Posted on 04/08/2015 6:41:36 PM PDT by grundle
How apropos - “Jurassic Park” is airing on AMC right now and will run again tomorrow at 3:00 PM.
ping...
"One of these things is not like the other, one of these things just doesn't belong..."
Brontosaurus deniers are losing. What about the settled science?
Bringing back the Brontosaurus classification fits what agenda?
Read my post again.
Like time on a clock, the Scientific American is destined to get some facts correctly at least a couple of times per day.
Very glad to read this as I grew up with Brontosaurus as my favorite dinosaur back in the ‘50s and was very disappointed to learn some dozen years ago or so that they were dropping that name in favor of the boring name Apatosaurus.
“Brontosaurus deniers are losing. What about the settled science?”
There is no such thing as settled science. If it is science, it can never be settled. Real science can only demonstrate improved and improving observations of phenomena and conjecture with proposed future observations leading to more reliable observations.
In the case of the Brontosaurus, the acquisition of additional evidence made it possible to observe previously unobserved characteristics in the fossil evidence. Consequently, it is now possible to observe enough differences to differentiate the Brontosaurus from the Aptosaurus in their biological classifications. There is nothing Earth shattering about discovering previously unseen fossils. The only thing remarkable about such a find is longstanding popularity of the depictions of the Brontosaurus in the media for more than a century.
Jurassic Park is frightening in the dark
All the dinosaurs are running wild
Someone shut the fence off in the rain
I admit it’s kinda eerie
But this proves my chaos theory
And I don’t think I’ll be coming back again
Oh no
-Weird Al
“Is that important and why not stress that aspect?”
We frequently hold the Scientific American up to criticism, because it is so frequently wrong about so many things it publishes in these days under its latest publishers. Even so, correct information must in honesty be acknowledged no matter what the source of publication may be. From a scientific point of view the revision of the biological classification is nothing remarkable at all, given the very low numbers of partial fossil specimens used to formulate the earlier classifications. As more and more sets of fossils can be retrieved and in better conditions it becomes possible to observe more similarities and/or more differences in those individual animals. Such observations then make it possible to formulate more accurate and reliable classifications of the animal groups who share the same characteristics. Everyone needs to look farther than the Scientific American, however, to verify the observations of the evidence and evaluate any conclusions made about such observations.
Not enough information. I have to know what the libs think about this so I can take the opposite position.
“Brontosaurus deniers are losing. What about the settled science?”
“”There is no such thing as settled science. If it is science, it can never be settled.””
Yes.
But, the is such a thing as sarcasm.
“But, the is such a thing as sarcasm.”
You may conjecture there “is such a thing as sarcasm,” but you have presented no such observational evidence supporting a hypothesis of its existence, much less a theory of its existence.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.