James's theory on dinosaurs

  • 1811 Replies
  • 312312 Views
*

Ski

  • Planar Moderator
  • 8730
  • Homines, dum docent, dispenguin.
Re: James's theory on dinosaurs
« Reply #1170 on: March 06, 2011, 04:15:52 PM »
I see no real cause of concern between FET and plate tectonics.
"Never think you can turn over any old falsehood without a terrible squirming of the horrid little population that dwells under it." -O.W. Holmes "Truth forever on the scaffold, Wrong forever on the throne.."

*

EnglshGentleman

  • Flat Earth Editor
  • 9548
Re: James's theory on dinosaurs
« Reply #1171 on: March 06, 2011, 04:17:59 PM »
Allow me to point out yet again that no one has presented any evidence whatsoever that ancient dinosaurs were capable of building boats and crossing oceans, for the sake of moving this conversation back on topic.
The evidence is the presence of like fossils in separate areas, much like the evidence for continental drift are the presence of like fossils in separate areas.

Except continental drift is also supported by plate tectonics and paleomagnetism.
Indeed.  They are competing theories.  I for one hold plate tectonics and paleomagnetism (in a certain modified form) are a more likely than super intelligent dinosaurs, however there is nothing impossible about dinosaur boats;  its just I would like to see a little more hardy evidence before I talk of it in the zeal others do.

I share your thoughts. There is nothing impossible about dinosaurs sailing around. However, the evidence for it is less than compelling, especially when compared to that of continental drift.

*

Username

  • President Of The Flat Earth Society
  • Administrator
  • 17045
  • Most Prolific Scientist, 2019
Re: James's theory on dinosaurs
« Reply #1172 on: March 06, 2011, 04:21:47 PM »
I see no real cause of concern between FET and plate tectonics.

The more I draw connections with my old work concerning fractal geography the more I am really seeing a strong connection between it and continental planar expansion.
Quantum Ab Hoc

1 + 1 = 2
"The above proposition is occasionally useful." - Bertrand Russell

*

James

  • Flat Earther
  • The Elder Ones
  • 5613
Re: James's theory on dinosaurs
« Reply #1173 on: March 07, 2011, 09:39:56 AM »
Allow me to point out yet again that no one has presented any evidence whatsoever that ancient dinosaurs were capable of building boats and crossing oceans, for the sake of moving this conversation back on topic.
The evidence is the presence of like fossils in separate areas, much like the evidence for continental drift are the presence of like fossils in separate areas.
The main difference, however, is that continental drift (plate tectonics) can be seen in action.  I don't know of anyone who has ever seen a dinosaur build a ship to cross an ocean.

Here is a photograph of a dinosaur in a boat which it has built, schooning easily across the water. There are many, many more such examples, and if you watch dinosaurs habitually as they congregate by the side of a body of water, you will no doubt see this occur yourself.

"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

*

EnglshGentleman

  • Flat Earth Editor
  • 9548
Re: James's theory on dinosaurs
« Reply #1174 on: March 07, 2011, 09:41:40 AM »
Allow me to point out yet again that no one has presented any evidence whatsoever that ancient dinosaurs were capable of building boats and crossing oceans, for the sake of moving this conversation back on topic.
The evidence is the presence of like fossils in separate areas, much like the evidence for continental drift are the presence of like fossils in separate areas.
The main difference, however, is that continental drift (plate tectonics) can be seen in action.  I don't know of anyone who has ever seen a dinosaur build a ship to cross an ocean.

Here is a photograph of a dinosaur in a boat which it has built, schooning easily across the water. There are many, many more such examples, and if you watch dinosaurs habitually as they congregate by the side of a body of water, you will no doubt see this occur yourself.



Please provide evidence that the duck is actually traveling through the water, and instead didn't build his nest on an outcropping in the water.

*

James

  • Flat Earther
  • The Elder Ones
  • 5613
Re: James's theory on dinosaurs
« Reply #1175 on: March 07, 2011, 09:44:21 AM »
Here is video footage of a similar craft under way:
"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

*

EnglshGentleman

  • Flat Earth Editor
  • 9548
Re: James's theory on dinosaurs
« Reply #1176 on: March 07, 2011, 10:36:14 AM »
Nobody is denying, James, that there is a nest on the water. What I am curious about is how we know that the bird did not just build his nest on that board in the water to protect it from predators, rather than the bird using the nest as a method of transportation.
« Last Edit: March 07, 2011, 10:40:08 AM by EnglshGentleman »

?

