|
Nominations and Campaigning for the 2024 RationalWiki Moderator Election are now open |
Talk:Dinosaur denialism
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
"They couldn't have possibly gotten that big!"[edit]
While not a bad idea for a section, there was a big problem with it as written that prevented it from being anything of quality — most dinosaurs were warm-blooded, not cold-blooded. The section seemed to suffer from the common misconception that dinosaurs were just giant reptiles, when in fact they were more closely related to birds than any living species of reptile (and even "reptile" has questionable utility as a category). Plutocow (talk) 15:59, 2 September 2022 (UTC)
- Was the oxygen different then (which might affect matters)?
- Mary Anning was fossil hunting before Queen Vic's time; to what extent are the legends of dragons and other strange beasts based on the discovery of fossils which are then given backstories based upon 'known beasties' and liberal doses of imagination (and are there any maps which say 'here be dragons'?). Anna Livia (talk) 18:18, 2 September 2022 (UTC)
- I mean isn't the section just repeating claims from dino deniers? That dino deniers are the ones making those assumptions about cold-blooded giant monster things? I think the arguments you're making should supplement the section, as it continues addressing claims from those dino deniers. The only major problem I have with the section is lack of sources. There's some prose and formatting issues too but it's easily fixed. --It's-a me,
LeftyGreenMario! 19:09, 3 September 2022 (UTC) - Anna Livia: The oxygen level is likely different too, but I'm not a super paleontologist, I just know the air levels could be whack. As for the mythology part, that's definitely addressed in the section through a reference. Check the section "just an invention by curio-hungry Victorians". --It's-a me, LeftyGreenMario! 19:14, 3 September 2022 (UTC)
- I mean isn't the section just repeating claims from dino deniers? That dino deniers are the ones making those assumptions about cold-blooded giant monster things? I think the arguments you're making should supplement the section, as it continues addressing claims from those dino deniers. The only major problem I have with the section is lack of sources. There's some prose and formatting issues too but it's easily fixed. --It's-a me,
Reductio ad absurdum[edit]
Guns and souped-up cars were not mentioned in the bible -therefore they should be denied.
Should there be a mention of the Crystal Palace Dinosaurs be included? Anna Livia (talk) 18:53, 18 November 2022 (UTC)
- Probably "historically" they're not mentioned in the Bible so therefore they don't exist. But again, Neptune isn't mentioned in the Bible, guess it doesn't exist either and telescopes and mathematical equations that account for some gravitational interactions with Uranus are just a sham. --It's-a me, LeftyGreenMario! 23:19, 16 March 2023 (UTC)