enemy but forget to remind us that even among Christians, there is right and wrong to be held accountable within the church between brothers and sisters in Christ. In other words, the media has told Christians to shut up, be quiet, take down your decorations, don't wear a cross at work or school and be thankful that you can still watch A Charlie Brown Christmas on DVD, you terrible, ignorant, irritating believer you.

Now things are different. There is an enemy not in sociological or pop culture terms, but in physical, life or death terms; an enemy that wants to behead us; a filthy, brutal and barbaric enemy so inhumanely savage as to make the worst of Hitler's Nazi Third Reich look like shining examples of humanity by comparison. That enemy, Radical Islam, has claimed continually since its activist emergence that it wants to kill every Christian man, woman and child and are so entirely unhinged in their murderous, brainwashed mindset that they will kill themselves just for the privilege of murdering others.  And among the adherents of that faith, as many as 51% polled within the United States say they want Sharia law in the United Sates, which just happens to include: stoning, rape, oppression and murder, and 25% agree with bombings of civilians for the same reason. It would be comical it is so extreme, were it not so nightmarishly true.  And all the while, those same pop culture popularists espouse a brutal variation of their past rhetoric so horrendous in regard to radical Islam as to be beyond comprehension - and as the easily-influenced, social -misfit youth , as those past influenced by Hitler's Brownshirts and the radical SDS in the early 1970's - pick up their message and say it more directly on social media: "Shut up, Christians, while he kill you for the savage thrill of it."

Suddenly what has happened and what is happening to this nation - and the world - falls into very sharp focus and the lethargic, shrug-it-off Christians now realize they are faced with a life or death decision: shut up and die.... OR SPEAK UP AND LIVE. And unsurprisingly, tens of millions are speaking up.  Angrily.


If it were only number one, above, things might trod on as they have been for many more years, but related to one, above, is that there is a Presidential election coming in which something remarkable is already happening: the Republican front-runner, Donald Trump, has rejected all of the timid, knees-knocking political correctness exhibited by every former and current republican candidate for decades and has spoken up against the murderous threat to Christians by radical Islam, and Trump has done so with basic common sense and in strong, blunt and direct terms leaving no one in any doubt about where the matter currently stands. Everyday conservative Christians, admiring Trump and feeling unshackled and liberated to speak by his example, are also not just speaking up, but speaking up loudly and most of all, demanding action from their elected leaders against an enemy that threatens to kill them while our current White House leadership downplays to the terror and admonishes those in fear for their families as being 'racist".

It is unfortunate that so many Christians, psychologically bludgeoned into submission by a brutal and intolerant pop culture society needed a life-or-death decision to rouse them from their lethargy, but finally the giant has awakened and, with each passing day, is making his anger and indignation known in stronger and stronger terms. And the world is listening and other countries are picking up on trumps message: the leaders of other nations - France, Great BritainGermany and small European countries, seemingly following Trump's example, are  saying what our current President has refused to utter, though words so simple to say: take a stand against radical Islam or radical Islam will certainly succeed in killing us.

This in turn, is forcing a usually timid congress to take stronger action against the current politicians who appear to have been complacent and even accommodating to terrorists, doing so through the channels they have available, such as the Benghazi investigation.

Many Christians eschew politics, instead favoring the Kingdom of God, and while that is Christian and noble, God made it very clear that we are on this earth to prove that we are worthy, and we are specifically commanded, in the Old and New Testament alike, to fight evil - and those who would murder children wholesale for any reason whatsoever are truly evil in the purest form, or evil has no practical definition. 

For the first time in my over-half-century lifetime, ordinary citizens are fighting evil again. The otherwise gentle giant known as American Christianity is now understanding that they have a choice between entering the Kingdom of God by either being strong and entering it via natural causes, or being weak and entering it by being murdered by a hideously beheaded,  and so, finally, ordinary citizens are again making their voices heard: they are choosing strength, longevity and following God's word to fight evil.

And as they fight evil, Christianity shows its truth and power, and thus, as one would expect, Christianity has very suddenly started growing again. 


Extending 2, above, the country appears to be headed toward a Republican President - probably Trump - who is certain to excoriate Hillary Clinton on her mountain of scandals and do so in the debates before millions of Americans who had otherwise not really been paying attention until that point, and those millions will be sickened and horrified by Hillary's scandals, because Trump will lay it on the line and say it straight up. 

If Hillary is damaged by her scandals, as appears to be her obvious political trajectory, that's the end of all the democrat hopes for 2016, and if nothing else, a republican, conservative congress led by a conservative, republican President will put Christ and the cross back in the public square again, arguing successfully that separation of church and state was so very plainly meant to allow public displays of faith, not censor them, and that includes federal buildings. remember, back in the day of our founding fathers, Sunday Christian services were held in the congressional building. That legal precedent alone makes clear the intention of the founding fathers demand of separation of church and state, and thus shows that that idea has been monstrously perverted by very bad people and that perversion allowed by very weak leaders who could have fought it. 

2016, however, will see no weakness, that is for sure, because Trump is making blunt common sense popular in America, again. 

All that was in America in recent decades is about to change.


Christian movies made for very little money are raking in the cash. Fireproof, War Room and the like are turning astounding profits at the box-office. Hollywood, hating Christians but greedily unable to resist the smell of hard cash, is starting to follow the independent movie example and put out little Christian films for fat returns, and this new, slow, drip drip drip of the Christian message from - of all places - Hollywood into the American mainstream is seeing profound effects. Hollywood hates Christians, but their lust for money will be the undoing of that anti-Christian town and the audience they have for so long successfully influenced away from God, and it will happen in a way rare in the world: with poetic justice.

Creationism is on the rise. if you don't know, polls from such reliable secular - and sometime atheist-biased - sources such as Gallup, CBS News, the BBC and others consistently have shown for decades up until today that more than 40% of all those polled in the U.S. and (higher in) Great Britain, both essentially equally, reject evolution and believe that God made man as he is. This you would never know, of course, as most citizens - even Creationists themselves - have come to believe the unending lie that they represent a some kind of crazy fringe in English-speaking countries. 

In an rather sick but unsurprising irony, the atheists who dominate the media and who have been responsible for spreading the fringe creationist lie, conversely make up only 15% in those same countries in those same polls. 

The idea that those who reject evolution are a 'crazy, fringe minority" is perhaps the greatest lie ever successfully promoted in western society. And that is what that idea is: it is a lie. Almost half of all English-speaking people rightfully reject evolution as a fairy tale.

