What about the Dinosuars?

  • 402 Replies
  • 82672 Views
Re: What about the Dinosuars?
« Reply #30 on: May 27, 2009, 03:52:53 AM »
Don't be ridiculous. We've presented a large body of evidence and passionately defended that thesis over and over again for the last three or four years. Why would it be a joke? If it was a joke, how else would the distribution of fossils be explicable?

By continetal drift. If dinosaurs were meant for using tools to this degree, they would have proper arms and a brain larger than a peanut.

*

James

  • Flat Earther
  • The Elder Ones
  • 5613
Re: What about the Dinosuars?
« Reply #31 on: May 27, 2009, 03:58:37 AM »
By continetal drift. If dinosaurs were meant for using tools to this degree, they would have proper arms and a brain larger than a peanut.

A large brain and "proper arms" are prerequisite for complex tool use, are they?

Would you care to explain the plain fact that a great number of birds, which not only do not possess "proper arms" but in fact possess no arms at all are capable of extensive tool use and construction? Would you care to explain how otters, who by comparison to humanity are phenomenally stupid, are able to manipulate rocks with their crude, clawed forelegs in order to open oysters and other shellfish?

As has already been pointed out, continental drift is impossible. If it occured on any large scale, the Earth would break apart. Clearly, this has not occured.
"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

Re: What about the Dinosuars?
« Reply #32 on: May 27, 2009, 05:19:49 AM »
By continetal drift. If dinosaurs were meant for using tools to this degree, they would have proper arms and a brain larger than a peanut.

A large brain and "proper arms" are prerequisite for complex tool use, are they?

Would you care to explain the plain fact that a great number of birds, which not only do not possess "proper arms" but in fact possess no arms at all are capable of extensive tool use and construction? Would you care to explain how otters, who by comparison to humanity are phenomenally stupid, are able to manipulate rocks with their crude, clawed forelegs in order to open oysters and other shellfish?

As has already been pointed out, continental drift is impossible. If it occured on any large scale, the Earth would break apart. Clearly, this has not occured.

Do you realise the difference between using a small stick to find a worm, and building huge boats to sail with`? Did I not say "using tools to this degree"? Clearly someone with a peanut brain and so small arms can't build boats. ::)

Clearly this has occured. The world have "broken apart". Continental drift.
« Last Edit: May 27, 2009, 05:28:12 AM by MisterHamper »

*

frostee

  • Official Member
  • 3555
  • Posts: 1337
Re: What about the Dinosuars?
« Reply #33 on: May 27, 2009, 05:54:56 AM »
Peanut sized brain you say...
Recently religious due to the impending rapture.

Re: What about the Dinosuars?
« Reply #34 on: May 27, 2009, 06:18:56 AM »
Peanut sized brain you say...

Yes their brains was VERY very small compared to their bodies, which is what matters. The EQ of a dinosaur is roughly 5 times lower than that of an elephant, and 50 times lower than that of a human. Very few dinosaurs were as smart as todays wild beasts, but only a few of them. How would they go about colonization and building boats? ::) This is just as stupid as the Flat Earth Theory

Even a regular human isn't smart enough to build a boat. It takes some studying to build a boat that can carry a big load and won't sink or break.

*

James

  • Flat Earther
  • The Elder Ones
  • 5613
Re: What about the Dinosuars?
« Reply #35 on: May 27, 2009, 08:45:57 AM »
Peanut sized brain you say...

Yes their brains was VERY very small compared to their bodies, which is what matters. The EQ of a dinosaur is roughly 5 times lower than that of an elephant, and 50 times lower than that of a human. Very few dinosaurs were as smart as todays wild beasts, but only a few of them. How would they go about colonization and building boats? ::) This is just as stupid as the Flat Earth Theory

The size of a brain does not dictate its intelligence, although in some species it can be indicative of it. The cereberal cortex, a relatively small part of the brain, plays a crucial role in the intelligence of an animal, the size and configuration of which do not necessarily correlate with the size of the whole brain. You have no idea how dinosaurs compared in intelligence to modern animals.

Even a regular human isn't smart enough to build a boat. It takes some studying to build a boat that can carry a big load and won't sink or break.

Not at all. Back when I ran the South West of England FES group, we would often provide counterexample to this ridiculous claim (I assure you, you are not the first to dispute the thesis that dinosaurs built boats) by taping together, on each hand, our thumbs to our index fingers, and our middle fingers to our ring fingers, and then proceeding to construct crude watercraft. Building a raft with some logs and withies is incredibly easy, and with our hands taped together to prevent us using our opposable thumbs, small groups were usually able to collaborate and construct rafts with relative ease.
"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

*

James

  • Flat Earther
  • The Elder Ones
  • 5613
Re: What about the Dinosuars?
« Reply #36 on: May 27, 2009, 08:54:29 AM »
Oh, I didn't film this particular adventure, it was a demonstration for the benefit of sceptics who were present at the meeting. You needn't worry, though, as the experiment is easily replicable, and fun too. All you need is some masking tape, some friends, some logs and some withies! It really is one of the most simple experiments to perform without any expensive equipment or expertise.
"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

*

James

  • Flat Earther
  • The Elder Ones
  • 5613
Re: What about the Dinosuars?
« Reply #37 on: May 27, 2009, 09:02:45 AM »
Oh, I didn't film this particular adventure, it was a demonstration for the benefit of sceptics who were present at the meeting. You needn't worry, though, as the experiment is easily replicable, and fun too.

No it is your experiment. I want to see you perform it. I will accept a youtube link.

