James's theory on dinosaurs

  • 1811 Replies
  • 379949 Views
?

Crustinator

  • 7813
  • Bamhammer horror!
Re: James's theory on dinosaurs
« Reply #1320 on: March 16, 2011, 03:26:44 PM »
Can there be a rule against using logical fallacies in the upper forum?


Listen, I don't like General Disarray's straw man arguments either, but we can't seriously start banning people for making suspect arguments.


It's the difference between going to the store to buy a knife and chipping a stone to make a knife.


Ah, well the former would be better described as using an existing tool than using existing materials. I think EnglshGentleman's phrasing was better. Anyway, here is the requested evidence:


http://news.bbc.co.uk/earth/hi/earth_news/newsid_9125000/9125227.stm

Quote
Young New Caledonian crows learn to use tools by going to "tool-school", where they can observe their parents at work. These crows are renowned for their extraordinary intelligence and ability to fashion tools to solve problems.

. . .

Even among this group, New Caledonian crows (Corvus moneduloides) stand out: they make the most complex tools of any animal yet studied apart from humans. For example, they will evolve and improve the shape of their tools over time, and will fashion left handed or right handed tools.

. . .

"[Juveniles] closely follow and watch their parents' behaviour, are taken to tool using sites, and are 'allowed' to use the tools of their parents," says Dr Hunt. Structuring their education in this way may also help explain how the crows improve their tools over time, as young crows may learn from their parent's mistakes.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Caledonian_Crow#Tool_making

Quote
The New Caledonian Crow is the only non-human species with a record of inventing new tools by modifying existing ones, then passing these innovations to other individuals in the cultural group. Gavin R. Hunt and colleagues at the University of Auckland studied tools the crows make out of pandanus (or screw pine) leaves:

    Crows snip into the leaf edges and then tear out neat strips of vegetation with which they can probe insect-harboring crevices. These tools have been observed to come in three types: narrow strips, wide strips and multi-stepped strips?which are wide at one end and, via a manufacturing process that involves stepwise snips and tears, become narrow at the opposite end.[2]

Observations of the distribution of 5,500 leaf counterparts or stencils left behind by the cutting process suggest that the narrow and the stepped tools are more advanced versions of the wide tool type. "The geographical distribution of each tool type on the island suggests a unique origin, rather than multiple independent inventions". This implies that the inventions, which involve a delicate change in the manufacturing process, were being passed from one individual to another.[3]

The New Caledonian Crow also spontaneously makes tools from materials it does not encounter in the wild, the only non-human species known to do so. In 2002, researcher Kacelnik and colleagues at the University of Oxford observed of a couple of New Caledonian Crows called Betty and Abel:

    Betty's toolmaking abilities came to light by accident during an experiment in which she and Abel had to choose between a hooked and a straight wire for retrieving small pieces of pig heart, their favorite food. When Abel made off with the hooked wire, Betty bent the straight wire into a hook and used the tool to lift a small bucket of food from a vertical pipe. This experiment was the first time the crows had been presented with wire.[4]

Subsequently, this ability was tested through a series of systematic experiments. Out of ten successful retrievals, Betty bent the wire into a hook nine times. Abel retrieved the food once, without bending the wire.[5] The process would usually start with Betty trying to get the food bucket with the straight wire, but then she would make a hook from it bending it in different ways, usually by snagging one end of the wire under something, and then using the bent hook to pick up the tray.

Clearly, Betty's creation of hooks cannot be attributed to the shaping or reinforcement of randomly generated behavior. In 2004, Gavin Hunt observed the crows in the wild also making hooks, but the adaptation to the new material of the wire was clearly novel, and also purposeful. This type of intentional tool-making, even if it is generalizing a prior experience to a completely new context, is almost unknown in the animal world. Chimpanzees have great difficulty in similar innovative tasks.

The use of direct human activity has been recorded as well. This involves the placing of nuts in front of a vehicle on a heavy trafficked street and waiting for the/a car to crush it open, and then waiting at pedestrian lights with other pedestrians in order to retrieve the crushed nut safely.


I've presented all of this several times before, so I really don't understand why I'm being asked to do so yet again.

