|
Post by [][][]cordylus[][][] on Oct 22, 2008 23:58:23 GMT
Unless the glass is that four-inch-thick glass that they use for tiger habitats at zoos.
|
|
|
Post by Tyrannax on Oct 23, 2008 1:53:16 GMT
Unless the glass is that four-inch-thick glass that they use for tiger habitats at zoos. Well obviously they don't use 4 inch thick glass at some zoos as recently a tiger escaped and killed a kid because he was taunting the animal. Poor kitty! Don't make me burn you at the stake thronder! You double posted! ;D
|
|
|
Post by crazycrowman on Oct 23, 2008 2:21:06 GMT
And what do brontosaurs have to do with ducks?" Very little, especially considering that brontosaurus was a composite animal! (I never said that sauropods have much to do with ducks or crows -) "Sauropods have NO modern analogs, and for you to come here to pretend they do is disingenuous at best." Never did, actually, it was another poster who said that, and I clearly stated that "if that is in reference to me bringing up bird behavior" when making conjecture about prehistoric animals behavior. "And stop accusing me of not answering your objections." But...you have not. And I am guessing you will not. I know whats going to happen. You are going to continue to pretend that you have solid ground to stand on, and you don't go back to the old argument, when you "left for good", and I think you will see, that you never really answered anything. "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. Well, because I don't have to. Those were not in any way my findings, and if they are legit, then they will stand up to peer review and the scientific process. That is how scientific process works, and it does so regardless of the media. The "dino bird" connection, frankly can be made with alot less then those chinese dinos you loathe so much, as all you really have to do is turn your attention towards fossils of animals like Archaeopteryx and the Dromaeosaurids. "YOU are the one creating straw men, and using crows to vindicate everything you say, no matter how off the point the comparison is." Nope, not at all. That claim though, is actually another strawman. You really should market all of these strawmen, as you would probably make a bundle selling them this time of year. There have been no straw man from me. I am not trying to misrepresent the claims you are trying to make here. Here is a definition of a strawman argument for you though, so that you can begin to understand what a strawman argument is, as you clearly do not seem to understand that. "A straw man argument is an informal fallacy based on misrepresentation of an opponent's position.[1] To "set up a straw man," one describes a position that superficially resembles an opponent's actual view, yet is easier to refute. Then, one attributes that position to the opponent. For example, someone might deliberately overstate the opponent's position.[1] While a straw man argument may work as a rhetorical technique—and succeed in persuading people—it carries little or no real evidential weight, since the opponent's actual argument has not been refuted." You know, like you trying to say that I was making the claim that ducks were good analogs for Sauropods. That would be another strawman. I see that you are trolling here, and I clearly see this conversation will end much like the last.
|
|
|
Post by bustosdomecq on Oct 23, 2008 2:26:55 GMT
Who is the troll, me or the one who pretends to be the "invisible user"?
YOU'RE the one who has never answered my objections about media seeking paleontologists and resorted to name calling and posting scarecrow pictures and yakking endlessly about your preposterous crows and invoking your 'expertise' when it has nothing to do with the animal being discussed--the only animal a crow expert is entitled to claim experience about is a CROW!
What? Is archaeopteryx no longer a bird but a dinosaur! Why? Did your crows tell you that?
|
|
|
Post by crazycrowman on Oct 23, 2008 2:28:48 GMT
Yes, the crows tell me everything.
|
|
|
Post by bustosdomecq on Oct 23, 2008 2:32:32 GMT
YOU'RE the one making straw men arguments. You have NEVER answered any of my claims, yet you come in here posting scarecrow pictures and cartoons as if they were refutations. Who's bringing up straw men now, eh? YOU have constantly misrepresented, deliberately so, what I'm saying, and when you can't answer them you say I'm making straw men? Is that ALL you can say? Is that the only argument you can muster-- invective and googling for scarecrow pics?
|
|
|
Post by bustosdomecq on Oct 23, 2008 2:37:07 GMT
And as for your preposterous siggy ccm, do you actually think gigantoraptor and therizinosaurus really behaved like crows or 'modern birds'? What insight into dinosaur psychology do you have that you can claim that no one who has not observed birds knows nothing about dinosaurs? Do you hold seances with velociraptor?