You don't understand - I did not film this experiment, I said so already!

If you seriously don't believe that a bunch of people with their hands taped together can build a raft, you really ought to try it yourself. I assure you it is incredibly easy. Tie a slip knot in one withy, using it as a noose, tighten it around one of the logs, and then weave it between the other ones. At the other end of the raft, secure the withy with a second knot. You might find that using your teeth helps to manipulate the withy, but with a bit of practice it's quite easy to hold it between your "claws" especially if someone else holds it steady with their "claws" whilst you tie the knot. Simply repeat this process at a number of intervals down the logs until your raft is complete. Then push it towards a lake or river and set sail!!
"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

*

James

  • Flat Earther
  • The Elder Ones
  • 5613
Re: What about the Dinosuars?
« Reply #38 on: May 27, 2009, 09:47:11 AM »
Look, I told you, twice, I didn't film it. I can't comply with your request because it's impossible, no such footage exists.
"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

Re: What about the Dinosuars?
« Reply #39 on: May 27, 2009, 09:50:32 AM »
Peanut sized brain you say...

Yes their brains was VERY very small compared to their bodies, which is what matters. The EQ of a dinosaur is roughly 5 times lower than that of an elephant, and 50 times lower than that of a human. Very few dinosaurs were as smart as todays wild beasts, but only a few of them. How would they go about colonization and building boats? ::) This is just as stupid as the Flat Earth Theory

The size of a brain does not dictate its intelligence, although in some species it can be indicative of it. The cereberal cortex, a relatively small part of the brain, plays a crucial role in the intelligence of an animal, the size and configuration of which do not necessarily correlate with the size of the whole brain. You have no idea how dinosaurs compared in intelligence to modern animals.

Even a regular human isn't smart enough to build a boat. It takes some studying to build a boat that can carry a big load and won't sink or break.

Not at all. Back when I ran the South West of England FES group, we would often provide counterexample to this ridiculous claim (I assure you, you are not the first to dispute the thesis that dinosaurs built boats) by taping together, on each hand, our thumbs to our index fingers, and our middle fingers to our ring fingers, and then proceeding to construct crude watercraft. Building a raft with some logs and withies is incredibly easy, and with our hands taped together to prevent us using our opposable thumbs, small groups were usually able to collaborate and construct rafts with relative ease.

Who cares if you can build a little raft without your thumbs? Try building a raft with your mouth or your feet, and we'll see if you succed. Oh, and try do that with your eyes closed to simulate how stupid dinosaurs were.

"The size of a brain does not dictate its intelligence, although in some species it can be indicative of it. The cereberal cortex, a relatively small part of the brain, plays a crucial role in the intelligence of an animal, the size and configuration of which do not necessarily correlate with the size of the whole brain. You have no idea how dinosaurs compared in intelligence to modern animals."

The EQ, as I just said... so yes, I have a pretty good idea how dinousaurs compared in intelligence to moderne animals

*

James

  • Flat Earther
  • The Elder Ones
  • 5613
Re: What about the Dinosuars?
« Reply #40 on: May 27, 2009, 09:57:17 AM »
Who cares if you can build a little raft without your thumbs? Try building a raft with your mouth or your feet, and we'll see if you succed. Oh, and try do that with your eyes closed to simulate how stupid dinosaurs were.

Many dinosaurs had clawed hands. The taping simulates this adversity they would have faced.

"The size of a brain does not dictate its intelligence, although in some species it can be indicative of it. The cereberal cortex, a relatively small part of the brain, plays a crucial role in the intelligence of an animal, the size and configuration of which do not necessarily correlate with the size of the whole brain. You have no idea how dinosaurs compared in intelligence to modern animals."

The EQ, as I just said... so yes, I have a pretty good idea how dinousaurs compared in intelligence to moderne animals

No, you are wrong. The configuration of the cerebral cortex can potentially affect intelligence far more than brain-body ratio. Dolphins, for example, have a very high brain-body ratio, but they are also phenomenally stupid.
"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

Re: What about the Dinosuars?
« Reply #41 on: May 27, 2009, 10:00:46 AM »
Who cares if you can build a little raft without your thumbs? Try building a raft with your mouth or your feet, and we'll see if you succed. Oh, and try do that with your eyes closed to simulate how stupid dinosaurs were.

Many dinosaurs had clawed hands. The taping simulates this adversity they would have faced.

"The size of a brain does not dictate its intelligence, although in some species it can be indicative of it. The cereberal cortex, a relatively small part of the brain, plays a crucial role in the intelligence of an animal, the size and configuration of which do not necessarily correlate with the size of the whole brain. You have no idea how dinosaurs compared in intelligence to modern animals."

The EQ, as I just said... so yes, I have a pretty good idea how dinousaurs compared in intelligence to moderne animals

No, you are wrong. The configuration of the cerebral cortex can potentially affect intelligence far more than brain-body ratio. Dolphins, for example, have a very high brain-body ratio, but they are also phenomenally stupid.

http://www.geo.cornell.edu/eas/education/course/descr/EAS109/109-Lec10.pdf

Maybe this would be soemthing for you then.

Oh, and I don't see Dolphins actually BUILDING complex things...

*

James

  • Flat Earther
  • The Elder Ones
  • 5613
Re: What about the Dinosuars?
« Reply #42 on: May 27, 2009, 10:06:44 AM »
http://www.geo.cornell.edu/eas/education/course/descr/EAS109/109-Lec10.pdf

Maybe this would be soemthing for you then.