Here is the good news: creationism is rising among republicans. In the 2012 election, the anti-Christian left, using  gross, Nazi-style propaganda art such as Sarah Palin riding a T-Rex (an image they still use today),  unsuccessfully attempted to use the fact of creationism rising among Republicans to attempt to portray Republicans as "becoming more stupid" in the last several years, which is of course an insane proposition, especially from people who embrace long-term evolution as a catalyst for human change. What is really happening, you might ask? It's obvious: social media is getting the Creationist message out faster and faster, and the smart people are understanding it.

When I first produced Behold Now Behemoth in 2007/2008, Creationism on social media barely existed. It was relegated to an intellectual and social media no-man's land; mocked and derided almost by all, in total defiance of the 45% of creationists. No longer. There are many creationist groups on social media, now, and as they spread news about more discoveries and more facts - some amazing, such as the Smithsonian Institution-reported finding of soft dinosaur tissue in bones, both of which should have decayed a couple of hundred million years ago - Creationists are gaining massive confidence compared to what they once had, and that confidence is being seen in strength of their their voices and their growing numbers. 

Before now before anyone who still does not quite understand the landscape says, "Oh no! The creationists will make the rest of us look silly!", please remember - once again - that  approximately 45% of the populations of both the United States and the always sophisticated Great Britain remain creationists and already reject evolution. And those numbers are firming up quite plainly in the last couple of years.

Creationists don't need to make our point so much as let the world know that 45% of us are them. That alone will see a further dramatic strengthening of the Christian mindset, determination and activism, as nothing says legitimate as a majority of believers, because once you remove the `15% of atheists, that 45% becomes 55% of a majority of all religious believers rejecting evolution. That's called "A Majority" once you chuck out the atheists.


A Christian-loving Congress signing laws to be signed by a very determined, Christian-loving President, changing the laws - and attitude - of the most influential nation on earth on the heels of anger and outrage by so many, including that same Congress and new President. The determination level will be one never seen by most living generations. Guaranteed.

A murderous and savage enemy which has gone too far, having committed not just a Hiroshima, but created a murderous,  albeit primitive, SS squad as well, and in so doing has brought upon itself not righteous victory, but the wrath of a nation whose power to send them to the one true God is certain to be witnessed in a little more than a year.

The Hollywood money machine is now unwittingly feeding Christians more of the confidence and determination they need to make restoring Christianity on a local level to the public square.

Creationism is, in my opinion, one of the great, positive ultimates of Christian belief. It's growing from within the conservative wing of the nation not because the conservatives are in some impossible way becoming overall less intelligent 6 years  than the 15% atheist - and statistically manifestly social misfit counterparts - but because social media has educated conservatives' smart minds to facts such as those found elsewhere on this site and many others which prove evolution to be once of the most absurd concepts ever embraced by a so-called enlightened society. As they learn that 45% of us are them - and why - expect that number to explode.

CreationDino will be doing its part, here, of course.

Tell everyone you know the little - and socially explosive - fact that creationists have always been in our lifetimes and currently - right now -   are 45% of all whom they know here and in the UK. Just like with your vote, in this you can make a difference. The polls are from such secular strongholds as CBS news and the BBC, so those polls are legit. Tell everyone you know that 45% of everyone in the US and UK are Creationists and watch Christianity - and creationism - grow.

We're at an absolutely wonderful reverse-precipice, a magnificent tipping point, going from shackled to unleashed, from silenced to owning the megaphone, all in God's name, in the most successful and powerful nation on earth.

2016 is the year of the Christian revival. Count on it.

Just watch!

If you like what you see and read on CreationDino, please help us continue our work as well as additional installments of the video Behold Now Behemoth by giving a "Christian Payment Offering" for the dollar amount of your choice with the dropdown menu on the Paypal button on the upper right hand side of the screen for what you read and watch on CreationDino. We could really use the help right about now. Thank you!

Tuesday, December 22, 2015

Behemoth/Genesis Update and A Brand New FAQ. PLEASE READ!

All quotes and images used via the Fair Use Act.

I suppose my adrenaline is running high,  just coming off the four-and-one-half-day Christopher Hitchens Appreciation page "debate" with an army of atheists (I won, frankly, by every debating rule in the book - they never debated and after four and a half days just blocked me after 400 posts consisting of mostly insults from the atheists). Being only human, therefore, and imperfect, I am in no mood, really, to then go to Facebook groups and see more ads for Eric Hovind's "Genesis the Movie". My problem with it is that movie, if you don't already know, is that in my opinion, and that of a growing number of others, is that there are similarities between Hovind's upcoming Genesis Movie and my Behold Now Behemoth from 2008 which are overwhelming. Too overwhelming to be coincidence, in my opinion and that of many others.

Before we get to the FAQ, I will repeat the similarities (so far) for those who don't know.

I'm not alone in my opinion of the similarities. Here is a very minimal sample of some of the previous responses on Facebook, used via the Fair Use Act, with personal information redacted. They can claim authorship if they want, but obviously I want to respect the privacy of friends and supporters. The opinions are those of the people who posted, not me.

While posting my request on Facebook for Eric Hovind to do the right thing according in accordance with Matthew 18 and explain why his upcoming Genesis The Movie for which he continues to raise finance looks so much like my Behold Now Behemoth from 2008, people have asked me the same questions repeatedly, and so it makes sense to post a FAQ.


1. Q. Eric Hovind says his movie, Genesis the Movie, is or will be the first special effects-driven Creationist movie/video of it's kind. Is that true or false?

A: If a movie is only defined as running 82 minutes or longer it is technically true but totally and IMO intentionally misleading in a very big way. If it means even something that runs 30 minutes, then the statement is entirely false. Behold Now Behemoth was released, seen and very favorably reviewed in 2008.

2. Q. In your opinion, should Eric Hovind stop publicly and repeatedly making the claim that his upcoming Genesis The Movie is the first such video and therefore unique?

A. Yes, of course. Absolutely. It is essentially untrue in actual fact, and he certainly knows it now.

3. Q. Have you contacted Hovind in private and does he know about this?

A: Yes, I conversed with his Facebook account in private and once I made my displeasure known, the account simply blocked me. I think most of us would agree that that's not the way one Christian brother is supposed to behave towards another. His show co-host., Maryanne Pike and I have communicated in private in Facebook a few times. Eventually she asked me to hold off my public complaint for one evening while she contacted Eric Hovind. That was many weeks ago. I asked her more recently for a follow-up. She did not respond directly to the request. Once again, IMO this is inappropriate behavior for one Christian to another.

4. Q. Creationism is coming from the same source, the Bible. therefore isn't such a preponderance of similarity to be expected from the two videos?

