Dinosaurs: Made In China

I always supply my sources, and this is relevant to the flat earth discussion. You are just too lazy to read flat earth literature, or my posts. Its not my fault folks have difficulty reading. The fact of the matter is that I'm such a beast these folks have made it their life goal to follow me around the forums and attack me non stop.

I always supply my sources,

No you don't, and when you do, it's usually some semi-religious pamphlet from 1928.

The fact of the matter is that I'm such a beast these folks have made it their life goal to follow me around the forums and attack me non stop.

Perhaps it's because you're pompous, self-righteous, thin skinned, and smug.

Ah, I see.

Might be Mr Davis is sensing the impending doom. There are not many here defending him, nor does it seem many share his views on various topics. Even the NBA players have started backpedaling. Momentum is lost.

This causes him distress.

Quote from: John Davis on January 18, 2018, 01:59:27 PM

I always supply my sources,

No you don't, and when you do, it's usually some semi-religious pamphlet from 1928.

Quote

The fact of the matter is that I'm such a beast these folks have made it their life goal to follow me around the forums and attack me non stop.

Perhaps it's because you're pompous, self-righteous, thin skinned, and smug.

I don't know. I know lots of pompous self-righteous thin skinned smug folks. I don't spend my time following them about like a lost puppy.

Ah, I see.

Might be Mr Davis is sensing the impending doom. There are not many here defending him, nor does it seem many share his views on various topics. Even the NBA players have started backpedaling. Momentum is lost.

This causes him distress.

This is a bit silly to me; the new wave of flat earthers is still growing and the popularity as well. You can't keep truth down, so I'm not particularly concerned.

You can't keep truth down, so I'm not particularly concerned.

Why is it that flat-earthers always claim to have "THE TRUTH"?

Especially as the current flat earth model with its miniscule sun and moon circling above a flat disk has no reasonable explanations for  so much that we see with our own eyes.

Even the ancient Sumerian, Babylonian and Chinese flat earthers could explain the motions of the sun, moon and stars fairly well.

I answered them. I know they were accepted by the scientific community, because I am on a first name basis with the scientific community.

Obviously that's a lie but that wasn't the question.  I asked how they were discovered and what solid evidence you have that they are accepted by the scientific community.  You saying you know them is not solid evidence.  You're really bad at the whole reading thing aren't you?

I always supply my sources, and this is relevant to the flat earth discussion. You are just too lazy to read flat earth literature, or my posts. Its not my fault folks have difficulty reading. The fact of the matter is that I'm such a beast these folks have made it their life goal to follow me around the forums and attack me non stop.

What do you expect when you make posts like:

Its hardly relevant which model is correct. We only need to know the current model is incorrect to justify a paradigm shift to a flat earth. I'd argue though that the Flat Earth model is correct, because we know it is through neo-zetetic research.

With no justification, then totally idiotic appeals to ridicule like

If people will believe that both giants boxes made of metal and tv dinners can fly in the sky, without knowing why they do, they will believe anything they are spoon fed; even things as silly a balling flying about like a rocket through space, whirling as if controlled by some sort of birling match.

What a "balling" could mean I can't work out, rotating at 0.0007 rpm is hardly "whirling" and orbiting the sun once in about 366.24 days is hardly "flying about like a rocket through space"

Of course you're going to get called out when you claim to have proven the earth flat with no more than a great list of baseless assertions.

Then post that "Einstein proves the earth flat" when he does nothing of the sort.

Quote from: John Davis on January 18, 2018, 10:53:09 AM

I answered them. I know they were accepted by the scientific community, because I am on a first name basis with the scientific community.

Obviously that's a lie but that wasn't the question.  I asked how they were discovered and what solid evidence you have that they are accepted by the scientific community.  You saying you know them is not solid evidence.  You're really bad at the whole reading thing aren't you?

It's no lie. I am. I know it is accepted by the scientific community because we are on a first name basis, and they agree.

Quote from: John Davis on January 18, 2018, 02:31:51 PM

You can't keep truth down, so I'm not particularly concerned.

Why is it that flat-earthers always claim to have "THE TRUTH"?

I imagine that as much as we do, its the same reason everybody else does.

I'll admit I had not heard of the zetetic method before I read of it here. The way it appears to be used does differ from the definition given here, though.

FE zetetics seem more in the vein of not actually doing any experimentation, cherry picking, and avoiding questions and evidence of anything that is in conflict with their beliefs.

