SH Archive Ask Pro | - All you ever wanted to know about dinosaurs but never dared to ask

SH.org OP Username
Randolph C
SH.org OP Date
2020-07-12 22:59:41
SH.org Reaction Score
100
SH.org Reply Count
100
Note: This post was recovered from the Sh.org archive.
Username: Randolph C
Date: 2020-07-13 21:17:30
Reaction Score: 10
Click to expand...
Hello, thanks for the questions

ad a. The problem here is the varying depictions of the dragon, was it a four-legged creature with wings or a two-legged one? Or did it not have wings at all? Just look at the varying depictions here, allegedly all of St. George and his dragon Saint George and the Dragon - Wikipedia So I seriously can not answer your question if you don't formulate it more precisely, i.e. which depiction of the dragon do you regard as the most truthful?

ad b. Depends about what fossils we talk to a large extent. That land and sea have not been as today is obvious. I can literally leave my house, go to the next field that has been recently ploughed and pick up fossil sea shells from the Jurassic sea, whenever the Jurassic period actually was. So no question about that. Inversion of the magnetic poles is documented by paleomagnetic data. Paleoclimate is very difficult to handle, as we just do not know to what kind of climate ancient creatures were truly adapted. But it is certainly interesting to find fossil leaves of trees that just look like those in Central Europe or the Mediterranean today at the foot of the Lonyearbyen glacier in Svalbard (a place that I visited), so I am all in for dramatic changes in climate as well.

Regarding ancient civilization centers: there is a dramatic lack of particularly dinosaur and other reptile fossils in Mesopotamia and Iran, although strata of the right age are present there. There are, however, beautiful dinosaur fossils from Egypt, none from Israel (except some footprints), Lebanon, Syria. There is nothing in the Indus valley, but a lot in other parts of India. China is just full of the critters. Nothing in Greece, nothing in Turkey. Talking about conventional civilization centers. So a clear pattern does not emerge, but their almost total absence in the lands of the Sumerians, Babylonians, Assyrians, Persians, Hethitans, Israelites etc. is interesting.

ad c: As fossils are per definitionem older than 10.000 years, they can not be created today
;) Just joking here. Most fossils are from marine environments anyway (about 99% of them), and shallow marine environments that is. They have probably never formed in soil. Soil contains humidic acids which dissovle bones, teeth and shells over time, so literally nothing remains. We have practically no fossil record whatsoever in Amazonia! We do not know anything about how those giant rainforests and their thriving wildlife came to be, because we have zero fossil finds. Nada, nothing. There are only few believable ways how fossils of land-living creatures can be preserved. Catastrophic events, like tsunamis, major floods, desert stroms come to mind. A lot of terrestrial sediments around the world (which are rare) are almost completely devoid of fossils. Just hundreds of meters of barren desert sandstone with nothing in there. I assume that the same processes which produced fossils in the past still work today. I assume it, i can not prove it. Uniforitarianism is a postulate of geology (and basically all other natural sciences). It can not be proven, as long as we do not have a time machine.

ad d: Most of what is exhibited in museums, particularly in the United States, is junk nowadays. They replaced many of the original skeletons with replicas. There are several reasons for that: 1. Most of the skeletons were largely replicas in the first place, with maybe some original bones in them, because there are actually very few complete dinosaur skeletons. 2. Replicas created with modern techniques just look exactly like the original, we have advanced far beyond the clumsy plaster replicas of the last century. 3. there is a big market for original dinosaur fossils and they pay fantasy prizes for them, so specimens are likely to be stolen. 4. replicas, particularly if they are made out of resin or some other lightweight stuff, are super-easy to mount. Original bones are extremely heavy and you have to be a genius engineer to mount them. It took two decades to mount the skeleton of Giraffatitan brancai in the Berlin Museum, only to dismantle it shortly afterwards because of the second world war. This is one of the few original giant dinosaur skeletons anywhere in the world. It is, however, also a composite of several individuals and the skull is a replica. The original skull, the only ever found of this dinosaur, is stored away, I have investigated it several times.

Giraffatitan_brancai_Naturkundemuseum_Berlin.jpg
That is a fair assumption. Dating in geology is a trainwreck actually. It is a system of beliefs and half-assed and error-ridden methods the results of which are heavily trimmed before publication. That book sounds highly interesting and seems to tie in very well with some of my own thoughts on the matter, is it on archive.org or do you have another link to it? I would be much obliged. Sorry I misread the author's name as "Day" instead of "Daly", otherwise the connection to R. A. Daly, who was indeed an eminent geologist, would probably have come to my own mind.
 
Note: This post was recovered from the Sh.org archive.
Username: Huaqero
Date: 2020-07-13 22:10:58
Reaction Score: 1
Click to expand...
Thank you very much for the thorough answers, absolutely covered!
 