Brother Wilmore, this is most illuminant evidence you have presented to our Institute. I would like to put before the council Further evidence of dinosaurs grand armada would be the finches bill which is a tool adapted for certain nuts.



 Such a bill might originally have been used for sanding mahogany or chiseling some of the softer woods used in ship building such as pine. We  know that birds bills are very adaptable and using their bills in such a way would leave their hands free for nails and rolled tobacco leaves which were probably smoked by site workers.

*

Saddam Hussein

  • Official Member
  • 35374
  • Former President of Iraq
Re: James's theory on dinosaurs
« Reply #1321 on: March 16, 2011, 05:03:34 PM »
Brother Wilmore, this is most illuminant evidence you have presented to our Institute. I would like to put before the council Further evidence of dinosaurs grand armada would be the finches bill which is a tool adapted for certain nuts.



 Such a bill might originally have been used for sanding mahogany or chiseling some of the softer woods used in ship building such as pine. We  know that birds bills are very adaptable and using their bills in such a way would leave their hands free for nails and rolled tobacco leaves which were probably smoked by site workers.

Maybe that's why dinosaurs evolved arms; so that they could hold their cigarettes.

?

Around And About

  • 2615
  • Circular Logic Falls Flat
Re: James's theory on dinosaurs
« Reply #1322 on: March 16, 2011, 06:08:19 PM »
Ah ha! Now everything makes sense.

I'm not black nor a thug, I'm more like god who will bring 7 plagues of flat earth upon your ass.

*

Lord Wilmore

  • Vice President
  • Flat Earth Believer
  • 12107
Re: James's theory on dinosaurs
« Reply #1323 on: March 16, 2011, 06:17:06 PM »
The joke in that cartoon doesn't make any sense, because of course dinoaurs haven't become extinct.


Brother Wilmore, this is most illuminant evidence you have presented to our Institute. I would like to put before the council Further evidence of dinosaurs grand armada would be the finches bill which is a tool adapted for certain nuts.



 Such a bill might originally have been used for sanding mahogany or chiseling some of the softer woods used in ship building such as pine. We  know that birds bills are very adaptable and using their bills in such a way would leave their hands free for nails and rolled tobacco leaves which were probably smoked by site workers.

Maybe that's why dinosaurs evolved arms; so that they could hold their cigarettes.


Whatever about sincerity, the broad thrust of your speculations is intriguing. However, I must say that I doubt Dinosaurs would use tobacco, as such an athletic race would find its effects to be a serious incumbrance (not to mention the difficulties it would cause at sea).
"I want truth for truth's sake, not for the applaud or approval of men. I would not reject truth because it is unpopular, nor accept error because it is popular. I should rather be right and stand alone than run with the multitude and be wrong." - C.S. DeFord

*

hoppy

  • Flat Earth Believer
  • 11803
Re: James's theory on dinosaurs
« Reply #1324 on: March 16, 2011, 06:19:10 PM »
Ah ha! Now everything makes sense.


 This is just another example of false politically correct doctrine. Smoking has not killed dinosaurs, they have evolved from smoking, into more nimble and smarter beings.
God is real.                                         
http://www.scribd.com/doc/9665708/Flat-Earth-Bible-02-of-10-The-Flat-Earth

*

Lord Wilmore

  • Vice President
  • Flat Earth Believer
  • 12107
Re: James's theory on dinosaurs
« Reply #1325 on: March 16, 2011, 06:24:23 PM »
That's nice.  Now, how is this evidence that ancient dinosaurs were able to make tools sophisticated to build a vast armada of ships so that they could migrate across an ocean?

That isn't what you asked for, so please don't try to blur the distinction.

Hasn't this discussion been going back and forth for the past 60 odd pages about how since modern avian dinosaurs can build floating nests and rudimentary tools, therefore it isn't unreasonable to assume that ancient, non-avian dinosaurs should have been able to construct vast armadas to migrate across oceans?