|
|
|
Post by bolesey on Oct 23, 2008 2:49:50 GMT
Under the pics it says "Dinosaur tail marks are rare". So they've discovered other marks before? I've seen dino tail marks before. I wish I could remember where, but I distinctly recall a diagram of a tridactyl dinosaur track site with tail marks specifically noted on it. The mark seemed to be where the dinosaur may have been turning sharply, or jumping or some sort of activity other than ordinary locomotion, and the interpretation as being from the tail appeared to be correct. Here's an example of a what track from a genuine tail dragger looks like (an amphibian): I used to have difficulty accepting the high tail position introduced in restorations by Greg Paul and others. My initial reaction was that it defied gravity and necessity, and for a while I felt a low-slung tail gave a more naturalistic appearance. However, if you look at the typical death pose in articulated dinosaur remains, such as the Carnegie Museum's Camarasaurus, that backward curve of the tail is caused by the tightening of the ligaments that in life must have had little effort holding it aloft. Looking at it from that perspective made things a lot more apparent to me. In animals such as Diplodocus, it's hard to imagine the tail held for such a distance, but it quite likely was. Just now thinking about it, I'm gaining more of an appreciation for what a bizarre adaptation that diplo tail was.
|
|
|
Post by crazycrowman on Oct 23, 2008 3:04:13 GMT
"And as for your preposterous siggy ccm, do you actually think gigantoraptor and therizinosaurus really behaved like crows or 'modern birds'?"
Nope. I would say it is very unlikely that they behaved just like modern birds. Are modern birds the living representatives of the once more diverse group of animals we call Maniraptoran dinosaurs, yes. May the behavior of modern birds help us shed light into what the behavior of their ancestors was like ?, yes, I think so, but only to a degree, similar to how the behavior of modern equids can help us glean some understanding about how prehistoric equids lived.
"What insight into dinosaur psychology do you have that you can claim that no one who has not observed birds knows nothing about dinosaurs?"
No, that is not what my sig says. It says "Anyone who has a hard time understanding that Aves are maniraptoran theropods really has not spent enough time observing, and understanding modern birds!" - and, I would say that it is pretty on the mark, not regarding "dinosaur psychology" but rather physiology. I would say that this is clearly another attempt at one of your creative strawmen.
"Do you hold seances with velociraptor?"
Regularly. (how did you know!) All the birds here, the corvids, kookaburra, parrots, hornbills, mousebird, and others sit one side of the table, and the snakes, lizards, turtles and crocodilians sit the other. Instead of a crystal ball we use a dromaeosaurid egg.
|
|
|
Post by tomhet on Oct 23, 2008 3:36:38 GMT
Those markings on the Velociraptor ulna were quite illusory, I mean, they just saw what they wanted to see if you ask me. If dinos had protofeathers, what would be the use of big true feathers? I truly hope one day we'll consider those stupid reconstructions of 'feathered' dinosaurs as inaccurate as the sprawling Diplodocus ;D May the behavior of modern birds help us shed light into what the behavior of their ancestors was like ?, yes, I think so, but only to a degree, similar to how the behavior of modern equids can help us glean some understanding about how prehistoric equids lived. I find that notion flawed, you can't possibly know to what degree it will help if we don't know how they behaved at all, Piltdown has a point. Did they behave like penguins? Like pelicans? Like crows? Fact is, we know very little and we assume a great deal.
|
|
|
Post by crazycrowman on Oct 23, 2008 4:10:40 GMT
I truly hope one day we'll consider those stupid reconstructions of 'feathered' dinosaurs as inaccurate as the sprawling Diplodocus"
Wow. So, another firm "believer" that the fossils from Liaoning are not real ?
"I find that notion flawed, you can't possibly know to what degree it will help if we don't know how they behaved at all, Piltdown has a point. Did they behave like penguins? Like pelicans? Like crows? Fact is, we know very little and we assume a great deal."
No one can say "extinct dinosaur A behaved *insert here*, simply because we can not observe it doing so. We can look at the little evidence we have regarding behavior, (specifically nests and trackways) to help us understand behavior (dinosaur A walked here and wandered in this direction, or dinosaur B died in large numbers together, of all ages, indicating they likely had a herd/flock structure based on similar findings in modern mass graves) and look at other modern animals that behave in similar ways. Looking at the animals who are closest in relation to extinct animals has been the way paleontologists have put together the loose ideas we have about dinosaur behavior. That is all they can do.
|
|
|
Post by bustosdomecq on Oct 23, 2008 4:32:27 GMT
And so what do crows and all the other members of Class Aves have to do with the behaviour of tyrannosaurus? What extant animal is "next" to a therizinosaurus or a utahraptor? A crow again? The dino-bird paleos favorite analogue, the chicken?
|
|
|
Post by bustosdomecq on Oct 23, 2008 4:38:03 GMT
Do you really think a hornbill or a parrot gives you insight into how a dromeosaur behaved? Are you insane? And you said "understanding", which implies knowledge about dinosaur behaviour and not their physiology. YOU accuse me of making straw men when I am just quoting you!