Pretty much all the evidence there is circumstantial or just plain wrong. How can having horns be construed as indicative of primitive social behaviour? Is the presence of teeth and nails in humans evidence for it? No.

Herding is used as another example, but herding is a great idea. People herd too, a lot of activities are much easier to accomplish in groups.

I'm not going to post rebuttals to every single flawed point in that lengthy screed, but perhaps if you'd like to post your favorites I could demolish those for you.

Oh, and I don't see Dolphins actually BUILDING complex things...

That was my exact point. Despite their excellent brain-body ratio, dolphins are completely thick. They are absolutely inanely stupid, which shows that a good brain-body ratio doesn't mean squat.
"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

*

markjo

  • Content Nazi
  • The Elder Ones
  • 40126
Re: What about the Dinosuars?
« Reply #43 on: May 27, 2009, 10:52:04 AM »
Look, I told you, twice, I didn't film it. I can't comply with your request because it's impossible, no such footage exists.

Then I cannot accept your claim that making a boat with thumbs taped up is possible seeing as I'm too lazy and/or too stupid to try it myself.

Fixed that for you.
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.

Re: What about the Dinosuars?
« Reply #44 on: May 27, 2009, 11:14:29 AM »
http://www.geo.cornell.edu/eas/education/course/descr/EAS109/109-Lec10.pdf

Maybe this would be soemthing for you then.

Pretty much all the evidence there is circumstantial or just plain wrong. How can having horns be construed as indicative of primitive social behaviour? Is the presence of teeth and nails in humans evidence for it? No.

Herding is used as another example, but herding is a great idea. People herd too, a lot of activities are much easier to accomplish in groups.

I'm not going to post rebuttals to every single flawed point in that lengthy screed, but perhaps if you'd like to post your favorites I could demolish those for you.

Oh, and I don't see Dolphins actually BUILDING complex things...

That was my exact point. Despite their excellent brain-body ratio, dolphins are completely thick. They are absolutely inanely stupid, which shows that a good brain-body ratio doesn't mean squat.

Humans have an EQ of 7 while dolphins have an EQ of only slightly above 2. Dinosaurs have an EQ of ~0.1 and most wild animals have an EQ of 0.1-1.
Do you now see why dolphins don't build anything complex like humans do? Or why dinosaurs don't either?

That PDF file is only ? a page long, between the "Evidence of intelligence" down to "How fast did they go?"
We know more about dinosaurs than you think we know, it seems.

*

James

  • Flat Earther
  • The Elder Ones
  • 5613
Re: What about the Dinosuars?
« Reply #45 on: May 27, 2009, 12:32:26 PM »
Once Dogplatter has produced his evidence in the form of youtube video I will perform my own investigation.

I don't have time to cover the same ground again, and my old group has disbanded. If you really have a massive problem believing that the relatively simple procedure of constructing a crude raft is possible with the digits of your hands taped together, you can perform the experiment yourself, otherwise you can continue to believe whatever idiotic denial of the obvious you want. I don't particularly care what you, anonymous internet globularist, think about my dinosaur experiment.

http://www.geo.cornell.edu/eas/education/course/descr/EAS109/109-Lec10.pdf

Maybe this would be soemthing for you then.

Pretty much all the evidence there is circumstantial or just plain wrong. How can having horns be construed as indicative of primitive social behaviour? Is the presence of teeth and nails in humans evidence for it? No.

Herding is used as another example, but herding is a great idea. People herd too, a lot of activities are much easier to accomplish in groups.

I'm not going to post rebuttals to every single flawed point in that lengthy screed, but perhaps if you'd like to post your favorites I could demolish those for you.

Oh, and I don't see Dolphins actually BUILDING complex things...

That was my exact point. Despite their excellent brain-body ratio, dolphins are completely thick. They are absolutely inanely stupid, which shows that a good brain-body ratio doesn't mean squat.

Humans have an EQ of 7 while dolphins have an EQ of only slightly above 2. Dinosaurs have an EQ of ~0.1 and most wild animals have an EQ of 0.1-1.
Do you now see why dolphins don't build anything complex like humans do? Or why dinosaurs don't either?

That PDF file is only ? a page long, between the "Evidence of intelligence" down to "How fast did they go?"
We know more about dinosaurs than you think we know, it seems.

Your citation of those EQs only further demonstrates my point. The EQ of an otter or a bird is far lower than a dolphin, yet both otters and birds are adept at tool use, and dolphins are completely incapable by virtue of their incredible stupidity. Out of interest, what is the suspected EQ of a chimp? I'm genuinely interest to know.
"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

Re: What about the Dinosuars?
« Reply #46 on: May 27, 2009, 01:29:14 PM »
Your citation of those EQs only further demonstrates my point. The EQ of an otter or a bird is far lower than a dolphin, yet both otters and birds are adept at tool use, and dolphins are completely incapable by virtue of their incredible stupidity. Out of interest, what is the suspected EQ of a chimp? I'm genuinely interest to know.

No if dolphins HAD to use tools in order to survive, they would have developed arms or a proper mouth for tool-use. But the thing is: they have had no reason at all to use tools. Oh, and why are you saying dolphins are stupid? They are quite smart as seen by the tricks they can easily learn and how they interact with humans and other dolphins.
Some birds have to use tools to build a little nest or something. There is a HUGE difference between building a simple nest so your eggs/kids is protected, compared to building a boat, even if it was just a simple boat ::) Do you know why humans use tools to such a large degree? Because we use our brains to survive instead of our big muscles. Did dinosaurs use their brains instead of their muscles to survive? No, if they did they would have had a larger brain.

