Support NeoGAF

[Elcid]

You don't prove theories, they will be theories forever. Proofs are for mathematics. So you either get on board with current scientific consensus (or come up with a theory that better fits the data) or you sound like a loony who denies reality based on belief and ignorance.

I think this section from Wikipedia will put it better than I can:
Evolution as a collection of theories not fact
Evolutionary biologist Kirk J. Fitzhugh[39] writes that scientists must be cautious to "carefully and correctly" describe the nature of scientific investigation at a time when evolutionary biology is under attack from creationists and proponents of intelligent design. Fitzhugh writes that while facts are states of being in nature, theories represent efforts to connect those states of being by causal relationships:

"'Evolution' cannot be both a theory and a fact. Theories are concepts stating cause–effect relations. Regardless of one's certainty as to the utility of a theory to provide understanding, it would be epistemically incorrect to assert any theory as also being a fact, given that theories are not objects to be discerned by their state of being."​

Fitzhugh recognizes that the "theory" versus "fact" debate is one of semantics. He nevertheless contends that referring to evolution as a "fact" is technically incorrect and distracts from the primary "goal of science, which is to continually acquire causal understanding through the critical evaluation of our theories and hypotheses." Fitzhugh concludes that the "certainty" of evolution "provides no basis for elevating any evolutionary theory or hypothesis to the level of fact."[40]

Dr William C. Robertson writing for National Science Teachers Association writes, "I have heard too many scientists claim that evolution is a fact, often in retort to the claim that it is just a theory. Evolution isn’t a fact. Rather than claiming so, I think scientists would be better served to agree that evolution is a theory and then proceed to explain what a theory is -- a coherent explanation that undergoes constant testing and often revision over a period of time."[41]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If you cannot prove a theory as fact, then it is a theory that is subject to revision, meaning it is not perfect nor certain because if something is 100% concrete, fact, then it is what it is and will not be revised.
Fact, humans require oxygen to live. No contest, if we don't have oxygen to breathe then we die.
Theory, high cholesterol causes heart disease. Often presented as fact but there are a lot of people beginning to question this and finding holes in it.

 

[Elcid]

Fucking fiction bro. It's just the toy business. All that shit is art. They dig up these bones and arrange them however they want.

It's obvious they are dragons. Look at old ass art with dragons in it. It's the government bro they wanna cover that shit up.

This wouldn't surprise me too much. Have you seen how much money these fucking dinosaur toys cost?

 

[AgentP]

If you cannot prove a theory as fact, then it is a theory that is subject to revision, meaning it is not perfect nor certain because if something is 100% concrete, fact, then it is what it is and will not be revised.
.

That is in fact what all scientist will tell you. Scientific theories are always changing because there is always new evidence. If the old theory doesn't fit new evidence, then the theory needs to change. This is the strength of science. For example scientist use modern reptiles to infer information about dinosaurs. They assumed they had scaly skin. Then evidence for feathers was found, hence the new theory and depictions of dinosaurs with feathers.

Does this bother you?

 

[-Minsc-]

It's interesting to reflect on my days back in school as a child. I read the books and never really questioned it. Perhaps my memory is distorted but I recall stuff being taught as fact and not the worlds accepted best guess.

 

[lock2k]

I heard Dragons were based on remains of Orca skeletons. It does like like a Dragon.

 

[Elcid]

That is in fact what all scientist will tell you. Scientific theories are always changing because there is always new evidence. If the old theory doesn't fit new evidence, then the theory needs to change. This is the strength of science. For example scientist use modern reptiles to infer information about dinosaurs. They assumed they had scaly skin. Then evidence for feathers was found, hence the new theory and depictions of dinosaurs with feathers.

Does this bother you?

Not at all! In fact I love that aspect of science. My problem is when they are presented as fact and people are called out for questioning it. I have heard many people saying shit like "this is how", "this is what", "this is why" presented to kids and others as fact, when in reality it should be, "based off of our latest research, scientists believe" (which I have heard before as well and agree with). I'm a firm believer that things that are unproven should be presented as such, so that people like my children grow up questioning and using their critical thinking skills, and who knows maybe one day become a researcher to revise some of these theories on their own!

