When you consider how far our species has come, slowly developing a more and more sophisticate understanding of the natural world, to the extent that today most scientists figure we’ve got most of the laws of the universe figured out, and then you contrast this with the gibberish you keep spouting and it becomes apparent that in spite of all of our massive intellectual progress, we are still just a collection of primates, although some are certainly more enlightened than others, we are in essence just upright walking chimps.

Creationism is one of the most amazing lies ever told. There is no evidence for this position at all, and instead it is based on an insane dogma. Oh, you keep claiming to have evidence, but instead you spout claims of sea monsters. Even if you’re right and these sea monsters do exist, this won’t prove a global flood, this won’t prove a special creation and when we do understand this (if indeed there is anything here to be understood), we will understand this through the context of evolution. After all, if you’re right, for a species this size to move in water that cold, it is highly unlikely that this thing isn’t warm blooded, and so if it is some kind of living dinosaur, that’s just evidence that dinosaurs were warm blooded, which establishes more evidence for the evolution of birds from dinosaurs.

For some strange reason, when reading your descriptions of these eyewitness accounts, I immediately think, “Hey, they’re talking about a whale!” Maybe this is because that’s the much more likely case in this scenario as opposed to believing in sea monsters. Maybe this is because these descriptions sound like whales. I’ve spent a sizable percentage of my life at sea, I’ve spent months on Lake Champlain (never saw anything even remotely like a pod of dinosaurs), I’ve sailed up and down the west coast, from north of Victoria to south of Tijuana, and I’ve seen what you’re describing here. These sound like whales.

Another possibility, given the general description of the shape of the animal, is that these are sightings of some sort of squid. Now, we know that very large squid exist, and we know that we don’t understand a tremendous amount about them, and sightings are as rare and as fleeting as what you’ve described here, but we do know that these aren’t sea monsters or some kind of extant dinosaur.

Changing the subject slightly,
Would you only use medicine that’s based off of the Bible? Terry, you claim to have a background in medicine, so surely you’ve noticed the remarkable correlation between the advent and subsequent application of the theory of evolution and our radical progress in medicine over the past century. That is to say, antibiotics, our understand of genetics and DNA, all of this is grounded in the theory of evolution and all of these act as evidence in support of the theory of evolution. If you only used creationist medicine, that is to say medicine based on the Bible, you wouldn’t even have the precursor to aspirin (although Muslims discovered that), much less anything more effective. Prior to the explosive growth in our understanding of biology due to the theory of evolution, medical science and technology was a joke. Today, we’re beginning to develop the ability to manipulate a person’s genetics, a fruit entirely borne through the labors of “evolutionists”.

On the one hand, your delusion scares me because it threatens the continued advancement of our species, and on the other hand, I find it hilarious. You sound like a child who is afraid of the dark, and you’ve turned God into your own little nightlight and safety blanket. You’re already talking about monsters out at sea, why not start talking about monsters under your bed too? It’s not that big a jump, both are simply expressions of fear of the unknown. I won’t mind if you claim that the monsters under your bed are homosexual communists who hate God and worship the devil, it just seems like that’s your sort of thing.

I have noticed that you seem to be all about this bit of cryptozoology, but you don’t try to also prove the existence of Sasquatch. Of course, another upright walking ape, perhaps one that we could share even more genetic information with than a chimpanzee, is an even bigger threat to your insistence that man was initially made out of clay brought to life, and not the latest in a series of increasing sophisticate hominids (which is what the fossil evidence would lead us to believe).

Not that any of this really matters, one way or the other, science marches on, despite your screaming protests that it stop immediately, lest your favorite fairy tales be further shattered by cold, hard fact.

I agree with Dinsdale – Maroun’s attitude towards stifling debate would indicate a frailty in his own faith, if it could be so easily shaken by a few people questioning the premise of a theory. I know the very basis of faith is “never question” and that’s fine when you’re preaching to the choir, but any theory should be open to rigorous questioning.

I’m also a bit disappointed that Terry still hasn’t answered the following questions:

You also haven’t answered the point about God saying He would kill “all flesh, wherein is the breath of life” and that Noah must take two of “every living thing of all flesh”. Both of these Bible verses are in stark contrast to your claim that “He didn’t have to bring the swimmers on board.”

Likewise, you haven’t explained how, if they had remained in the sea, they would have survived the crushing pressure waves and the deadly radiation.