The EQ of a chimp is 2-3.

Do you realise that alligators is one of the most ancient animals, who lived when dinosaurs was there too if I recall correctly? Do you see him building boats? He is just as smart as all other reptiles - dumb as a brick. How did crocodiles and alligators come almost all over the world?


Oh, and how exactly do you think this guy is going to build a boat? If he was designed for building things, he WOULD HAVE HAD SOME PROPER ARMS AND A PROPER BRAIN. I really can't see how you can believe a guy like this lived in a social colonization.




« Last Edit: May 27, 2009, 01:36:15 PM by MisterHamper »

*

James

  • Flat Earther
  • The Elder Ones
  • 5613
Re: What about the Dinosuars?
« Reply #47 on: May 27, 2009, 01:46:50 PM »
No if dolphins HAD to use tools in order to survive, they would have developed arms or a proper mouth for tool-use. But the thing is: they have had no reason at all to use tools.

Otters don't have to use tools either, but they do because it makes sense, showing they are more intelligent than dolphins.

Oh, and why are you saying dolphins are stupid? They are quite smart as seen by the tricks they can easily learn and how they interact with humans and other dolphins.

So can parrots and dogs, both of which are also incredibly stupid by human standards.

Some birds have to use tools to build a little nest or something. There is a HUGE difference between building a simple nest so your eggs/kids is protected, compared to building a boat, even if it was just a simple boat ::)

Nests are very similar to boats, structurally and conceptually. Building a boat to find new resources or avoid overpopulation is equivalent in importance to protecting your young by making them a nest. If your young will die because they have to compete for highly scarce resources amongst an overcrowded population, it makes sense to any rational animal to seek out new resources in different locations.

Do you know why humans use tools to such a large degree? Because we use our brains to survive instead of our big muscles. Did dinosaurs use their brains instead of their muscles to survive? No, if they did they would have had a larger brain.

The dichotomy you are trying to present between brains and brawn is highly misleading. Most successful species, humans included, recruit a combination of both in ensuring their survival. Of course, dinosaurs would have done the same.

Do you realise that alligators is one of the most ancient animals, who lived when dinosaurs was there too? Do you see him building boats?

Alligators aren't a type of dinosaur. Coexisting with intelligent beings doesn't make you yourself intelligent as a species, as evidenced by
the fact that dogs, dolphins, etc., coexist with humans and yet are completely moronic. The fact of the matter is, as a lethal and effective predator which was perfectly adapted to its environment, the prehistoric alligator would not have faced the kinds of evolutionary selection pressures which forced dinosaurs to develop intelligence in order to overcome the challenges which they faced.

Quote
He is just as smart as all other reptiles - dumb as a brick.

But dinosaurs aren't reptiles.

How did crocodiles and alligators come almost all over the world?

Dinosaurs would have transported the ancestors of the modern alligator and crocodile with them as livestock and/or pets. Also, both alligators and crocodiles are excellent swimmers, which explains a large amount of their local migration by water.

Oh, and how exactly do you think this guy is going to build a boat? If he was designed for building things, he WOULD HAVE HAD SOME NON-STUBBY ARMS AND A PROPER BRAIN. I really can't see how you can believe a guy like this lived in a social colonization.

Dinosaurs of different kinds had a wide range of biological configurations which would have lent themselves to different technical proficiencies. Actually, you point out the short arms of the dinosaurs which were bipedal. In my opinion, this serves as further evidence of specialisation along the same lines as humanity. Bipedalism frees up the forelimbs for operations such as tool creation and use, and the adjustment of the lungs in bipedal land animals (of which humans are currently the only real example) actually allows for a wider range of noises to be produced, a prerequisite for verbal communication. Bipedal dinosaurs such as compsognathus, velociraptor and deinonychus were ideal candidates for the evolutionary trappings of civilisation.
"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

Re: What about the Dinosuars?
« Reply #48 on: May 27, 2009, 01:48:08 PM »
That's not how science works. You produce evidence of your experimentation and then we verify it. I will accept a youtube link to a video of you taping your thumbs up and then trying to build a raft.

Dolphins aren't "incredibly stupid". And they do use tools.

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2005/06/0607_050607_dolphin_tools.html

They just haven't got round to building boats yet.

That's pretty cool, didn't know that actually. Dolphins are some of the smartest animals besides humans :)

*

James

  • Flat Earther
  • The Elder Ones
  • 5613
Re: What about the Dinosuars?
« Reply #49 on: May 27, 2009, 01:53:33 PM »
That's not how science works. You produce evidence of your experimentation and then we verify it. I will accept a youtube link to a video of you taping your thumbs up and then trying to build a raft.

You don't have the faintest idea how science works. Regardless, this isn't a matter of science, it's a petty argument which is going nowhere because you want me to send you a link which doesn't exist. YOU can replicate the experiment if you wish. That is the only option.

Dolphins aren't "incredibly stupid". And they do use tools.

Have you ever interacted with a dolphin? They cannot communicate coherently, they spend their entire lives mating, eating and inanely frolicing in the waves. They are by the standards of humanity completely and utterly dense.

The link you provide is mainly based on conjecture after what sounds like a chance observation of some retarded dolphin hijinks. Some idiot dolphin got a bit of sponge stuck on its face? Stop the presses, we've just found the Einstein of the ocean!  ::)
"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

Re: What about the Dinosuars?
« Reply #50 on: May 27, 2009, 02:10:34 PM »
Quote
Otters don't have to use tools either, but they do because it makes sense, showing they are more intelligent than dolphins.