 

[Plague Doctor]

It's difficult to nail down exactly what an animal looked like with only fossil records dating back presumably 10s of millions of years. Hell, they aren't even 100% sure they have the right bones aside from complete skeletons they have unearthed. They were/are doing the best with the evidence they have available and it does get updated.

Don't quote me but I think I remember they found evidence of feathers in a recent dig (years back). No idea where I read that.

I mean they could go the cloning route to put the discussion to rest but... yeah, that's a pandora's box and I don't think they found enough genetic material. And without a living version, how would that even work? Idk.

The point is that these are theoretical representation and do go through peer reviews. It's the best we can do at this moment in the field.

 

[Elcid]

I heard Dragons were based on remains of Orca skeletons. It does like like a Dragon.

Holy shit is that an Orca? That thing looks dragon as fuck.

Sidenote:
Anyone know where I can find this freaking toy for my son?
https://www.schleich-s.com/en/US/dinosaurs/products/spinosaurus-15009.html
Can't find it anywhere in the US.

 

[Alfen Dave]

A chicken talking to his friend:

''We were kangz and shit..''


Rex means king btw.

 

[lock2k]

Holy shit is that an Orca? That thing looks dragon as fuck.

Sidenote:
Anyone know where I can find this freaking toy for my son?
https://www.schleich-s.com/en/US/dinosaurs/products/spinosaurus-15009.html
Can't find it anywhere in the US.

Yes, it is! It's one of the coolest skeletons I've ever seen.

 

[Thurible]

Dinosaurs are bullshit. The word didn’t exist until sometime in the 1800s. Dragons on the other hand were all over the place in ancient history. If you took a dragon skeleton and dragged the wing portions off to the side somewhere, what would you be left with?

Spoiler

a Tyrannosaurus rex RAAAWWWRR

This is a jest, right?

Edit: surprised by the amount of skepticism on the timeline, existence, and form of dinosaurs on this forum.

 

[hecatomb]

I heard Dragons were based on remains of Orca skeletons. It does like like a Dragon.

well there not just that, but I think Pterodactylus gave them ideas about dragons also

 

[strange headache]

OP is using toys as an argument to refute the scientific credibility of paleontology.

Dinosaurs are bullshit. The word didn’t exist until sometime in the 1800s. Dragons on the other hand were all over the place in ancient history.

 

[Red Crayon Aristocrat]

What about the Norse? Weren’t they the ones with the dragon boats to scare the sea monsters? There’s an old map that has pictures of what looks like Chinese dragons in the waters. It wasn’t just the Chinese. Dragons were in atleast a few ancient cultures and are even mentioned in the Bible. Check this out. Every instance of dragon outside of the one who fell was either changed to some other animal or flat out removed. This was Daniel before he was sent to the lions den.



I’ve even seen Catholic art work with dragons in it and there’s a story of Marco Polo visiting a kingdom that still had living dragons as well. What time period does media like the Witcher and game of thrones take place in? More dragons there too.

Fossils can be found all over the world and as for places were there aren't any, well.... stories spread.

Buddhism originated in India but is most popular in Asia for example, so I don't think it's a stretch to say stories about dragons could spread throughout Europe.

 

[Rentahamster]

Fossils can be found all over the world and as for places were there aren't any, well.... stories spread.

Buddhism originated in India but is most popular in Asia for example, so I don't think it's a stretch to say stories about dragons could spread throughout Europe.

Especially among a population from a less educated time, who didn't know wtf they were looking at.

 

[AgentP]

Why is there talk of dragons, what is the point?

 

[Sqorin Hammerfarf]

I don't know, I think Dinosaurs had its moments. Not the mama. We're gonna need another Timmy!

 

[AngularSaxophone]

Why is there talk of dragons, what is the point?