I don't know. I know lots of pompous self-righteous thin skinned smug folks. I don't spend my time following them about like a lost puppy.

People are posting on the same active threads on a debate forum: don't let your over-inflated ego think that means people are "following you about".

I'll admit I had not heard of the zetetic method before I read of it here. The way it appears to be used does differ from the definition given here, though.

FE zetetics seem more in the vein of not actually doing any experimentation, cherry picking, and avoiding questions and evidence of anything that is in conflict with their beliefs.

My take on FE zeteticism goes like this:
Zeteticism means "proceed by enquiry". So
You enquire "What shape is the earth?",
          so as Space CowGirl and others say, "Look out the window, the earth looks flat!", so "The earth must be flat".

So, your "proceeding by enquiry" has led you to know that THE TRUTH is that "The earth is flat".

Now that you know that this is THE TRUTH,

• any conflicting observation (such as sunrises and sunsets) must, if possible be explained away by perspective, bendy light, refraction, finite visibility through the atmoplane, etc.
• any conflicting observation that cannot be explained away this way (such as stars rotating about the South Celestial Pole), is deemed fabricated and those that claim to observe such fabrications are called liars.

Yes, I have been call a liar for simply claiming that I have seen stars that rotate about the South Celestial Pole.

If you think that I am exaggerating see THE FLAT EARTH Wiki, Place of the Conspiracy in FET.  That clearly states "The FET (Flat Earth Theory) is an obvious truth" and
"If personally unverifiable evidence contradicts an obvious truth then the evidence is fabricated".


         

Quote from: Badxtoss on January 18, 2018, 04:53:34 PM

Quote from: John Davis on January 18, 2018, 10:53:09 AM

I answered them. I know they were accepted by the scientific community, because I am on a first name basis with the scientific community.

Obviously that's a lie but that wasn't the question.  I asked how they were discovered and what solid evidence you have that they are accepted by the scientific community.  You saying you know them is not solid evidence.  You're really bad at the whole reading thing aren't you?

It's no lie. I am. I know it is accepted by the scientific community because we are on a first name basis, and they agree.

Quote from: rabinoz on January 18, 2018, 04:50:02 PM

Quote from: John Davis on January 18, 2018, 02:31:51 PM

You can't keep truth down, so I'm not particularly concerned.

Why is it that flat-earthers always claim to have "THE TRUTH"?

I imagine that as much as we do, its the same reason everybody else does.

Wow, what is this, the fourth time?  And you still haven't answered the questions.  You really are a afraid aren't you.
How were the moon shrimp discovered and what solid evidence do you have they are accepted by everyone in the scientific community?
Why do you have such a problem with such simple questions?

If you think that I am exaggerating see THE FLAT EARTH Wiki, Place of the Conspiracy in FET.  That clearly states "The FET (Flat Earth Theory) is an obvious truth" and
"If personally unverifiable evidence contradicts an obvious truth then the evidence is fabricated".

That must be in jest. No one can truly think like that.

The wiki contains a lot of trash. We allowed a number of users from here to contribute to it, many of whom were round earthers.

The wiki contains a lot of trash. We allowed a number of users from here to contribute to it, many of whom were round earthers.

And although you try to imply that the trash was put there by the round earthers, you stop short of telling the actual lie and just hope people will believe your implication.

The wiki contains a lot of trash. We allowed a number of users from here to contribute to it, many of whom were round earthers.

And yet whenever any newbie comes here with questions, you immediately direct them to same said wiki. Meaning you prefer filling enquiring minds with thrash in the hope that they look no further? Dude, you are kinda bad at this job.

I can't remember anybody redirecting anyone to a wiki since 2013.

You don't think it reflects poorly on you to have erroneous crap on your wiki? You do not believe in a clean house?

Goes to show how much you value "your cause".

Of course it does, and yes it is on the roadmap.

It seems the globularist here loves to cry fowl and say I have presented no evidence! Again, we must sit down with him patiently, and count them one by one.

