Note: This post was recovered from the Sh.org archive.
Username: Randolph C
Date: 2020-07-15 10:26:53
Reaction Score: 15
Hey Dielectric
It goes sideways for me starting during the bone wars, 100s of faked dinosaurs. It seems since then there is a ton of shady stuff with dinosaurs specifically. I can give a link or two if you are not aware of dino skeptic info. It is pretty hard to find unbiased info out, creationists and atheists have kinda set up a narrative to suit themselves. I am just some guy with honestly no dog in the fight and looking for empirical proof of a dinosaur. If i fail at finding any i am ok with that. I dont care if some are alive now or disappeared a long time ago, although knowing would be nice. So far in my looking I have ran into a lot of strange dino hoaxes and am trying to find myself proof any at all ever lived. After finding out some paleontologists and bone hunters wrote the book on fake science i am naturally skeptical. As far as how many naturally existing fossils there should be is also a good question. They find em every week now many just the size of a chicken. I have taken it upon myself to start becoming a archaeology hobbyist recently to prove to myself that ancient man made tools are really laying around all over the place. I can say for sure something made spear points and celts and things like that and left them all over. I am sure that whales, saber tooth tigers, mammoths, elephants and rhinos existed but dinosaurs are in my not sure list. Some dinosaurs are based on just a couple bones or a tooth and that is just not enough for me. I am sure I will be out looking for myself if I cant find a way to donate my time on a dig or something. I am willing to put some time and money into the cause, its fun proving things.
The guy has a point. But he is right for the wrong reason.
First of all he gets the timeline totally messed up:
First dinosaur fossil which is still identifiable and present in a collection described an figured: Robert Plot, 1677
First dinosaur officialy described and still considered valid:
Megalosaurus by William Buckland, 1824
Richard Owen coins the term Dinosauria: 1841
Charles Darwins theory of evolution (and there is a lot to say about whether it was "Darwin's theory" at all, basically he plagiarized everything from German professor Heinrich Georg Bronn of the University of Heidelberg): 1859
So it is not true that dinosaurs were "invented" after the Darwinian pardaigm was. Darwin does not even discuss dinosaurs anywhere in the first edition of his book.
You don't believe it? Here is the first edition as pdf
-1859 - On the origin of species by means of natural selection, or, The preservation of favoured races in the struggle for life / - Biodiversity Heritage Library
Please search inside for the term "dinosaur". You get exactly zero results. Search for
Iguanodon or
Megalosaurus, you get zero results. Search for ichthyosaur, zero results. search for
Plesiosaurus or
Pterodactylus, zero results. Search for "reptile", one result on p. 439, where he writes about embryology.
Verdict: dinosaurs originally had nothing to do with Darwin's theory of evolution. They did not play any role. That came a couple of years later, particularly through Thomas Henry Huxley. They did not play a major role for the original establishment of his theory, because very little was known at the time. All the "great disvoveries" were made later.
What is extremely fishy, however, is the convenient discovery of this
Compsognathus - Wikipedia animal in 1859
and this animal
Archaeopteryx - Wikipedia first described from a single feather by Hermann von Meyer in 1861, and just one year later from an almost complete skeleton by Sir Richard Owen in 1862!!!
These two critters were feeding Thomas Henry Huxley, Darwin's bulldog, with the best arrow he had in his quiver to "prove" Darwin's theory.
The Solnhofen limestones where both
Compsognathus and
Archaeopteryx come from have been mined for centuries. It is well possible that these two fossils had been long known before, but just made public at a convenient time!
I am no experts on the true or alleged mythology of Native Americans, but I know of the stories of the "thunder animals", by which they supposedly explained their occasional findings of huge bones. I don't know whether these are true, needs further research.
That so many of Cope's and Marsh's dinosaurs are no longer valid does not mean that they were not dinosaurs. Instead it was very often the case that these two nutheads described the same species under different names, because they wanted to outdo each other. Furthermore they very often gave several species names to the same dinosaur in order to produce more "new species" than their competitor. Third, they gave names to every little scrap of bone or tooth that they found.
Modern palaeontology considers most of these "dinosaur taxa" as nomina dubia, which means, yeah, they are probably some kind of sauropod, ceratopsian, theropod or whatever, but they are so lousy and incomplete that it is absolutely useless to try and identify them to species level. Both also indeed produced a bunch of species which later turned out not to be dinosaurs at all, but rather crocodiles or even turtles. So we have a mix of what this video indicates ("all of Cope's and Marsh's dinosurs which are no longer valid today were not dinosaurs") and what is actually the case
Leidy did not reconstruct the skeleton shown in the video from the few teeth he was sent by Hayden. The skeleton is not
Trachodon mirabilis, but
Hadrosaurus foulkii, which was found in New Jersey, and the type specimen of which does not preserve a skull or teeth, but mainly vertebrae, limb bones etc. It was only later recognized that the
Trachodon teeth and the
Hadrosaurus skeleton were from very similar animals.
A lot of dinosaurs were actually NOT discovered by scientists, at least not in the past when fossil digging was "free for all" and no "verboten bone" laws existed. Even according to offical lore. The most important site in Germany, Trossingen, where most of the only real complete large skeletons were excavated, was discovered by a school boy. The first feathered dinosaur from China was discovered by a local farmer. The first complete plesiosar and pterosaur skeletons from England were discovered by an uneducated girl named Mary Anning.
