Posted by: paulgarner | March 21, 2011

More on the Kachina Bridge “sauropod”

You may recall me writing earlier this month about Senter and Cole’s paper which cast doubt on the creationist claim that a Native American petroglyph at Kachina Bridge (Natural Bridges National Monument, Utah) depicts a sauropod dinosaur.

On Friday last week, Answers in Genesis, who have a panel depicting the image in the Creation Museum, published a web article defending the dinosaur interpretation. The author of the article, Ishmael Abrahams, brushes aside all of Senter and Cole’s arguments, and reasserts that the image is best explained as a dinosaur.

I must say that I find Abrahams’ defence of the sauropod interpretation superficial and unconvincing, and I stand by my original assessment that Senter and Cole have made a compelling case against it. Furthermore, I think the burden of proof now rests with those who want to defend the dinosaur interpretation of the petroglyph, which, of course, they could do by visiting the site and undertaking a careful field study.

By the way, many thanks to those who drew my attention to AiG’s article.



%d bloggers like this: