Did Ancient Humans Coexisted with Dinosaurs?

originally posted by: Noinden
a reply to: Raggedyman

Do you have an undisclosed issue with learning? OR do you just not read what is posted? OR do you deliberately ignore posts that don't fit your paradigm?

Evidence has been posted.
QED
You
are
wrong

I discovered a photo of Raggedyman in Action. Depending on how far into the future you are when you click the link, you may have to search out the entry for 25 September 2017.

a reply to: rnaa

Yeah, many of us have suggested this being what is going on. We shall see.

originally posted by: rnaa

originally posted by: Noinden
a reply to: Raggedyman

Do you have an undisclosed issue with learning? OR do you just not read what is posted? OR do you deliberately ignore posts that don't fit your paradigm?

Evidence has been posted.
QED
You
are
wrong

I discovered a photo of Raggedyman in Action. Depending on how far into the future you are when you click the link, you may have to search out the entry for 25 September 2017.

So thats your scientific evidence
I am so glad I come here

and you are making fun of me, hard to beleiev

originally posted by: Noinden
a reply to: Raggedyman

So did you read the reference which I provided?

Let us try again:

The Geological Time Scale 2012 edited by F M Gradstein, J G Ogg, Mark Schmitz, Gabi Ogg

Phantom provided a ]Link

Now you can not honestly say, if you've read that, no evidence has been provided.

So go forth and read it.

Its probably a noindy porn site link, I am not that silly

Want to discuss it or let someone else discuss it, leave the thread if you cant discuss the subject without having your hand held by link sites, not how forums or ats works

Let us try again:
I am just asking for evidence of the geological time scale.

Phantom has provided the scientific method, I agree and I am happy to see that as our framework to show the method
Evidence gentlemen

And since laughter is the best medicine.................

originally posted by: Phantom423

What scientific evidence did you offer
Seriously Phantom, there was none, I expect you really know that, I expect you know there is none, hence why you are trying to tackle me personally
Its not working

It was ALL assumption and theory

In fact the cartoon is self reflective about you, not me
I havnt made any statements, just asked for evidence, no evidence has been fourthcoming.
I asked for evidence that your conclusion about geological dating is accurate, none.

I am not denying it, just asking for evidence

You have the timescale, believe it and conclude its right, yet there seems to be a blackhole in relation to the science.

Yet here, now you are saying I am wrong, when I havnt made any statements, just asking for evidence

You have drawn the conclusion with no facts, no evidence only conviction and zeal.

I dont understand why you hate science, why you want to turn science into religion, why do you hate information.
Why do you hate science

originally posted by: Raggedyman
Three days kayaking the Blackwood and I return to
Still
No empirical evidence for the geological time scale

Not surprised at all

Next....

Just because it is highly unlikely for dinosaurs to have survived in a continual lineage, doesn't mean they couldn't have met humans.

There are other ways it could happen. This forum entertains notions of aliens, right? They could abduct a dinosaur and then return it millions of years later.

Maybe a dinosaur could get frozen and then thaw? (I think chickens are able to be frozen and then thawed, and sometimes survive.)

Or something even more paranormal could happen, like a rift the teleports them through time and/or another dimension.




But yeah, survival is unlikely. They're too big. A predator of that size would not be able to find enough food in the world as it is now.

a reply to: bloodymarvelous

Maybe a dinosaur could get frozen and then thaw?

I saw that movie when I was a kid. Scared the crap out of me.
www.imdb.com...

a reply to: Raggedyman

You keep demanding that others provide you with information that is already well established in the scientific literature. You don't actually want people to show you evidence of anything, you simply want to pick apart the ways that people reply to you. Geology is well over 200 years old, the information you claim you want to see is out there and it's a simple matter for you to read the information and then tell us where the errors in the scientific data are. But the truth is, you don't know the science and sinplymdismiss it out of hand while playing your tired and sad little games here. If repeating the same demandnover and over worked, you would have readnyp on the Law of Superposition and demonstrated the errors you feel exist in it. Instead, you prefer to play "gotcha" games.

Since you are the one claiming the science is incorrect, the onus lies on you to address the errors. I don't understand why you hate science so much that you won't utilize the Scientific Method to show everyone what an expert in geology you are? Because you're not disputing the actual science. You're picking apart peoples replies. That's a very different thing that your arrogant routine doesn't seem capable of recognizing the difference between the two concepts.

