This is divisive nonsense. Stop doing it.
1 Like
I generally find creationist videos to be painful to watch. Perhaps someone else will be willing to endure it. And please don’t try to equate me with a creationist.
Now, if you have a point to make here, I would be willing to discuss it with you, but I won’t argue with a video.
1 Like
Who says you’d have any argument with it? If it’s only a false perspective coming from incredulity, why not answer it, or at least critique it? Or even expose yourself to it? And if not, why should a “creationist” have to be willing to expose their kids to non-creationist materials? Closed-mindedess is definitely the enemy, here.
1 Like
They don’t if they’re happy with their kids ending up as scientifically illiterate ditch diggers or fry cooks. Of course that’s not very fair to the kids.
Agreed. And I resent your attempt to imply that I’m closed-minded. Do you think I’m closed-minded about flat-earthism? What if I refused to watch a flat-earth video?
If a flat earther asked you to critique a video, why wouldn’t you?
That didn’t answer my question.
Nor did you mine.
I asked you first.
Actually, you didn’t. No worries; your loss.
Thanks @Guy_Coe for sharing! What a spectacular video. @John_Harshman, you should watch it. It’s just a beautiful display of a bird developing. Plus there are cameos by @pnelson and @Agauger…
1 Like
Yeah, I watched it with the sound off. Pretty cool. Do you think the sound would add anything?
2 Likes
Hahahaha… well, yes. I do. And I don’t believe you’ll be insulted by any of it at all…
1 Like
You have piqued my curiosity. I now wan to find out if you’re right.
2 Likes
And you mine. I was sincere. I think it’s just about awe, which we can all enjoy. Looking forward to hearing your thoughts.
1 Like
It has long been suspected that flow through lungs evolved in earlier dinosaurs before Aves branched off or early in Aves evolution:
1 Like
Is it a option this is because non-avian dinosaurs are just birds?1 They are non dinos.
it was a 19th century error of classification and fossil interpretation.
Only now is the likeness being demonstrated by better research.
yet , whopps, they then say our birds are just dinosaurs. Nope.
There was no dinosaurs(great lizards in latin) but just kinds of creatures. these theropod types were wrongly classified as lizards with wish bones.
now what KIND are the sauropods.
Creationists hypothesis should be first be favoured.
Oddly (very oddly), there are actually a few scientists who agree with Robert on this. The parallels with creationism are striking. They have their own derogatory epithets, BANDit (for Birds Are Not Dinosaurs) or MANIAC (Maniraptorans Are Not In Actuality Coelurosaurs). They have a prominent leader, Alan Feduccia, who publishes odd books on the subject. And, as with creationists and hominid fossils, they can’t agree on which dinosaurs are birds and which are really dinosaurs. Feduccia, famously, changed his opinion on the dividing line right in the middle of one of his books.
1 Like
Wrong way around. Birds are just dinosaurs, but not all dinosaurs are birds. In the same way, humans are mammals but not all mammals are human.
What error is that?
i never knew about this. i will seek out this guy.
So I don’t have priority??
my point would be the fossils, theropod dinos , are just from the flood 4500 years ago and are not dinos at all.
A misclassification from the 1800’s. they are JUST flightless ground birds in a spectrum of diversity.
ground birds were more common in many places above the k-t line.
Terror birds of S , and N America etc.
I’m saying there is no reptilian features to theropod dinos anymore then parrots. Long tail or not.
It would be odd for a non creationist to be saying this but you said he makes odd books.
It would be a purpose to end the dinosaur division and just make kinds and go from there.