|
Post by kekistani on Oct 4, 2020 10:40:56 GMT 5
Oh, and I forgot "Bringing up something you said months prior that he thinks is wrong in a totally unrelated argument" on the card
|
|
|
Post by creature386 on Oct 10, 2020 13:33:54 GMT 5
Alan Feduccia is back!
I can't be bothered to actually read this book (unless I start a blog one day, if I do, I'll try to dissect this piece as well as I can). However, I have three remarks to make concerning this cover image:
1. Why is Feduccia still active? I get that BANDitism is his career, but is their work even still relevant? From what I've gathered, only creationists cite them these days and I hope this isn't the target audience Feduccia wants. 2. What's with that title? According to Holtz, it refers to an 1984 movie (I looked it up and got "Romancing the Stone"). I'm not old enough to understand the reference, so, can someone enlighten me? 3. What on Earth does "postmodern" paleontology mean? People who claim birds are dinosaurs certainly believe words have meaning. Or did he get his understanding of "postmodernism" from Steven Pinker and Sam Harris for whom it means "anyone I disagree with"?
|
|
|
Post by Infinity Blade on Oct 10, 2020 16:35:59 GMT 5
I saw this on Twitter recently, and I was also shocked to see him still active.
Emily Willoughby pointed out that some scientists have a certain hypothesis as their kind of "thing", and when they go their lives championing this hypothesis, only for it to be disproven, there tends to be some emotion behind their reactions. They are, after all, only human.
But it's certainly not rational.
|
|
|
Post by theropod on Nov 10, 2020 19:07:30 GMT 5
"The USÂ is a republic, not a democracy!!!!"
This one is special because it is arguably true if we apply a strict standard to what we consider to be a democracy. But the framing of the statement by conservatives is so utterly wrong and reveals their total lack of understanding of basic political terms it is mind-boggling. Republic and democracy are not opposites or mutually exclusive. A republic is simply a state that is not a monarchy. China, Belarus, Iran and North Korea are republics (although I guess one could make a good point for the latter being functionally a monarchy). If simply being a "republic" is enough of an excuse for you for it to not matter that you aren’t being democratic, then maybe you belong in one of those countries rather than the country that spend the better part of the last century invading countries to bring them the blessings of democracy (with varying levels of success), because simply being a republic is an incredibly low bar.
"Democracy is mob rule, we live in a republic!!!" I also wonder if those people believe that the UK, Netherlands or Skandinavian countries (or Canada and Australia for that matter) have "mob rule" because they are democracies, but not republics.
|
|
|
Post by creature386 on Jul 30, 2021 2:24:21 GMT 5
"How ridiculous can it get?" David Peters: "Yes."
|
|
|
Post by Infinity Blade on Jul 30, 2021 2:44:25 GMT 5
Yeah, a friend of mine on Twitter shared that screenshot of Peter's post earlier today.
Brain cell death moment.
|
|
|
Post by Infinity Blade on May 2, 2022 16:48:58 GMT 5
|
|
|
Post by creature386 on May 3, 2022 12:13:57 GMT 5
You know, I usually hate the concept of power levels, but this is one of the most epic power levels-related fails ever.
|
|
|
Post by Supercommunist on Mar 18, 2024 1:25:37 GMT 5
I find it weird how some paleo people get annoyed of paleoart of predatory dinosaurs doing exciting but realistic things like hunting but then also advocate for more paleoart of herbivores killing predators given that is actually way less common.
Heck, I've even seen people draw paleoart of tenontosaurus eating a deinonychus even though there is like 0 modern evidence of herbivores eating their predators, even pre-killed ones.
|
|
|
Post by razor45dino on Mar 18, 2024 17:10:10 GMT 5
people get flabbergasted whenever dromaeosaurs are shown to be doing anything together
|
|
|
Post by Supercommunist on Jun 29, 2024 2:01:20 GMT 5
Sometimes I see people that crocodilians are inferior to mammals because there are records of jaguars killing caimans in water. This, however, ignores the fact that aquatic whales and seals are also known to be taken out by polar bears in the water.
|
|
|
Post by Supercommunist on Jul 13, 2024 9:00:14 GMT 5
Just a random thought on the whole "predator's prefer sick, weak or young" prey.
I think most of us are aware that people have pushed this narrative too hard, and the idea that predators will never take on tough prey items is laughable, and just to point how out of touch this is couldn't you also argue that on paper predators should obviously avoid sick animals or carcasses because they are more likely to harbor diseases or parasites?
|
|
|
Post by Supercommunist on Aug 31, 2024 0:11:23 GMT 5
Have you guys notice that some leopard and jaguar enthusiasts have huge beef with one another. You would think that they wouldn't bash each other's favorite cats given how visually similar they are.
|
|
|
Post by Infinity Blade on Aug 31, 2024 3:44:32 GMT 5
I saw this on Twitter recently, and I was also shocked to see him still active. Emily Willoughby pointed out that some scientists have a certain hypothesis as their kind of "thing", and when they go their lives championing this hypothesis, only for it to be disproven, there tends to be some emotion behind their reactions. They are, after all, only human. But it's certainly not rational. Can't imagine the amount of copium Willoughby herself was huffing all these years with her race science nonsense. Have you guys notice that some leopard and jaguar enthusiasts have huge beef with one another. You would think that they wouldn't bash each other's favorite cats given how visually similar they are. A lot of it seems to boil down to "Nuh uh, leopards can be just as robust as jaguars" and jaguar fans doubling down against them.
|
|
|
Post by creature386 on Sept 1, 2024 17:03:43 GMT 5
I saw this on Twitter recently, and I was also shocked to see him still active. Emily Willoughby pointed out that some scientists have a certain hypothesis as their kind of "thing", and when they go their lives championing this hypothesis, only for it to be disproven, there tends to be some emotion behind their reactions. They are, after all, only human. But it's certainly not rational. Can't imagine the amount of copium Willoughby herself was huffing all these years with her race science nonsense. The same kind of copium creationists huff all the time, only with different branding. Replace: "Academia is full of godless atheists that just want to oppress Christians!" with: "Academia is full of PC SJWs who can't deal with facts that hurt their feelings!"
It's always the same with these people. They're excellent at spotting flaws in other people, but never in themselves.
|
|