Horatio

  • Official Member
  • 4016
Re: James's theory on dinosaurs
« Reply #1177 on: March 07, 2011, 10:39:06 AM »
Allow me to point out yet again that no one has presented any evidence whatsoever that ancient dinosaurs were capable of building boats and crossing oceans, for the sake of moving this conversation back on topic.
The evidence is the presence of like fossils in separate areas, much like the evidence for continental drift are the presence of like fossils in separate areas.
The main difference, however, is that continental drift (plate tectonics) can be seen in action.  I don't know of anyone who has ever seen a dinosaur build a ship to cross an ocean.

Here is a photograph of a dinosaur in a boat which it has built, schooning easily across the water. There are many, many more such examples, and if you watch dinosaurs habitually as they congregate by the side of a body of water, you will no doubt see this occur yourself.



Calm water. Hardly capable of crossing an ocean in that.
How dare you have the audacity to demand my deposition. I've never even heard of you.

*

PizzaPlanet

  • 12259
  • Now available in stereo
Re: James's theory on dinosaurs
« Reply #1178 on: March 07, 2011, 10:42:15 AM »
Hardly capable of crossing an ocean in that.
Why?
hacking your precious forum as we speak 8) 8) 8)

?

Horatio

  • Official Member
  • 4016
Re: James's theory on dinosaurs
« Reply #1179 on: March 07, 2011, 10:44:07 AM »
Hardly capable of crossing an ocean in that.
Why?

Do you seriously think that "craft" is capable of withstanding an ocean voyage?
How dare you have the audacity to demand my deposition. I've never even heard of you.

*

Username

  • President Of The Flat Earth Society
  • Administrator
  • 17045
  • Most Prolific Scientist, 2019
Re: James's theory on dinosaurs
« Reply #1180 on: March 07, 2011, 10:53:22 AM »
Hardly capable of crossing an ocean in that.
Why?

Do you seriously think that "craft" is capable of withstanding an ocean voyage?
Well I imagine dinosaurs would have built larger floating nests, if that 'hypothesis' is valid.  Its amazing some of the boats that supposedly have made oceanic voyages. 

Even ignoring intelligence in dinosaurs, its not impossible that large nests near the water (or brought near the water) may make voyages that are beyond belief.  Consider even those that travel by sail across the ocean in recent times or feats like easter island, etc:
http://books.google.com/books?id=ftsXAQAAIAAJ&pg=PA719&lpg=PA719&dq=small+boat+oceanic+voyages&source=bl&ots=JW43BE_iAP&sig=3ijONGl4hdrpN8n5bvlWW-Zyg94&hl=en&ei=SCl1TYOjJc2ztweEp4z8Dg&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=4&ved=0CEMQ6AEwAw#v=onepage&q&f=false
Quantum Ab Hoc

1 + 1 = 2
"The above proposition is occasionally useful." - Bertrand Russell

*

EnglshGentleman

  • Flat Earth Editor
  • 9548
Re: James's theory on dinosaurs
« Reply #1181 on: March 07, 2011, 11:57:59 AM »
I agree with John.

Even within our own history, time after time humans have crossed vast oceans in nothing more than canoes. Consider the natives of Hawaii, or Australia.

?

General Disarray

  • Official Member
  • 5039
  • Magic specialist
Re: James's theory on dinosaurs
« Reply #1182 on: March 07, 2011, 12:21:58 PM »
Allow me to point out yet again that no one has presented any evidence whatsoever that ancient dinosaurs were capable of building boats and crossing oceans, for the sake of moving this conversation back on topic.
You don't want to make an enemy of me. I'm very powerful.

*

gotham

  • Planar Moderator
  • 3340
Re: James's theory on dinosaurs
« Reply #1183 on: March 07, 2011, 01:35:15 PM »
If constructed, I don't know whether the ancient vessels would ever be able to found if they were constructed out of biodegradable materials?

In terms of the physical and mental capacity required, I recall discussions about dinosaurs having limbs and digits with the needed movement and dexterity requirements.

There is also a comparison of modern dinosaurs to ancient dinosaurs for such things as speech and reasoning abilities to support how they could have had a basic intellectual capacity for such tasks.

The span of time since the referenced era is so vast that, as has been stated, anything could have occurred and that all points made in this thread should remain a consideration as to what did occur.  


*

markjo

  • Content Nazi
  • The Elder Ones
  • 42319
Re: James's theory on dinosaurs
« Reply #1184 on: March 07, 2011, 04:17:51 PM »
Here is video footage of a similar craft under way:


Do dinosaurs often use sheets of plywood in their boat construction?
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.