The Law of Superposition is a very well known and fundamental aspect of Geology. Are you incapable of demonstrating the errors in the words of actual Geologists? Say it ain't so!!!

a reply to: Phage

When I was 5 or 6 they played this as part of a double feature with Godzilla vs. King Kong and yeah... it scared the hell out of me at that age. My mom never hired that babysitter again when she found out about it.

a reply to: peter vlar

I was in the balcony section of a movie theater. I tried to run out, up the aisle but hit a dead end.
It was bad. Really bad.

a reply to: Phantom423

Dang, I forgot that was Tom Paxton.

a reply to: Phage

If the babysitter hadn't made fun of me for being such a scaredy cat, it never would've been found out. I didn't have the benefit of a balcony. It was a sketchy late 70's second run theater where tickets were probably about $1 for admission. It was only a couple of years after the 1976 remake of King Kong and I was so excited o watch him fight Godzilla. And then the second feature started and I just about wet my pants and say there with Lynn hands over my eyes for 90% of the movie haha. I'm not too ashamed to admit it now, it was almost 40 years ago. Though I do find the irony of their limited FX budget resulted in what would now be considered a fairly accurate Neanderthal depiction compared
To how Pleistocene hominids were depicted back then.

originally posted by: peter vlar


You keep demanding that others provide you with information that is already well established in the scientific literature.

Well if you cant do it, walk away
Just trolling
If its not in your capacity to explain science, go away

originally posted by: peter vlar
You don't actually want people to show you evidence of anything

But I do, hence my relentless questioning
Your lack of answers is evident evidence doesnt exist

originally posted by: peter vlar
, you simply want to pick apart the ways that people reply to you. Geology is well over 200 years old, the information you claim you want to see is out there and it's a simple matter for you to read the information and then tell us where the errors in the scientific data are.

There is no evidence, there can be no argument
The geo time scale is not 200 years old, thats what I am dealing with. Keep up, I am sick of your cowardly, strawman side issues
Geological time scale, evidence its valid, that it is science not faith

originally posted by: peter vlar
But the truth is, you don't know the science and sinplymdismiss it out of hand while playing your tired and sad little games here. If repeating the same demandnover and over worked, you would have readnyp on the Law of Superposition and demonstrated the errors you feel exist in it. Instead, you prefer to play "gotcha" games.

I think you dont know anything, whu you reply in thousands of words and no evidence
I think you are bluffing your way into the dunning krueger effect and you look silly doing it

If you want to reply, use the scientific method, not attacking me
Scientific evidence please

originally posted by: peter vlar
Since you are the one claiming the science is incorrect, the onus lies on you to address the errors.

Ok I am no longer claiming its incorect, only that I want scientific evidence to prove it.
I am fluid
The argument doesnt change, talk about mindlesness
EVIDENCE FOR THE GEOLOGIOCAL TIME SCALE

originally posted by: peter vlar
I don't understand why you hate science so much that you won't utilize the Scientific Method to show everyone what an expert in geology you are? Because you're not disputing the actual science. You're picking apart peoples replies. That's a very different thing that your arrogant routine doesn't seem capable of recognizing the difference between the two concepts.

Liar liar pants on fire

I am calling for you to use the aforementioned scientific method, go get them boy
Not assumption, scientific method, PLEASE

originally posted by: peter vlar
The Law of Superposition is a very well known and fundamental aspect of Geology. Are you incapable of demonstrating the errors in the words of actual Geologists? Say it ain't so!!!

Providing a constant and evidence in nature and, guess what, fail

Axiom is not just an australian band that sung about the titanic

Is the law of superposition absolute dating?
Numerical dating determines the actual ages of rocks through the study of radioactive decay. Relative dating cannot establish absolute age, but it can establish whether one rock is older or younger than another.
What is Relative Dating? - Law of Superposition, Principles of Original ...
study.com/.../what-is-relative-dating-law-of-superposition-principles-of-original-horizon...

Why is the law of superposition only applied to sedimentary rocks? (liar)
the law of superposition applies primarily to sedimentary rocks because it states that in an undeformed sequence of sedimentary rocks, each bed is older than the one above it and younger than the one below it.

Which rock layers are oldest to youngest?
The many horizontal layers of sedimentary rock illustrate the principle of original horizontality (Figure below). The youngest rock layers are at the top and the oldest are at the bottom, which is described by the law of superposition.


www.google.com.au...

why do you hate and butcher science with lies, blatant and down right lies.
Why are you turning science into religion

a reply to: Raggedyman

lmao!

I get it... you need a video

because Youtube is the end all be all of knowledge...

originally posted by: Akragon
a reply to: Raggedyman

lmao!

I get it... you need a video

because Youtube is the end all be all of knowledge...

I dont even need to watch the video to know you are never goingto get it Ak, no chance, no point, ho help at all...

I dont think the science hating wannabes understand science hereabouts

a reply to: Raggedyman

You realize most of your replies don't even make sense right?


is english your first language?