Note: This post was recovered from the Sh.org archive.
Username: Dielectric
Date: 2020-07-13 23:44:29
Reaction Score: 5
Click to expand...
Hi Randolph C. I Just want to say welcome and thanks for putting yourself out front. There's an obvious need for a lot more of this kind of interaction in all areas. Now of course you probably realized even before joining that there is a profusion of dinosaur bigots whom just seem to roundly hate the idea of dinosaurs altogether. So I know it can seem that you've stepped in to a virtual reality pandemic of dinosaur bone deniers.

I want you to know that I will stand by you. Say anything, I don't care, I'll still claim you're right and they are all wrong. I don't want you to feel alone or unwelcome. Just realize that these are a demanding group of special dino deniers. Challenging and likeable but trying at times. Thanks for being here.
I'm really looking forward to reading your input.

And to the rest of you, well just be patient, I don't want Randolph blasted like I was on my first posts regarding dinosaurs, and which were so bad I immediately blocked 2 people.
 
Note: This post was recovered from the Sh.org archive.
Username: Red Bird
Date: 2020-07-14 00:12:32
Reaction Score: 5
Click to expand...
Thanks for taking questions!
We spent many vacations fossil hunting in Montana and didnt find dinosaur fossils, unfortunately (although I wouldn’t say here anyway : ) Because it has become more and more illegal to take ‘rocks’ from public lands, as you say. We’ve had people from state lands visit for other reasons and won’t invite them in because we have them, and Indian articles, displayed- many from decades ago (grandparents etc).
The first dinosaur’museum’ I visitEd was in Ekalaka MT at an old doctor’s house who had just been collecting Over the Years.

I have a few questions:
- Do paleontologists take myth and folklore, and old news articles into to account these days? I’m thinking of the Written accounts, in the 1700’s, of villages In England with accounts of Different weird predatorS, etc. Especially.
If not, why not? Just goes against the age theories@? Do they know and read alt history information, besides you? Surely the younger ones... Things will probably break loose soon, unless they obey flu rules, of course.

— your speciality is dinosaurs. However, do you have an educated opinion on human giants?
Great interest on this one.

-You mentioned resets, catastrophes. Do you have any theories or like some other theories more than others? Can you suggest authors?

thought of another one — Is there a big data base where paleontologists log their finds, or research, etc. Not just journals.
I’ve been thinking surely there is some such thing in this day.
 
Note: This post was recovered from the Sh.org archive.
Username: Dielectric
Date: 2020-07-14 00:54:22
Reaction Score: 5
Click to expand...
Thanks Redbird for noticing what Randolph brought up in this issue of outlawing access.

I just want to say that this is some sneaky shit the PTB have been implementing for quite some time, and it's something to be hip to which is very broad based, such as public lands being put off limits, vast stretches of oceans, islands, forests, and even the formerly international waters are all at risk of being made the domain of the few under the guise of protecting nature from humans.

The hegelian dialectic of today's world is proven in a sick choreographed narrative told by corporate crime news, using staged, or accidental, or intentionally created outrages which allow a pretext for political action to create or amend a laws, and really all of these are aimed at creating a world where only a few have real knowledge and access to otherwise forbidden nature.
 
Note: This post was recovered from the Sh.org archive.
Username: Willielad
Date: 2020-07-14 03:30:28
Reaction Score: 1
Click to expand...
Hi @Randolf C , Its great to see your responses here, thanks so much. I read through the thread and I dont think anyone asked this, Have you personally witnessed or participated in removing large bone shaped fossils from the ground? At what stages if any have you witnessed personally a dig of a large dinosaur? Thanks for your time.
 
Note: This post was recovered from the Sh.org archive.
Username: Randolph C
Date: 2020-07-14 08:22:53
Reaction Score: 12
Click to expand...
Thanks Dielectric for the kind reply

Yes, I really had the feeling I had to step in, because of things that we just have mentioned. Dinosaur denialism is obviously something that is in the best interest of TPTB, divide et impera. And it makes it easier for the establishment to ridicule us all in the eyes of the "normies" and it takes away our investigative energy from the things that really matter: what is "evolution" actually and how did it happen if it happened? And what about the chronology of earth's and human history that we are made to believe? And what about the fossils (like giant hominids) and archeological artifacts (like the Ica burial stones) that science actively denies or tries to ridicule? What about the cryptids?

And in this context you have to see the "fossil protection laws", the outhright ostracization of private fossil collectors and fossil dealers worldwide, the "no access" policy concerning practically all revelant fossil sites around the globe, all "in our best interest".

Decades ago it was easy to just go out and look for yourself. Nowadays you are faced with ridiculous laws, like, e.g., those in Greece and Turkey where you can be heavily punished if you only try to export a jar of beach sand as a souvenir, because it could contain some "archaeological treasure".

Then there is the tendency to remove original bones from the exhibits and replace them with replicas, many of them so good that you can't tell what is real and what is not. A striking example from personal experience: I once closely examined a Tyrannosaurus rex skeleton that was just being prepared, many of the bones were still in the matrix (and they had, as usual, mixed in remains of several other critters, which I had to sort out).