Yes they have to use tools in order to crack open the shells to get their food. It is like a crab using a shell as a "backpack". Doesn't make it smart.
I doubt you realise the difference between using a stick or rock to crack something open with food in it for thousands of years, compared to building complex structures like boats for no short-term reason.

Quote
Nests are very similar to boats, structurally and conceptually. Building a boat to find new resources or avoid overpopulation is equivalent in importance to protecting your young by making them a nest. If your young will die because they have to compete for highly scarce resources amongst an overcrowded population, it makes sense to any rational animal to seek out new resources in different locations.

No they are not! They are not the same at all! We humans have built "houses" for as long as we have existed, but have only begun builting boats that can sail very far the last couple of thousand years, and small river-boats have only existed for a few ten-thousands years.
It doesn't make sense that a T-Rex would think "Hey we are running a little dry on ressources. You, cryphotaus, get me some wood. You, hopalitaus, get me a hammer. I'm going to build a boat so we can sail over the ocean into the unknown." ::)
Why exactly would they use months/years building a boat, when they have no idea what's out there, and they instead could just WALK over the land or kill the other predators in their land.

Quote
The dichotomy you are trying to present between brains and brawn is highly misleading. Most successful species, humans included, recruit a combination of both in ensuring their survival. Of course, dinosaurs would have done the same.

No. We humans have almost no muscle-power. We have our brains instead. If we were to have the same muscle-power as an ape together with our brain, we would need way over 5000 calories daily to not lose weight. So we would probably need 6-7000 calories daily to gain weight to survive the cold winter. That is why we don't have large muscles - because we can't have both. That is also why so few animals have large brains. Because they consume alot of calories. I have heard that in a class, where you focus 100%, you can burn several hundreds kcal an hour.

Quote
the fact that dogs, dolphins, etc., coexist with humans and yet are completely moronic. The fact of the matter is, as a lethal and effective predator which was perfectly adapted to its environment, the prehistoric alligator would not have faced the kinds of evolutionary selection pressures which forced dinosaurs to develop intelligence in order to overcome the challenges which they faced.

Dogs, dolphins etc don't co-exist with humans. They are wild animals, that have nothing to do with humans. An alligator is a dinosaur, just like most birds are. They haven't changed much.
"develop intelligence in order to overcome the challenges which they faced"
Oh, like what?

Quote
But dinosaurs aren't reptiles.

Yes they are.

Quote
Dinosaurs would have transported the ancestors of the modern alligator and crocodile with them as livestock and/or pets. Also, both alligators and crocodiles are excellent swimmers, which explains a large amount of their local migration by water.

Why am I even debating with you?  ::) Holding croc's as livestock? Come one.....

Quote
Dinosaurs of different kinds had a wide range of biological configurations which would have lent themselves to different technical proficiencies. Actually, you point out the short arms of the dinosaurs which were bipedal. In my opinion, this serves as further evidence of specialisation along the same lines as humanity. Bipedalism frees up the forelimbs for operations such as tool creation and use, and the adjustment of the lungs in bipedal land animals (of which humans are currently the only real example) actually allows for a wider range of noises to be produced, a prerequisite for verbal communication. Bipedal dinosaurs such as compsognathus, velociraptor and deinonychus were ideal candidates for the evolutionary trappings of civilisation.

Their arms was NOT meant for using tools. They were most likely used when running to "move" like we use our arms, or they were simple meathooks, or maybe they were just something that didn't have any purpose at all - after all we have many things in our body with no purpose at all. Like the "tail-bone". The thing is, many dinosaurs broke their arms very often. They simply didn't need them that much.
Their arms had VERY limited range of motion. They could barely be bended


Re: What about the Dinosuars?
« Reply #51 on: May 27, 2009, 02:11:54 PM »
Have you ever interacted with a dolphin? They cannot communicate coherently, they spend their entire lives mating, eating and inanely frolicing in the waves. They are by the standards of humanity completely and utterly dense.

Much like most humans?

*

sokarul

  • 18043
  • Discount Chemist
Re: What about the Dinosuars?
« Reply #52 on: May 27, 2009, 03:01:13 PM »


If you seriously don't believe that a bunch of people with their hands taped together can build a raft, you really ought to try it yourself.  

Your experiment is scientifically flawed.    

New experiment, I am going to repeatedly hit you in the head as hard as I can with a baseball bat, and then you can go tape up your fingers and try and build a raft.  Lets see what happens.  


Added: I guess I should elaborate.  Dinosaurs do not have the same joins as us.  You cannot compare your bone structure to theirs.  Taping fingers does not make you a dinosaur. 
« Last Edit: May 27, 2009, 03:04:11 PM by sokarul »
ANNIHILATOR OF  SHIFTER

It's no slur if it's fact.

*

James

  • Flat Earther
  • The Elder Ones
  • 5613
Re: What about the Dinosuars?
« Reply #53 on: May 27, 2009, 04:49:17 PM »
Yes they have to use tools in order to crack open the shells to get their food. It is like a crab using a shell as a "backpack". Doesn't make it smart.

Not at all, there are plenty of other food sources available for otters, they just choose to use tools to maximise the food they can get. It's a completely contingent decision.

I doubt you realise the difference between using a stick or rock to crack something open with food in it for thousands of years, compared to building complex structures like boats for no short-term reason.

