According to science, dinosaurs predate humankind. This I believe is reasonable, considering their monstrous forms that they are most known for. It's quite clear that we are more compatible with a biosphere dominated by mammals and birds rather than by giant reptiles.
However, archaeological anomalies exist. What are known as the Ica stones are an excellent example of this, for they include scenes of dinosaurs interacting with humans, supposedly from eyewitnesses! This is where discernment should come in, which would prevent expressions such as this:
Quote:The link is to a video documentary. While one man in that video at 26:10 claimed that the dinosaurs are drawn "precisely" on the Ica stones, I noticed some inconsistencies. For instance, at 25:33 teats are shown on the bottom of the "sauropod" with its young drinking from them. However, everything we know about sauropods indicates that they were reptiles, not mammals--and this includes scaly skin impressions, thus exposing that Ica depiction as totally erroneous. Also, at 25:53 a stegosaur is depicted with its forelimbs looking more like arms. Yet, all stegosaurs to date have been quadrupedal. Now, assuming these Ica stones are authentic, I would like to consider the possibility that these are illustrations based on ancient paleontology. That is, ancient people in the Americas discovering the fossil remains of dinosaurs and making restorations and illustrations of them, recording them on what would later be referred to as the Ica stones. If that is so, then they made some errors, like assuming some were mammals instead of reptiles and incorrectly restoring a stegosaur's forelimbs.
"Check out minute 20 onward through minute 27 for excellent discussions of carbon dating and, incredibly, thousands of Inca [sic] stones showing very clear depictions of dinosaurs interacting with humans! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7EZ6fFfRE2k&feature=related" (underscore added)
However, it turns out that there is much evidence that these Ica stones are frauds. For instance, their provenance is unknown and, to make matters worse, their discoverer has flip-flopped on their authenticity depending on who he's talking to, saying the stones that depict dinosaurs with man and other archaeological anomalies are his hoaxes.
Thus, it would be in our best interests to identify these artifacts as sensational and less than genuine.
(The title is based on Jesus' caution at Matthew 24:15, "let the reader use discernment.")
 Sauropod Skin and Eggs. http://faculty.plattsburgh.edu/thomas.wolosz/sauropod.htm
 "Stegosaur (dinosaur)." Encyclopaedia Britannica http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/564911/stegosaur
- Creation FAQ, Dinosaurs, see last question/answer. http://www.jimspace.000space.com/YECFAQ.htm
- Ica stones. Wikipedia. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ica_stones
- Dinosaurs on Ica stones. Talk Origins Archive. http://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/CH/CH710_1.html
- Encyclopedia of Dubious Archaeology, page 143: http://goo.gl/7GWYy