A. No. The idea that Creationism covers the same ground is obvious. the idea that so many visual and conceptual similarities arose by necessity by following those ideas is not remotely credible. Let's describe it this way, for starters:
I. Both are documentaries about creationism which cover the same ground in the style of the special-effects oriented science documentaries on the science channels. So there is a similarity right off the top. Before Genesis the Movie behold Now Behemoth had been the only video/movie to ever do a Creationist video in that manner. Indisputable.

II. Even if Eric Hovind had been previously unaware of Behemoth, which in my opinion is unlikely in the extreme,then the PREPONDERANCE of visual similarities was something that IMO Hovind, as a producer, had a duty to avoid by doing due diligence on this matter. You need to find similar subject matter and make sure you avoid it. This plainly was not done. Since Hovind makes his living, apparently, in the Creationist field and Behemoth was available and got good reviews years beforehand, make the idea that Hovind was unaware of Behemoth, in my opinion, essentially totally impossible. 

III. It's one thing to say, :"documentaries have nebula travel scenes".... "they have dinosaurs".... they have flying dinosaurs over mountains"..... "they may even have waterfall with creatures".... "maybe others have a T-Rex roaring at the camera"..... "maybe they fly over misty mountains"...... "and elephants"..... "and CGI animals".... but for a new Creationist video to have all those similarities with the only one previously existing creationist video of its kind ever made and thinking it to be a mere coincidence in my opinion and that of others lacks believably on a huge scale.

IV. Some aspects, such as the general visual aesthetic of shady forest lighting augmented by glowing highlights, particular in the only other creationist video of its kind ever made IMO screams "copy". 

V. ADD to that (please, do not compartmentalize these similarities because it is the preponderance which is the issue) the fact that both videos include the idea/concept of a man scratching the head a juvenile Apatosaurus, and IMO the idea that Behemoth "inspired", Genesis directly, just sends, IMO, the copy-o-meter needle into the red line. Remember, it is not that Genesis The Movie contains one of these things or many things from many different videos, it is that the one upcoming Genesis The Movie contains ALL of these things only found together in one other place: my Behold Now Behemoth from 2008.

5. Q: Should not all Christians should be grateful for another Creationist video telling the truth? 

A. That's fine on the surface. But I am also trying to raise money for volumes 2 and 3 of Behemoth (see the paypal buttons if you want to contribute) . Genesis, backed by a loud, big-money operation could make Behemoth from 2007 look like the copycat. Basically, my own opinion is that I am being steamrolled by an unauthorized remake of my own previous production. 

6. Q:  Should you really be personally upset?

A. Wouldn't you? This is serious business for me. How would YOU feel if YOU put a year of blood and sweat into Behemoth, it did well, got good reviews, and when you started to raise funds for volumes 2 and 3 you discovered Genesis being incorrectly touted by a big-money operation as 'the first of its kind" and "unique"? Be honest. It's unpleasant but stop and think about it. How would you feel? That's your answer.

7. Q. Besides Eric Hovind refusing to respond and Maryanne Pike's communications, has anyone else responded? 

A. Perhaps. A couple of people taking up for me have been verbally harassed on Facebook (though this has since stopped, so it's okay to make your thoughts known publicly again), in an apparent effort to shut them up. Hovind should speak out against these kinds of people ASAP or risk, IMO, appearing as though he employs such trolls as social media henchmen for his own business advancement.
8. Why not sue?

A. 1 Corinthians 6 tells us not to, but rather to work it out within the church. I know media and I know social media. Like it would be in the halls of a single congregation, eventually this issue will sit on the surface of Genesis the Movie like a radioactive cloud to other Christians and by that time, Eric Hovind's answers may read and sound thin, indeed, to those from whom he is attempting to raise money from Genesis. Obviously, it would be best for him to follow Matthew 18, which he has steadfastly refused to do for months, and make a credible and completely believe case for the overwhelming similarities.

9. Q. Will you stop before you get a satisfactory response per Matthew 18?

A. No. I paid for Behemoth in 2007-2008 out of my own pocket, with my own money. We worked hard on it and while the special effects are now looking a dated, they were regarded as excellent even by mainstream standards in 2008. I intend to do more volumes of Behemoth. It is my opinion that Genesis The Movie is very, very dramatically damaging my interests by existing so similarly and making untrue claims about being the first and unique, destroying Behemoth's well-deserved accolades and reputation.
Here are additional shots from Behemoth and a review.

10. What do you think will happen?

A. That depends entirely on Eric Hovind, who is listed as the producer of Genesis the Movie and who, in my opinion and that of many others, has a great deal of explaining to do.

HERE ARE A COUPLE OF PIECES OF GENESIS THE MOVIE GRAPHICS, used here via the Fair Use Act, which Hovind and company are using to promote their movie and rase money (they already raised half a million dollars. 

Please remember my Behold Now Behemoth and the fact that Eric Hovind apparently refuses to answer, per Matthew 18, questions about the similarities, when you see these posters online.

Used via the Fair Use Act.

Used via the Fair Use Act.


My most heartfelt thanks to the friends on Facebook and elsewhere who have like, shared, and spoken in defense of these concerns by following Mathew 18, which I will repeat here:

"Moreover if thy brother shall trespass against thee, go and tell him his fault between thee and him alone: if he shall hear thee, thou hast gained thy brother. But if he will not hear thee, then take with thee one or two more, that in the mouth of two or three witnesses every word may be established. And if he shall neglect to hear them, tell it unto the church: but if he neglect to hear the church, let him be unto thee as an heathen man and a publican".

Monday, December 14, 2015

The Empirical Evidence For A Young Earth 6,000 - To - 10,000 Years Old.

All images and quotes used via the Fair Use Act.

By David Wilson

here is a great deal of scientific theory and speculation being passed off as fact regarding the age of the earth. But there is no way to prove any of it without at least two points of reference, historical record, or empirical evidence. The empirical evidence which does exist makes clear not only that the earth is young, but taken in its totality, the resulting collection fits very nicely into the Biblical time frame of 10,000 years or less. Such a manner of deducing the age would ordinarily be called an extrapolation (to draw a conclusion from a series of facts) by the mainstream scientific community, but where science must accept the facts of Christianity for the larger view to hold together, the scientific community appears to willfully lose sight of that little technique usually so important to any field of study.

There are many examples, but some are so conclusive as empirical evidence that, taken collectively, you really don't need anything else because all the additional theories in the world do not address and certainly do not disprove these examples of empirical evidence of a young earth. CreationDino wants to win this battle against the Old Earth atheists and those they influence quickly, so here is a small collection when, taken in the aggregate, is all anyone needs to throw at an atheist - and those innocents whom atheists would wrongly influence with their really, really bad science.

