the larynx fossil is extremely rare, and the
evolution of this structure remains largely unknown. Here we report
the fossil larynx found in non-avian dinosaurs from ankylosaur
Pinacosaurus grangeri.
An ankylosaur larynx provides insights for bird-like vocalization in non-avian dinosaurs
On February 16, Pandora wrote:
An ankylosaur larynx provides insights for bird-like vocalization in non-avian dinosaurs
WRONG thinking.
Everywhere some nutter says "Bird-like" in reference to a dinosaur,
you know you're staring at a member of the Lucky Sperm Club. This
is someone who was rich and/or well connected enough to pursue
a career path with ZERO economic value. So you're never getting the
best & brightest, you're getting the luckiest and/or best connected.
Need proof?
Whenever you see "Bird-like" you know you're dealing with an idiot
because it would in fact have to be "Dinosaur-like."
It can't be "Bird-like" vocalizations in dinosaurs, it's "Dinosaur-like" vocalizations in birds.
...a parent does not inherit their blue eyes from their child, you
need to explain to these people.
It makes a difference. It makes a big difference. It's not a little
mistake. It's a mode of thinking, a perception. And it's wrong.
-- --
https://jtem.tumblr.com/post/709529851983544320
JTEM wrote:
Whenever you see "Bird-like" you know you're dealing with an idiot
because it would in fact have to be "Dinosaur-like."
She says tomahto, you say tomato, but
It can't be "Bird-like" vocalizations in dinosaurs, it's "Dinosaur-like" vocalizations in birds.
Phylogenetically speaking, the near-consensus on bird ancestry
says you are right, but "dinosaur-like" is a huge unknown
except where it is NOT bird-like, as in Parasaurolophus.
OTOH bird-like is what almost everyone on earth has lots
of knowledge of.
One of the main uses of language is to convey information.
Peter Nyikos wrote:
JTEM wrote:
Whenever you see "Bird-like" you know you're dealing with an idiot because it would in fact have to be "Dinosaur-like."
She says tomahto, you say tomato, but
It makes a difference. You're pretending this is science, remember?
Accuracy matters. Getting things completely ass-backwards is WRONG,
it's not just a stupid mistake. It exposes an inability to perceive things as they really are.
...a parent does not inherit their blue eyes from their child, you
need to explain to these people.
You know what "Circular Reasoning" is, no doubt, but do you have any
why it's bad?
Seriously. The study of dinosaurs is the study of evolution, and this
nimrod doesn't grasp evolution! The have it backwards!
It can't be "Bird-like" vocalizations in dinosaurs, it's "Dinosaur-like" vocalizations in birds.
Phylogenetically speaking, the near-consensus on bird ancestry
says you are right,
but "dinosaur-like" is a huge unknown
except where it is NOT bird-like, as in Parasaurolophus.
How you frame the data matters a great deal. You can't unravel the
mysteries of the past by seeing, and thinking, very wrong.
Yes, this does suffer parallels with human evolution. I've argued
online for near 20 years AGAINST the insane "Humans are apes"
and "Humans evolved from apes" line of thinking, BECAUSE it
locked generations into WRONG answers where the LCA with
Chimps was a Chimp or at least extremely Chimp like.
You can
argue that "Humans are apes" isn't technically wrong and it doesn't
matter: It framed everything wrong, it caused generations of
students to believe wrong answers! But in the case of "Bird-like"
behaviors or traits in dinosaurs IT IS WRONG! It's not just polluting thought, models -- understanding -- but it is absolutely wrong.
OTOH bird-like is what almost everyone on earth has lots"Science is a process. People are idiots."
of knowledge of.
--JTEM
One of the main uses of language is to convey information.One would hope that there'd be room for accuracy there... maybe
even two might hope.
Accuracy matters. Getting things completely ass-backwards is WRONG,
it's not just a stupid mistake. It exposes an inability to perceive things as they really are.
Too bad you are describing yourself
You know what "Circular Reasoning" is, no doubt, but do you have any
why it's bad?
You are talking to a mathematician with years of study of logic and
Seriously. The study of dinosaurs is the study of evolution, and this nimrod doesn't grasp evolution! The have it backwards!
Harshman should love you, he's
Yes, this does suffer parallels with human evolution. I've argued
online for near 20 years AGAINST the insane "Humans are apes"
and "Humans evolved from apes" line of thinking, BECAUSE it
locked generations into WRONG answers where the LCA with
Chimps was a Chimp or at least extremely Chimp like.
You are now
You are a fine one to lecture about accuracy.
Peter Nyikos wrote:
Accuracy matters. Getting things completely ass-backwards is WRONG,
it's not just a stupid mistake. It exposes an inability to perceive things
as they really are.
Too bad you are describing yourselfNo. This isn't kindergarten. I was describing people who call Dinosaur-like traits in birds, "Bird like traits in dinosaurs" Which, I apparently need to point out, is completely ass backwards.
You know what "Circular Reasoning" is, no doubt, but do you have any
why it's bad?
You are talking to a mathematician with years of study of logic andOkay, so you have no clue.
Seriously. The study of dinosaurs is the study of evolution, and this nimrod doesn't grasp evolution! The have it backwards!
Harshman should love you, he'sGreat. Nothing has changed. The study of dinosaurs IS the study of evolution, and they got it all WRONG! And not just a little wrong, they
got it spectacularly wrong.
...they have dinosaurs evolving FROM birds!
Yes, this does suffer parallels with human evolution. I've argued
online for near 20 years AGAINST the insane "Humans are apes"
and "Humans evolved from apes" line of thinking, BECAUSE it
locked generations into WRONG answers where the LCA with
Chimps was a Chimp or at least extremely Chimp like.
You are nowIt's an example of STUPID thinking leads people down the wrong path.
You are a fine one to lecture about accuracy.I guess so! Considering that, given all your alters you still haven't figured out that the dinosaurs came FIRST, and any traits they had
which were shared with the later birds would have to be DINOSAUR
LIKE TRAITS in birds...
-- --
https://jtem.tumblr.com/post/711397709548027904
I was going to refer him to this thread, where JTEM came through with some good points
Here, however, JTEM has
Sysop: | Keyop |
---|---|
Location: | Huddersfield, West Yorkshire, UK |
Users: | 302 |
Nodes: | 16 (2 / 14) |
Uptime: | 99:10:12 |
Calls: | 6,767 |
Calls today: | 5 |
Files: | 12,295 |
Messages: | 5,376,405 |
Posted today: | 1 |