|
Post by sbell on Oct 22, 2008 16:11:42 GMT
Why doesn't Piltdown show me which one he believes in? You can show me which ones he believes in if you like. Then I will demonstrate that it is a fake, as they all are. ;D How can you say fake before you've even seen his evidence? Are you Psychic or something. You don't know how many books he has read. Do you think we can learn about Brontosaurus from a Duck? Do you think this is a laughing matter? Piltdown will answer all of your questions in good time. ;D I don't know about his evidence (understatement of the year), but judging from the pictures, those are just blobby rocks. I have seen many real examples of the trace fossils those purport to be, and they don't look right. It doesn't even look carved, just misrepresented.
|
|
|
Post by Dinotoyforum on Oct 22, 2008 16:14:44 GMT
;D So if most people believed that if they fell off a tall building they would die. Then they would be wrong. Is that logical? ;D I just like poking holes in the idea that an idea with a bunch of followers, or people that agree, somehow lends support to an argument. Well, the more people that believe something, the more convincing the EVIDENCE must be. right? And you of all people must put special weight on evidence. [I'm giving myself a headache ]
|
|
|
Post by stoneage on Oct 22, 2008 16:16:13 GMT
;D So if most people believed that if they fell off a tall building they would die. Then they would be wrong. Is that logical? ;D I just like poking holes in the idea that an idea with a bunch of followers, or people that agree, somehow lends support to an argument. ;D So what you are really saying is you want to be a Maverick. You want to think for yourself like McCain-Palin. ;D
|
|
|
Post by Dinotoyforum on Oct 22, 2008 16:17:54 GMT
;D How can you say fake before you've even seen his evidence? Are you Psychic or something. You don't know how many books he has read. Do you think we can learn about Brontosaurus from a Duck? Do you think this is a laughing matter? Piltdown will answer all of your questions in good time. ;D I don't know about his evidence (understatement of the year), but judging from the pictures, those are just blobby rocks. I have seen many real examples of the trace fossils those purport to be, and they don't look right. It doesn't even look carved, just misrepresented. Another one who has seen the light! Fakes, each and every one. CT thinks so, so does Tyrannax, Sbell too, and myself. Only Stoneage is convinced that these forgeries are real now - maybe he will come to his senses when Piltdown fails to provide the evidence...
|
|
|
Post by stoneage on Oct 22, 2008 16:33:31 GMT
;D You have Psychi abilitys. Tell that to the other Paleontologist. They will laugh and ridicule you to where you can no longer find work. You can not prove that Psychic Abilitys exist anymore then Big Foot. At least we have actual concrete fossil impressions. Are you a podiaologist. I did't think so. ;D
|
|
|
Post by Dinotoyforum on Oct 22, 2008 16:41:20 GMT
;D You have Psychi abilitys. Tell that to the other Paleontologist. They will laugh and ridicule you to where you can no longer find work. You can not prove that Psychic Abilitys exist anymore then Big Foot. At least we have actual concrete fossil impressions. Are you a podiaologist. I did't think so. ;D You'd rather change the subject than discuss the issue at hand? namely this 'blobby dino' mess: Dinosaurs did the tango! and the twist! yeah right. In any case, I have proved that I am psychic on hundreds of occasions. Many people vouch for my abilities. You want to test me, fine, but if you must create a new thread for it. I don't care if palaeontologist mock me - they are stuck in their paradigm - I feel sorry for them. I am free. my mind is open.
|
|
|
Post by Dinotoyforum on Oct 22, 2008 16:44:48 GMT
At least we have actual concrete fossil impressions. 'concrete' being the operative word. Because they are certainly not natural rock features, it IS concrete, or plaster. You are right about that
|
|
|
Post by tomhet on Oct 22, 2008 16:59:51 GMT
Well, the more people that believe something, the more convincing the EVIDENCE must be. right? Not necessarily. The thing is, evidence is not what makes people believe. I'm with sbell on this one.
|
|
|
Post by sbell on Oct 22, 2008 17:44:19 GMT
Well, the more people that believe something, the more convincing the EVIDENCE must be. right? Not necessarily. The thing is, evidence is not what makes people believe. I'm with sbell on this one. I'm going to be honest, I think they were joking around, but my sarcasm detector has gone haywire with the silliness. Please, everyone, come clean--who is messing about out there? Also, admin, if you are psychic, you are required by UK law to indicate that you are doing it only for entertainment purposes!
|
|
|
Post by tomhet on Oct 22, 2008 18:02:56 GMT
But it's true, if evidence convinced people, everybody would accept the evolution theory. Sadly that's not the case.
|
|
|
Post by crazycrowman on Oct 22, 2008 18:22:52 GMT
"Fakes, each and every one."
Me and my "ugly corvids" are with you on that....
|
|
|
Post by crazycrowman on Oct 22, 2008 18:34:35 GMT
"Do you think we can learn about Brontosaurus from a Duck?"
If that is in reference to me bringing up bird behavior, and what birds are capable of, and how much we are beginning to understand birds, when in the past they were perceived to be "stupid" animals, when compared to dinosaur behavior, I would have to say, indeed, we can attempt to understand how dinosaurs behaved by making composites (I know ol pilty loves that word, composite) of the behavior of modern animals with similar niches/relations to dinosaurs. Crocodilians, chelonians, modern squamates and aves are all good groups to draw from, as they are (even if you choose to ignore all the evidence, and do not "believe" modern aves are indeed dinosaurs, that would still make the birds highly derived group of reptiles) the closest things to the extinct dinosaurs we have today.
"look forward to Piltdown proving the 'blobby dinos' are real. good luck with that."
Its nearly halloween - Personally, I bet he is armed with more scarecrows, like he was last time he refused to back his "argument" with anything valid.
|
|
|
Post by sid on Oct 22, 2008 19:54:48 GMT
But even if these traces could be fake,this notion would NOT disregard the fact that,probably,biggest dinosaurs sometimes dragged their tails. And that,virtually,every dinosaur could too. That's my two cents
|
|
|
Post by sbell on Oct 22, 2008 20:29:42 GMT
But even if these traces could be fake,this notion would NOT disregard the fact that,probably,biggest dinosaurs sometimes dragged their tails. And that,virtually,every dinosaur could too. That's my two cents True--but even if these aren't hoaxes/fakes etc, it only indidcates that one individual of one species dragged its tail at that moment. If we assume that it is a sauropod, it might be quite a stretch to conclude that theropods or ornithopods were also draggers.
|
|
|
Post by sid on Oct 22, 2008 20:47:56 GMT
But even if these traces could be fake,this notion would NOT disregard the fact that,probably,biggest dinosaurs sometimes dragged their tails. And that,virtually,every dinosaur could too. That's my two cents True--but even if these aren't hoaxes/fakes etc, it only indidcates that one individual of one species dragged its tail at that moment. If we assume that it is a sauropod, it might be quite a stretch to conclude that theropods or ornithopods were also draggers. Speakin' about Sauropods i can be pretty confident that they were tail draggers,sometimes...Regarding other dinosaurs...Mmh,i guess you're right,probably Theropods and other bipedal critters touched the ground with their tails only when they were resting or rearing up to an almost "kangaroo" stance (maybe because they had sensed a prey/predator,or something along these lines),just like our dear Papo T.rex,to make an easy example
|
|
|
Post by crazycrowman on Oct 22, 2008 20:56:16 GMT
"True--but even if these aren't hoaxes/fakes etc, it only indicates that one individual of one species dragged its tail at that moment. If we assume that it is a sauropod, it might be quite a stretch to conclude that theropods or ornithopods were also draggers." Indeed. To add to that, even if a single tail drag trackway were produced, that was indeed proven legit from a species known from trackways, it would also not rule out an aberrant or deformed animal, or an animal with a disability, considering the numbers of trackways lacking any indication of tail drag marks. That said, I wouldn't doubt you would see tail impression of these animals under certain conditions. You see "tail marks" even for modern birds, and almost all of those carry their tails, with the length consisting of feathers high off the ground. As a matter of fact, more peculiar IMHO is the lack of tail drag marks/impressions that accompany dinosaur trackways.
|
|
|
Post by richard on Oct 22, 2008 21:03:43 GMT
are they referring to something like this??
I found that article sort of... lame, I mean it looks like the paleontologists were trying to do a joke because they did not sound serious
|
|
|
Post by stoneage on Oct 22, 2008 21:16:01 GMT
In any case, I have proved that I am psychic on hundreds of occasions. Many people vouch for my abilities. You want to test me, fine, but if you must create a new thread for it. I don't care if palaeontologist mock me - they are stuck in their paradigm - I feel sorry for them. I am free. my mind is open.[/quote] ;D OK what is my middle name! ;D
|
|
|
Post by bustosdomecq on Oct 22, 2008 21:27:12 GMT
"Do you think we can learn about Brontosaurus from a Duck?" If that is in reference to me bringing up bird behavior, and what birds are capable of, and how much we are beginning to understand birds, when in the past they were perceived to be "stupid" animals, when compared to dinosaur behavior, I would have to say, indeed, we can attempt to understand how dinosaurs behaved by making composites (I know ol pilty loves that word, composite) of the behavior of modern animals with similar niches/relations to dinosaurs. Crocodilians, chelonians, modern squamates and aves are all good groups to draw from, as they are (even if you choose to ignore all the evidence, and do not "believe" modern aves are indeed dinosaurs, that would still make the birds highly derived group of reptiles) the closest things to the extinct dinosaurs we have today. "look forward to Piltdown proving the 'blobby dinos' are real. good luck with that." Its nearly halloween - Personally, I bet he is armed with more scarecrows, like he was last time he refused to back his "argument" with anything valid. And what do brontosaurs have to do with ducks? Do ducks have tons of guts to digest plant material? Do ducks or crows have long necks and long bony tails? Do brachiosaurs have feathers? How many 50-ton ducks are there? Sauropods have NO modern analogs, and for you to come here to pretend they do is disingenuous at best. And stop accusing me of not answering your objections. It's YOU who haven't till this time explained just why Mary Schweitzer wernt to the media before testing her proteins, why Xu Xing went to the media before analyzing his Archaeoraptor, why Phil Manning went to the media before the edmontosaurus he was studying was even prepared, etc. YOU are the one creating straw men, and using crows to vindicate everything you say, no matter how off the point the comparison is.
|
|
|
Post by bustosdomecq on Oct 22, 2008 21:33:40 GMT
And I did say that I would like the finds verified too. I thought it was a good idea, and still do, but unlike the dino bird people I won't insist if an ichnologist proves it fake. Unlike the dino bird people I don't tolerate fakery just to bolster my claims.
|
|