I investigated each and every bone and tooth in detail, still have hundreds of photos of the thing in its original state and during various states of preparation. The skeleton was at best 40% complete (which actually makes it one of the most complete ones known). When I finally saw it mounted it was, of course, 100% complete. That is not unusual, but the shocking fact was that all the bones had been recolored and probably smeared over with some resin or whatever as well, so as to adapt their color and texture to those of the fake parts, which were literally seamlessly attached to the original bones. At least that is what I was told, and I cannot verify it, because I did not supervise the mounting of the skeleton, only part of the preparation. In fact I cannot even tell for my life whether the mount I have seen contained a single real bone or whether it was all a work of art, so well was it done.

If you go to localities like Dinosaur Provincial Park in Alberta, one of the major sites in North America, you are allowed to "take part" in excavations, but the scientific staff of this highly protected area is always watching you like big brother himself, you are not allowed to take the smallest bone fragment home as a souvenir, and you are not allowed to dig out anything of real worth, just scratching the surface. I can deeply understand people who come to the conclusion that under such circumstances the scientists may just have put some fake bones in the ground for people, particularly kids, to "excavate". Indeed, such "fake skeleton excavations" have become one of the geratest hits of many natural history museums and travelling dinosaur shows.

If you want to see real bones as a non-professional, you usually have to go to great lengths to get access to the vaults of the musems, where most of them are stored nowadays. If you get access, that is. Even as a professional you will have difficulties to get access to some particularly iconic fossils, like the original Archaeopteryx or Homo neanderthalensis.

Instead people nowadays know dinosaurs mostly because of Jurassic Park or some totally over-the-top BBC or National Geographic documentaries which are full of CGI most of which has no or little basis in reality. The list could go on and on.

Add some absolutely understandable skepticism about Darwinian evolution and the correctness of the alleged age of these fossils (which I, as a professional, absolutely share, although I would never admit to it to my peers, except the few whom I know think along the same lines secretly), and you end up with a dinosaur denier.

It is actually an almost logical conclusion, because all the above cited facts point into the direction that scientists have to hide something, and are probably just a bunch of fraudsters who feed the gullible public with fantastic tales on a daily basis. The simple fact that many palaeontologists I know are really bad scientists who are in it all for their 15 minutes of fame and will tell the most outrageous bullshit based on a few bits and pieces of bone they had scratched out in some godforsaken place just to keep their funding and to get their papers published in high-rank journals does not make things better.

Therefore I absolutely feel that dinosaur deniers have a point, and as the professionals refuse even to talk to these "tinfoil hatters", the deniers will always feel that they are on the right track and that they are just lied to. And I can not blame them. We are lied to about such an enormous amount of things, why should dinosaurs be an exception? I frankly tell you, without my first hand experience I would probably be in the same boat with the deniers.
 
Note: This post was recovered from the Sh.org archive.
Username: BStankman
Date: 2020-07-14 09:16:22
Reaction Score: 12
Click to expand...
How would you explain these four paradoxes of physics?
Were dinosaurs magical? Are they actually marine creatures? Has earth's gravity changed? Did the bones somehow grow after the death of the creature? Are our Newtonian physics actually another deception?

  1. Inadequate bone strength to support the largest dinosaurs
  2. Inadequate muscle strength to lift and move the largest dinosaurs
  3. Unacceptable high blood pressure and stress on the heart of the tallest dinosaurs
  4. Aerodynamics principles showing that the pterosaurs should not have flown
 
Note: This post was recovered from the Sh.org archive.
Username: Randolph C
Date: 2020-07-14 10:12:47
Reaction Score: 6
Click to expand...
Hi there

Probably one of the most important questions. I have been actively excavating fossil reptiles, including dinosaur material, for 20 years. Most of my dinosaur-related publications (about 90%) are based on material that I or my team have personally excavated. I never found a complete one, though ;) or better: I did, but was not allowed to excavate it with my team (it was in China, and they were over-protective). It was later excavated by an American-Chinese expedtion (of course). I have personally excavated pterosaurs, ichthyosaurs, mammal-like reptiles, fossil amphibians and the like in different parts of the world (Germany, Africa, China, North America), including several virtually complete skeletons and numerus complete skulls. These were not dinosaurs, however, but other fossil reptiles.
Thanks for your input and your questions. Not all of Montana is dinosaur hunting ground, and evenif you havethe right strata, they are usually concentrated in particular areas, many of them protected, so you will have little chance to find something worthwhile yourself.

Regarding your questions:

- No, palaeontoloists nowadays totally ignore these accounts, which are outright dismissed as "unscientific" and "unreliable". Early palaeontologists tended to investigate them more closely. The last outstanding and comprehensive professional work which collected a lot of folklore, myths and legends concerning fossils was done by the famous Austrian palaeontologist Othenio Abel in 1939
"Vorzeitliche Tierreste im deutschen Mythus, Brauchtum und Volksglauben" meaning "Ancient animal remains in German myths, regional customs and folklore", where he collected a huge amount of otherwise largely forgotten myths and legends, unfortunately only for the German speaking countries. It is, however, a treasure-trove of information. I have not found it as a pdf online, but i have the original.
I know several guys in the field who are heavily interested in alternative history, cryptozoology and the like. They tend to admit it at the bottom of the 6th beer. Officially nobody wants to be connected with it, except for "debunking" and ridicule, because otherwise you would be at severe risk to lose your scientific reputation, funding and very probably your job.

