I'm linking this thread to the one about abusive posts...

Should provide excellent evidence in the case of ATS v. Trolls, docket# 24601.

I commend gools for inhuman composure..so you are from another planet! Seriously, good on ya'!

By the way, I find this theory of MM's interesting, but highly improbable, for two reasons. Logistics, efficiency. This is the sort of conspiracy that is interesting to talk about, but just doesn't seem feasible from a logistics/resources/investment-return standpoint.

I think it's a fun idea, something worth talking about, in theory at least, for some people. I'm not some people, and that's about the limit of my ability to contribute to the thread, so I'll leave now.

For gods sake people. of course we co exsist with dinos have you people never seen Jurassic park? it was a documentary not a film.

And anyway if we came from another planet and killed all the dinos then that means our ancestors must have brainwashed themselves to forget where they originally came from. Whats the point in that. Thats like saying in 500,000 years the earth will no longer be habitable so we are gonna move to mars but the only people allowed are thjose who agree to be brainwashed and lose your memory. Oh and you gotta pretend that there were big monsters when we got there but a big meteor came out the sky and killed them and we all lived happily ever after. And for no reason at all were gonna ditch all the technology that enabled us to come here and were gonna wear animal skins and live in caves.

purrleeeeaaase. Dinos and Humans obviously exsisted together. Trust me i have a friend who is half Human half T-Rex. Honestly!!!!!!!!!!

So far, MattMarriott, you have made a bunch of claims with nothing to back them up, and then ask others to try and provide evidence for you.
Hah.

Soooo....

Phase 1 of evolution theory, the Piltdown Man phase: the main technique used to fool people was planting hoaxes.

What hoaxes? Got proof?

Phase 2 of evolution theory, the Dinosaur phase: the main task is to cover-up REAL findings.

What cover-ups? Got proof?

Today the main purpose of people working in the illuminati payroll digging out in the field (palaeontologists, etc) is to cover-up scores of findings concerning dinosaurs.

What about the people that are on DinoHunters LLC's payroll? They're all bribed? Got proof?

Each of these findings is sufficient to expose immediately evolution theory as a lie, even to a six year old child.

You have no idea what evolution is. You have no idea what a theory is. You have no idea what a six year old child understands.

Please post here information on such findings and cover-ups around the world.

Again, you have NO proof, so you ask others to provide it for you.

- the most immediate reason is to cover-up the REAL reason for the extinction of the dinosaurs.

Which was? Got proof?

It's obvious that dinosaurs and humans don't belong in the same planet.

Yeah... obvious.
Oh wait...

"Seapeople"started "contributing" with a general copy/paste insult that has nothing to do with this or any particular thread.
After being exposed by other posters he insinuated that I mean that the cover-up is "dinosaurs did not exist", despite the fact that I explicitly mentioned that the "scientists" are HIDING from the public the dinosaur fossils.

Seapeople is right in that he's saying what a lot of people are thinking. Used the wrong way of relating his disappointment, yes, but still got his point across.

So I ask again, got proof?

Interesting and rather funny actually

Piltdown Man phase: the main technique used to fool people was planting hoaxes.

His implications do not seem to direct specifically to this one event, rather defining this one event as an entire era of thought.

> and I know Ive used wikipedia as a reference once as well, but they really are an unreliable source.. I really dont like that 'edit' button. I came up with better, reliable sources via google pretty easily.


[edit on 5-6-2005 by apc]

quoteOriginally posted by MattMarriott

Example in the context of this thread: as it became clear that it was impossible to continue to sell the extinction of the dinosaurs relying in one of two base assumptions of evolution - survival of the fittest - catastrophism was added in the form of an impact of an interplanetary body.



If I understand you mean that Dinosaurs were the fittest?
It has been demonstrated that dinosaurs were not prepared to stay much more time in earth. That's the cause they evolved into birds.
Dinosaurs were not prepared for fast changes in the world (fast in geological terms). Mammals were. That's why mammals stay today, and dinosaurs not. The cause of the extinction of dinosaurs doesn't matter that much. The meteor, volcans... all those theories are just looking for the cause of what killed dinosaurs. And what killed them was, probably, a global scale environmental change.
Catastrophism is only a theory, because there are no proofs of what happened then.
You also say that scientist are covering fossils. Why would they do that? Sorry, but you look like one of those creationists who can't accept what is right in front of their faces. Till now, there is no REAL problem with evolution. It's a theory, that means that there aren't proofs to make it a "law". But evolution is the best we have, and probably will never be demonstrated, but I'm pretty sure that this will be accepted like the truth for a long long time (maybe forever).
If I misunderstood the post, sorry, but the thread is not too much clear... it only leaves the sensation of... "I don't know exactly what has this guy said, but he is wrong"

[edit on 5/6/05 by Chemapeich]

Originally posted by Chemapeich
If I understand you mean that Dinosaurs were the fittest?

No. Evolution theory explained extinction of the dinosaurs because they were not the fittest.
When this explanation didn't sell anymore, they included catastrophism

Originally posted by MattMarriott


Reversed Profession - Burying instead of Digging Out Dinosaur Fossils
Today the main purpose of people working in the illuminati payroll digging out in the field (palaeontologists, etc) is to cover-up scores of findings concerning dinosaurs.
Each of these findings is sufficient to expose immediately evolution theory as a lie, even to a six year old child.

Please post here information on such findings and cover-ups around the world.

I think that the burden of proof is on YOU here, since you are the one who posted this neat theory. The fact that you posted it in a first place must mean you actually have some evidence to support your theory... at least one would expect so. I would never post something like that without evidence to support it.

