Dinosaurs: Made In China

Speaking of which a big problem with science is when someone who knows nothing about science tries to talk about. It’s how you get “evolution claims people came from monkeys. How stupid is that?”

Stuff like that. They use their lack of understanding as evidence for their argument.

I'll rely on the experts words then:

"Anyone who witnesses the advance of science first-hand sees an intensely personal undertaking, A few saintly personalities stand out admist a roiling sea of jealousies, ambition, backbiting, suppression of dissent, and absurd conceits. In some fields, highly productive fields, such behavior is almost the norm." Carl Sagan

“Ask a scientist what he conceives the scientific method to be, and he will adopt an expression that is at once solemn and shifty eyed: solemn because he feels he ought to declare an opinion; shifty eyed because he is wondering how to conceal the fact that he has no opinion to declare.”

You don’t rely on experts, in fact you shit on them.

“Paleontologist are worthless. The whale flew, with wings, into the jungle.”

Paleontologists are not experts in anything but their own shared delusions.

And with I made a better argument then all tour quote mining combined.

Maybe when you drop your preconceived notion that science is scary you can advance your life.

If the measure of normal science is consistency - which Kuhn would lead us to believe it is - paleontology somehow has failed this metric time and time and time again. No other field has more historical misconduct poisoning their fruits, up to the point that we now have dragons and an industry of indoctrination intended to convince folks of these mythical beasts from childhood on.

Science is not scary, but like I mentioned - we are not dealing with science. We are dealing with some false charade by those that would like us to think it is science.

And yes Sokarul, the Nuremburg Code confirms science is scary. In many cases, its a human rights or war crime.

Its really fucking scary.

I’m not playing your silly little game. I’m just going to keep being a scientist.

If the scientific establishment had an ounce of the resolve I do to do what is right when I'm an engineer, there wouldn't be these kinds of problems in the field. Unfortunately, that is not how scientists and academics are taught. Is it unreasonable for such a body of educated individuals that hold some of the largest centres of power to be held to a higher standard than a software engineer?

I don't think so, and I don't think people believe this to be the case either.

Quote from: rabinoz on February 25, 2020, 01:13:01 PM

Quote from: John Davis on February 25, 2020, 01:05:13 PM

It is my job as an engineer to not 'cut corners.' When I'm asked to do such, I fight it, and if the fight is impossible I find new employment.

I have no doubt science "works" in some ways; namely it appears useful to engineering, as the examples you pointed out that are actually owing to science (encryption is largely a mathematical exercise) show. Saying it actually states the truth is another thing. I am reminded of what was said by Hartle; that many different laws can be fitted to a given set of data, and that we can never be sure that we have attained the correct set

Lindegren says of scientific method “[it] is permeated with opinions which pass for valid scientific inductions and with contradictions which are disregarded because it is too painful to face the prospect of the revisions of the theory which would be required to reconcile the contradictory observations with the dominant theory.”

When we look at such experts saying it does not work, and then I'm met with your apparent amazement in your television and microwave who am I to believe?

As Planck puts well: "Anybody who has been seriously engaged in scientific work of any kind realizes that over the entrance to the gates of the temple of science are written the words: 'Ye must have faith.'"

I find it strange that little you say ever has the slightest relevance to the shape of the Earth.

The moral nature of the round earth academic is very relevant when one is asking me to take them on their word, which they self admittedly say is not worth the ink it is printed with.

Which again has no relevance as to whether the Earth is a Globe, as has been believed and demonstrated for millenia, or flat, which has been promoted for only about 150 years with logic like this from your own library:

Such wisdom !

Quote from: John Davis on February 25, 2020, 01:23:49 PM

If the scientific establishment had an ounce of the resolve I do to do what is right when I'm an engineer, there wouldn't be these kinds of problems in the field. Unfortunately, that is not how scientists and academics are taught. Is it unreasonable for such a body of educated individuals that hold some of the largest centres of power to be held to a higher standard than a software engineer?

I don't think so, and I don't think people believe this to be the case either.

Quote from: rabinoz on February 25, 2020, 01:13:01 PM

Quote from: John Davis on February 25, 2020, 01:05:13 PM

It is my job as an engineer to not 'cut corners.' When I'm asked to do such, I fight it, and if the fight is impossible I find new employment.

