Some overgrown chickens could have been pretty scary though. Predatory land birds are pretty efficient hunters if Great Blue Herons are any indicator and now imagine that but taller than a person. Not a single chance you could outrun or fight that off.
Terror Birds are pathetic. Closest thing to raptors in the cenozoic but they fell for the flight meme and so lacked many of the traits that made utahraptor so terrifying. No long clawed hand to grapple, no tail for balance, smaller, and toothed snouts are better at ripping through flesh than beaks. No wonder they got displaced by mammals as the top apex predator.
Because christcucks all have the same 3 copypasta copes >evolution is just a theory >if evolution is real why do we still have monkeys? >how can there be a Big Bang if there was nothing there to make the bang?
I haven't read the bible or the qaran or whatever the frick the muslims use.
Can anyone tell me what makes the big bang and evolution incompatible with religion?
because christians believe God created the world 6000 years ago and created humans 5 days later.
2 years ago
Anonymous
Seething Christcuck detected
Because christcucks all have the same 3 copypasta copes >evolution is just a theory >if evolution is real why do we still have monkeys? >how can there be a Big Bang if there was nothing there to make the bang?
2 years ago
Anonymous
>denies reality >lefunnyhat.gif, heh, that’ll teach em
Bible says God created the Earth himself. So that contradicts TBB. Bible says God created humans in his own image, starting with Adam and Eve. This goes against evolution
2 years ago
Anonymous
>God creates big bang >Ensures space materials go perfectly to form Earth >Animals evolving >Adam and Eve are a beta test in the Garden of Eden (a different area) >Test shows human independence >God likes this and decides to keep them >Guides certain animals until they evolve to his image >Days for God could be any length in our time, he is beyond our comprehension
They work together
2 years ago
Anonymous
Why would God need to do testing if he is all knowing?
2 years ago
Anonymous
Some divine reason
You could say something similar about Satan betraying him
2 years ago
Anonymous
>some divine reason
Lol. That’s the same cope as “God works in mysterious ways” Christians use when people point out contradicts
2 years ago
Anonymous
Some divine reason
You could say something similar about Satan betraying him
because Zeus didn’t believe him and wouldn’t take his word for it
2 years ago
Anonymous
The problem here is that you are essentially reinterpreting the meaning of the bible and also relegating much of it's content as "just a metaphor." This is what most modern religious people do, but the people who get butthurt about dinosaurs are deep into biblical literalism and therefore everything in the bible has to have literally happened as it was written.
2 years ago
Anonymous
Much of the old testament was meant to be metaphorical and taking a literal interpretation of everything is a very degenerated modern idea.
2 years ago
Anonymous
>Much of the old testament was meant to be metaphorical
This is a very stale cope that is extremely disingenuous. Yes you will find Christian philosophers and theologians pondering certain parts of the bible to be metaphor but these scholars made up basically nothing of the actual population of the religion. The reality is that 99.9% of Christians in the past were just regular people who couldn't even read latin and were just read these stories by their local priest. At no point would the priest ever break from reading and go "oh by the way this next part is just made up bullshit but just go with it ;)" Stories like the creation of man were taught as literal fact.
2 years ago
Anonymous
The early christians who would have known the bible in greek and known the Hebrew traditions and sayings that make up the old testament very much would have understood that a large part of the old testament was metaphorical.
2 years ago
Anonymous
>very much would have understood that a large part of the old testament was metaphorical.
They absolutely didn't and you are only doing this whole historical revisionism thing to try and make the mountain God of the Gaps mental gymnastics religious people have to do now look natural as if this was always the case, which it absolutely was not. Also mainstream naturalist views were still hundreds of years away from the time you are talking about.
2 years ago
Anonymous
*mountain of God of the Gaps
2 years ago
Anonymous
They would have understood the 7 days and 7 nights to be a metaphor for an abstract but not very long amount of time, as a hebrew figure of speech. Just as the phrase 40 days and 40 nights in the story of Moses leading the Israelites out of Egypt represented a very long abstract amount of time.
2 years ago
Anonymous
>They would have understood the 7 days and 7 nights to be a metaphor for an abstract but not very long amount of time
No they didn't and more importantly they had absolutely zero reason to reinterpret the bible in this way. They didn't have to contend with carbon dating, fossil records, or the cosmic background radiation, etc etc that contradicted the bible. There was no necessity to try and interpret these things as metaphor and thus they didn't. To them god, made Earth in 7 days because god can do what ever he wants the holy texts are his infallible testament to these things.