Because dinosaurs are dragons. May as well be a proper synonym. I don’t think the smithsonian would allow that though.

Fossils can be found all over the world and as for places were there aren't any, well.... stories spread.

The stories are about live ones not dead ones.

 

[AgentP]

Because dinosaurs are dragons. May as well be a proper synonym. I don’t think the smithsonian would allow that though.

Dragons are mythical creatures. If you think the myths are based on dinosaur fossils, seems logical, but you cannot call them dragons. Do you call horses unicorns? I think you are just being a dumbass and trying to get attention. Poe's law is strong with you.

 

[AngularSaxophone]

Dragons are mythical creatures. If you think the myths are based on dinosaur fossils, seems logical, but you cannot call them dragons. Do you call horses unicorns? I think you are just being a dumbass and trying to get attention. Poe's is strong with you.

If you want to believe they’re mythical creatures I’m not stopping you. They’re in history, they’re in scripture, so to me they’re real. As far as unicorns go as a one horned horse, those don’t exist. It was talking about a rhinoceros in the Bible. All you have to do is do a little digging on that and you get truth. Mythical creatures. Imagine that for a second. Imagine if some nations flag beared my little pony or Elmo. Sure they’d be taken seriously.

 

[AgentP]

they’re in scripture, so to me they’re real.

I think this ends the conversation. You believe everything in your book of stories and myths. You are by definition willfully ignorant and incapable or learning.

 

[Wings 嫩翼翻せ]

I think the real myth here is NeoGAF itself. There was no GAF before it, so how can there be a "Neo??????" Are we all just figments of an evil Lore?

 

[AngularSaxophone]

Couldn’t the same be said of you? Yet I’m not telling you that am I. Odd how that works.

 

[Da-Kid]

Dinosaurs existence contradicts the Bible, them apparently being millions of years old. But the Bible says the Earth was made in 7 thousand years, and going off it too, the Earth isn't even 10 thousand years old.

Now the Bible did say God created the creatures before man. But there has only been creatures described as the ones seen today. There is no mention of Dinosaurs mentions in the Bible.

It just seems strange that the Bible describes so much of life on the Earth but Dinosaurs are missing.

Don't know what to believe. But I kinda wouldn't be surprised if Dinosaurs were fake. Or maybe they're remains of an experiment God made, or concepts of the creatures he wanted but decided to go with something different?

 

[AngularSaxophone]

Again, the word dinosaur didn’t exist before the 1800s. It doesn’t mention them because that wasn’t the word for them. It was dragon. Which is in the Bible and a bunch of other places.

 

[Da-Kid]

True, the Bible described Satan as a dragon....... And he appeared as a Snake.... Which dragons are often described as looking.... and he's an Angel......

Holy fuck are the Dinosaurs fucking demons??????!!!!! And what we're digging up is their remains???

 

[AngularSaxophone]

Spoiler

what if China reanimates them with “AI”?

 

[strange headache]

Because dinosaurs are dragons.

I'm afraid AngularSaxophone will reach critical mass soon and collapse this forum into a singularity of stupid.

 

[Da-Kid]

This shit is actually blowing my mind because of how plausible it is.

Too many cultures mention Dragons. Satan was a seven headed dragon, was red, and had crowns. So he's basically King of the Dragons. Dragons in history are almost always described as being "magical" and also malevolent. Spirit creatures are considered to be magical beings, and demons are evil.... So were these demons just going around being dicks to humans?

Also it would make sense Dinosaurs are Millions of years old presumably considering Angel's are pretty much existed since the beginning of all that was, but then... The Bible still contradicts it... So either man is lying about something, the Bible is lying, or we're in the middle of some Divine conspiracy....

 

[AngularSaxophone]

whos been rising to become the worlds superpower? Who’s churning out all this new tech?

 

[Da-Kid]

Or maybe the Bible isn't lying, but not telling either.

 

[SpartanN92]

The only thing separating a Creative Writing major and a Paleontology Major is a Bio class.