I have no doubt science "works" in some ways; namely it appears useful to engineering, as the examples you pointed out that are actually owing to science (encryption is largely a mathematical exercise) show. Saying it actually states the truth is another thing. I am reminded of what was said by Hartle; that many different laws can be fitted to a given set of data, and that we can never be sure that we have attained the correct set

Lindegren says of scientific method “[it] is permeated with opinions which pass for valid scientific inductions and with contradictions which are disregarded because it is too painful to face the prospect of the revisions of the theory which would be required to reconcile the contradictory observations with the dominant theory.”

When we look at such experts saying it does not work, and then I'm met with your apparent amazement in your television and microwave who am I to believe?

As Planck puts well: "Anybody who has been seriously engaged in scientific work of any kind realizes that over the entrance to the gates of the temple of science are written the words: 'Ye must have faith.'"

I find it strange that little you say ever has the slightest relevance to the shape of the Earth.

The moral nature of the round earth academic is very relevant when one is asking me to take them on their word, which they self admittedly say is not worth the ink it is printed with.

Which again has no relevance as to whether the Earth is a Globe, as has been believed and demonstrated for millenia, or flat, which has been promoted for only about 150 years with logic like this from your own library:

Such wisdom !

Your timeline is quite incorrect. For example, Cosmas Indicopleustes' Topographia Christiana comes to mind. As do several others throughout history. The idea has always been around.  I am reminded:

"When such a critic says, for instance, that faith kept the world in darkness until doubt led to enlightenment, he is himself taking things on faith, things that he has never been sufficiently enlightened to doubt. That exceedingly crude simplification of human history is what he has been taught, and he believes it because he has been taught. I do not blame him for that; I merely remark that he is an unconscious example of everything that he reviles."

Am I to take it you have never been sufficiently enlightened to doubt your quaint version of history, much like those who follow Draper and White?

I'll rely on the experts words then:

"Anyone who witnesses the advance of science first-hand sees an intensely personal undertaking, A few saintly personalities stand out admist a roiling sea of jealousies, ambition, backbiting, suppression of dissent, and absurd conceits. In some fields, highly productive fields, such behavior is almost the norm." Carl Sagan

And yet it is science, not flat-Earth beliefs, which has given us, for good or ill, vaccines, automobiles, computers, telephones, airplanes, sanitation, water and sewer systems, and everything else that distinguishes modern life from the life of people in the Middle Ages, who, if they were lucky enough to be one of the few who survived infancy, were extremely lucky if they survived more than 20 or 30 years. Science is flawed and scientists are people, with all the foibles of people. But it is because of science that we have all the things that make life tolerable.

Many religious sects claim to possess the Only Revealed Truth™ and claim that everyone else is worshipping evil. I'm beginning to see the same pattern in some of the advocates of FET.

I think you could make good use of the above quote as well. Your view of history is quite cute. Cuter than rab who probably made an honest mistake and forgot about all the civilizations and great thinks to have taken on the mantle of the flat earth. I suggest you pick up a book or take your interesting views to a history forum.

Your timeline is quite incorrect. For example, Cosmas Indicopleustes' Topographia Christiana comes to mind. As do several others throughout history. The idea has always been around.

Sure, "The idea has always been around" but accepted by relatively few.

I am reminded:
"When such a critic says, for instance, that faith kept the world in darkness until doubt led to enlightenment, he is himself taking things on faith, things that he has never been sufficiently enlightened to doubt. That exceedingly crude simplification of human history is what he has been taught, and he believes it because he has been taught. I do not blame him for that; I merely remark that he is an unconscious example of everything that he reviles."

When have I suggested that "faith kept the world in darkness until doubt led to enlightenment"?

Am I to take it you have never been sufficiently enlightened to doubt your quaint version of history, much like those who follow Draper and White?

And why is my "version of history" "quaint"? I would claim it realistic and fits with what we observe today.

Maybe if you posted some real evidence to cause me to "doubt my 'quaint version' of history" I might.

What about occasionally actually posting evidence that the Earth might be flat?

They'd have little trouble finding support for the fact scientists are evil, stupid, or both.

No one doubts that some are, so finding some individual examples isn't a huge challenge. As has already been pointed out, in any large group of humans some members are evil, stupid or both.

But that's not what I said.

At any rate (there's that idiom again!), the problem is that even if he's just writing all this nonsense for his own amusement, some people who read it will actually believe it, often because they are looking for support of a notion that all scientists are stupid, evil, or both.

Emphasis added so you don't miss it this time.