Remember, each one of these does not exist in its own universe. You must acknowledge that all of these are true simultaneously, and then you realize that an Old Earth is entirely impossible and a Young Earth is what the empirical evidence proves:

All facts in this creationist article are qualified by mainstream secular information sources - in other words, the places that most mock creationists - so you know the facts are not being fudged in favor of Creationism. Click the links as you go and you will be astounded at how correct this article really is. Astounded, because it proves everything you have been taught by the mainstream your whole life is absolute garbage.


A fragment of Sumerian writing: primitive production, sophisticated content.

It only goes back approximately 4,000 years, and when it begins, people are discussing philosophy and politics and intelligent views of the human emotional condition. Now, the problem with the Old Earth model is that it is believed that primitive people handed down primitive stories from generation to generation. That's cute, but what is written in the beginning of recorded history far surpasses any kind of verbal passing from one generation to another, it is much, much too complex to be preserved by oral tradition.

King Tutsville

Humankind used to be thought to go back a million years. Now chromosome discoveries have forced the mainstream scientific establishment to roll that back to "only" 50,000 - to - 150,000 years or so (once again basing their statement of "fact" on theoretical conclusions about the chromosome evidence). So even then, how did human beings pass down to generations and spread out to very large populations all these complex ideas for 44,000 - to - 144,000 years which otherwise spring like a fountain the moment written history is introduced?

There are many examples of why oral tradition breaks down after a certain population size, but here is a simple one everyone remembers. Did you ever play "telephone" in grade school where the teacher whispers an idea into one child's ear, they whisper it to the next and so on and when it comes back to the teacher the expressed thought is entirely different? That extremely simple, everyday example alone should remind everyone that preserving the first written philosophical and sociological complexities to very large populations and through generations by oral tradition alone would have obviously been entirely impossible. Oral tradition breaks down very quickly when larger numbers are introduced. It would have been impossible to preserve complex philosophies in the same manner.

What we are left with according to the information the mainstream promotes is essentially 44,000 - 144,000 years of grunting and 10-word vocabularies punctuated by bearskins and clubs and then out of nowhere people are writing about politics, ethics, philosophy and good manners. While this absurd dichotomy does not seem to bother the mainstream scientist at all, it's a laughable scenario to anyone with an ounce of common sense. The mainstream view is therefore plainly wrong and the Christian Creationist view is plainly the correct one.

Possibly the first Christian book, held by the Apostles

The Creationist - and obviously correct - answer? God created man as he exists, his mind fully-formed and functioning as a created being, already thinking complex concepts from the get-go, so all that sophisticated thinking showed up the moment man started writing.

4,000 year written history fits perfectly into the Biblical time frame which makes coincidence rather unlikely to say the least.

Now as they say in those TV commercials for "as seen on TV" products, "But wait! there's more!"


For the earth to be 10,000 years old or less would demand that dinosaurs lived at the same time as men. So indoctrinated has western culture been with the supposed "fact' that such a thing was impossible that, unhappily, as you know or can imagine, many people find the concept laughable. But then, remember this CreationDino article that proves - proves, 100%, no doubt whatsoever - that mainstream paleontology either lied to protect jobs and scientific establishment orthodoxy or were truly too stupid to be trusted for a full 100 years on the subject of warm or cold-blooded dinosaurs.

1964 illustration showing inaccurate endothermic dinosaurs, an idea demanded by all of mainstream science when the truth that the dinosaurs were warm-blooded - endothermic - was already understood for 100 years, but what;s a little fib here and there between mainstream science academicians?

First, there is none - zero - empirical evidence that dinosaurs died off millions of years ago. The age of dinosaur bones is determined by radiometric dating - reading the age of the mineral content around the bones and, despite mainstream science pronouncements to the contrary, this process has been proved time and again to be extremely unreliable; volcanic material from different volcanoes, all less than 1,000 years old, over and over, are dated in the hundreds of thousands - to - millions of years old. The labs have become so paranoid about being punked by happy and fun-loving creationists that the labs now demand to know so much about the sample to be dated beforehand that they essentially demand that the person paying the lab to date the material essentially date it themselves. It's horrendously unreliable science, but then the paleontology field lied or was too stupid to get the absolute simplest basics right for 100 years, also, so radiometric dating is just more of the same, today.

One dating process that is, in fact, somewhat reliable, however, is radiocarbon dating, which, as rightfully predicted by the inventor, Professor Willard Libby, is only good for 50,000 years - based on an abstract, idea sample condition -  since the element in question, C-14, has a half-life of only 5,000 years, and after 50,000 years - based on a theoretical ideal sample -the process becomes useless.

Willard Libby who invented the radiocarbon dating process got it right: it's only good for as far back as 50,000 years. So why is there C-14 in supposed 65 million-year-old dinosaur samples?!

Let's take a quick look at the empirical evidence.

A. Soft Dinosaur Tissue in Dinosaur Bones.-

This remains to yours truly still a bit of a mind-blower, but the mainstream scientific community was 'shocked" and then almost forgot about what common sense demanded should have re-written the rules about all prior concepts of old earth history.

In a nutshell, soft, pliable dinosaur  tissue was found inside an actual dinosaur bone - not a fossil. Cue sound effect of car screeching brakes. Let's stop right there a moment and back up a bit. What was an actual dinosaur bone doing hanging around after 65 million years? Animal bone decomposes after a few years in normal, natural conditions. Even the bones of the largest contemporary land animal, the elephant, falls apart after a few years and the larger bones absolutely, positively do not last for one million years, let alone 65 million years.

Actual T-Rex soft tissue, supposedly an obviously impossible 65 million years old.

Now obviously, soft tissue is even worse than the bone. Decomposition is extremely rapid. Yet the rational mind is supposed to believe, despite all contemporary empirical evidence to the contrary, that animal tissue, soft and pliable, was supposed to survive after 65 million years. Go to Africa and see how many elephant bones still have soft tissue in them after a few years. Now it turns out people are finding dinosaur tissue all over. Scientist Mark Armitage has his very own triceratops horn - the largest discovered -  and he found soft tissue in that, too, for which the wonderful, free-thinking and peace-loving scientists at the University where he worked fired him. 

But it gets better (or worse).

The mainstream scientific community has an explanation after nearly 10 years as to why the initial T-Rex bone has soft tissue inside. Ready for this? Iron seeped into the bone which should not still exist and preserved the tissue inside the bone. Problem? Many. 1. The same water which would have been needed to carry the iron into the tissue also would have carried materials in which would have destroyed that same tissue. 2. Formalin is not so great at preserving things for more than several years, So even if iron, which is being compared by the mainstream as very weak formalin, carried by seeping water was as good as formalin, and it isn't, it could have only preserved the tissue a few years. In fact, in Russia, they continue the ghastly, morbid practice of keeping Lenin's body preserved so they can can trot it out occasionally and people can gaze at it, because, I guess, you know, it's there. And the body according to some experts is already looking "ragged" (gak) after only 80 years and under these extreme preservation tech conditions: "Lenin gets an extreme makeover every 18 months or so. The mausoleum is closed for two months and the body is immersed in a bath of glycerol and potassium acetate for 30 days. The skin slowly absorbs the solution, regaining its moisture and pliancy."