 

[AngularSaxophone]

This is from Marco Polo. One would think crocodile but what crocodile is 8 feet wide and 30 feet long?

Leaving the city of Yachi, and traveling ten days in a westerly direction, you reach the province of Karazan, which is also the name of the chief city....Here are seen huge serpents, ten paces in length (about 30 feet), and ten spans (about 8 feet) girt of the body. At the fore part, near the head, they have two short legs, having three claws like those of a tiger, with eyes larger than a forepenny loaf (pane da quattro denari) and very glaring."

The jaws are wide enough to swallow a man, the teeth are large and sharp, and their whole appearance is so formidable, that neither man, nor any kind of animal can approach them without terror. Others are met with of a smaller size, being eight, six, or 5 paces long; and the following method is used for taking them. In the day-time, by reason of great heat, they lurk in caverns, from whence, at night, they issue to seek their food, and whatever beast they meet with and can lay hold of, whether tiger, wolf, or any other, they devour After which they drag themselves towards some lake, spring of water, or river, in order to drink. By their motion in this way along the shore, and their vast weight, they make a deep impression, as if a heavy beam had been drawn along the sands. Those whose employment is to hunt them observe the track by which they are most frequently accustomed to go, and fix into the ground several pieces of wood, armed with sharp iron spikes, which they cover with sand in such a manner as not to be perceptible.

When therefore the animals make their way towards the places they usually haunt, they are wounded by these instruments, and speedily killed. The crows, as soon as they perceive them to be dead, set up to scream; and this serves as a signal to the hunters, who advance the spot, and proceed to separate the skin from the flesh, taking care immediately to secure the gall, which is most highly esteemed in medicine.

In cases of the bite of a mad dog, a penny weight of it, dissolved in wine, is administered. It is also useful in accelerating parturition, when the labor pains of women have come on. A small quantity of it being applied to carbuncles, pustules, or other eruptions on the body, they are presently dispersed; and it is efficacious in many other complaints.

The flesh also of the animal is sold at a dear rate, being thought to have a higher flavor than other kinds of meat, and by all persons it is esteemed a delicacy." (The Travels of Marco Polo, © 1948,Book 2, Chapter XL, pg. 185-186)

 

[hecatomb]

Dinosaurs existence contradicts the Bible, them apparently being millions of years old. But the Bible says the Earth was made in 7 thousand years, and going off it too, the Earth isn't even 10 thousand years old.

Now the Bible did say God created the creatures before man. But there has only been creatures described as the ones seen today. There is no mention of Dinosaurs mentions in the Bible.

It just seems strange that the Bible describes so much of life on the Earth but Dinosaurs are missing.

Don't know what to believe. But I kinda wouldn't be surprised if Dinosaurs were fake. Or maybe they're remains of an experiment God made, or concepts of the creatures he wanted but decided to go with something different?

You know, they didn't have the word dinosaur yet. Though there are mentions of giant animals called behemoths and leviathans. So it doesn't really contradict the Bible. Its even mentioned that a leviathan swallowed Jonah, so it might have not been a whale. Though believing in dinosaurs or not isn't the point of the Bible.

 

[Da-Kid]

The only thing separating a Creative Writing major and a Paleontology Major is a Bio class.

Hmmm.... yeah something isn't adding up here. Because either way, Demons are spirits, even if they appeared as dragons, why would their still be remains of something that doesn't really exists in our plain of existence?

Also would explain why no creature that fits the description of Dragons have been found. But why fake Dinosaurs, what would be the reason? Money? Sure but I doubt Dinosaurs generate enough money to justify the continuance of faking them.

 

[Da-Kid]

You know, they didn't have the word dinosaur yet. Though there are mentions of giant animals called behemoths and leviathans. So it doesn't really contradict the Bible.

What contradicts the Bible is that dinosaurs are apparently millions of years old and existed way longer than when the Earth was created.

 

[SpartanN92]

there are some religions of them mentioning killing, or fighting behemoths and leviathans. They didn't have the word "dinosaur" yet.