2 years ago
Anonymous
they would have interpreted it that way not because they had any reason to do so but because that was a feature of the hebrew language. just like someone today writing something took forever would be understood as not actually taking forever, just a long but abstract amount of time
2 years ago
Anonymous
Conflating 7 day creation with the phrase 40 days and 40 nights is a completely false equivalency. There is no phrasal vagueness of 7 days. The bible goes into extensive detail of each individual day and leaves no room for doubt that the events are supposed to have happened in literally 7 days. This is just extremely transparent revisionism that you are engaging in.
2 years ago
Anonymous
>if thy right hand offend thee, cut it off, and cast it from thee >People read this and started cutting off people's hands >This means that was what was intended.
2 years ago
Anonymous
>God tells messenger angel story >Messenger tells prophet >Prophet tells scribe >Scribe scribes >Gets translated into Latin >Pope comes and has it retranslated, cramming some of his ideology into it >Gets translated again into English by another person with their own ideologies >Gets modernized as language has changed, modern ideas crammed in, already filled with interpretations >Some gay spreads his interpretation of those interpretations as if it is the word of God
Modern Bibles are far from God's word anyway
Christianity should just be between a believer and God
2 years ago
Anonymous
And the Christians that use abstraction all the time for biblical events end up doing so to such an extent that the bible could be reshaped to mean literally anything
2 years ago
Anonymous
Maybe it could be the sign following a 2700 years old book is a stupid idea ? If you need spirituality in your life, make up your own, you don't need the words of ancient israelites they wrote because Babylon was about to rape their culture.
2 years ago
Anonymous
You don’t need to “make it up”. You can still find spirituality from others whose ideals of morality, metaphysics etc are well written about. It just requires a good amount of research and introspection
2 years ago
Anonymous
The actual problem here is you thinking that shit like god created the heaven and earth in seven days was ever supposed to be taken literally.
2 years ago
Anonymous
God would realistically create everything instantaneously. If not, then he’s not all powerful since time is literally not a factor to him. So if the 7 days thing is a metaphor (which I believe it is), then what exactly does it represent?
2 years ago
Anonymous
> God > Realistically
I don't think you really understand what spirituality is about.
2 years ago
Anonymous
>So if the 7 days thing is a metaphor (which I believe it is), then what exactly does it represent?
A gestation time, like a natural birth. Things that just pop into existence seems unnatural, why do you think so many people hates the Big Bang theory ?
A week's work, to mimic your average guy life. Don't forget religion goals is to appease the human need for answers so they can get to work and be a useful tool in society.
2 years ago
Anonymous
The Bible was written for an audience of people who lived thousands of years ago. God is a smart fella and knows you need to appropriately contextualize your words for an audience. If you laid out everything in terms of modern basedence the Roman Empire plebeians that took up Christianity's mantle would have no fricking idea what it was on about, thought it was fricking weird, and rejected it. If Christ were to appear today, I believe he would almost certainly speak in modern terms, again for the benefit of his intended audience
Evolution isn't a theory, it's an observed phenomenon. Evolution via natural selection is a theory that seeks to explain said phenomenon.
That’s like saying “gravity is just a theory”. Science is based on theories, just not the type of theories you’re used to hearing about
Gravity is not a theory. It is an observed phenomenon. There are several theories of gravity attenpting to explain that phenomenon, such as m theory, loop quantum gravity, Newtonian gravity, your several MoND theories, and so on. Dozens.
Fricking sciencelets.
>evolution is an observed phenomenon.
No. It's a well-established theory but it can't actually be observed with mortal eyes, only inferred by indirect evidence. Animals have had hardly any morphological change since mankind created the written word.
This is entirely wrong, if a strong selection factor suddenly appears in an environment, such as a long-term shift in weather patterns or natural disaster, or even human influences, this can cause the behavior and morphology of a species to change rapidly in just a few generations. This is even ignoring the phenomenon of artificial selection, whereby breeding certain individuals of a species we can curate certain traits we see in them. If natural selection didn't exist artificial selection would not be possible, and that happens on a very human time scale.
I think you're conflating adaptation with evolution. Creating a new dog breed isn't evolution, because it's still a dog cross-breedable with all other dogs.