- Human giants: absolutely possible. There is evidence not only from what we call "myths" and "legends" all over the world, but also numerous accounts of such things being fround particularly throughout the 19th century. Although I consider it highly likely that some of these remains were simply mistaken for human remains and in fact represented dinosaurs of ancient mammals, the accounts are too manifold, and in some cases so detailed and obviously written by people who would be able to tell a human (or humanoid) bone from a reptile or elephant, that I consider them as legit. If there is any kind of fossil that will be swept under the rug as soon as it is excavated, it will be something like this.

- Resets and catastrophes are most probably related to rapid changes in sea-level, massive flooding events, volcanic activity, rapid climate change, pole shifts. A lot of cataclysms that have left their geological record seem to be related to one or a combination of these. I am not sure what to make of the asteroid theory regarding the extinction of the dinosaurs. If asteroids are a thing, we should have probably been constantly bombarded with them throughout earth history. The Iridium anomaly and special minerals that are found at the K/T boundary can also be explained by extreme volcanic activity. Evidence for that is found particularly on the Indian subcontinent, with the huge Deccan trap basalts which covered most of India at that time.

Deccan Traps - Wikipedia

Now conventional science of course try to link them to the supposed asteroid impact in Mexico. There is also evidence for rapid climate change, probably in connection to the volcanic catastrophe. I do not necessarily need to postulate an "extraterrestrial" deus ex machina for the K/T extinction event.

Databases you can find here for example: The Paleobiology Database
 
Note: This post was recovered from the Sh.org archive.
Username: Seven823One
Date: 2020-07-14 12:00:30
Reaction Score: 1
Click to expand...
Hi Randolph C.

Thank you for answering our questions. I have a question related to dinosaurs.
Tyrannosaurus Rex was a scavenger animal. Due to its weight and dimensions it would not have been able to move quickly or sustain any prolonged bursts of speed. Yet, the public sees the CGI animated Rexs in the movies running at 30 MPH and this is how one gets its impressions, memories and thus, education.

Looks great on screen and helps to sell more tickets :(
Isn't that a task of science to correct those aberrations?
 
Note: This post was recovered from the Sh.org archive.
Username: Divine Wind
Date: 2020-07-14 12:04:07
Reaction Score: 3
Click to expand...
A few more questions if you don't mind Randolph, I have also added some info from the Khmer ruins thread.


1. What do Paleontologists think about Polystrate fossils (not standard description), and the fact that there are so many trees, in so many continents that sit vertically, and often through several strata layers? Have you ever seen one?

polystrate-trees-david-rives-2014-tennessee.jpgpolystrate%20fossil.jpg

polystrate fossil.jpg

What is your personal view on this answer for these fossils in wiki, does any of this make sense?

Polystrate fossil - Wikipedia
"In geology, such fossils are referred to as either upright fossil trunks, upright fossil trees, or T0 assemblages. According to mainstream models of sedimentary environments, they are formed by rare to infrequent brief episodes of rapid sedimentation separated by long periods of either slow deposition, nondeposition, or a combination of both.[2][4][5]

Upright fossils typically occur in layers associated with an actively subsiding coastal plain or rift basin, or with the accumulation of volcanic material around a periodically erupting stratovolcano. Typically, this period of rapid sedimentation was followed by a period of time - decades to thousands of years long - characterized by very slow or no accumulation of sediments. In river deltas and other coastal-plain settings, rapid sedimentation is often the end result of a brief period of accelerated subsidence of an area of coastal plain relative to sea level caused by salt tectonics, global sea-level rise, growth faulting, continental margin collapse, or some combination of these factors.[4] For example, geologists such as John W. F. Waldron and Michael C. Rygel have argued that the rapid burial and preservation of polystrate fossil trees found at Joggins, Nova Scotia directly result from rapid subsidence, caused by salt tectonics within an already subsiding pull-apart basin, and from the resulting rapid accumulation of sediments.[6][7] The specific layers containing polystrate fossils occupy only a very limited fraction of the total area of any of these basins.[6][8]"


2. What is the opinion on Whale fossils being found so high up in mountains all over the world? ie over 5,000 ft or more in Chile etc. Is the official story with uplifts a satisfactory answer? What is the highest elevation a sea dinosaur has ever been found?
Whale Fossils in Mountains: How Did Million-Year-Old Bones End Up There?

3. What do you think about the Plesiosaur photos on the other thread? Do they both look authentic?

Plesiosaur photos
This is recent, 2018 Georgia - it is a deliberately false trail or is it in fact true?
Mysterious sea creature resembling Loch Ness Monster washes up on Georgia beach


Is it trying to discredit much earlier photos like this - 1925 California, or is just confirming it.
The Sea Monster of Santa Cruz | Genesis Park
Pliosaur - Plesiosaur Sightings | Vengeance from the Deep - Pliosaur

Counter Claim
Here is the 'evidence' telling us that the Plesiosaur is actually a Beaked Whale
Lies, Damned Lies, and Cryptozoology counter claim
+ EL Wallace doesn't exist. Has he been wiped off the internet as I can't find him.