Saying that they could have been able to do it is not the same as saying they should have been able to do it. Furthermore, neither statement is the same as saying they were able to do it. Though one can interpret the latter two as having the same meaning as the first, they can also be interpreted quite differently. I want to be very clear about the claims we are making, and I don't want people constructing straw man arguments (which is precisely what RE'ers have been doing throughout this thread).
"I want truth for truth's sake, not for the applaud or approval of men. I would not reject truth because it is unpopular, nor accept error because it is popular. I should rather be right and stand alone than run with the multitude and be wrong." - C.S. DeFord

*

markjo

  • Content Nazi
  • The Elder Ones
  • 42535
Re: James's theory on dinosaurs
« Reply #1326 on: March 16, 2011, 06:30:55 PM »
I want to be very clear about the claims we are making, and I don't want people constructing straw man arguments (which is precisely what RE'ers have been doing throughout this thread).

James has presented his ancient dinosaur migration armada as fact, not speculation.
Science is what happens when preconception meets verification.
Quote from: Robosteve
Besides, perhaps FET is a conspiracy too.
Quote from: bullhorn
It is just the way it is, you understanding it doesn't concern me.

?

sillyrob

  • Official Member
  • 3771
  • Punk rawk.
Re: James's theory on dinosaurs
« Reply #1327 on: March 16, 2011, 06:32:05 PM »
James presents every strange belief he has as fact actually, never once has he tried to state his idea as a possibility.

?

Around And About

  • 2615
  • Circular Logic Falls Flat
Re: James's theory on dinosaurs
« Reply #1328 on: March 16, 2011, 07:11:53 PM »
Hmm, arguing against a Far Side comic, eh? I'm not sure if the credibility could get any lower.
I'm not black nor a thug, I'm more like god who will bring 7 plagues of flat earth upon your ass.

*

Lord Wilmore

  • Vice President
  • Flat Earth Believer
  • 12107
Re: James's theory on dinosaurs
« Reply #1329 on: March 16, 2011, 07:55:17 PM »
Hmm, arguing against a Far Side comic, eh? I'm not sure if the credibility could get any lower.


How about arguing with a Far Side Comic?
"I want truth for truth's sake, not for the applaud or approval of men. I would not reject truth because it is unpopular, nor accept error because it is popular. I should rather be right and stand alone than run with the multitude and be wrong." - C.S. DeFord

?

Around And About

  • 2615
  • Circular Logic Falls Flat
Re: James's theory on dinosaurs
« Reply #1330 on: March 16, 2011, 08:05:18 PM »
Hmm, arguing against a Far Side comic, eh? I'm not sure if the credibility could get any lower.


How about arguing with a Far Side Comic?

I don't know, how about it? It probably won't respond, so I imagine it'd be an easy argument to win. ???
I'm not black nor a thug, I'm more like god who will bring 7 plagues of flat earth upon your ass.

*

PizzaPlanet

  • 12260
  • Now available in stereo
Re: James's theory on dinosaurs
« Reply #1331 on: March 16, 2011, 08:27:05 PM »
I imagine it'd be an easy argument to win. ???
FE VICTORY
hacking your precious forum as we speak 8) 8) 8)

Re: James's theory on dinosaurs
« Reply #1332 on: March 16, 2011, 08:35:41 PM »
Hmm, arguing against a Far Side comic, eh? I'm not sure if the credibility could get any lower.


How about arguing with a Far Side Comic?

Using support from a publication is 100 percent justifiable.

I for one support James' theory. Not the colonial dinosaurs part, but attempts at creating "rafts" of sorts like modern day birds, and the ocean currents taking the dinosaurs to other parts of the planet.

?

Around And About

  • 2615
  • Circular Logic Falls Flat
Re: James's theory on dinosaurs
« Reply #1333 on: March 16, 2011, 09:01:22 PM »
I imagine it'd be an easy argument to win. ???
FE VICTORY

I lulz'd...but in the good-natured way.  ;)
I'm not black nor a thug, I'm more like god who will bring 7 plagues of flat earth upon your ass.

?

Around And About

  • 2615
  • Circular Logic Falls Flat
Re: James's theory on dinosaurs
« Reply #1334 on: March 17, 2011, 04:24:27 AM »
[Moved over from raindrop thread]

So, is it fair to say that birds are a subset of dinosaurs, according to you? And humans are a subset of primates?
Humans are primates actually.