I shouldn't have used "morphological" but what I was trying to say is that it is (currently) impossible to observe the emergence of a new species. That happens on a timescale of hundreds of thousands of years, rendering direct observation impossible. Evidence can be inferred through fossil records and extrapolating observation of short-term adaptation but it's the height of scientific arrogance to say we *know* anything about evolution other than that it is most likely real.
2 years ago
Anonymous
Evolution is changes in allele frequency in populations over time and it is an observed phenomenon. We have observed this many times. Look at something like Richard Lenski's experiments if you want something experimental instead of observational. You are talking about speciation, which has also been observed but less frequently due to the difficulties you touched on.
And theories are pretty secure in their factuality. I blame colloquialisms hyperbolizing theories to also mean hypothesis or just basic ass "I thinks".
>And theories are pretty secure in their factuality.
That depends on the theory. Phlogiston theory is about as far from factual as empiricism can get. The various gravitational theories are contradictory and so most are far from factual. Relativity and quantum theory are both widely accepted and yet contradictory, so we know at least one has some strong element of non-factual. A theory is just a bundle of assumptions that attempts to describe observed phenomena. You can have good theories or bad theories but both are still theories.
There were plenty of large dromaeosaurids, just pick one.
looks like a bird
Dinosaurs don't have feathers. I don't give a frick what theories you've heard, none of them make any sense. What possible evolutionary advantage could feathers be on a fricking dinosaur that weighs way too much to ever fly? And don't point at Emus and Ostriches today, they evolved FROM birds. Dinosaurs evolved INTO birds. Emus and Ostriches have feathers because they're a remnant of their previous incarnations, but dinosaurs came before birds. There's no way they had feathers.
>And don't point at Emus and Ostriches today, they evolved FROM birds. Dinosaurs evolved INTO birds. Emus and Ostriches have feathers because they're a remnant of their previous incarnations
and feathers are ancestral to Dinosauria
brainlet
>No, I'm trying to tell you that feathers aren't a trait unique to birds.
Well you'd be wrong, moron. Post all the gay cartoons you want, it won't change anything.
2 years ago
Anonymous
You can keep baiting as long as you want, you'll always be a massive moron. It won't change anything.
2 years ago
Anonymous
At least I don't use infographics to justify a theory about something from 100 million years ago that is utterly moronic to anyone that spends 5 seconds thinking about it.
>Quit thinking that means ALL dinosaurs had feathers.
I'll quit thinking that when morons stop putting fricking feathers on any creature larger than a person just to be contrarian morons pretending they know something that never happened.
People did but they were morons that thought they found dragons, cyclops, griffins and other wacky shit, plus it's not like the fossils are just laying around most of the time you have to dig to find them.
Feathers are cool and closer to what dinos probably looked like irl. I bet there were idiots complaining in 1995 that the t-rex wasn't a cumbersome godzilla-like creature dragging its tail on the ground.
Feathers are cool and closer to what dinos probably looked like irl. I bet there were idiots complaining in 1995 that the t-rex wasn't a cumbersome godzilla-like creature dragging its tail on the ground.
something I like to point out that's basically being Jurassic Park's advocate, but: in the movie they are not dinosaurs, they are just (genetic) chimeras, so that's a point for them being the way they are
What doesn't make sense to me is why people keep demanding them in Jurassic Park when that was never the point to begin with?
The scaled designs always allowed for more creativity a la mad scientist experiments and using real reptiles and their characteristics as a point of reference to make them seem more alien but natural.
theyre even bigger in the new ones. also i noticed the size of the dinosaurs constantly change throughout the movie, usually depending on the plot, the mosasaurus was gigantic in the beginning and then they shrunk it down for the last scene
They were Utahraptors. Hell, if you really want to get pedantic about it, they were genetic abominations designed to 'look' like dinos (due to the missing dna). Not that it matters really. because try and enrage a chicken. I dare you. See how those little shits can frick you up.
For the last time.
There are no dinosaurs in Jurassic Park.
There are reconstructions of dinosaurs made with fragments of dino DNA plus DNA from other species, with a trial-and-error strategy.
Those are what Dr. Wu thought a Raptor would look like. Maybe it even intentionally selected for bigger ones because Hammond asked.