Response to counter claim
Notice this article is stating that this would be a very rare Beaked whale if it is one, as the skeleton is in a Californian museum, and has never been clearly identified as 'anything'
TrueAuthority.com - Cryptozoology - Moore's Beach Monster detailed investigation : no blowhole, teeth not as whale etc
Dinosaurs and the Bible

4. You have personally seen Pterosaurs, does the creature here from apparently from a photo from the American Civil War look authentic? If it does, is it possible that people back then could make such real looking dinosaurs? Note a similar photo was staged for an American TV series called 'freaky things' or similar, but this photo is meant to be original.
Modern Pterosaur in an Old Photograph

Civil-War-Pterosaur-shot-canoe-like.jpg
 
Note: This post was recovered from the Sh.org archive.
Username: Randolph C
Date: 2020-07-14 12:13:16
Reaction Score: 9
Click to expand...
Sorry, I have overlooked that question which you added. Burlingame Canyon is absolutely legit. Massive changes of the Earth's surface can happen almost overnight. But you cannot compare it to a structure like the Grand Canyon, not only because of size but also because of rock composition. as far as I am aware the rocks at Burlingame are soft silts and claystones (Pleistocene loess, said to being formed form dust-sized sedimentary particles after the ice age). Grand Canyon you have massive sandstones and the like. If you dont believe how different these are take a hammer and chisel, get some samples and check it out yourself ;)

However, the entire chronology problem comes in here again. In the town where I live, we have a massive canyon, going through rock hard Jurassic limestones. The "river" at the bottom of the canyon is just a tiny, tiny little brooke, it even dries up in recent years during summer occasionally. Conventional wisdom tells me, that the canyon was produced as a result of the last ice age. That means 10.000 years. In this case I am not even sure if 10.000 years is enough time to produce such a massive change just by running water. There were no real giant glaciers in my area, and there is practically no evidence of ice age sediments. So something is off here, directly in front of my nose. It is equally possible that even larger structures than the Burlingame Canyon formed in a very short time, particularly during cataclysmic events, depending on the event and the strata/rocks which are involved.

As far as I am aware there are not many fossils in these strata, except for some land snails.

I include my reply on the polystrate fossils: yes, I am of course familiar with them and was actually involved in the scientific publication of a particularly drastic example. The conventional explanation given by Wikipedia for the world-famous Joggins trees sounds like a cop-out to me. The Joggins case indicates indeed extremely fast accumulation of a huge amount of sediment during a cataclysmic event, much faster than acknowledged by text-book knowledge. There are traces of these catacylsms everwhere. 19th century geologists and palaeontologists knew about those, it was standard theory for Georges Cuvier (the founder of palaeontology as a science) and everybody after him, until Darwin came along. Food for thought.

How do you know that Tyrannosaurus rex was a scavenger? Can I borrow your time machine? :cool: The only thing about its diet that we can infer with a lot of confidence is that it was a carnivore, because its steak-knife teeth would hardly have allowed it to process plant material.

There is allegedly a bitten hip bone of a Triceratops with a T.rex tooth still sticking inside and indications of re-healing of the bone, which means that the Triceratops must have been alive when it was bitten. I am not sure about that, I have not seen the specimen and I am not aware that you can tell different genera of ceratopsians apart from a single hip-bone, so I would take that information with a grain of salt as well. It's probably bed-time-story paleontology, as I call it. But certainly we do not know if T. rex was a hunter or a scavenger. To me it is most probable that as most large carnivores today (bears, lions, tigers, hyaenas etc.), he was an opportunistic combination of both, scavenging on carcasses whenever he could and taking out injured or sick or very young animals. To catch injured or sick animals you don't have to run 30 mph.

That lifestyle does not guaranatee good sells on the cinema box office or for the next fancy all-colorful dino coffee-table-book though. You are absolutley right. Dinosaurs were probably much less spectacular than hollywood and some scientists who want to sell their books and see their faces on TV make them.
ad 1: who says that the physical conditions on this planet have not changed since these huge dinosaurs lived? Uniformitarianism says so, which is just an unproven axiom of natural science in general.

ad 2: see ad 1.

ad 3: see ad1

ad4: see ad1

We assume that the continents were arranged differently, that the world's climate was totally different, that the contents of oxygen, carbon dioxide and other components of the earth's atmosphere have drastically changed, that the sea level was much higher, that we had a lot more of volcanic activity, even that a year was not a year in the Devonian and the earth's rotation has actually changed and so on ad infinitum. Nobody however would care to acknowledge that all this may be a result/related to far more fundamental changes, even including such aspects as the earth's gravity. Probably Newtonian physics are not an deception, but rather a very good approximation to some aspects of the CURRENT reality of this realm, which must not necessarily mean that they can not as well change over time. If we accept the idea of intelligent design for "evolution", we also have to accept it for physics. You either go the entire way or not. It is child's play to prove that the dinosaurs actually existed, it is highly difficult to prove that "the laws of physics" have not changed in this realm. Because laws of physics leave no fossil record.