<litany of accusations without citations that nicely demonstrates my point about your attitude>

No matter how much you pontificate and bloviate, you aren't going to be able to offer examples evil intent or stupidity for more than a tiny number of scientists, even if you simply make up reasons to say you're aggrieved. In a population as large as the number of scientists, that's a long, long way from all.

What we are seeing is as Fort described it: "Attempted positivism: not to find out the new; not to add to what is called knowledge, but to systematize" and "We see conventionally… We see what it is “proper” that we should see." We even see it with Copernicus: "A Copernicus conceives of helio-centricity.  Continuity is against him. He is not permitted to break abruptly with the past.  He is permitted to publish his work, but only as an interesting hypothesis" and so we see: "The preposterous is always interpretable in terms of the “proper”, with which it just be continuous."

That's one man's opinion. Thanks for sharing.

It matters not if any of this make a lick of actual sense; all that matters to the scientist is that it is continuous. And continuous to nonsense is more nonsense. Dragons be here.

I do recall coming away from reading Mr. Forts writing thinking it barely made any sense at all. As I already said, however, that was a long time ago.

At any rate, did you just say, in effect, "even if what was just said makes no actual sense, it says <stuff> and I believe it"?  That falls right in line with the conclusion that you'll believe anything you read if it seems to confirm what you want to believe.

I think you could make good use of the above quote as well. Your view of history is quite cute. Cuter than rab who probably made an honest mistake and forgot about all the civilizations and great thinks to have taken on the mantle of the flat earth. I suggest you pick up a book or take your interesting views to a history forum.

Give me a break! No civilizations have "... taken on the mantle of the flat earth." If you go far enough back in time you can find people who didn't know that the Earth is round. IOW, there was a time when people didn't know what was outside their own little piece of it. Around two and a half centuries before Jesus, Eratosthenes calculated the circumference of the Earth by a method which you could replicate today! Since that time (allowing time for the information to spread) nobody has thought the Earth was flat. Not. A. Single. Educated. Person! (Or any "great thinks" either, whatever that's supposed to mean.)

The last person to think the world was flat before Samuel Rowbotham lived more than two thousand years ago. At which time "the world" didn't mean the Earth, it just meant their little patch of land.

I think you could make good use of the above quote as well. Your view of history is quite cute. Cuter than rab who probably made an honest mistake and forgot about all the civilizations and great thinks to have taken on the mantle of the flat earth. I suggest you pick up a book or take your interesting views to a history forum.

John, if your going to pretend to intellectual superior, at least be consistent about it.

If; in your view, people lie. (And lie all the time, without a moments break)
Then how the hell do you believe in civilizations of the past?
There is not a single text from an original author that survives til today in the bible. All re-told and re-written hundreds of times until it was compiled by a committee that had fights about what to include and not. Yet somehow these people where perfectly honest. No skepticism there?

Then you quote the great words of some well re-known scientists; fantastic job. But did you seriously just quote Carl Sagan?

I'll rely on the experts words then:

"Anyone who witnesses the advance of science first-hand sees an intensely personal undertaking, A few saintly personalities stand out admist a roiling sea of jealousies, ambition, backbiting, suppression of dissent, and absurd conceits. In some fields, highly productive fields, such behavior is almost the norm." Carl Sagan

Carl Sagan who engineered the Voyager missions?
The same guy who made the famous Pale Blue Dot possible?
https://www.planetary.org/explore/space-topics/earth/pale-blue-dot.html

So of all these guys you trust when they say that the field of science has humans in it, where does your trust in them go when they say

“In science it often happens that scientists say, 'You know that's a really good argument; my position is mistaken,' and then they would actually change their minds and you never hear that old view from them again. They really do it. It doesn't happen as often as it should, because scientists are human and change is sometimes painful. But it happens every day. I cannot recall the last time something like that happened in politics or religion.”
― Carl Sagan

“How is it that hardly any major religion has looked at science and concluded, “This is better than we thought! The Universe is much bigger than our prophets said, grander, more subtle, more elegant?” Instead they say, “No, no, no! My god is a little god, and I want him to stay that way.” A religion, old or new, that stressed the magnificence of the Universe as revealed by modern science might be able to draw forth reserves of reverence and awe hardly tapped by the conventional faiths.”
― Carl Sagan

I can also quote mine, its really easy.

How about you go quote a famous Scientists from the last 100 years that also believed the world to be flat.

You have faith only in what your bias says you to have. I think that makes you as flawed as the people you criticize.
Also makes you a hypocrite.