Smoking Gun: The Curious Tale of Archaeoraptor liaoningensis, the Piltdown Chicken
Currently Identified Methods Used To Fake
Impossibility of Blood Flow
No Stress on Dinosaur Bones
Impossibility of Dinosaur Weight and Impossibility of Evolved Traits
Carbon 14
Scientists Claim to Extract DNA
Testimonials from experts and lay people
Flip flopping with dinosaur feathers
History of the Bone Wars and incredibility of profession in general, historically and today
An event that would kill off all dinosaurs would have destroyed ALL life on earth. This would be clear to see in evidence.
An extinction event like an Asteroid would not have killed off under-water dinosaurs
Dinosaurs were too big to be able to feed themselves
Given they can eat 90 hours a day, or somehow much faster, they would have depleted their food sources
Dinosaurs sizes are inconsistent with what we know about gravity
Where are all the fossils? Why are they not everywhere
A full dinosaur skeleton has never been found

Until these can be dealt with, and the rest of the pile presented in the past 25 pages, there should be no doubt that your belief in dinosaurs is no more credible than a belief in unicorns.

Well I will start.

You already know carbon 14 isn't a problem.

As for eating 90 hours a day, don't pull numbers out of the air. Days were shorter then, not longer.

Well I will start.

You already know carbon 14 isn't a problem.

As for eating 90 hours a day, don't pull numbers out of the air. Days were shorter then, not longer.

Elephants have to eat around 18 hours a day. The brontosaurus, supposedly at least 5 times larger would have to eat for an impossible 90 hours a day!

Quote from: sokarul on January 23, 2018, 03:01:46 PM

Well I will start.

You already know carbon 14 isn't a problem.

As for eating 90 hours a day, don't pull numbers out of the air. Days were shorter then, not longer.

Elephants have to eat around 18 hours a day. The brontosaurus, supposedly at least 5 times larger would have to eat for an impossible 90 hours a day!

Well you are comparing a warm blooded elephant to dinosaurs. Dinosaurs were most likely not warm blooded so don't do this. Second, if a day was around 21-23 hours you cannot eat 90 hours a day. Please note this.

Quote from: sokarul on January 23, 2018, 03:01:46 PM

Well I will start.

You already know carbon 14 isn't a problem.

As for eating 90 hours a day, don't pull numbers out of the air. Days were shorter then, not longer.

Elephants have to eat around 18 hours a day. The brontosaurus, supposedly at least 5 times larger would have to eat for an impossible 90 hours a day!

You incorrectly assume that a Brachiosaurus (NOT Brontosaurus), would consume food at the same rate as an Elephant.

Why is that?

Maybe he was there observing them?

Quote from: John Davis on January 15, 2018, 11:09:08 AM

"I just want it to be just done with". And I'm thinking to myself, 'alright, humans - like Homo sapiens - we've been here since, like, 10,000 B.C. We've been roaming the Earth, we've had multiple empires all over the world... and in all that time, we didn't find any fossils until 150 years ago?' .

Your a bit off on your facts John, once again!. Homo in its various forms including sapiens have been around for a lot longer than 10,000 years.

Homos can't reproduce, so I doubt they have been around for 10,000 years.

Quote from: Nightsky on January 16, 2018, 12:40:22 AM

Quote from: John Davis on January 15, 2018, 11:09:08 AM

"I just want it to be just done with". And I'm thinking to myself, 'alright, humans - like Homo sapiens - we've been here since, like, 10,000 B.C. We've been roaming the Earth, we've had multiple empires all over the world... and in all that time, we didn't find any fossils until 150 years ago?' .

Your a bit off on your facts John, once again!. Homo in its various forms including sapiens have been around for a lot longer than 10,000 years.

Homos can't reproduce, so I doubt they have been around for 10,000 years.

Ignoramus!
Homo is used here to refer to humans like Homo sapiens, but you being just a humble Ovis aries would not know what that was like.

Elephants have to eat around 18 hours a day. The brontosaurus, supposedly at least 5 times larger would have to eat for an impossible 90 hours a day!

More of your miraculous extrapolation I see. Are you certain that the relationship is linear?

Quote from: John Davis on January 23, 2018, 04:43:33 PM

Quote from: sokarul on January 23, 2018, 03:01:46 PM

Well I will start.

You already know carbon 14 isn't a problem.

As for eating 90 hours a day, don't pull numbers out of the air. Days were shorter then, not longer.

Elephants have to eat around 18 hours a day. The brontosaurus, supposedly at least 5 times larger would have to eat for an impossible 90 hours a day!

You incorrectly assume that a Brachiosaurus (NOT Brontosaurus), would consume food at the same rate as an Elephant.

Why is that?

Your own roundy scientists can't even make up their minds. 

https://news.nationalgeographic.com/2015/04/150407-brontosaurus-back-return-apatosaurus-sauropod-dinosaurs-fossils-paleontology/