The sad or rather truly upsetting part is that THERE IS a dinosaur that looks like the movie Velociraptor, it just has a different name and I forgot which. Why don't scienbreasts just swap the name so that the cool one can be called Velociraptor? But no they keep things as is because then they can go into an autistic sperg every now and then to correct us real people when we want to enjoy our large raptors. But I will not comply. I will keep on saying Velociraptors are big and cool. I hate science
I was hoping in the last movie for them to say she had dino dna and was begining to change suddenly having Species Reboot Electric Boogaloo or some shit
Next movie she'll get herself pregnant
Think about it, she can will it at any time...
Added bonus is that she doesn't have periods because of the differing reproduction methods
Couldn't we just send a camera out far enough into space, look back at earth with an advanced telescope, and observe dinosaurs because of light time shit?
Its only possible if we had the ability to travel faster than the speed of light and if you can move at ftl you can just violate causality and go back in time and hang out with the dinos in person.
It would be possible if we found some convoluted set of gravitational lenses that redirected the light toward some point closer to us, essentially being giant space mirrors, but obviously that's absurdly farfetched even if physically imaginable.
>movie based on a book made on the 80s >with theories based on the knowledge back then >knowledge based on discoveries back then >discoveries based on technology back then >people surprised it isn't up to date
>mogs every mammal land predator in existence >climbs up your back and claws and then bite the shit out of you >hunted giant iguanadonts
If the theory that Utahraptors hunted in packs is true, they would be the apex predator if transported in the modern world.
Jurassic park embellished the size of the raptor for the film. What they didnt know is that utahraptor, an even bigger one than they made up, would be discovered later
Its extremely gay that the later movies dont use it, but then again, the later movies are extremely gay
He was really stretching with that lumping. I think he just went with Velociraptor because it sounded cooler and he was honestly a bit of a hack writer.
Real question. How do christgays explain dinosaur bones? Doesn't that mean that dinosaurs lived side by side with humans if god created everything in 7 days? How do they cope with this? Or do they say Noah and the ark wiped out dinosaurs? Even though god commanded Noah to grab two of every animal? lol?
>Catholics are the ones who act like evolution is incompatible with God
Listen here, homosexual. I basically grew up in the Catholic church. At no point did any of the priests, monsignor or nuns deny evolution or encourage anyone else in the church to do so. The only "Christians" I have met that have also been creationist / anti-evolution lunatics are Southern Baptists and Mormons.
Nobody here has ever met anyone that unironically believes in creationism. You may as well ask what a flat earther thinks when they fly high enough to see the curve of the earth. Who the frick cares what morons that are 0.0001% of the population thinks?
it does not matter
if dinosaurs are ever in movies again, they're going to look like Jurassic Park dinosaurs, because no one is going to greenlight chicken dinosaurs
dinosaurs were "discovered" by two prominent freemasons in order to push more anti religious sentiment and to push the works of charles darwin >[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Henry_Huxley](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Henry_Huxley) Aldous Huxleys grandfather, found a lot of dinosaur bones
was pro evolution, anti religion >his rival [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Owen](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Owen) another dinosaur guy
these two guys really knew were to dig to find the bones, everywhere they went, dinosaur bones popped up
really makes me think
We;ve been over this.
The species in the book was identified as Velociraptor antirrhopus. This was because when Crichton wrote the book it looked like Deinonychus antirrhopus was going to be reclassified as a species of Velociraptor like it's close relative Velociraptor mongoliensis. That never happened but the name stuck because Crichton and Spielberg thought the name was cooler.
The dinosaurs in the book and by extension the film are Deinonychus. Deal with it.
>That never happened but the name stuck because Crichton and Spielberg thought the name was cooler.
It objectively is, and you know what it is before you even see it.
There should be a part of ethics dedicated to stuff being cool. Like if you discover something, and it's not cool, just fricking keep it to yourself. >uhm well actually some people think the reality of dinosaurs being pathetic feathery cucks is very cool
nah
How did they even live so long?
It is like a shittier version of a narwhal yet lived for millions of years.
Not doubting it or anything, just a genuine question
Reminder: the current scientific understanding of T. rex has souped it up so much that it effortlessly mogs the T. rex and Spinosaurus from JP1-3. The ONLY thing the JP T. rex has over it is roadrunner level speed.