Regarding bones growing after becoming fossilized (or during that process), yes there are cases of that where fossil bones have swollen to twice the original size or more during the fossilization process. I have investigated numerous examples from, e.g., Germany and South America, including dinosaurs the size of which was probably overestimated by 30% or more due to these processes, which basically involve the bones being broken into tiny pieces due to pressure/shearing forces/suncracking before burial and minerals growing in the spaces inbetween to such an extent, that the size of the fossil is dramatically increased due to secondary mineral growth INSIDE the bone. You only see it really when you make thin-sections of the bones and examine them microscopically. This has not been done for most dinosaurs.

Regarding dinosaurs as marine animals: no, because if they were marine, they would have fins, not legs.
 
Note: This post was recovered from the Sh.org archive.
Username: Divine Wind
Date: 2020-07-14 13:43:01
Reaction Score: 2
Click to expand...
The Importance of Plot’s Natural History Of Stafford-Shire 1686

This article here may interest you. It relates to Reverend Robert Plot who is generally regarded as detailing the first ever dragon bones. The site is a masonic webpage, and they are stating he wasn't a freemason. he first found bones in the 1670's.

It's interesting that he was working for a clergyman, the Bishop of Oxford, and he seems to have negative views of the 'craft' ie

"I have reason to suspect are much worse than these, perhaps as bad as this History of the craft itself which there is nothing I ever met with more false or incoherent"


Rocky Road: Robert Plot
Robert Plot
Plenty of dinosaur enthusiasts know that the first formal description of what would later be identified as a dinosaur fossil came in 1824: William Buckland's Notice on the Megalosaurus. Fewer people realize, however, that the first known illustration of what was probably a dinosaur bone — maybe also a Megalosaurus — was published a century and a half earlier. The man responsible for the first dinosaur bone depiction was an English naturalist named Robert Plot.
 
Note: This post was recovered from the Sh.org archive.
Username: Randolph C
Date: 2020-07-14 14:17:50
Reaction Score: 2
Click to expand...
Thank you, I am familiar with some of Robert Plot's work but did not know about his views about the freemasons. He actually described and figured the distal end of a Megalosaurus femur as fossil human testicles "Scrotum humanum". This is actually truly the first scientific illustration and description of a dinosaur bone that is acknowledged by mainstream palaeontology. He seems to have been an interesting character, worth digging into a bit more.

I see you have added more questions to one of your previous posts.

ad 2: the standard explanation is a míxture of changing sea levels (absolutely believable) and tectonics. How they work exactly depends on whether the theory of plate tectonics is actually true. There is no question that our continents were arranged differently in the past, the eastern coast of South America does not fit to the western coast of Africa like two pieces of a jigsaw puzzle only by chance. There are alterantive theories to plate tectonics though, all dismissed nowadays by mainstream science, like the geosynclinal theory which was developed by German scientists like Hans Stille and still taught at German universities only about a decade or so before I studied. It was still in the textbooks as an alternative model, and many of my old professors were still skeptical about plate tectonics at that time. Nonetheless this theory also involves dramatic changes of the earth's surface. Expanding (or contracting) earth do as well. Mountains are not for eternity. Nothing is. Marine fossil reptiles have been found even in the Himalayas.

ad 3: I do not know what this "sea monster" is. The "head and neck" truly look plesiosaur-like, the tail fin looks much more like a variety of modern sharks, although it does not fit exactly with any species that I know. We do not know, however, about the shape of plesiosaur tail fins except for one single specimen found in Germany in the late 19th century. They could be very variable among different species and sure could have changed a lot in 65 million years anyway, so not an argument. I only see one fin in the picture, where are the other 3 it should have, both as a plesiosaur or a shark? The single fin looks much how I would imagine a plesiosaur flipper might have looked like. intriguing beast, I have read somewhere they took DNA samples. I wonder if we ever see the results. It is well possible that some of the other sightings you cite describe large unknown marine reptiles of a kind. I would not be surprised if some of them still were around. Would not be a bigger surprise than the coelacanth or the New Zealand Tuatara.

The Moore's beach monster is not a Berardius whale, if the article you cite describes the anatomy correctly. It is not a whale at all, but it also has no similarity to a plesiosaur. It is a cryptid of unkown affinites. I have to dig whether I find anything concerning this wallace guy. the Bulletins of the Natural History Society of British Columbia should mention him at some point.

ad4: The creature on that photo has the general appearance and size of the pterosaur Pteranodon ingens. Not sure if it is toothed, but there are similar toothed genera, such as Ludodactylus known. This would be my best bet if the photo was legit. It appears staged to me. The analysis you refer argues that it is legit. Any further source on that one? Who was supposed to have taken it and when? We need a photography expert and a military expert here, who could probably say something more about the soldiers and their uniforms. To me it looks like Civil War era or not too long afterwards.
 
