What do crows using tools have to do with EQ? 
It wasn't that long ago. Let me help you.
Dinosaurs had equal intelligence to crows...
Since you fail to recognise EQ comparisons, this is incorrect.
What? Honestly Crustinator, your use of labguage is baffling. Would recognising EQ comparisons make it correct? I'm pretty sure you'd disagree with that too, so what exactly are you trying to say?
I'm not bawwing. You just keep misrepresenting me.
No I didn't. You even apologised for claiming I did when I didn't. 
You were bawwing about how I said you misquoted me just a couple of posts ago. Of course, I never claimed you misquoted me, as I have shown. Thus, you misrepresented my position. Again.
If there's anywhere else you think you've been misrepresented I beg you to create a new thread in "Suggestions and Concerns". Of course such claims will be entirely unfounded but at least it will stop you derailing this thread.
I've warned you about memberating before, so please stop. Poor debating tactics are not against the rules, and thus not an issue for S&C. This board is called 'Flat Earth
Debate', and thus debating tactics such as the misrepresentation of another persons argument are entirely relevant.
I don't know, the Guiness book of records? Mankind in general? First-time events are usually considered pretty impressive.
So no one said "it was more impressive than anything apes had yet done.".
Misrepresenting sources again Wimore? Whenever will you learn?
I never claimed anyone said exactly that. However, to draw any other conclusion from the article would be ludicrous.
One flat denial is enough. I'm not going to go back and read the rest of them.
*sigh* You've been linked to enough stuff.
You claimed that you'd shown evidence for dinosaurs building boats. After much squealing you revealed that your evidence was "fossil evidence" and some Hunter S. Thompson-esque posts from James.
I've linked various articles showing how intelligence can be measured, how bonobos have built quite complex tools and how petrified wood is made.
If you're telling me you can't be bothered to read the stuff then I'm happy for you.
Sorry, but nothing you've provided is relevant. For example, you've shown how petrified wood is made, and then claimed this was more likely to happen in the early cretaceous period than at any other time. To back this up, you provided sources referring to the triassic period. Not very convincing.
Disagreeing with a theory is not the same as suppressing it.
Then you can remove the words "only" from each of these posts then.
dinosaur boats are the only thing that can account for the fossil record
The evidence presented by James shows that the evolutionary track followed by certain species can only be explained by inter-continental migration.
All of the above quotes represent my opinion. None of them deny the existence of CD theory. The key word there is 'can': I do not believe other theories
can explain the fossil record. Of course they try to, but in my opinion, they do not succeed. This is not "suppression", it's disagreement.
Since that was when
...?
My internet packed up on me last night; see the edit. Basically, Deinonychus lived in the early cretaceous.
The Cretaceous period did not have huge amounts of volcanic activity.
*sigh* Please stop failing so hard.
At the end of the Cretaceous, there were severe climate changes, lowered sea levels, and high volcanic activity .
Massive Early Cretaceous volcanic activity in the Nauru Basin related to emplacement of the Ontong Java Plateau
After the end of the Berriasian, however, temperatures increased again, and these conditions were almost constant until the end of the period.[8] This trend was due to intense volcanic activity which produced large quantities of carbon dioxide.
etc etc.
Source 1 is so childish as to be laughable. Maybe this is the kind of site you frequent regularly, but it doesn't cut the mustard. Source 2 refers to a specific geographic location. Again. The third source refers to the Berriasian period, which occured some 15 million years before Deinoychus existed. So basically, all these sources are irrelevant.
One area, in modern India, had huge amounts of volcanic activity. The asteroid struck nowhere near this place.
The asteroid strike was a global catastrophe. Please for the love of the baby Jesus learn some history.
If the volcanic activity was geographically specific, then the asteroid would not have thrown volcanic dust into the atmosphere unless it struck such a region. This is not difficult to grasp.
I've already done this. Petrified wood comes largely from periods in time when there was large amounts of volcanic activity. I even drew it out simple for you to understand. You were given articles to read. Stop pretending you haven't been shown it.
Nothing you've shown refers to the period in question! All of your sources are out by tens (sometimes hundreds!) of millions of years! They are completely irrelevant! You have shown nothing, repeat
nothing, to support your claims.
Of course, even if you could prove this, it still wouldn't apply to the early cretaceous.
It probably would. But I don't think we were specifying early Cretaceous.
Anyway. here's some petrified wood from the early Cretaceous period.
http://www.safossils.com/petrifiedwoodfossils.html
Still no boats. 
One example != proof of great conditions.
Fossil distribution is evidence of where dinosaurs lived and died. Said distribution supports our theory.
No it doesn't. You theory is that dinosaurs built boats, sailed them across open seas with livestock (crocodiles) and took plants with them to colonise new worlds. Oh and they also shaved for some unknown reason.
This theory needs a whole lot more than just the fossilised bones.
Ie Irrelevant/unfounded/absurd conclusion.
They could not have developed the way they did without the kind of geographic separation seen in our theory..