I am not equating the two. I raise the tool-use of otters purely as a counterexample to the wrongful claims that opposable thumbs or a high EQ are requirements for tool use.


Quote
Nests are very similar to boats, structurally and conceptually. Building a boat to find new resources or avoid overpopulation is equivalent in importance to protecting your young by making them a nest. If your young will die because they have to compete for highly scarce resources amongst an overcrowded population, it makes sense to any rational animal to seek out new resources in different locations.

No they are not! They are not the same at all! We humans have built "houses" for as long as we have existed, but have only begun builting boats that can sail very far the last couple of thousand years, and small river-boats have only existed for a few ten-thousands years.

No we haven't. For much of human history, our ancestors wandered in the open as shelterless nomads. We've been building boats almost since we left Africa, there is strong archaeological evidence that the aboriginal population of Australia used boats to travel there from mainland Eurasia. This was before the last Ice Age. We're not talking about a few thousand years here, this is ancient prehistory. Building boats is totally easy and has been done for much of human prehistory.

It doesn't make sense that a T-Rex would think "Hey we are running a little dry on ressources. You, cryphotaus, get me some wood. You, hopalitaus, get me a hammer. I'm going to build a boat so we can sail over the ocean into the unknown." ::)

What exactly is implausible about this scenario besides the use of vocal English and the involvement of a human tool?

Why exactly would they use months/years building a boat, when they have no idea what's out there, and they instead could just WALK over the land or kill the other predators in their land.

For the exact same reasons that humans did. Scarcity of resources, overpopulation, inherent sense of adventure.

Quote
The dichotomy you are trying to present between brains and brawn is highly misleading. Most successful species, humans included, recruit a combination of both in ensuring their survival. Of course, dinosaurs would have done the same.

No. We humans have almost no muscle-power. We have our brains instead. If we were to have the same muscle-power as an ape together with our brain, we would need way over 5000 calories daily to not lose weight. So we would probably need 6-7000 calories daily to gain weight to survive the cold winter. That is why we don't have large muscles - because we can't have both. That is also why so few animals have large brains. Because they consume alot of calories. I have heard that in a class, where you focus 100%, you can burn several hundreds kcal an hour.

Many adult men involved in the kind of exertion levels that would have typified prehistoric life (i.e. modern soldiers, athletes, etc.) do require massive calorific intakes in order to fulfill their energy needs. Also, brains consume hardly any calories. You have heard incorrectly. Rigorous scientific testing by a number of scientific institutions has demonstrated that the amount of energy used in intense concentration scarcely differs from that used in normal homeostasis.

Quote
the fact that dogs, dolphins, etc., coexist with humans and yet are completely moronic. The fact of the matter is, as a lethal and effective predator which was perfectly adapted to its environment, the prehistoric alligator would not have faced the kinds of evolutionary selection pressures which forced dinosaurs to develop intelligence in order to overcome the challenges which they faced.

Dogs, dolphins etc don't co-exist with humans. They are wild animals, that have nothing to do with humans. An alligator is a dinosaur, just like most birds are. They haven't changed much.
"develop intelligence in order to overcome the challenges which they faced"
Oh, like what?

Quote
But dinosaurs aren't reptiles.

Yes they are.

Their hip configurations mean that they aren't. Legged reptiles walk with the hips such that the legs are not directly below the body (as with alligators, lizards, etc.). Dinosaurs had hips which enabled them to walk with the legs directly underneath the body, distinguishing them from the modern class of animals known as reptiles. An alligator is absolutely NOT a dinosaur. Birds are descended from dinosaurs, but are not dinosaurs.

Quote
Dinosaurs would have transported the ancestors of the modern alligator and crocodile with them as livestock and/or pets. Also, both alligators and crocodiles are excellent swimmers, which explains a large amount of their local migration by water.

Why am I even debating with you?  ::) Holding croc's as livestock? Come one.....

Do you have an actual rebuttal to this claim? Humans both modern and in antiquity have kept crocodiles as pets. What is so unintuitive about dinosaurs keeping them in much the same way as people keep dogs and cattle?

Quote
Dinosaurs of different kinds had a wide range of biological configurations which would have lent themselves to different technical proficiencies. Actually, you point out the short arms of the dinosaurs which were bipedal. In my opinion, this serves as further evidence of specialisation along the same lines as humanity. Bipedalism frees up the forelimbs for operations such as tool creation and use, and the adjustment of the lungs in bipedal land animals (of which humans are currently the only real example) actually allows for a wider range of noises to be produced, a prerequisite for verbal communication. Bipedal dinosaurs such as compsognathus, velociraptor and deinonychus were ideal candidates for the evolutionary trappings of civilisation.

Their arms was NOT meant for using tools. They were most likely used when running to "move" like we use our arms, or they were simple meathooks, or maybe they were just something that didn't have any purpose at all - after all we have many things in our body with no purpose at all. Like the "tail-bone". The thing is, many dinosaurs broke their arms very often. They simply didn't need them that much.
Their arms had VERY limited range of motion. They could barely be bended

You're just wildly conjecturing now. Which is it? You just pulled three made-up characterisations of dinosaur arms out of thin air. I'm not sure we can continue to have a serious discussion if you're just going to make things up all the time in order to prop up your ailing thesis.

Furthermore, you can't possibly generalise about the ranges of motion of dinosaur arms, because as I have pointed out, a large number of different configurations for the anatomy of dinosaurs existed. Some were even quadripedal.
"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

*

James

  • Flat Earther
  • The Elder Ones
  • 5613
Re: What about the Dinosuars?
« Reply #54 on: May 27, 2009, 04:58:06 PM »


If you seriously don't believe that a bunch of people with their hands taped together can build a raft, you really ought to try it yourself.  