Note: This post was recovered from the Sh.org archive.
Username: Red Bird
Date: 2020-07-14 14:33:52
Reaction Score: 1
Click to expand...
Most new Mainline thought seems to be European, like the missing ‘dark/middle ages’, and not translated into English. I see great careers for some entrepreneurial student or professional In a lot of this, as people love this sort of thing And many are waking up to scientism, and scholarly politics, in every area. Some are already there Like Hancock. Here’s one: a firm that hires out professional archeologists for private digs.
Of course I am an unashamed, stereotypical American entrepreneur, ka Ching

However I understand legislation was purportedly to prevent artifacts disappearing into private collections of rich people and the Vatican etc. And saved for ‘everyone’. Commeercial enterprises can be corrupt too. No easy Answer.
.
Do you think there was a Noah’s flood?
 
Note: This post was recovered from the Sh.org archive.
Username: Randolph C
Date: 2020-07-14 14:50:57
Reaction Score: 1
Click to expand...
Thanks for your input. Yes, I do think there was a Noah's flood. And it was not the only one. There have been numerous similar events in Earth's history.
I did some research, but man was it difficult to find at least a hint. An E. A. Wallace is listed in this document of the Natural History Society of British Columbia from 1913 (on p. 13 as an ordinary member). It is well possible that he was gaining a higher rank within more than a decade. So the man appears to be possibly legit, probably E. L. Wallace in the article you cited is a typo.

Revised constitution and list of members. - Biodiversity Heritage Library
 
Note: This post was recovered from the Sh.org archive.
Username: Dielectric
Date: 2020-07-14 20:16:14
Reaction Score: 6
Click to expand...
Hmm....all quite interesting.
Now Randolph, your responses have given rise to a few interesting ideas, and mind you this isn't really something you have address professionally, rather I'm just mentioning these ideas as food for thought/discussion more than anything else, so here's some observations I see.

To begin with, a real investigator looking at this discussion must recognize that logic say's there's a reason for the creation of these Verboten Dino Bone Collector Law's, because considering that these have actually been snuck in on a global scale, and without any real questioning as to the validity of their value, which considering the impact is apparently actually negative, and these laws therefore are actually retarding advancement in discovery and knowledge, then what one has to see is there are significant aspects to the whole of this which presents a case of manufactured excuses to create verboten bone laws.

Considering the aforementioned we must conclude that it is somehow of extreme importance to prevent questioning and discovery by the wide eyed innocent, and so much so that these verboten bones must figure into the official narrative in significant and perhaps ground shaking ways.

So I see that in reality what's been done is not being done to help science or to advance human understanding, which is of course a crime against humanity in it's own right. We are justified in questioning the narrative, but more importantly we really need to make sense of these pesudo~legal obstructions and to see them for what they honestly appear to be, which is criminal conspiracy to deprive humanity from physical facts and the theoretical ideas which naturally come from discovery.

So now we arrive at a real reason to root round in this quagmire of the verboten bones of long dead creatures. What the hell could possibly be so earth shaking in dinosaur bones to require a global effort to prevent their discovery by otherwise well meaning quasi-skilled dino hunters? I mean seriously this is just crazy if you think about the scale of it and all the under ground scheming that's been going on.

So getting on with it then, many people don't really realize that plate tectonics is a relatively new theory. For example it was considered a revolutionary theory when I was a child and was still being debated to a certain degree, while today most people have now been sufficiently brainwashed to accept that this is how earth's geography came to be, but of course there's always that guy who just does not follow instructions and so now we have the Epand'0 Planet Model trying to crack the petrified shell that the pre~existing dino narrative had created.

The whole of the above raises in my mind some highly speculative thoughts about the nature of nature. For example, are dinosaur and other critters connected to physics in ways we may not have previously considered?

If the Earth was in fact 1/4 the size it is now at one time, and if it were significantly closer to the Star our Sun, and if then the rotations were thereby also faster, would this then not somehow be involved in evolution? Perhaps significantly altering the speed of evolutionary changes in the same way a planetary expansion phase would also drastically alter the face of the planet.

This critter in the video appears to me to be a failed attempt at genetic hacking. It was found just outside of another verboten off limits public lands, a marine park with inland marshes ideal for say experimenting with genetics involving sea creatures. So although we have been told that hacking dino bones is not possible, the manifest truth seems otherwise, one only has to do a bit of digging to see how the national lands have been put off limits to exploration and then add the inconvenient dead escapee's to put two and two together: Something is fishy. I am just stupid enough to bet that we have covert operations going on which are involved in using recovered dna, or other un-acknowledged means, to obtain or replicate more likely, partial genetic codes from ancient critters and which are now being used in combination with living critters in an attempt to develop hybrids whose origins seem manifestly obvious.
 
Note: This post was recovered from the Sh.org archive.
Username: zatrix
Date: 2020-07-14 20:27:34
Reaction Score: 2
Click to expand...
Randolph, welcome and thank you!

I am not an expert and am not trying to nit pick, but genuinely curious.

