Firstly, thanks for your reply. It's good to have differing opinions and be able to banter back and forwards without bleeding noses!
Originally posted by zorgon
The museums are full of stuff that is out of place, most of it you cannot even get to view, even if you are an academic with 'qualifications' Heck I
tried to view a rare collection of minerals at the ROM in Toronto. The collection was donated by the owner so others could see it. Well rarely they
show a few pieces, but other collectors can't even look at the collection... which was why it was donated in the first place
It's the old "not what you know but who you know" and I've been fortunate enough to have contacts in the local museum (mainly the Palaeontology
section, but also in collections maintenance and archiving) and thus have seen a lot of artifacts that aren't generally publicly available (at least
not anymore) but none that raised an eyebrow as much as the word from a former Director who said" we know about these but we don't want to" about
pit-hut remains in the South Island of New Zealand....basically consigning them to the basket of ignorance (or Iwi pandering) and obscure
archaeological circles. There are people around who still research these things, if one knows where to look, specifically in this case being the
Waitaha and a Celtic-biased archaeologist (who curiously enough had one of his books endorsed by a head Kuia ( Head Woman) : Dame Whina Cooper; so I
can be, at least, sympathetic to 'outlandish' or un-prescribed ideas. However, what differentiates my tacit acceptance of the possibility of pre-Maori
peoples in New Zealand (and the associated cover-up due to Treaty issues and the notion of tangata whenua) and my reluctance to accept humans
coexisting with dinosaurs is that one is well within the realms of possibility (N.Z.) while the other is a virtual Outremer: a kingdom in the mind,
not in a physical location and certainly devoid of any evidence other than fabrication..
Originally posted by zorgonThe old books on Archaeology contains so much data and since it was before cameras these guys had artists
along to make diagrams. But today a lot of what was in those books is hard to find... not lost, just very hard to find
Again, many of those books are available if one knows of someone who has them or knows where to look
However, a lot of those old books on Archaeology were by people not well trained in technique or without the corrolatory tools we have nowadays and
there was often a load of conjecture which stemmed from many things, religion not the least!
Originally posted by zorgonI doubt that we will ever really know the truth... because not only is new stuff being found, but ancient
stuff we haven't even dug up yet is being looted or blown to smitherines by war.
That is the beauty of Science: that we will never know the truth but we will refine and adapt so as to get close enough that the gap doesn't matter.
'Things' are always getting lost, looted, blown up etc, and don't forget inundated. Certainly, in my mind, there are discoveries to be made relating
to the last Ice Age, when the sea level was lower. Again however, there is a vast difference between matters of thousands of years and millions of
years, which is why I don't subscribe to the human-dinosaur coexistence: there just is NO evidence. None, not a dime, nada. sure, it's like looking
for a needle in a haystack, but -and again I repeat- it doesn't follow what we already know about human/hominid/mammalian evolution and what we know
is not - I am certain - a vast conspiracy to hold us back in our development and understanding of our origins.
Originally posted by zorgonAnd 'the notion of dinosaurs and humans coexisting is laughable" may be so in certain stodgy academic
circles, but certainly quite popular with the masses ie Flintstones... and I have found in most cases stodgy old ideas fall to time
The Academic circles you circulate in may well be stodgy, but the ones I frequent are known for their forward-thinking and openness to reason. The
notion of the Flintstones is entirely unreasonable. Fortunately it isn't only 'stodgy academics' who think such notions are bunkum, as most anyone I
know would agree that it is pure fantasy (these are people who are artists, junkies, doctors, preachers, politicians, shopworkers, factory workers,
farmers etc...so, a plethora of people-types).
Originally posted by zorgonOnce upon a time those stodgy were 100% sure the Earth was flat.. and had Galileo been a few years earlier he
would have been burned at the stake..
Great West-centric point you make there
This just shows you what it can be living under the rule of fear, as Church Rule. Simple observation would have told them otherwise.
Originally posted by zorgonSo your 'science' may work for you, but it doesn't work for me
So it doesn't work for you because you've been 'burned' by them, you have grave misgivings about the application, or you just plain don't understand?
It's not 'my science' by the way, it belongs to everyone and you use it everyday, so what exactly about it doesn't work for you?
Originally posted by zorgonAnd here are two quotes;
"Imagination is more important than knowledge"
"Reality is merely an illusion. albeit a very persistent one"
Imagination and knowledge are two sides of different coins. One you can use and the other is useless without the knowledge that it is imagination. So,
you can't have imagination without knowledge and imagination can certainly help advance knowledge.
"Persistent illusions" a.k.a. reality help us come to terms and imagine and understand the world around us. Imagination is important and it seems to
be a well-subscribed myth that scientists are "stodgy" and "unimaginative". If you feel that this is so then I feel sorry for you for you obviously
haven't met the right scientists or lack the imagination to accept that we are people too, with the same fears, loves, wants and needs.
edit on 31-1-2011 by aorAki because: some werds mizzpleled
edit on 31-1-2011 by aorAki because: smiley and stuff