"With current techniques, the body could last 'many decades, even for 100 years,' said Ilya Zbarsky, 90, a doctor who worked on the body from 1934 to 1952."

Yet we are supposed top believe that iron carried by destructive water seepage kept the soft Tyrannosaurus Rex tissue pliable for sixty-five million years. SIXTY-FIVE MILLION YEARS.  And Thomas-Rexy isn't alone. So does that mean that water bled totally and completely impossible-preserving iron into Mark Arimitage's triceratops horn, too, and everyone else's dinosaur bones supposedly 65 million years ago? It begins to look a little unlikely, doesn't it?

Now to be fair, the mainstream scientific community never categorically said iron definitely preserved it; the media makes that declaration in the headlines and the scientists themselves only say it may have played a part. They don't know how the soft tissue can exist in their presumptive Old Earth mindset. But then, they never say, "Well, it may be the dinosaur died a teensy bit closer to us on the timeline." No. They say "may have" and "65 million years" and then skip merrily along like drooling, spastic idiots to the next presumptive absurdity on another subject.

Obviously, the mainstream science community never asks themselves meaningful questions that might upset their comfy fantasy world, They say, in effect, "We have degrees we earned 30 years ago by virtue of telling our professors back then what they wanted to read and hear from us so don't ask us any dumb questions like, you know, 'how could soft tissue possibly exist after sixty five million years when everyone from children to doctors know that that is patently impossible' or anything like that."

It's like we're living in the middle ages, folks, and the primitive atheist religion is the dominant force in the world, demanding that we simply accept their superstitions or be humiliated to death for heresy!

B. Dinosaur Art Made A Thousand Years Before The Science Of Paleontology.

The implication here is clear: people sharing a Young Earth with dinosaurs at that time saw living dinosaurs and made pictures and pottery of them the way they did antelopes and other animals. It's the only thing that makes any sense, really, because these things time and again have been proven over decades after their discovery to be genuine and the resemblance to known dinosaur species is unmistakable.

The most dramatic examples of this are the Acambaro dinosaurs. Making a long story short, there is now, in Mexico, a state-run museum housing countless primitive sculptures, radiocarbon dated at between 1,500 and 3,000 years old and their unearthing was witnessed by people beyond reproach including some Americans, among them Erle Stanley Gardner, at first a lawyer and then the best-selling novelist of the 20th century at the time of his death in 1970. Gardner wrote the famous Perry Mason mysteries and wrote a book about the Acambaro dinosaurs in the 1950's, as he was there when the first statues had been unearthed, which he saw for himself. Others, including representatives of the Mexican government were also at the dig at the time. In other words, it's totally impossible for the statues to be planted fakes even if they had never been radiocarbon dated. While some of the dinosaurs are admittedly a little vague in appearance, most are decidedly suggestive of dinosaurs and some are true dead-ringers.

Pretty recognizable dinosaur types in the state-run museum in Mexico, statues the unearthing of which were witnessed by people beyond reproach and radiocarbon-dated variously at 1,500 - 3,000 years old - over 1,000 years before the science of paleontology even existed.

So we have actual dinosaur bones - not fossils; actual soft dinosaur tissue which should not exist by an insane degree if the the bones were even one million years old and they read according to radio carbon dating as being no more than a few thousand years old But if you question the idea that maybe - just maybe - they might not be 65 million years old you will get fired from your university job. How sweet. How beautiful the love for truth in fact-funding as exemplified our mainstream scientific community which fires people for simply stating a truth contrary to the scientific orthodoxy. And, of course, thousands of little statues,authenticated by everyone including the Mexican government, obviously made by a wide range of primitive artisans, statues some of which are dead-ringers for dinosaurs when the world had not the tools to even dig a fossil carefully out of the ground in those times, let alone reconstruct them accurately, and certainly not in Mexico 2,000 years ago.

The mainstream can stupidly mock all they want but the facts add up to dinosaurs + men = together. There is no other possible explanation and the soft dinosaur tissue makes it more than merely "possible"; the soft tissue - reported by every mainstream news and science source in the world - is so obviously relatively recent that there is no way that those samples of soft dinosaur tissue could have possibly existed before the advent of man, therefore dinosaurs and men had to have lived at the same time. No other scenario is literally possible.


This is actually pretty simple. It is estimated by all mainstream sources that there are 7 billion people on the earth today,  If the human race was repopulated after the Great Flood starting with the survivors from the Ark at a population growth rate of only 0.5% , we would be at the current population we have today. Most of the mainstream science community would say that the population explosion is recent due to advances in nutrition and medicine, but those places that have the least of both - Third World countries - have the highest population growth rate, as high as a full 3%.

However if you take the number of years back only 100,000 years, as demanded by the mainstream scientific community otherwise demands you must, by implication, you would have today a current population of many trillions of people.

There are many population graphs which all have one huge flaw: there were no census takers before the late 1800's, and certainly not global. Everything before that time is conjecture and you see the population growths slow way down on the imaginary part of the graph. Even then, Year One, which hypothesizes one one graph 200 million people in the world only goes back 2,000 years.

The Old Testament was written 3,500 years ago and the Great Flood happened before that. So by using mainstream - non-Creation - sources - it is plainly impossible for there to be any likely population just after the Great Flood, well after 6,000 - 10,000 years ago in which the empirical evidence plainly suggests everything started. And that which is said to have happened before that is literally theory and conjecture.Literally. No fact. What we know is that medical science, as proved by the rate of growth in Third World countries, has very little to do with modern population growth despite cheery assumptions to the contrary and without that as a hypothetical catalyst, working backward, the human human race tally literally dries up and shows to have started - or re-started after the flood, as told in the Old Testament - around 4,000 years ago.

U.S. census shows a doubling of the world population in just the last 65 years. Yet we are supposed to believe that the human race could possibly be as old a 200 thousand years when the most optimistic appraisal forces the human population, working backward, to start around 4,000 years ago, approximately the time when the Great flood destroyed all but those in the Ark 

Additionally, like with recorded history, the mummies, artifacts, burial remains and the rest only go back 4,000 - 5,000 years, mostly even with radiometric dating techniques applied to the objects which otherwise could be read as far back as 50,000 years with radiocarbon dating. They do not. 10,000 years appears to be a universal cutoff point for 90% of tests, and the remaining 10% could easily be regarded as simply falling well within the much larger margin of error.