The T-Rex is mostly powerful in the movies because it only attacks a few panicking people at a time. A lot of its real life abilities would make it too powerful in the movies, plus, it may not have some of those because of being a hybrid and living in isolation.
Its an Achillobator
looks like a bird
Something about the feathers makes it even creepier. I don't know why.
If you're scared of chickens. This is feathergay cope
nah but I’m scared of cassowaries
Some overgrown chickens could have been pretty scary though. Predatory land birds are pretty efficient hunters if Great Blue Herons are any indicator and now imagine that but taller than a person. Not a single chance you could outrun or fight that off.
>kelenken
No way that shit was that big
Terror Birds are pathetic. Closest thing to raptors in the cenozoic but they fell for the flight meme and so lacked many of the traits that made utahraptor so terrifying. No long clawed hand to grapple, no tail for balance, smaller, and toothed snouts are better at ripping through flesh than beaks. No wonder they got displaced by mammals as the top apex predator.
>titanis actually had two little claws instead of just usless wings
we have to go back
https://google.com/search?q=hoatzin+chick+claws
Yeah but those homosexuals lose the claws once they became adults
Yeah they're so dangerous that they got completely exterminated by mammals when the Americas came together, lel
Frickin hate big birds. Birds in general too. Spooky fricks. Glad they died and turned tiny for the most part.
Kelenken looks like a fricking nightmare
>Titanis tiptoeing to the fridge at 3am
gastornis was a herbivore unrelated to terror birds lmao
>creepy, isn’t it
I can't frick that.
FLY PELICAN
birds ARE dinosaurs
>a killer bator
Jurassicbros...
Evolution is just a theory.
That there is no God is a fact
That’s like saying “gravity is just a theory”. Science is based on theories, just not the type of theories you’re used to hearing about
why do people say "theory" when they mean "hypothesis"
I say hypertheory to confuse people
Because christcucks all have the same 3 copypasta copes
>evolution is just a theory
>if evolution is real why do we still have monkeys?
>how can there be a Big Bang if there was nothing there to make the bang?
I haven't read the bible or the qaran or whatever the frick the muslims use.
Can anyone tell me what makes the big bang and evolution incompatible with religion?
because christians believe God created the world 6000 years ago and created humans 5 days later.
>denies reality
>lefunnyhat.gif, heh, that’ll teach em
Prove that dinosaurs aren't imaginary.
Bible says God created the Earth himself. So that contradicts TBB. Bible says God created humans in his own image, starting with Adam and Eve. This goes against evolution
>God creates big bang
>Ensures space materials go perfectly to form Earth
>Animals evolving
>Adam and Eve are a beta test in the Garden of Eden (a different area)
>Test shows human independence
>God likes this and decides to keep them
>Guides certain animals until they evolve to his image
>Days for God could be any length in our time, he is beyond our comprehension
They work together
Why would God need to do testing if he is all knowing?
Some divine reason
You could say something similar about Satan betraying him
>some divine reason
Lol. That’s the same cope as “God works in mysterious ways” Christians use when people point out contradicts
because Zeus didn’t believe him and wouldn’t take his word for it
The problem here is that you are essentially reinterpreting the meaning of the bible and also relegating much of it's content as "just a metaphor." This is what most modern religious people do, but the people who get butthurt about dinosaurs are deep into biblical literalism and therefore everything in the bible has to have literally happened as it was written.
Much of the old testament was meant to be metaphorical and taking a literal interpretation of everything is a very degenerated modern idea.
>Much of the old testament was meant to be metaphorical
This is a very stale cope that is extremely disingenuous. Yes you will find Christian philosophers and theologians pondering certain parts of the bible to be metaphor but these scholars made up basically nothing of the actual population of the religion. The reality is that 99.9% of Christians in the past were just regular people who couldn't even read latin and were just read these stories by their local priest. At no point would the priest ever break from reading and go "oh by the way this next part is just made up bullshit but just go with it ;)" Stories like the creation of man were taught as literal fact.
The early christians who would have known the bible in greek and known the Hebrew traditions and sayings that make up the old testament very much would have understood that a large part of the old testament was metaphorical.
>very much would have understood that a large part of the old testament was metaphorical.
They absolutely didn't and you are only doing this whole historical revisionism thing to try and make the mountain God of the Gaps mental gymnastics religious people have to do now look natural as if this was always the case, which it absolutely was not. Also mainstream naturalist views were still hundreds of years away from the time you are talking about.
