It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
There are no dinosaurs depicted in petroglyphs.
The dinosaurs depicted in petroglyhs were depicted as small in stature.
You seem to be lacking sources. Habitually.
As for the pterdactyl argument, a 300 to 400 pound animal would need a 60 to 80 foot wingspan and an enormous amount of energy to get off the ground
Therefore, while the largest pterosaurs appear to exceed the size limits for continuous flapping flight by a volant animal, there is no reason to suspect that they could not fly long distances Rather, it is reasonable to expect that so long as giant pterosaurs launched within 1 to 2 kilometres of an external source of lift, they could then stay aloft by transitioning to a soaring-dominated mode of travel after an initial burst of anaerobic power.
OK let me put it this way, that's wrong. Sure gravity varies slightly, but not such that there are voids that planes can't go over them, they are only slight variations.
originally posted by: randomthoughts12
a reply to: Arbitrageur
I'm lazy search it it's there.
It is pretty much common knowledge.
This was old news to me sorry I thought this was common knowledge as I originally saw it on BBC like I thought 10 years ago before looking deeper.
Effective gravity on the Earth's surface varies by around 0.7%, from 9.7639 m/s2 on the Nevado Huascarán mountain in Peru to 9.8337 m/s2 at the surface of the Arctic Ocean. In large cities, it ranges from 9.7760 in Kuala Lumpur, Mexico City, and Singapore to 9.825 in Oslo and Helsinki.
Yes. A few thought that pterodactyls couldn't fly, based on questionable analyses. Does that mean that gravity was less?
Previous assessments led to a flightless animal based on estimates of body weight and wing span data.
As pointed out, at one time the expanding Earth was considered (and the implications of such in regard to surface gravity was problematic). Then we learned more. Like we have about dinosaurs.
Proving if it was less wouldn't even be considered by mainstream science.