Each time that it's no more possible to cover-up some basic assumption of evolution theory for the mass of the sheeple, evolution theory is modified accordingly.

Did it ever occur to you that theories are modified for another, very obvious reason: NEW facts.
We learn something new every day. The initial assumptions in science are modified all the time, not to cover up something, but because research has brought new facts to light.
Example: we thought earth was flat. Then it was proven otherwise, the theory on how earth looks like was modified in the light of new facts.

Same goes for paleontology. We have theories, then we discover things that point into another direction, another possible explanation of extinction of dinosaurs, so we modify the theory.


Again, the burden of proof is on YOU , not us. Present actual proof of your theory and we might consider believing you.
Oh yeah, random "illuminati" pics from history do not count as "proof" in this case, and neither do links to your previous threads or google search.

We are talking hard facts science here, so gimme some hard facts....

You are mistaken. What catastrophism tries to explain is how could the environment change so fast to kill dinosaurs. Dinosaurs didn't dead "from one day to another", the extinction of dinosaurs took many years in human scale, but quite fast in geological scale. What scientist suppose is that a meteor or the sudden eruption of giant volcans covered the sky and reduced the temperature of the planet, and over all, reduced the sun irradiation. Big animals like dinosaurs, that also had cold blood, dead in a short time because they weren't able to addapt to the new situation. There are proofs that shows that something put a lot of dust in the sky, it's called the KT-limit, and you can see in the geological strata from 65 million years ago. So WHAT'S THE FU**ING PROBLEM???? there are many proofs that shows that dinosaurs were not he fittests and that shows that something happened in Earth. I don't understand why you can't understand what's right behind you eyes...

Surely the dinoaaur extinction helps prove evolutionary theory - for the most part it was those species that were most adaptable and able to exist in a variety of ecological niches that survived.

Dinosaurs may have been perfectly adapted for their environment - a warm, moist, climatically stable Greenhouse World. But they were only adapted for that enviroment. So when it changed, they died.

That's how evolution works: species become progressively more adpated to progressively more specific environments. Then it changes, a handful of species survive, and off we go again..... And remember it was only the PT extinction 250mya that enable the dinosaurs to florish.

I wonder who'll survive the Quarternary extinction?

I don't know what I think about all of this. I believe they did live on the earth, and that they did exists. I believe that they were extinct like we thought they were. I mean lots of animals get extinct over long periods of time. I believe humans lived on the earth at the very same time.

REad the lacerta files,it would give you an accurate story of what happend to the dinos and what is our real history.

WILMA!! Yaba daba doo......................

Originally posted by MattMarriott

Originally posted by Chemapeich
If I understand you mean that Dinosaurs were the fittest?

No. Evolution theory explained extinction of the dinosaurs because they were not the fittest.

Actually, that's not quite true. The original explaniation (which was before Darwin wrote Origin of Species) is that they were all killed off in the Biblical flood.

As the science of geology developed and people tracked rock beds and looked at what fossils were found in what rock beds, the Flood theory was discounted. At that point a number of theories came up, including disease and something in the environment changed and dinos died off because food and so forth wasn't available.

When this explanation didn't sell anymore, they included catastrophism

Again, not quite true. The meteor strike was EXTREMELY controversial for several decades. Scientists weren't quite willing to believe it at first and it's only in the past 25 years that it became accepted.

Maybe time is really running backwards and dinosaurs really evolved out of humans????

The French revolution and the Roman Empire are still in our (real) future. The election of 2008 is already history. We just don't realize time is running backward because our current perception of time is the only frame of reference we have ever had and thus no comparison to determine 'forward' or 'backward'.

Now that makes for some interesting philosophical musings...

This MattMarriot guy really pushes my buttons, and not in the good way! Besides the fact that most of his posts are rambling and bordering on insanity, when someone has the nerve to question what he's trying to say, he acts as though he speaks in plain English and that THEY are the morons!

In this case he makes vague references to some grand dinosaur conspiracy, without giving any facts. Instead he tells us the facts will come later, as if he has some kind of television program and he wants us to hang on for ratings purposes. Give me a break! If you have evidence of a conspiracy, you should post it with your claims to begin with. And you should never claim a conspiracy and then tell others to find your evidence for you, even though you "know" it to be true.

I wish there were warnings put in the title lines of MattMarriot posts. His headlines get me all exicted, until I click on it and see that it was posted by him and he's just rambling on and on and on again. For the love of God, Matt! Take your medicine as prescribed!!!!

Byrd, you're aware, I'm sure, that I'm one of your biggest admirers; in all the times I've read your posts, I've almost never disagreed with you, and your scholarliness and cool-headedness in the face of some of the more ... exotic ... posts here are truly the stuff of legend.

It is therefore with trepidation that I attmept to advise you, but I do so now.

Don't even bother with this thread; it's just too over the top!

Originally posted by Off_The_Street
Byrd, you're aware, I'm sure, that I'm one of your biggest admirers; in all the times I've read your posts, I've almost never disagreed with you, and your scholarliness and cool-headedness in the face of some of the more ... exotic ... posts here are truly the stuff of legend.

It is therefore with trepidation that I attmept to advise you, but I do so now.

Don't even bother with this thread; it's just too over the top!

Couldn't have said it better myself!

Byrd, your breakdown rebuttle to this theory (and I stress the word theory), is perhaps one of the best posts I've seen since joining ATS to date.

[edit on 6-6-2005 by mpeake]