I KNOW humans are primates. Do you think humans are the only primates, or do other primates exist? Would that make humans a subset, or are you saying the terms are interchangeable? ::)

Anyway, what makes no sense to me is this analogy - Humans:Primates::Birds:Dinosaurs.
I'm not black nor a thug, I'm more like god who will bring 7 plagues of flat earth upon your ass.

*

James

  • Flat Earther
  • The Elder Ones
  • 5613
Re: James's theory on dinosaurs
« Reply #1335 on: March 17, 2011, 04:49:59 AM »
I expect a dinosaur might have smoked a pipe once in a while. I find it is soothing for the intellect, especially when engaged in some grand project.
"For your own sake, as well as for that of our beloved country, be bold and firm against error and evil of every kind." - David Wardlaw Scott, Terra Firma 1901

?

Horatio

  • Official Member
  • 4016
Re: James's theory on dinosaurs
« Reply #1336 on: March 17, 2011, 06:37:29 AM »
I expect a dinosaur might have smoked a pipe once in a while. I find it is soothing for the intellect, especially when engaged in some grand project.

James & Crustinator are now interchangeable.
How dare you have the audacity to demand my deposition. I've never even heard of you.

*

Lord Wilmore

  • Vice President
  • Flat Earth Believer
  • 12107
Re: James's theory on dinosaurs
« Reply #1337 on: March 17, 2011, 08:45:54 AM »
I expect a dinosaur might have smoked a pipe once in a while. I find it is soothing for the intellect, especially when engaged in some grand project.


We shall have to conduct further oneironautical surveys in order to as whether or not Dinosaurs engaged in such recreational activities in the past. However, I must say I have not encountered modern Dinosaurs doing so, though that is perhaps due to their pennated form.
« Last Edit: March 17, 2011, 09:11:57 AM by Lord Wilmore »
"I want truth for truth's sake, not for the applaud or approval of men. I would not reject truth because it is unpopular, nor accept error because it is popular. I should rather be right and stand alone than run with the multitude and be wrong." - C.S. DeFord

?

Around And About

  • 2615
  • Circular Logic Falls Flat
Re: James's theory on dinosaurs
« Reply #1338 on: March 17, 2011, 09:02:58 AM »
We shall have to conduct further oneironautical surveys

Ah yes, this explains quite a bit.
I'm not black nor a thug, I'm more like god who will bring 7 plagues of flat earth upon your ass.

*

Ichimaru Gin :]

  • Undefeated FEer
  • Planar Moderator
  • 8904
  • Semper vigilans
Re: James's theory on dinosaurs
« Reply #1339 on: March 17, 2011, 09:29:18 AM »
[Moved over from raindrop thread]

So, is it fair to say that birds are a subset of dinosaurs, according to you? And humans are a subset of primates?
Humans are primates actually.

I KNOW humans are primates. Do you think humans are the only primates, or do other primates exist? Would that make humans a subset, or are you saying the terms are interchangeable? ::)

Anyway, what makes no sense to me is this analogy - Humans:Primates::Birds:Dinosaurs.
Do you think T rex are the only dinosaurs, or do other dinosaurs exist? As for interchangeable, no. I have been very clear. Birds are dinosaurs.
I saw a slight haze in the hotel bathroom this morning after I took a shower, have I discovered a new planet?

*

Raist

  • The Elder Ones
  • 30590
  • The cat in the Matrix
Re: James's theory on dinosaurs
« Reply #1340 on: March 17, 2011, 09:44:52 AM »
I expect a dinosaur might have smoked a pipe once in a while. I find it is soothing for the intellect, especially when engaged in some grand project.

I find this quote odd unless you mean that birds smoked them. Most animals that we refer to as "dinosaurs" predate tobacco by a long time.

As you are not a dinosaur it is rather irrelevant how pipe smoking makes you feel.

*

Saddam Hussein

  • Official Member
  • 35374
  • Former President of Iraq
Re: James's theory on dinosaurs
« Reply #1341 on: March 17, 2011, 11:46:10 AM »
I expect a dinosaur might have smoked a pipe once in a while. I find it is soothing for the intellect, especially when engaged in some grand project.

I find this quote odd unless you mean that birds smoked them. Most animals that we refer to as "dinosaurs" predate tobacco by a long time.

As you are not a dinosaur it is rather irrelevant how pipe smoking makes you feel.

