Replies

Windflier: "Wassamatta - you don’t like science heretics?"

Hey, I love fantasy & sci-fi as much as the next guy -- Disney World, Harry Potter, Lord of the Rings, Guardians of the Galaxy, all wonderful stuff, not a word of it true.

So what you're talking here is not "science heresy", it's not science period, it's make-believe fantasy.

Totally, nothing wrong with make-believe, just so long as you don't pretend it's real science.

So, you've read something suggesting these super-sized sauropods were "to big to walk on land"?
That's fine, now I'm suggesting a real science book (post #33) which will set your mind at ease on this subject.

The Cajun: "I remember, way back when in school, where we were taught dinosaurs like the Brachiosaurus were the biggest land dinosaurs that could exist and they also had to live in swampy areas where water would help support their tremendous weight."

Sure, and nothing today suggests those beasts did not live near rivers & lakes, but it also seems that some of them travelled overland, perhaps migrating in herds, and if you wish to learn the whole debate, then I suggest the book above.

The “too big” meme has been pushed by the internet’s own Ted Holden (a.k.a. Medved, and a number of other FR nicks, banned one by one, other than his current one) and suffers from starting with a conclusion and cherry picking (very little) data in support of it.

The idea of the largest dinos having to stand in water to support their overgrown bulk went out with the “bees can’t fly” meme.

Heresy in the sciences is a good thing, because — like Ted Holden — scientists pay lip service to testability, logic, etc, but many need to spend a couple of bucks and get bumperstickers that read, “my professor said, I believe it, and that settles it”.

If you read what I said, I was saying that we/I was taught way back (1960s) a bunch of "stuff", in the sciences, that has proved to be wrong or partially wrong.
That, I think, is kind of normal as knowledge progresses.

Just look what has been learned about T-Rex compared to what was thought and taught about it 50 years ago.
There are still debates as to if it was the apex predator or a scavenger or a combination of both and how fast it could really run and if the thing had feathers.

That being said, I like anomalies or the prospect of an anomaly that buck current scientific orthodoxy.
Most of the time an adequate explanation is given or "cobbled together" that will suffice and satisfy questions............But sometimes not :)

...what you're talking here is not "science heresy", it's not science period, it's make-believe fantasy.

Not really. We're merely asking a legitimate question --- how could animals so large exist on the surface of a planet with Earth's level of gravity?

Apparently, just asking the question provokes chuckles and accusations of believing in fantasy. Obviously, it's because "the science is settled", so anyone questioning the consensus is either uninformed, uneducated, or unintelligent. That's the sort of rigid, dogmatic mindset, that has allowed the global warming hoax to go on for as long as it has.

I'm not even saying that the answer to that question hasn't been found. What I'm saying is, that, advancement in our understanding of the natural world ceases when the door is slammed shut on inquiry and exploration.

I personally think that's a door that needs to be removed from its hinges and thrown on the junk pile.