In other words, when you take entirely unreliable dating methods out of the equation everything - everything, language, recorded history, artifacts - even dinosaurs - that we can know simply starts between 6,000 - to - 10,000 years ago. Everything else about an old earth is steeped in hypothesis and even that is slowly being undone by mainstream science itself: C-14 is being found in diamonds which supposedly take hundreds of thousands of years and more to form, Likewise, coal beds are now proven to be formed relatively recently ("A rather startling and serendipitous discovery resulted...These observations suggest that in their formation, high rank coals...were probably subjected to high temperature at some stage in their history. A possible mechanism for formation of these high rank coals could have been a short time, rapid heating event." [Six Hours], George R. Hill (Dean of College of Mines & Mineral Industries at the University of Utah), Chemical Technology, May, 1972, pp. 292-296.), distant starlight as a way of measuring the age of the universe never takes into account that gravity - of which there is plenty in space - bends time, and is also therefore useless. The list goes on and on (read other articles on this site for more)

When you take wishful theory out of what we have and know, what you are left with is a few gigantically compelling empirical evidences for an earth no older than a mere 10,000 years... recorded history bursting out of nowhere filled with social and philosophical sophistication with absolutely nothing leading up to that moment; totally unexplained dinosaur soft tissue you can see and touch today and the secondary fact that people were painting and sculpting dinosaurs in art of antiquity thousands of years before the science of paleontology and 65 million years after the dinosaurs supposedly went extinct; and the discrepancy between the human population re-started after the Great Flood, a population which gives us today's population and obliterates the theory in which the human population supposedly began a million years ago, because even if cut down to 10% - to 100,000 years - would have produced a current global population many thousands of times larger than the 7 billion people which it currently is. Oh yes, as a side note, don't forget our old lunar pal, the re-energized Dust on the Moon evidence, which is plainly mostly empirical.

Once again, mainstream science advocates will attempt to compartmentalize this evidence so each subject stands apart from the others and as they discuss it, will work in unsubstantiated hypothesis after hypothesis, getting further and further away from reality without ever even drawing an extrapolation from the facts - facts which show each one must have occurred somewhere in the same time frame: 6,000 - to - 10,000 years ago, and essentially prove them all when understood collectively. That's a bit too much of a coincidence for even the most starry-eyed secular optimist with any sense of shame to want to accept, at least publicly.

Someone please inform the mainstream scientific establishment to forget regurgitating what their professors wanted to hear and read according to their personal biases and prejudices back in the day and stick to the current scientific and historic empirical facts and only the empirical facts. The world looks a whole lot different when you stick to the facts. It looks young.
If you like what you see and read on CreationDino, please help us continue our work as well as additional installments of the video Behold Now Behemoth by giving a "Christian Payment Offering" for the dollar amount of your choice with the dropdown menu on the Paypal button on the upper right hand side of the screen for what you read and watch on CreationDino. We could really use the help right about now.

Thursday, December 3, 2015



crowdfunding "Go Fund Me" page has been discontinued. Too many people have privately expressed concern that it wants credit card information rather than PayPal (which also takes Credit Cards and is a lot safer and better insured, quite frankly) and other hassles which have been proving to make people uncomfortable. 


Videos like Behold Now Behemoth are expensive and time-consuming to make. We can make them much more inexpensively than other videos which are way too similar, in our opinion, to Behemoth to be a coincidence.


Use the Paypal button to choose the small amount and help as much and whenever you can.

PLEASE GIVE for more like what you read, here....

PLEASE GIVE for more of what you see here....

PLEASE "pay" whatever you wish on the "honor system" for more of what you watch here, we can certainly use the help!....



Monday, November 16, 2015

A Christian Plea Per Matthew 18: Behold Now Behemoth and Genesis The Movie

All images used via the Fair Use Act

UPDATE, 11/20/2015: People on Facebook have begun to weigh in, and so far the majority of the small number offering opinions agrees with our view about the unlikely similarities between Eric Hovind's "Genesis The Movie" (2015) and our "Behold Now Behemoth" (2008). If you also agree with how we feel about this and want to witness on our behalf as commanded in Matthew 18, we suggest that you do so on Eric Hovind's Facebook page so he can respond and that of his movie, Genesis The Movie, so that account can respond. Thank you so much for your growing moral support. We'll keep you continually posted. God Bless. 


You may have seen me raise this question before: "Why Does Eric Hovind's "Genesis the Movie" look so much like my "Behold Now Behemoth"?  Yes, this matter concerns my own interests, but  that doesn't cheapen my motives given the circumstances, and I'm sure you'll agree with that, because there is also a possible issue of plain old-fashioned right and wrong, here.

It's funny that my name is David, insomuch as this is, IMO, a true David and Goliath situation. On the one hand is the independent producer, myself, with his modest Behold Now Behemoth, well-received in 2008, and the other is a mega-money-ministry which apparently brings in millions of dollars a year and has raised nearly half a million dollars for.....? Well, how you define what they are trying to produce is really the issue.

I'd not heard of Genesis the Movie before starting the crowdfunding for volumes 2 and 3 of Behemoth. Unlike Eric Hovind, for whom Creationism is apparently his daily business and bread-and-butter, I have been restricted by time and other constraints. But it was time for Behemoth volumes 2 and 3. Then the crowdfunding goes nowhere for once-well-received Behemoth. Why? In my opinion this is the answer: a nearly identical video being launched with well-funded publicity which has already raised nearly half a million dollars has basically sucked the air - and the capital -out of Behemoth. Sour grapes? No. It might be if it were not for the fact that their video/movie appears in my opinion to be so identical to Behemoth has to be almost an unauthorized tribute - and perhaps even makes Behemoth to the casual viewer look like a cheap copy of Genesis and that hurts my interests and the interests of all Creationists for whom a fair playing field is always at a premium.

If it is what it looks like, it is also plain just not right.

I brought up this question directly on Hovind's Facebook page and in an interesting response they asked me to observe Matthew 18 and discuss this with them in private. When Hovind's account which gets signed "The Team" (so I have no idea with whom I was communicating, although I have the screenshots) reached out in a private message, I responded. They wanted me to email Eric Hovind - but failed or refused to give me the email address in the private message - so he could tell me "personally" why the two films are in no way connected to one another. I told them I was not born yesterday and that if expecting me top believe that the two films were not in any way connected is what they were after, they were wasting our time, but I wanted to and was very willing to communicate with Hovind in private on the larger issue.