If the scientific establishment had an ounce of the resolve I do to do what is right when I'm an engineer

You are aware there are plenty of engineers that likewise cut corners?
There is a quite famous case from New York, about a building with a massive structural design flaw, all because the engineer didn't do a proper job.
When it was discovered it was hidden, continuing to put people's lives at risks while it was being fixed.
In another case, to make it easier for the builders/material suppliers, an engineer agreed to cut a corner, which resulted in the deaths of 114 people and 216 people injured.

Just because some aren't being good doesn't mean no one is or even that the vast majority isn't.

The moral nature of the round earth academic is very relevant

And you are yet to even begin to discuss that.

No, the previously linked studies that show the vast majority isn't mean the vast majority isn't.

We are all being punked. There may be a few mentally-ill people who actually believe in FE, but mostly they're all just making fun of us. I have half a mind to switch back to pretending to be a flat-Earther. It's so much easier: You just make stuff up, deny everything, ignore what you cannot deny, and search the internet for references and quotes that sound "sciency" but don't actually back up your position. I'll never be able to do it as well as Wise does it, because he manages to garble the English language in a way that makes it almost but not quite completely impossible to figure out what he's trying to say.

But before I do, in order to stay on topic about dinosaurs, I don't know how anybody can deny their existence when they're all around us: I see them flying around pretty much everywhere I go. The non-avian dinosaurs went extinct 65 million years ago, but the avian dinosaurs are very much with us today, and are quite numerous and successful.

No, the previously linked studies that show the vast majority isn't mean the vast majority isn't.

Which previously linked studies?
Do you mean like the one you appealed to before which I clearly explained didn't show what you claimed?

Quote from: John Davis on February 25, 2020, 01:23:49 PM

If the scientific establishment had an ounce of the resolve I do to do what is right when I'm an engineer

You are aware there are plenty of engineers that likewise cut corners?
There is a quite famous case from New York, about a building with a massive structural design flaw, all because the engineer didn't do a proper job.
When it was discovered it was hidden, continuing to put people's lives at risks while it was being fixed.
In another case, to make it easier for the builders/material suppliers, an engineer agreed to cut a corner, which resulted in the deaths of 114 people and 216 people injured.

Just because some aren't being good doesn't mean no one is or even that the vast majority isn't.

Quote from: John Davis on February 25, 2020, 01:23:49 PM

The moral nature of the round earth academic is very relevant

And you are yet to even begin to discuss that.

They do show what I claimed; that misconduct is widespread.

Also, Engineers are legally culpable. Academics should be as well.

They do show what I claimed; that misconduct is widespread.

Care to provide a valid citation, rather than just "people say" or "a study by someone"?

Because last time you provided one I checked and it didn't indicate the majority were hiding the truth like you pretended.

Also, Engineers are legally culpable.

Is that way after their corner cutting cost the lives of over 100 people, the engineers were acquitted?
Is that way after cutting corners, then discovering that it caused a massive flaw, and then secretly fixing it while continuing to put peoples lives in danger, nothing happened to the engineers, with it kept secret for even longer?

That doesn't sound like they are being held legally culpable.

So again, the same can be said for engineers.

Quote from: JimmyTheCrab on February 25, 2020, 04:36:42 AM

@ Alpha2Omega - you must know he's just trolling, right?

It's hard to tell with John. Much of the time he seems to really believe the things he says.

At any rate (there's that idiom again!), the problem is that even if he's just writing all this nonsense for his own amusement, some people who read it will actually believe it, often because they are looking for support of a notion that all scientists are stupid, evil, or both.

He's a LARPing.  However either way, if you ignore him he'll get bored, the thread will drop and nobody will read it. If anyone comes here and reads John's boring "scientist evil...dinosaurs fake " schtick and actually believes it, then they probably have fundamental issues separating fact and fiction and your debunking won't help anyway.

Like most trolls he feeds off responses, take that feedback away and he'll stop.

Quote from: Alpha2Omega on February 25, 2020, 07:07:48 AM

Quote from: JimmyTheCrab on February 25, 2020, 04:36:42 AM

@ Alpha2Omega - you must know he's just trolling, right?

It's hard to tell with John. Much of the time he seems to really believe the things he says.

At any rate (there's that idiom again!), the problem is that even if he's just writing all this nonsense for his own amusement, some people who read it will actually believe it, often because they are looking for support of a notion that all scientists are stupid, evil, or both.

He's a LARPing. 

Maybe. I'd hope so (sort of). I'm not convinced, though. There are some bizarre ideas that people really do believe out there.