|
|
|
Post by tomhet on Oct 23, 2008 5:04:34 GMT
Wow. So, another firm "believer" that the fossils from Liaoning are not real ? I can't prove they are fake, but seeing how much money and attention the 'dino = birds' circus draws, I wouldn't be surprised if they were. I know for a fact that Chinese people are very fraudulent, I see them cheating everyday.
|
|
|
Post by crazycrowman on Oct 23, 2008 5:11:51 GMT
"And so what do crows and all the other members of Class Aves have to do with the behaviour of camarasaurus or tyrannosaurus or stegosaurus? What extant animal is "next" to an euoplocepahlus or an edmontonia? A crow again? The dino-bird paleos favorite analogue, the chicken? " You are AGAIN living true to your way of life, and posing more strawmen. Like I said, in my post about dinosaur behavior, who knows how dinosaurs thought, it is pretty much all conjecture. Like I said here, all we have to look at are reptiles, and modern archosaurs for relatives. One can look at other modern animals for how they make use of niches. As for corvid based analogue, I was merely saying that they are birds, a living maniraptoran dinosaur, and they are very smart animals, and that who is to know what dinosaurs were capable of. Please, do refer back to the post to clarify. I never said that dinosaurs were smart because crows are smart. I just said crows were smart. dinotoyforum.proboards100.com/index.cgi?board=dinos&action=display&thread=461"Do you really think a hornbill or a parrot gives you insight into how a dromeosaur behaved? Or an iguanodon? Are you insane? Well, my name is CRAZYcrowman... That aside, do I think that the behavior of modern birds may give us insight into the behavior of extinct dinosaurs ? Like I have said before, In some ways, yes. Think of birds like rattites when compared to say, ornithomimids. Bird behavior like how they deal with co specifics, nurture and rear young, and some of the other "basics" seem, at least to what paleontologists have found, to help us begin to understand dinosaur behavior when applied with appropriate caution. "And you said "understanding", which implies knowledge about dinosaur behaviour and not their physiology." No, understanding implies just that - understanding. Understanding is a psychological process related to an abstract or physical object, such as, person, situation, or message whereby one is able to think about it and use concepts to deal adequately with that object. Saying this does not implies knowledge about dinosaur behavior. "YOU accuse me of making straw men when I am just quoting you!" I am still feeling if you are saying this you do not have much understanding about what a strawman is, or you are choosing to ignore that to make claims that I am making strawman arguments. Gee...thats a whole lot like the archeoraptor post...
|
|
|
Post by bustosdomecq on Oct 23, 2008 5:20:46 GMT
Well then, tell us, oh wise one, how many eggs did velociraptor lay, since you think maniraptors are birds? How many did deinonychus have? Troodon? How long did they brood the eggs? What did the mommy velociraptor feed her hatchlings? What is the survival rate of the chicks? How many clutches does she lay a year? Does the father also help rear the chicks? Well? Don't tell me it's a straw man, it's YOU who claimed that how birds 'nurture' gave insight to dinosaurs, a suggestion which is preposterous on the face of it anyway! And don't say maybe or perhaps! It's YOU who claim knowledge, now put up or shut up!
So what do you understand about dinosaurs then? That they were vertebrates? Amniotes? Pray tell, what insight have you gleaned from the seances with velociraptor in its dinosaur paradise?
|
|
|
Post by bustosdomecq on Oct 23, 2008 5:26:36 GMT
Did velociraptor migrate every year? Did it have leks? Did they chirp, bark, or growl? Did it sing like a nightingale or caw like a crow? What did it like to eat, aside from protoceratops? Did it get along with the oviraptors? How many were in its pack? Or was it a solitary hunter? Answer me then, oh great wise one in the 'conspecific' ways of birds! Perhaps you will argue it did fly too, since there were according to 'research' [sic] flight feather knobs on its ulna! Or perhaps velociraptors solved quadratic equations and read The Iliad?
|
|
|
Post by bustosdomecq on Oct 23, 2008 5:37:56 GMT
So CCM do you really know anything about dinosaurs after all? It's YOU who wrote that "Anyone who has a hard time understanding that Aves are maniraptoran theropods really has not spent enough time observing, and understanding modern birds!" So does 'observing' modern birds give us an insight on dinosaur behaviour and psychology, or not? Does 'understanding' birds require merely looking at their anatomy? I would think the concept of 'understanding' implies far more than that! How do you know how maniraptoran dinosaurs, or any dinosaurs, looked or behaved, for you to make such a claim that they looked and behaved similar to birds? Where is the straw man here? I'm quoting YOU EXACTLY now.