Sir Richard Owen never excavated a single fossil by himself in his entire life, he was a complete "armchair" palaeontologist and got his specimens from all around the British Empire largely collected by persons with no or little scientific education.
I could go on and on and debunk the video to smithereens, but I think you get the gist of it.
Nonetheless, as I said, the guy is right for the wrong reason. there is something EXTREMELY fishy going on with the official narrative. The question is not "did dinosaurs exist", of course they did. The question is not "were they invented for the sake of Darwin's evolution?" No they weren't, as they are not even MENTIONED by Darwin, as I have proven aboven!
The REAL question is: why was there no science of palaeontology (or geology, or archaeology, or modern chemistry... the list can go on and on) to speak of before the early 19th century?
And why were there allegedly no or only so very few discoveries?
This does indeed not compute, and this for me ties in with the idea of a civilization reset somewhere in the late 18th/early 19th century.
The real fabrication are not the dinosaurs, the real fabrication if the history of dinosaur/palaeontological research that we are made to believe.
We are all made to believe that all we know about dinosaurs, all these amazing discoveries, were just "accidentally" made about not even two centuries ago by (conveniently) a small bunch of Europeans and Americans (some of them of shady background, tied in to freemasonry and other dubious stuff) in the great, modern, civilized Industrial Revolution age, and that humanity was basically too dumb to recognize a fossil bone for thousands of years, despite leaving us, for example, the greatest architectural wonders of this earth which we are totally incapable of reproducing today? Yes, totally belivable to me.
Randolph C
Excellent answers and welcome to the forum. You are going to fit right in.
By accepting dinosaurs as real, I see you are calling into question the validity of evolution, plate tectonics, earth shape, earth history, uniformitarianism, physics and probably more. Basically everything that was introduced to science in the 19th century.
It is a great example of why the specialized sciences we have today does not work. Each field is stuck in their own silo and lacks the "expertise and authority" to question the validity of another vocations claims. We will frankly never find honest answers with the current scientific structure. If this by design or incompetence would be a judgement call.
Probably the most public example of this would be Robert Schoch and geologists arguing with Egyptologists over the age of the Sphinx like children. Both unwilling to budge and look at the big picture and accept to themselves that both fields are likely wrong. Being thoroughly invested in their belief system and unable to accept that it is probable the foundation was built with deception. Maybe you have some of your own examples in Paleontology?
I am a bit disheartened that there is at least a minority of Palentologists that are like minded thinkers as you, but will only admit it to each other after 5 or so beers. What percentage would you think feel this way, and do you have any anecdotes? I am interested in how this would compare to the number of critical thinkers we have in the general population, and how this minority are silenced into isolation by the beast system.
You have probably made the most valid point in this discussion so far, kudos to you.
The time of "universalists" in science, such as Goethe, von Humboldt or Leidy (who did much more than just describe a few dinosaurs, the best biography on him is called "The last man who knew everything" for a reason...) is long gone. We are absolutely programmed nowadays in our univeristies to specialize as soon as possible. It has become far, far worse since the time I studied. I sincerely would not want to study at a German/British/American university anymore, it is exactly like the programming and indoctrination at school, maybe even worse, and you are absolutely discouraged by the current system to think outside the box.
Robert Schoch I once met in person, he is a very likeable character, and I have followed these shenanigans you mention with great interest, Yes, I think these are necessary results of the way our entire science system has been set up by TPTB. Only specialists can also be experts. If you even try to look beyond your small field of expertise, you soon are discouraged and feel totally lost. That is why I think that it is absolutely necessary that more people with academic training make their input here. From as many fields as possible. We could ALL be wrong to a smaller or larger extent. we are actually MEANT to be, because only in this way it will never be possible to truly lift the veil.
Regarding my peers, I would say that less than 5% show any discontent with what they are fed on a daily basis. 95% of scientists are just NPCs who work perfectly within the system and will viciously attack anything that threatens it, because they feel personally attacked. I could give some anecdotes, but I do not want to compromise any of my colleagues.
In a way I think these thoughts you just have expressed have very similarily been worded almost a century ago by the great H. P. Lovecraft (from whose fiction my user name is derived, and whose stories, disguised as "pulp horror stories" contain most of the topics with which we are concerned here in a nutshell):
"The most merciful thing in the world, I think, is the inability of the human mind to correlate all its contents. We live on a placid island of ignorance in the midst of black seas of infinity, and it was not meant that we should voyage far. The sciences, each straining in its own direction, have hitherto harmed us little; but some day the piecing together of dissociated knowledge will open up such terrifying vistas of reality, and of our frightful position therein, that we shall either go mad from the revelation or flee from the deadly light into the peace and safety of a new dark age."
What he wrote in 1926 is exactly the situation in which humanity finds itself now, and is felt particularly strongly by those of us who have come here to discuss exactly this.
, no it's not that late actually, another hour to go until midnight, and I haven't slept before midnight in years. Thanks also for your PM. Your idea sounds intriguing. With people allegedly making biorobots out of frog stem-cells and having the chutzpah to announce that publicly, I don't even want to know what is actually going on behind the scenes (well, truly I want...).