It might not have been tobacco as we know it today, but similar plants could have existed millions of years ago.

?

sillyrob

  • Official Member
  • 3771
  • Punk rawk.
Re: James's theory on dinosaurs
« Reply #1342 on: March 17, 2011, 12:18:52 PM »
[Moved over from raindrop thread]

So, is it fair to say that birds are a subset of dinosaurs, according to you? And humans are a subset of primates?
Humans are primates actually.

I KNOW humans are primates. Do you think humans are the only primates, or do other primates exist? Would that make humans a subset, or are you saying the terms are interchangeable? ::)

Anyway, what makes no sense to me is this analogy - Humans:Primates::Birds:Dinosaurs.
Do you think T rex are the only dinosaurs, or do other dinosaurs exist? As for interchangeable, no. I have been very clear. Birds are dinosaurs.
You do a lot more saying they are than you do actually proving it.

?

Eddy Baby

  • Official Member
  • 9986
Re: James's theory on dinosaurs
« Reply #1343 on: March 17, 2011, 12:48:58 PM »
I expect a dinosaur might have smoked a pipe once in a while. I find it is soothing for the intellect, especially when engaged in some grand project.
OK

*

Ichimaru Gin :]

  • Undefeated FEer
  • Planar Moderator
  • 8904
  • Semper vigilans
Re: James's theory on dinosaurs
« Reply #1344 on: March 17, 2011, 12:57:44 PM »
[Moved over from raindrop thread]

So, is it fair to say that birds are a subset of dinosaurs, according to you? And humans are a subset of primates?
Humans are primates actually.

I KNOW humans are primates. Do you think humans are the only primates, or do other primates exist? Would that make humans a subset, or are you saying the terms are interchangeable? ::)

Anyway, what makes no sense to me is this analogy - Humans:Primates::Birds:Dinosaurs.
Do you think T rex are the only dinosaurs, or do other dinosaurs exist? As for interchangeable, no. I have been very clear. Birds are dinosaurs.
You do a lot more saying they are than you do actually proving it.
http://www.ucmp.berkeley.edu/diapsids/avians.html
I saw a slight haze in the hotel bathroom this morning after I took a shower, have I discovered a new planet?

?

sillyrob

  • Official Member
  • 3771
  • Punk rawk.
Re: James's theory on dinosaurs
« Reply #1345 on: March 17, 2011, 01:32:22 PM »
http://www.birding.com/birdsdino.asp
That was hard, it says many different things.

?

Around And About

  • 2615
  • Circular Logic Falls Flat
Re: James's theory on dinosaurs
« Reply #1346 on: March 17, 2011, 01:39:51 PM »
I am not questioning the idea that birds have evolved from dinosaurs. I am questioning the idea that birds are dinosaurs. If primates evolved from, say, shrews, then does that mean primates are shrews? Why or why not?
I'm not black nor a thug, I'm more like god who will bring 7 plagues of flat earth upon your ass.

*

Ichimaru Gin :]

  • Undefeated FEer
  • Planar Moderator
  • 8904
  • Semper vigilans
Re: James's theory on dinosaurs
« Reply #1347 on: March 17, 2011, 03:26:52 PM »
Do you understand how cladistics and phylogeny work?
I saw a slight haze in the hotel bathroom this morning after I took a shower, have I discovered a new planet?

?

sillyrob

  • Official Member
  • 3771
  • Punk rawk.
Re: James's theory on dinosaurs
« Reply #1348 on: March 17, 2011, 03:32:01 PM »
 So your link is right because you posted it, and my link is wrong because you didn't? There is still debate out there, it's not 100%.

*

Ichimaru Gin :]

  • Undefeated FEer
  • Planar Moderator
  • 8904
  • Semper vigilans
Re: James's theory on dinosaurs
« Reply #1349 on: March 17, 2011, 04:19:08 PM »
So your link is right because you posted it, and my link is wrong because you didn't? There is still debate out there, it's not 100%.
If you subsrcibe to the classification of dinosaur, then there is no debate in the scientific community. I also don't think you actually read your link.
I saw a slight haze in the hotel bathroom this morning after I took a shower, have I discovered a new planet?