"Making a whole skeleton from a fragment" is what is done when not enough remains are present to fully describe a species. They compare it to remains of a related and well-known form. It isn't unusual for descriptions to be updated as more info is avaible
Egal, most of the better known dinos are known from largely or entirely complete remains.. sometimes dozens or hundreds. Also fossilization is a very exact process. Not everything that dies and get burried becomes a fossil.
Egal, carbon dating is effective WITHIN A CERTAIN DATE RANGE: ~100,000 years. I'm not allowed nearly enough room in this reply to explain why but trying googling it. NO scientist has EVER used carbon dating on dinos. Colleagues would laugh them to death.
Honestly folks, if there were thousands of one species, shouldn't there be at least one partial skeleton kicking about, a section of a thigh bone is hardly enough to build a full frame, I still laughed at the pic though =p
Billions of years ago nothing exploded into a perfect order instead of the chaos that normally happens when things explode, Carbon dating is about as reliable as the scientists who make a whole skeleton from a fragment and say there were tons of that type
Seriously? I'm not putting you down for having faith in a divine power. In that respect, I'm agnostic...BUT you can't possibly believe that humans and dinosaurs lived in the same time period. ...or even close to one another. And your evidence is based on
So spot of token christian is open, lol, first book in the bible mentions great beasts, cause dinosaurs is a fairly new word for large lizard, and animals etc. were tame in the start and good chance they all ate veggies.