Well, so much for Matthew 18: "Goliath" Hovind removed all my and other comments from the thread in question,  blocked my ability to comment on the page and blocked any more direct messages - direct messages for which they asked and initiated. So the question remains: "WHY DOES THEIR NEW GENESIS THE MOVIE LOOK SO MUCH LIKE MY SLIGHTLY OLDER BEHOLD NOW BEHEMOTH"? This is a question Hovind appears not to want to answer publicly and now not even privately.

Since Hovind has suspended all communication with me - which his account initially requested - I believe I, and in my opinion all of the Flock, have the obligation to follow Matthew 18: we tried to do it privately, but Hovind will not hear us. So to follow Matthew 18 which Hovind's account recommended on this very issue, the next step in following Matthew 18 is that we need to talk to Hovind about it as a group, and if that does not work, announce this problem to the world.

Matthew 18: 

"Moreover if thy brother shall trespass against thee, go and tell him his fault between thee and him alone: if he shall hear thee, thou hast gained thy brother.  But if he will not hear thee, then take with thee one or two more, that in the mouth of two or three witnesses every word may be established. And if he shall neglect to hear them, tell it unto the church: but if he neglect to hear the church, let him be unto thee as an heathen man and a publican".

Please click on the image for full size, save and share this graphic and politely inquire of Hovind and others involved in Genesis the Movie - as well as your friends and acquaintances on Facebook - how such an overwhelming preponderance of similarities could have taken place by accident. And please state your opinions here, too, regardless of who they favor - I feel genuinely righteous on this issue.
Remember, additionally, what we are called upon to do in Deuteronomy 13:14:

"Then shalt thou enquire, and make search, and ask diligently; and, behold, if it be truth, and the thing certain, that such abomination is wrought among you;"

Please don't be shy: please post this wherever Genesis The Movie is being discussed, ask Hovind and those around him about this directly per Matthew 18  and investigate per , Deuteronomy 13:14 and say what God tells you in your mind and heart to be true. Our Lord Jesus has said it on all such matters.

Remember also, on a more earthly level, if this is what it looks like, if it can happen to me, it can happen to you.

Thank you for your patience and your anticipated social media moral support, per Matthew and Deuteronomy.

God Bless.

- David

Behold Now Behemoth review from 2008

If you like what you see and read on CreationDino, please help us continue our work as well as additional installments of the video Behold Now Behemoth by giving a "Christian Payment Offering" for the dollar amount of your choice with the dropdown menu on the Paypal button on the upper right hand side of the screen for what you read and watch on CreationDino. We could really use the help right about now.

Tuesday, November 10, 2015

WHY CHRISTIANITY? The Answer, Scientifically and Historically

All quotes and images used via the Fair Use Act.

Having essentially, for all practical purposes, proven to them that the miracles in the Bible are all scientifically possible, categorically, and that even 6-day creation is scientifically possible (both via quantum physics), I now find that atheists on social media are responding to these arguments more and more with a particularly shill, but frankly entirely legitimate, response: "Why Christianity? With the other faiths that exist, why Christianity?" They mean that question from the fact-based and even scientific view point which is the manner of CreationDino. Okay. I will answer that, for those atheists and for everyone else, and the facts are true, qualified, undeniable and fascinating.

Let's tackle this with the Old Testament first, then with the New Testament. This will only take a few minutes.


SCIENTIFIC FOREKNOWLEDGE in the Bible basically proves the veracity of the Old Testament to be read literally and as a reliable scientific and historical text. No other "religious" text (with the exception of some lines in the New Testament) contains scientific foreknowledge. Also, I believe we have here at least one and probably two instances which are new examples of scientific foreknowledge in the Bible and so we hope no matter who you may be, CreationDino  is providing new information which is new and significant, for you.

Many Christians and most Creationists are aware of the line about "the circle of the earth..... suspended upon nothing" accurately describing the sphere of the earth, suspended within a larger environment by invisible forces, which is entirely accurate. However, there are other - and frankly more concrete - examples of scientific foreknowledge in the Bible....

(A probable CreationDino first)

Jeremiah 3:3
Therefore the showers have been withheld, and the spring rain has not come; yet you have the forehead of a whore; you refuse to be ashamed.

(Therefore the showers have been withholden, and there hath been no latter rain; and thou hadst a whore's forehead, thou refusedst to be ashamed. - KJV)

There are other quotes which similarly describe the forehead as being the area in which rational decisions are made. This is amazingly important and so simple to check, too. Note the diagram of the brain-area-to-function map, below, and you will see that "shame" originates in the exact physical area of the brain where it is described to originate in the Bible: the forehead. Since mapping of brain-to-function is extremely recent in human history, this tiny passage stands as a startling piece of scientific foreknowledge in the Bible. It's extremely difficult to over-estimate the importance of this small but incredibly specific - and entirely accurate - reference.  If humankind had been aware of that area of brain function in the general population for even a few decades before now, we, too, would likely speak colloquially the exact same way as that idea is phrased in the Bible. And sooner or later in the future, that reality is certain to come to pass. But it was nevertheless written that way in the Old Testament 3,500 years before brain-area-to-function was understood and mapped.


Job 36:27
For he maketh small the drops of water: they pour down rain according to the vapour thereof: Which the clouds do drop [and] distil upon man abundantly.

Mainstream science second-guessed this, formulating many wrong and subsequently disproved hypothesis. The first published thinker to assert that rainfall alone was sufficient for the maintenance of rivers, lakes and the oceans was Bernard Palissy (1580). Palissy's theories were not tested scientifically until 1674.  Interesting how the Bible seems to directly infer the vapor carries the water back to the clouds and then drops it down again. Watching rain fall is one thing. Understanding the rest of it 3,500 years ago based on zero human science and direct observation only is quite another thing entirely. Scientific foreknowledge communicated by God, yet again.

(Another probable CreationDino original catch)

Proverbs 17:22
A merry heart doeth good [like] a medicine:  but a broken spirit drieth the bones. 
(Drieth the bones is a common poetic reference of the time to debilitating ailment)

From this medical link, below:

"Long-term depression is also known to negatively impact the heart. Depression causes inappropriate release of adrenaline which, over time, damages the cardiovascular system. An increase in artery and blood vessel stress are further health effects of depression. This can increase the risk of blood clots and heart attack.... The effects of depression cause an overall increase in mortality, where those with depression may die 25 years sooner than the average person. This is thought to be due to both the physical and social side effects of depression."


Ecclesiastes 1:6
The wind goeth toward the south, and turneth about unto the north; it whirleth about continually, and the wind returneth again according to his circuits.

First discovered in the mid-20th century.   All you need do is compare the TV weather report image, below, of the jet stream to the Biblical quote, above. 'Nuff said. Extremely clear. Pretty good "guess" considering there were no satellite images 3,500 years ago to otherwise qualify it.