Dinosaurs and Humans are separated by 65 million years.

 

[AngularSaxophone]

Also would explain why no creature that fits the description of Dragons have been found. But why fake Dinosaurs, what would be the reason? Money? Sure but I doubt Dinosaurs generate enough money to justify the continuance of faking them.

To turn truth to “myth” and shit people just imagine, like Jurassic park into “truth”.

 

[hecatomb]

What contradicts the Bible is that dinosaurs are apparently millions of years old and existed way longer than when the Earth was created.

scientist don't have any proof when the earth was made or how old it is also. I might as well leave this thread before all the butt hurt atheist start bitching and complaining about everything.

 

[Da-Kid]

To turn truth to “myth” and shit people just imagine, like Jurassic park into “truth”.

What truth though?

 

[AngularSaxophone]

Velociraptors. How many kids thought that velociraptors were the shit? It just keeps the fairy tale going. My daughter used to love dinosaurs. I even painted one in her room when she was young. And then you discover the truth and it’s the friggin tooth fairy all over again.

 

[Elcid]

scientist don't have any proof when the earth was made or how old it is also. I might as well leave this thread before all the butt hurt atheist start bitching and complaining about everything.

Lol this is so true though. Pure speculation. Dunno wtf is going on about dragons though. Color me intrigued.

 

[hecatomb]

Lol this is so true though. Pure speculation. Dunno wtf is going on about dragons though. Color me intrigued.

just talking about how some people came up with the idea of dragons. I think people found pterodactyl bones, and just came up with dragons. People back in the Middle Ages also came up with salamanders having some kind of fire powers.

 

[AngularSaxophone]

Yeah just completely ignore this

They found this dragon... I mean dinosaur recently. Tell me that looks old to you.

Spoiler

its not they’re still here

“People found bones”

Looks nothing like this. NOPE. COMPLETELY different.

 

[DS_Joost]

scientist don't have any proof when the earth was made or how old it is also. I might as well leave this thread before all the butt hurt atheist start bitching and complaining about everything.

I don't think AngularSaxophone will be the only one exploding in a mass of stupidity... I know Newgaf is more open to people but where did all you nutcases come from all of a sudden?

 

[5secondrulesucks]

youre not a good dad. youre indecisive and your kid will most likely be a skittish person because of your indecisiveness.

 

[Tesseract]

 

[Chairman Tickles]

youre not a good dad. youre indecisive and your kid will most likely be a skittish person because of your indecisiveness.

99% of child growing into adult comes from genetics. Nurture has always been a myth. Provided he does not damage child, the fate of child is already written.

 

[Paracelsus]

Imagine being chased by a 12 feet tall version of


You'd stop them and start ripping yourself to shreds to spare them the trouble.

 

[Shifty]

Dinosaurs are bullshit. The word didn’t exist until sometime in the 1800s. Dragons on the other hand were all over the place in ancient history. If you took a dragon skeleton and dragged the wing portions off to the side somewhere, what would you be left with?

Spoiler

a Tyrannosaurus rex RAAAWWWRR

You know what? I'm not convinced that you're real, Mr. Saxophone.

My eyes see your posts, and apparently so do those of various other people in here, but the only conclusion I can draw is that this is all some sort of grandiose conspiratorial hoax.

Someone must have surreptitously KOed me at some point and replaced my ocular system with extremely sophisticated fake eyes that use deep learning to subtly edit NeoGAF visual data in real-time.

Or it might be that the moon men are using their brainwave machine to remotely alter the waking dream that is consciousness and make it -look- like there's a saxophone avatar talking about dragons when clearly there couldn't possibly be.

Or, genius moment, the scientologists could be taking advantage of the planet's atmosphere (which is shaped like one of those Smarties chocolate sweets, the more you know) to refract and reflect light in just such a way that it makes impossible things seem real.

Either way, the evidence is right in front of my face and I refuse to believe a single word of it. They'll never get me!