Your experiment is scientifically flawed.    

New experiment, I am going to repeatedly hit you in the head as hard as I can with a baseball bat, and then you can go tape up your fingers and try and build a raft.  Lets see what happens.  

For threatening me with armed physical violence, I have banned you from the forums for one week.

Added: I guess I should elaborate.  Dinosaurs do not have the same joins as us.  You cannot compare your bone structure to theirs.  Taping fingers does not make you a dinosaur. 


The experiment specifically illustrates that opposable thumbs are not a prerequisite for tool use and construction. This is the aim of the experiment, and it generally yields results which confirm the hypothesis.
"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

?

yup

Re: What about the Dinosuars?
« Reply #55 on: May 27, 2009, 05:07:08 PM »

For threatening me with armed physical violence, I have banned you from the forums for one week.

You are retarded. 

*

James

  • Flat Earther
  • The Elder Ones
  • 5613
Re: What about the Dinosuars?
« Reply #56 on: May 27, 2009, 05:17:14 PM »

For threatening me with armed physical violence, I have banned you from the forums for one week.

You are retarded. 

For circumventing the ban with a dummy account, I have banned the dummy account and extended the ban on your main account to one month. Further efforts to circumvent the ban, upon discovery, will result in progressive increases in the total amount of time your main account is banned for.
"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

Re: What about the Dinosuars?
« Reply #57 on: May 27, 2009, 05:30:57 PM »

For threatening me with armed physical violence, I have banned you from the forums for one week.

You are retarded. 

For circumventing the ban with a dummy account, I have banned the dummy account and extended the ban on your main account to one month. Further efforts to circumvent the ban, upon discovery, will result in progressive increases in the total amount of time your main account is banned for.

He is right, you are retarded it seems. Believing dinosaurs, who clearly had the size of a walnut and arms that had no purpose at all, was intelligent enough to build complex structures (that is NOT the same as using very simple tools to do very simple stuff, because most animals do that) and had a social colonization with every other dinosaur sort. It is the stuff you hear in a childrens book. It is just as retarded as believing the Earth to be flat when you can clearly look out your window and see the exact thing RET describes, and calling people for liars and fraudelents with no proof at all (the space agencies) - which is actually a pretty serious crime.

"New experiment, I am going to repeatedly hit you in the head as hard as I can with a baseball bat, and then you can go tape up your fingers and try and build a raft."
is not the same as
"For threatening me with armed physical violence, I have banned you from the forums for one week."

I don't think you realise how happy I am that no Flat Earther have any meaningful position in society, like scientists, lawyers, politicians etc. The world would be completely fucked.

*

James

  • Flat Earther
  • The Elder Ones
  • 5613
Re: What about the Dinosuars?
« Reply #58 on: May 27, 2009, 05:41:05 PM »
He is right, you are retarded it seems. Believing dinosaurs, who clearly had the size of a walnut and arms that had no purpose at all, was intelligent enough to build complex structures (that is NOT the same as using very simple tools to do very simple stuff, because most animals do that) and had a social colonization with every other dinosaur sort. It is the stuff you hear in a childrens book. It is just as retarded as believing the Earth to be flat when you can clearly look out your window and see the exact thing RET describes,

I'm interested to know if you've encountered the Quine-Duhem thesis of underdetermination. W V O Quine, specifically, states that the particulars which make up any given theory can be rearranged to match observable evidence no matter how integral they are, because we can never know the extent to which the logical connections between these articles of knowledge transmit the necessity of revision in the case that one particular is revised. If this thesis is true, looking out of your window and seeing exactly what RET describes (which, incidentally, is exactly what FET describes as well) means nothing for the absolute veracity of RET. Round Earth theory can plausibly be reconstructed and rearranged to meet any observable evidence, and it routinely is reconstructed so.

and calling people for liars and fraudelents with no proof at all (the space agencies) - which is actually a pretty serious crime.

It's not a crime if I sincerely believe it to be true. I'm fairly sure that slander and libel require the defendant to knowingly promulgate falsehoods, though I'm no lawyer. Anyway, the Space Conspiracy is completely off topic for this thread, please return to the matter at hand ('What about the Dinosaurs?').

"New experiment, I am going to repeatedly hit you in the head as hard as I can with a baseball bat, and then you can go tape up your fingers and try and build a raft."
is not the same as
"For threatening me with armed physical violence, I have banned you from the forums for one week."

I don't think you realise how happy I am that no Flat Earther have any meaningful position in society, like scientists, lawyers, politicians etc. The world would be completely fucked.

Let's keep the language decent in the serious discussion fora please.
"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

*

James

  • Flat Earther
  • The Elder Ones
  • 5613
Re: What about the Dinosuars?
« Reply #59 on: May 27, 2009, 07:54:59 PM »
Here are some images of the dromaeosaur races Adasaurus and Dromaeosaurus, and their common ancestor, Deinonychus:

Adasaurus, pictured gingerly cradling its young in its nimble clawed hands.


Dromaeosaurus, a cousin of the Adasaurus, who would have existed during the same period as the Adasaurus (the late cretacious), but on different continents.


Deinonychus, the ancestor of the Dromaeosauruses and the Adasauruses.


The natural history of the dromaeosaurs is a good example of the kinds of developments which the dinosaurs as a whole would have undergone. Fossil evidence indicates that Deinonychus originated in North America during the early cretacious period.