Psalms 8:8
The fowl of the air, and the fish of the sea, [and whatsoever] passeth through the paths of the seas.

Isaiah 43:16
Thus saith the LORD, which maketh a way in the sea, and a path in the mighty waters;

The "paths of the sea" is considerably more specific than simply roughly describing the fact of currents and flows. It was not until the mid-1800's when Matthew Fontaine Maury, nicknamed "Pathfinder of the Seas" and later, "Scientist of the Seas," basically proved the "paths of the seas" when inspired to do so by that very verse in the Bible. Here the Bible not only pointed the way to a scientific fact, but someone actually followed the clues in the Bible to confirm the facts. Well done, Captain Maury! Bravo!


BOOM! Suddenly humankind is no longer a million years old. Just like that, after many decades of self-righteous fist-pounding from the secular science orthodoxy demanding acceptance of the idea that mankind is a million years old. Even among mainstream science, a struggle persists in the last year or so as to whether Adam and Eve existed between 50,000 years or 135,000 years. Remember the articles HERE and HERE at this site, CreationDino? I suspect someday soon even mainstream science will have to admit that Adam and Eve "might possibly" have sprung into being within the last 10,000 years after all. Seriously, what's shedding a mere 40,000 years off the timeline when you have already chucked a supposedly previously "proven and known" 950,000 years off the timeline in one toss with a single chromosome discovery?

1 Timothy 1:8-9

"Therefore do not be ashamed of the testimony of our Lord, nor of me His prisoner, but share with me in the sufferings for the gospel according to the power of God, who has saved us and called us with a holy calling, not according to our works, but according to His own purpose and grace which was given to us in Christ Jesus before time began,"

While time was certainly understood 3,000 years ago as it mostly remains understood today, according to its measurement, the scientific notion of time beginning and ending as an absolute quantity is a comparatively scientifically recent concept. Note that time and physical matter begin in the Bible on the first day, right in-line with time and space being indivisible (though, on a quantum physics level, infinitely malleable, but in tandem).

There are many other examples and maybe some day I'll list them all on one post. But this is not meant to be an encyclopedia on the subject, just written to prove that it's safe to say that scientific foreknowledge being found all through the Bible is an indisputable fact. "Interpretation" does not enter it at all to any reasonable, common-sense mind. Scientific foreknowledge runs all through the Old Testament. True. Fact.

So we know the Old Testament has something no other faith or "religion" has: utterly  scientific foreknowledge. There can be no debate about it. None whatsoever.

But what about The New Testament? That's easy:


Even ever-secular/liberal wikipedia admits, "There is "near universal consensus" among scholars that Jesus existed historically .... critics do support the historicity of Jesus, and reject the theory that Jesus never existed."

A few historical references to Christ outside of the words of the Apostles:

Josephus' Antiquities of the Jews, written around 93–94 AD, includes references to the Biblical Jesus. Josephus scholar Louis H. Feldman has stated that "few have doubted the genuineness" of Josephus' reference to Jesus in Antiquities 20, 9, 1.

"And when Pilate, at the suggestion of the principal men amongst us, had condemned him to the cross, those that loved him at the first did not forsake him; for he appeared to them alive again the third day." 

Roman historian Tacitus referred to 'Christus' and his execution by Pontius Pilate in his Annals (written ca. AD 116), book 15, chapter 44. Tacitus' negative tone about Christians make the passage even more likely to be entirely genuine.

"Consequently, to get rid of the report, Nero fastened the guilt and inflicted the most exquisite tortures on a class hated for their abominations, called Christians by the populace. Christus, from whom the name had its origin, suffered the extreme penalty during the reign of Tiberius at the hands of one of our procurators, Pontius Pilatus...."

Pliny the Younger was governor of Bithynia in Asia Minor. Pliny wrote ten books. The tenth around AD 112, and mentions Christ.

"They (the Christians) were in the habit of meeting on a certain fixed day before it was light, when they sang in alternate verses a hymn to Christ, as to a god, and bound themselves by a solemn oath, not to do any wicked deeds... never to commit any fraud, theft or adultery, never to falsify their word, nor deny a trust when they should be called upon to deliver it up; after which it was their custom to separate, and then reassemble to partake of food but food of an ordinary and innocent kind."

Suetonius (69-140AD) was a Roman historian of the Imperial House under the Emperor Hadrian. He wrote about Christians and about Christ (41-54AD):

“Because the Jews at Rome caused constant disturbances at the instigation of Chrestus (Christ), he (Claudius) expelled them from the city (Rome).” 

Lucian of Samosata (115-200 A.D.), an extremely cynical Greek satirist who, though speaking cynically, confirmed that Jesus and His followers were real people.

"The Christians, you know, worship a man to this day—the distinguished personage who introduced their novel rites, and was crucified on that account…. and worship the crucified sage, and live after his laws.”

Jewish Talmud (400-700AD) Early Talmudic writings of Jewish Rabbis

“Jesus practiced magic and led Israel astray” 

Not to mention, of course, the written words of the Apostles themselves. Many classical, secular historians agree that devoutly-held Book of God or no, the New Testament should be treated like any other historical series of documents from the time - and treated with the same respect and regarded with the same validity as any other historical text. There is certainly plenty of secular - even antagonistic - historical writing outside of the Bible that confirm the Jesus existed, had followers, performed miracles and was crucified.

No other religion has all this. Some have elements, while others, the older ones, such a Hinduism, are admittedly little more than pagan rituals with no god or set structure of belief as admitted by the Indian Supreme Court itself (with India being mostly Hindu, that declaration by the India Supreme Court is a big surprise, but they said it just the same.)

Undeniable and extremely specific examples of scientific foreknowledge - sometimes surprisingly casually referenced -  in most cases over a full 3,000 years before understood by modern science.  An historic figure whose teachings, death, influence and most important of all, miracles, are documented in secular historical record. It is difficult to know what more any honest thinker would need to know to understand that God's word is real, true and verified and that His Son, Jesus Christ, came to earth and did all that the Apostles claim for Him.

No one need read or hear more, though there is certainly more available. If that isn't good enough for anyone to know that Christianity is the way, according to science and historical fact, then those rare people just don't want to know, and there's nothing anyone can do about that. But you have the information. Never let it be said by anyone who read this that he or she was not told. Scientifically and historically. There you have it.

If you like what you see and read on CreationDino, please help us continue our work as well as additional installments of the video Behold Now Behemoth by giving a "Christian Payment Offering" for the dollar amount of your choice with the dropdown menu on the Paypal button on the upper right hand side of the screen for what you read and watch on CreationDino. We could really use the help right about now.