*

James

  • Flat Earther
  • The Elder Ones
  • 5613
Re: James's theory on dinosaurs
« Reply #1185 on: March 07, 2011, 10:13:11 PM »
Dinosaurs are resourceful men, sometimes I think they will use all manner of things to build the things which they need and want. I don't see why a dinosaur couldn't use a sheet of plywood to build a boat for himself.
"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

*

EnglshGentleman

  • Flat Earth Editor
  • 9548
Re: James's theory on dinosaurs
« Reply #1186 on: March 07, 2011, 11:04:11 PM »
Nobody is denying, James, that there is a nest on the water. What I am curious about is how we know that the bird did not just build his nest on that board in the water to protect it from predators, rather than the bird using the nest as a method of transportation.

*

James

  • Flat Earther
  • The Elder Ones
  • 5613
Re: James's theory on dinosaurs
« Reply #1187 on: March 07, 2011, 11:06:22 PM »
Very well, I will endeavour to find more video footage, of a dinosaur's boat whose hull is not made from plywood. It is little surprise that as I provide more and more conclusive evidence, that the demands of the globularist lobby should increase; nontheless I shall for now try and meet them.
"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

?

Thevoiceofreason

  • 1792
  • Bendy Truth specialist
Re: James's theory on dinosaurs
« Reply #1188 on: March 07, 2011, 11:20:54 PM »
If constructed, I don't know whether the ancient vessels would ever be able to found if they were constructed out of biodegradable materials?

In terms of the physical and mental capacity required, I recall discussions about dinosaurs having limbs and digits with the needed movement and dexterity requirements.

There is also a comparison of modern dinosaurs to ancient dinosaurs for such things as speech and reasoning abilities to support how they could have had a basic intellectual capacity for such tasks.

The span of time since the referenced era is so vast that, as has been stated, anything could have occurred and that all points made in this thread should remain a consideration as to what did occur.  



NOPE.avi


could happen=/=did happen.

And nothing in modern birds/lizards suggests that they could. Also evolution. The fact that we can make computers doesn't imply that cavemen could

?

Crustinator

  • 7813
  • Bamhammer horror!
Re: James's theory on dinosaurs
« Reply #1189 on: March 08, 2011, 02:47:51 PM »
Why did James propose this theory in the first place? I don't understand its relevance to FET.

We know that dinosaurs were one of the first non conspiracy groups to discover the earth?s flatness.

?

Thevoiceofreason

  • 1792
  • Bendy Truth specialist
Re: James's theory on dinosaurs
« Reply #1190 on: March 08, 2011, 03:24:32 PM »
Also,
Why wouldn't the dinosaurs have built monuments? Empirical evidence shows that human beings build all manner of great monumental constructions all about the place, it would be unreasonable to suppose that the dinosaurs did not do the same. Modern dinosaurs are quite capable of the most ingenious feats of building - of treehouses, boats and other municipal buildings. Why would the ancient dinosaurs be any different?

And now
"
Q: "How is it that the Earth does not have a gravitational pull, but stars and the moon do?"

A: This argument is a non-sequitur. You might as well ask, "How is it that snakes do not have legs, but dogs and cats do?" Snakes are not dogs or cats. The Earth is not a star or the moon. It does not follow that each must have exactly the properties of the others, and no more."

*

Username

  • President Of The Flat Earth Society
  • Administrator
  • 17045
  • Most Prolific Scientist, 2019
Re: James's theory on dinosaurs
« Reply #1191 on: March 08, 2011, 06:28:00 PM »
Nobody is denying, James, that there is a nest on the water. What I am curious about is how we know that the bird did not just build his nest on that board in the water to protect it from predators, rather than the bird using the nest as a method of transportation.
Does the intent of the dinosaurs really mater?
Quantum Ab Hoc

1 + 1 = 2
"The above proposition is occasionally useful." - Bertrand Russell

*

markjo

  • Content Nazi
  • The Elder Ones
  • 42319
Re: James's theory on dinosaurs
« Reply #1192 on: March 08, 2011, 07:22:06 PM »
Nobody is denying, James, that there is a nest on the water. What I am curious about is how we know that the bird did not just build his nest on that board in the water to protect it from predators, rather than the bird using the nest as a method of transportation.
Does the intent of the dinosaurs really mater?
Yes.  It could mean the difference between intelligence and dumb luck.
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.

*

EnglshGentleman

  • Flat Earth Editor
  • 9548
Re: James's theory on dinosaurs
« Reply #1193 on: March 08, 2011, 07:22:11 PM »
Nobody is denying, James, that there is a nest on the water. What I am curious about is how we know that the bird did not just build his nest on that board in the water to protect it from predators, rather than the bird using the nest as a method of transportation.
Does the intent of the dinosaurs really mater?

Considering James thinks Dinosaurs were super intelligent, had their own civilization, and perhaps even herded herbivores like cattle, I think it does.

More to the point though, James posted a picture of a duck sitting in its nest that is in water and there is no way to tell if the nest is actually going anywhere. There is a large difference between building a nest on water, and building a nest to cross water.