Deinonychus are thought to have been highly social, organising themselves into complex communities in order to work together. During their development, Deinonychus evolved an iconic five-inch claw on the foot, which was highly dexterous, and could be retracted and moved back and forth. Initially, this would have served a purpose in hunting and combat, though it would later have been useful in the performance of complex motor skills such as puncturing fabrics, making written inscriptions and so on. The special success of this early dromaeosaur is partly explicable by its long tail, which acting as a counterbalance allowed the use of both the hands and feet in dexterous activity.

The distribution of Deinonychus' descendants, the Adasuruses and Dromaeosauruses, suggests that one or more colonial expeditions sailed from the West Coast of North America and colonised the far East, probably landing in Japan and China and then spreading across the eastern part of Eurasia.


Above: The Pacific Ocean

Travel between the colonies during this period seems to have been very limited, because the two previously homogenous groups of dromaeosaur began to evolve minor racial adaptions which distinguished them from one another, though they retained all of the major characteristics of the dromaeosaur species. The fact that these groups proceeded to evolve on the micro scale along different lines despite their immediate proximity in the faulty "pangea" model is testament to the fact that ocean seperated them, much as it does today.

The colonist Deinonychuses who reached the far east adapted in a number of ways. Adasauruses, probably due to massively increased tool usage and the removal of the necessity to be involved in violence as their civilisation progressed, developed much smaller foot-claws than their ancestors. A smaller claw would have been much more suitable for precision tasks like inscription, manipulation of cloth and fine materials and so on, and marks the transition from its role as a mechanism of hunting and combat to its role as an additional dexterous digit. In the absence of the selection pressures brought on by the development of a civilisation, and the mastery of the surrounding wildlife and other hazards, Adasauruses' bodies became smaller than those of their Deinonychus ancestors, who had needed to be larger because their lifestyle was primarily one based around hunting and conflict. Fossil evidence suggests that the Saurolophus, a herbiverous, docile grazing dinosaur, originating in North America, also appeared in the far East at roughly the same time, making it likely that the first Deinonychian colonists brought specimens with them on the transcontinental voyage, and probably began to farm them for food (they would have previous been hunted by tribes of Deinonychus living a hunter-gatherer lifestyle on the American continent). The advent of an agrarian society based on the pasturing of Saurolophus would remove the necessity for the brutalities of hunting. In order to bring down a wild Saurolophus, tribal warriors would have needed considerable bulk and might as well as cunning, but their agrarian descendants needed no such unneccessary brawn, which explains their shrinking - the average Adasaurus living during the late cretacious was around 8 feet long, whereas a North American Deinonychus of the early cretacious period, who would have had to hunt the large wild Saurolophus and Tenontosaurus (probably hunted to extinction by early Deinonychian hunters, explaining why it was not exported to the far east along with Saurolophus) would have measured 11 feet long.


Above: The west coast of North America. Groups of pioneering Deinonychus, who would later microevolve into the Asasauruses, would have set sail from shores such as these.

The Deinonychus who stayed behind also show signs of developing agriculture along similar lines. The Dromaeosaurus, from which the species derives its name, were Deinonychus who remained in North America. Their adaption did not include such an acute reduction in claw size as the the Adasaurus, but their body size decreased significantly, to around 6 feet long. Again, this is attributable to the development of farming, primarily of the tamed Saurolophus. That the Dromaeosauruses did not develop the highly precise small-claw of the Adasauruses suggests that they may not have involved themselves so heavily in activities such as writing. Dromaeosauruses developed a coat of downy feathers, which might suggest that colder climates prevailed in North America at this time. Their smaller size than the Adasaurus could also be indicative of evolutionary adaption in order to conserve heat. If temperatures did drop for the Dromaeosaurs entering the Late Cretacious, perhaps their society was a more rugged one, and the harsh realities of surviving the cold winters precluded such an extensive focus on writing, hence the lack of precision small-foot-claw adaption shown in the Adasaurus. The evolution of their tails gave greater flexibility and may have been indicative of adaption in favour of some civilised activity, since the balancing capability of the tail enables enhanced use not only of the forelimbs but also the foot claw.


Above: Saurolophus. These gentle giants were probably first hunted by the North American Deinonychus, and later herded and grazed by them when farming entered their culture just prior to the colonisation era, and splitting of Asasaurus and Dromaeosaurus, the two Deinonychus descendant races.

So, fossil remains suggest that as intelligent Deinonychus became highly successful hunter-gatherers during the Early Cretacious, conquering the entire North American continent with such rampant success that they drove one of their main prey animals, the Tenontosaurus, to extinction. It is likely that the advent of Saurolophus domestication roughly coincided with, or just preceded, the maritime renaissance and colonisation period. The tendency of agrarian societies to promote massive population growth is clear, and in this scenario, facing scarcity of land and dropping temperatures, some of the Deinonychus would have begun their colonisation of China and the far East, taking with them livestock as well as elements of the budding culture of North America. Fossil evidence suggests that the Adasaurus society was massively successful, placing some of their near relatives as far afield as Denmark. An empire the size of Alexander the Great's would no doubt have been underpinned by careful organisation and a culture steeped in the written word and refinements of erudition. Meanwhile, as the Late Cretacious brought colder climates in North America, the remaining American Deinonychus grew smaller, hairier and more rugged as they faced the elements as best they could, thought they still retained their agriculture and some vestements of civilisation.
« Last Edit: May 27, 2009, 08:13:23 PM by Dogplatter »
"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