You said "original bones" in the quote above, but I am assuming that is a typo, right?
All of the dinosaur "bones" on record are mineral or rock (fossil) and not bone (calcium, etc), is that correct?
Specifically trying to clarify that we do not have any actual organic matter that represents the bone(s) of the dinosaur as they existed.
 
Note: This post was recovered from the Sh.org archive.
Username: Randolph C
Date: 2020-07-14 20:33:43
Reaction Score: 7
Click to expand...
Thank you Dielectric for the input.

I have not much to say about your thought on the "verboten bones" (I like that term a lot and will use it from now on :cool:), these are almost my thoughts exactly. And it is of course not only dinosaur bones, it is a lot of other areas as well, of course affecting archaeology even more than palaeontology (about which fewer people care), making more and more stretches of land practically inaccessible to the public and the like.

Dinosaurs are tied in to a lot of very fundamental questions, and that is why they are an important topic to this board. They are relevant for our perception of the entire history of this realm, including some of its very fundamental aspects, as we have hinted at in several posts above, from the size and possibly even shape of the Earth to its inner workings to even the question whether there may have been changes in some fundamental physical properties over time. Of course they are also a central cornerstone of Darwinian evolution, one of the five pillars of modern scientism - and please, I do not want to have true natural sciences pursued by such people as Cuvier, von Humboldt or Goethe confused with scientism. The first is just that, science, which does not claim to be anything more, born out of a genuine interest for the contents of this realm, and also a heartfelt affection for them. The latter is just a secular surrogate-religion, disguised as science. And it soon turns to outright Orwellian totalitarianism as soon as you question its prophets. I consider myself as a natural scientist of the old school and feel much closer to Cuvier or Goethe in my thoughts than to almost any of my peers nowadays. I simply ask questions to nature, and I try to get answers within a framework dictated by actual observation and logical thinking, not by some doctrine that is imposed on me.

Considering physics: as said above several times. i do not think we can exclude the possibility that even "the laws of physics" are not as constant as we are made to believe. of course even the slightest change would affect tempo and mode of evolution (whatever that is in the end) fundamentally.

Considering the genetics aspect: the critter which has now been posted several times is, as I said, indeed an oddity that I can not place anywhere among known vertebrate organisms, but with features that remind of some extinct reptiles. Maybe the entire "Jurassic Park" franchise is nothing else but predictive programming. If dinosaurs are still around today in some remote areas of the world, or at least were in historical times, and there is many a crytozoological yarn which supports this hypothesis profoundly so as to make it almost a certainty, together with archaeological evidence, eywitness accounts over many centuries etc., then there is more than a slight possibility that we will be granted with astounding hybrid creatures in the future.

Thanks for your question. By original bone I mean original fossils in contrast to forgeries, plaster/resin casts, pseudofossils and the like.

But it may be surprising that most fossil bones still preserve their original mineral composition, apatite. Only the plentiful cavities of the bones are usually filled with sediment/other minerals. If that was not the case I would speak of impressions, casts, or whatever. These exist as well. Sometimes also the original bone substance has dissolved and been replaced by an astounding variety of minerals, from pyrite (fool's gold) to precious opal. In most cases, however, the original chemical composition is largely intact. At least if we assume that ancient bones were comparable to the bones of all extant vertebates, from fish to Homo sapiens, which are all exclusively of apatite composition with not a single exception. Apatite is a very hard and stable mineral. It is usually not altered much or replaced.

So simply: bones are, in a very real sense, already "petrified" (i.e. composed of a very hard and stable mineral) before they become fossil. The organic parts (not mineralized parts) of the bones, all the living bone cells, small blood vessels and so on, have of course gone. So I should precisely say: the original mineral components of the bones.
 
Note: This post was recovered from the Sh.org archive.
Username: Dielectric
Date: 2020-07-14 20:48:50
Reaction Score: 1
Click to expand...
Thanks, as per my pm communication, I don't think they are around, or if they are, it's not by nature that we have what appears to me to be quasi-critters suddenly are showing up. Now it must be late where you're at. Maybe you should go to bed?

I have to gather some information together and then present it. You are in a unique position to potentially exploit that information. Depends on how many crackpots you've managed to associate with that have some real lab skills I'd imagine. So anyway's maybe some fun concepts to consider when I get it all collected up.
 
Tips
Tips
Please respect our Posting Rules.

Similar threads

Tomkat
The Now; an unauthorized auxiliary to The End
Replies
12
Views
2K
Oracle
Oracle
Breizh
Probable controlled opposition Mark Steele interviewed about 5G by 2 BBC disinformation/conspiracy specialists.
Replies
9
Views
2K
Breizh
Breizh
Oracle
  • Sticky
A How To Write a Thread Guide
Replies
0
Views
150
Oracle
Oracle
Akanah
Destruction through terraforming
Replies
0
Views
823
Akanah
Akanah
Frostychud
Castration, Circumcision, and Transgenderism from Antiquity to Today
2
Replies
34
Views
7K
velholobo
V
Back
Top