Evidence of dinosaurs? There is no evidence of dinoursrous, no one had found a full skeleton of a dinosaur. For all we know they could be bones of mammoths, there is not a fully formed skeleton of a dinourrs in any museum made of its original bones. Many of the skeletons bits are added to forum a dinoursour. I could go out find a undiscovered species of mammoth and claim it’s a dinirousur.
Im going to give you an educational story, the first dinosaur skeleton found was an iguanadon in the 1800's, they found a large sharp tooth like object which they presumed belonged to a giant jaw of said creature, when they found the skull and the majority of other bones, they started to piece them together like a jigsaw and realise they didnt have a tooth at all, they had a thumb-spike, this is where the piece fitted on the skeleton, you do not need a complete skeleton to see what you are looking at, if they find a human skull or ribcage etc, they can be fairly sure they have a human, they need not have a full skeleton. Think of it as a jigsaw, you do not need every single piece to see what the picture is about, you could fill in the blanks yourself.
Firstly I suggest you learn to spell
Muslim you're in no position to criticise spelling, as usual. Perhaps you both merely make typos? Or hadnt you considered that?
Well evolution has actually been disproved, as an instance, if the theory of evolution were factual, then the fossil records would ALWAYS be evidence for a smooth changeover from one life form to another, such that it would be complex to tell where invertebrates ended, and vertebrates began. This is NOT constantly the case. Instead, completely formed life forms have been revealed to abruptly jump into the fossil evidence ostensibly from nowhere, with irrational gaps before them where their ancestors should be. Numerous evolutionists do not dispute this fact, while others look the other way.
From what i can tell you have a basic misunderstanding of evolution, and perhaps fossilization.
Fossils only form under the right conditions, most things, sometimes due to carbon dating or other methods(see below) are given a rough estimate of where they formed, hence there will be crossover, there will also be crossover as one form of life slowly dies out and another becomes dominant, it is not an instant process, and its not necessarily smooth, have you ever seen the development tree for homo sapiens from our ancestors?
Carbon dating is not accurate,
Can you provide backup for this to support your claims? Im quite aware it isnt 100%, and is not able to pinpoint a precise date, hence usually multiple readings are taken and they have a margin of error in a way, any carbon date will have a +/- of a certain number of years to give a range where the date comes from.
They also use potassium argon dating.