However either way, if you ignore him he'll get bored, the thread will drop and nobody will read it. If anyone comes here and reads John's boring "scientist evil...dinosaurs fake " schtick and actually believes it, then they probably have fundamental issues separating fact and fiction and your debunking won't help anyway.

Like most trolls he feeds off responses, take that feedback away and he'll stop.

... leaving his poop out there to fester.

He'll drop the conversation after a while, anyway, it just might take a few days longer. It's not so fun for someone whose half-baked ideas are effectively challenged instead of being eagerly embraced.

It could be argued that what you say applies to this whole website.

There are too many people in denial of reality mode (I know some personally IRL, and they're not kidding - they really do believe some truly odd things) and some are always looking for "examples" they think validate their opinions that they can point to, so simply letting known and easily-challenged BS (whether it was put up "in jest" or not) lie there out in the open is not, IMO, a great option.

So here is the conclusion I have come to a very long time ago.

The Flat Earth society is less to do with the shape of the earth, and more to do with the rejection of all authority, in a very arm chair kind of way.

Things all Flat Earth people here have in common is
A) The distrust of authority
B) Always trying to find proof from the comfort of their homes.
*although this is more a trait with everyone here, so not just Flatties. And I am sure there are flatties doing real life stuff, but they are in turn, not here*

All arguments come from a stance that everyone is wrong, and they (and only they) can see through all the BS.
This very thread here started with

Noted zeteticist Eric Dubay in his book The Flat Earth Conspiracy talked at length about the dinosaur lie.

The problem for us roundies is that any Evidence from a source of a Authority is immediately a lie. And authority is anything from your brother who may be a paleontologist to The actual president of America, Australia.
This means arguments can only be made using their own source of information, Which they may or may not believe depending on if it agrees with them or not.
For examples Johns use of Carl Sagans quotes to prove that science is a scam, but ignores all the stuff he says about how science is better than religion. So, only source information that they like.
Or the use of Robert Schadewald's published paper "Worlds of their own" because it shows that early Jews believed the world to be flat, but forget the Irony that he only did it to show how silly creationism was, and ignore his life work in describing the flat earth (and other pseudoscience) as a scam.


So what are the Roundies to do, to convince the distrusting Flatties of anything?


We cant use evidence as proof, even their own.
Well I suppose we can only try and be nice to them and ask them questions pertaining to their own ideas.
Only if you lead people to their own conclusions can they really change.


Screw it, that sounds hard.


Continue the insults!

I think you treatment is patently incorrect. I don't have to agree with every single thing Sagan said to quote him on a particular topic. That is a ludicrous position to hold.

Also, I have no distrust of authority in general. I distrust those authorities whom have lost my trust.


You are painting with a broad brush when a fine point is needed. But hey, actually representing things accurately; screw that, it sounds hard amirite?


To the other posts, when I'm absent here its not because of some reasoning that is apparently self-centric to yourself; I have a life. Most times this thread has not had my presence, it has had plenty of active posts before me leaving.

Of course, I wouldn't think these globularists would actually care to look at the facts of the matter. They seem to like to drive their narrative off supposedly foregone conclusion.

I can't imagine a broader brush strokes than claiming the Earth is flat!

How many great minds need to be wrong for you to be right?

I can't imagine a broader brush strokes than claiming the Earth is flat!

How many great minds need to be wrong for you to be right?

The same number as the number of great minds that need to be wrong for them to have been right in the first place. Well technically less, but really not in a meaningful way.

Please refrain from contentless posting.

All arguments come from a stance that everyone is wrong, and they (and only they) can see through all the BS.
This very thread here started with

Quote from: John Davis on May 12, 2016, 09:39:37 AM

Noted zeteticist Eric Dubay in his book The Flat Earth Conspiracy talked at length about the dinosaur lie.

I doubt that anyone who calls Eric Dubay a "Noted zeteticist" has even read Eric Dubay's "200 Proofs that the Earth is not a Spinning Ball"!

Take a look at:
         200 Proofs The Earth Is Not A Spinning Ball
or
         "The Atlantean Conspiracy: 200 Proofs The Earth Is Not A Spinning Ball"
It is also available as a printed book and and eBook - but I don't think I'll bother !
Most of his "Proofs" are meaningless and without supporting evidence and quite a number are badly copied from Rowbotham's ENaG and William Carpenter's:
         ONE HUNDRED PROOFS THAT THE EARTH IS NOT A GLOBE by WM. CARPENTER - all nicely indexed .