The difference is like that of the two objects in these photos.



« Last Edit: March 08, 2011, 07:29:14 PM by EnglshGentleman »

*

Username

  • President Of The Flat Earth Society
  • Administrator
  • 17045
  • Most Prolific Scientist, 2019
Re: James's theory on dinosaurs
« Reply #1194 on: March 08, 2011, 07:50:00 PM »
Yes, but the same thing could have happened by "dumb luck".  If dinos had often built floating nests of significant size, then it is feasible that some migrated through dumb luck.   

Another idea to look at would be that dinos were frozen and simply floated across where they landed, later melted, and much later were fossilized.
Quantum Ab Hoc

1 + 1 = 2
"The above proposition is occasionally useful." - Bertrand Russell

*

markjo

  • Content Nazi
  • The Elder Ones
  • 42319
Re: James's theory on dinosaurs
« Reply #1195 on: March 08, 2011, 10:03:30 PM »
Yes, but the same thing could have happened by "dumb luck".  If dinos had often built floating nests of significant size, then it is feasible that some migrated through dumb luck.   

Another idea to look at would be that dinos were frozen and simply floated across where they landed, later melted, and much later were fossilized.

However, this is not what James contends.  James contends deliberate colonization by sea faring dinosaur civilizations.
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.

?

Eddy Baby

  • Official Member
  • 9986
Re: James's theory on dinosaurs
« Reply #1196 on: March 09, 2011, 08:44:06 AM »
The fact that we can make computers doesn't imply that cavemen could

yeah it does

*

Username

  • President Of The Flat Earth Society
  • Administrator
  • 17045
  • Most Prolific Scientist, 2019
Re: James's theory on dinosaurs
« Reply #1197 on: March 09, 2011, 10:49:23 AM »
Yes, but the same thing could have happened by "dumb luck".  If dinos had often built floating nests of significant size, then it is feasible that some migrated through dumb luck.   

Another idea to look at would be that dinos were frozen and simply floated across where they landed, later melted, and much later were fossilized.

However, this is not what James contends.  James contends deliberate colonization by sea faring dinosaur civilizations.
I know but when you get to the base of the idea itself, it doesn't really matter;  the important thing to note is that there is a possibility of this happen and we need to look for evidence of that;  not evidence of dinosaur intelligence.  Of course, there is the argument that James is wrong about intelligence, but that doesn't defeat the theory, just that mechanism of it.
Quantum Ab Hoc

1 + 1 = 2
"The above proposition is occasionally useful." - Bertrand Russell

?

Crustinator

  • 7813
  • Bamhammer horror!
Re: James's theory on dinosaurs
« Reply #1198 on: March 10, 2011, 09:17:18 AM »
Yes, but the same thing could have happened by "dumb luck".  If dinos had often built floating nests of significant size, then it is feasible that some migrated through dumb luck.   

Another idea to look at would be that dinos were frozen and simply floated across where they landed, later melted, and much later were fossilized.

However, this is not what James contends.  James contends deliberate colonization by sea faring dinosaur civilizations.
I know but when you get to the base of the idea itself, it doesn't really matter;  the important thing to note is that there is a possibility of this happen and we need to look for evidence of that;  not evidence of dinosaur intelligence.  Of course, there is the argument that James is wrong about intelligence, but that doesn't defeat the theory, just that mechanism of it.

James theory is that dinosaurs are intelligent. If dinosaurs weren't intelligent then the theory would be defeated.

*

Username

  • President Of The Flat Earth Society
  • Administrator
  • 17045
  • Most Prolific Scientist, 2019
Re: James's theory on dinosaurs
« Reply #1199 on: March 10, 2011, 09:21:21 AM »
Yes, but the same thing could have happened by "dumb luck".  If dinos had often built floating nests of significant size, then it is feasible that some migrated through dumb luck.   

Another idea to look at would be that dinos were frozen and simply floated across where they landed, later melted, and much later were fossilized.

However, this is not what James contends.  James contends deliberate colonization by sea faring dinosaur civilizations.
I know but when you get to the base of the idea itself, it doesn't really matter;  the important thing to note is that there is a possibility of this happen and we need to look for evidence of that;  not evidence of dinosaur intelligence.  Of course, there is the argument that James is wrong about intelligence, but that doesn't defeat the theory, just that mechanism of it.

James theory is that dinosaurs are intelligent. If dinosaurs weren't intelligent then the theory would be defeated.
James theory is that dinosaurs migrated due to intelligence.  If they aren't intelligent, it is still possible they migrated.
Quantum Ab Hoc

1 + 1 = 2
"The above proposition is occasionally useful." - Bertrand Russell