|
|
|
Post by bustosdomecq on Oct 23, 2008 5:43:06 GMT
Wow. So, another firm "believer" that the fossils from Liaoning are not real ? I can't prove they are fake, but seeing how much money and attention the 'dino = birds' circus draws, I wouldn't be surprised if they were. I know for a fact that Chinese people are very fraudulent, I see them cheating everyday. Except me ;D
|
|
|
Post by crazycrowman on Oct 23, 2008 8:20:05 GMT
"Don't tell me it's a straw man, it's YOU who claimed that how birds 'nurture' gave insight to dinosaurs, a suggestion which is preposterous on the face of it anyway! And don't say maybe or perhaps! It's YOU who claim knowledge, now put up or shut up!" But...it IS yet another of your strawman arguments. (seriously, am I the only person noticing/identifying this ?) I said they may give us insight, not tell us any of those other things. You really are reaching, and you are quite clearly distorting what I wrote. I thought I made it clear, but I will once more, and for the last time. We can look at modern birds, along with the other animals who are "related" to dinosaurs, and through the fossil record, and the behaviors of these creatures attempt to understand what dinosaur behavior was like, and how dinosaurs lived. For example, we know dinosaurs laid eggs. We know they constructed nests. We have fossils. We know that in the case of oviraptors, they either guarded or incubated those nests. We can look at both rattite birds and crocodilians today for a living example of a related creature that does those same things. We can look at fossils of "nestling" and unhatched dinosaurs, and make conclusions about the offspring based on what we know about birds were they altricial ?, were they precocial ? Those are questions we can ask in part because of our knowledge about birds, and as the fossil evidence grows, questions that may be able to be better and more clearly responded to and defined. That is how science works, and you seem to have a major problem with that. Its ok, many faith based belief systems do. You are the one who won't "put up" anything to back anything you claim, except ad hominem attacks, and strawmen. You have made some grand claims in various posts here, and have yet to support a one of them. I have never claimed to be an "expert". "So what do you understand about dinosaurs then? That they were vertebrates?" Please. Now you are just being...well. Silly. I would question what you actually know about dinosaurs though, besides what you decide is your argument of the day. You seem to think you know a great deal, at least more then the so called "dinosaurologists" you rant on and on about being frauds and idiots do... "So does 'observing' modern birds give us an insight on dinosaur behavior and psychology, or not?" Maybe and in part, when combined with the fossil record, yes. I already responded to this. You obviously are not happy with my clear response though. You instead chose to make absurd comments like "Or perhaps velociraptors solved quadratic equations and read The Iliad?" As if that would somehow invalidate me. As for the rest of your litany of "questions", you should be aware that there is no way to accurately know those things. Maybe one day if we find a fossilized hatchling troodon, we can know what they ate, and if we find fossils of females on nests, we could begin to get an idea about things like clutch size. But you don't care about me specifying that. You were just trying to aggrivate me. A person possesing specific information and knowledge of such information (say, modern birds) does not mean that the person who has that is somehow devoid of other knowledge. (say, dinosaurs) You seem to be inferring that is the case with me. You seem to be seeking "credentials", and using my "lack of" to discount me - as in "You know crows - therefore, all you know is crows - therefore, you can't know anything about dinosaurs" sort of thing. To that, I would, (and sort of have) ask, what are your credentials ? Are you a "dinosaurologist" ? What did you get your PHD in ? If not dinosaurs, then I have to ask, how are you able to make the grand claims you have made ? "How do you know how maniraptoran dinosaurs, or any dinosaurs, looked or behaved, for you to make such a claim that they looked and behaved similar to birds?" As fossils, they sure look a whole lot like birds. They had too many similarities to birds to dismiss as coincidental. Look how the fossil record supports this. (I know, you will make the claim it does not, and they are all fakes, or what have you, but you fail to distinguish why you do not include archeopteryx, who clearly has as many dinosaurian traits as the traits of modern aves, as I have asked before...) As for how they behaved, I already responded to this, and you chose to ignore that as well. "I'm quoting YOU EXACTLY now." And you are distorting how the quoted material was presented. Oh, yeah....another... I am not going to continue to feed you, as you are clearly trolling, not actually responding with anything valid, and frankly, I would rather not waste my effort trying trying to communicate with someone like that. I am amused you felt the need to come back to this forum after you made such a fuss the last time you left. Does it make you feel like a big boy to attempt to belittle people with your logical fallacy arguments ? *May crows poop all over your strawmen*
|
|