*mountain of God of the Gaps
They would have understood the 7 days and 7 nights to be a metaphor for an abstract but not very long amount of time, as a hebrew figure of speech. Just as the phrase 40 days and 40 nights in the story of Moses leading the Israelites out of Egypt represented a very long abstract amount of time.
>They would have understood the 7 days and 7 nights to be a metaphor for an abstract but not very long amount of time
No they didn't and more importantly they had absolutely zero reason to reinterpret the bible in this way. They didn't have to contend with carbon dating, fossil records, or the cosmic background radiation, etc etc that contradicted the bible. There was no necessity to try and interpret these things as metaphor and thus they didn't. To them god, made Earth in 7 days because god can do what ever he wants the holy texts are his infallible testament to these things.
they would have interpreted it that way not because they had any reason to do so but because that was a feature of the hebrew language. just like someone today writing something took forever would be understood as not actually taking forever, just a long but abstract amount of time
Conflating 7 day creation with the phrase 40 days and 40 nights is a completely false equivalency. There is no phrasal vagueness of 7 days. The bible goes into extensive detail of each individual day and leaves no room for doubt that the events are supposed to have happened in literally 7 days. This is just extremely transparent revisionism that you are engaging in.
>if thy right hand offend thee, cut it off, and cast it from thee
>People read this and started cutting off people's hands
>This means that was what was intended.
>God tells messenger angel story
>Messenger tells prophet
>Prophet tells scribe
>Scribe scribes
>Gets translated into Latin
>Pope comes and has it retranslated, cramming some of his ideology into it
>Gets translated again into English by another person with their own ideologies
>Gets modernized as language has changed, modern ideas crammed in, already filled with interpretations
>Some gay spreads his interpretation of those interpretations as if it is the word of God
Modern Bibles are far from God's word anyway
Christianity should just be between a believer and God
And the Christians that use abstraction all the time for biblical events end up doing so to such an extent that the bible could be reshaped to mean literally anything
Maybe it could be the sign following a 2700 years old book is a stupid idea ? If you need spirituality in your life, make up your own, you don't need the words of ancient israelites they wrote because Babylon was about to rape their culture.
You don’t need to “make it up”. You can still find spirituality from others whose ideals of morality, metaphysics etc are well written about. It just requires a good amount of research and introspection
The actual problem here is you thinking that shit like god created the heaven and earth in seven days was ever supposed to be taken literally.
God would realistically create everything instantaneously. If not, then he’s not all powerful since time is literally not a factor to him. So if the 7 days thing is a metaphor (which I believe it is), then what exactly does it represent?
> God
> Realistically
I don't think you really understand what spirituality is about.
>So if the 7 days thing is a metaphor (which I believe it is), then what exactly does it represent?
A gestation time, like a natural birth. Things that just pop into existence seems unnatural, why do you think so many people hates the Big Bang theory ?
A week's work, to mimic your average guy life. Don't forget religion goals is to appease the human need for answers so they can get to work and be a useful tool in society.
The Bible was written for an audience of people who lived thousands of years ago. God is a smart fella and knows you need to appropriately contextualize your words for an audience. If you laid out everything in terms of modern basedence the Roman Empire plebeians that took up Christianity's mantle would have no fricking idea what it was on about, thought it was fricking weird, and rejected it. If Christ were to appear today, I believe he would almost certainly speak in modern terms, again for the benefit of his intended audience
because hypothesis is hard to pronounce and is a way to trick you to going back to the 5th dimension.
God created a universe with evolution
You can believe in both
Based demonic get
Also, no. Bible says God created Adam and Eve along with all other life at once
>Bible says
dr seuss says theres a cat in a hat who eats a green ham
Dumbass that’s Sam I Am, not the cat in a hat
A GAME THEORY
Evolution isn't a theory, it's an observed phenomenon. Evolution via natural selection is a theory that seeks to explain said phenomenon.
Gravity is not a theory. It is an observed phenomenon. There are several theories of gravity attenpting to explain that phenomenon, such as m theory, loop quantum gravity, Newtonian gravity, your several MoND theories, and so on. Dozens.
Fricking sciencelets.
>evolution is an observed phenomenon.
No. It's a well-established theory but it can't actually be observed with mortal eyes, only inferred by indirect evidence. Animals have had hardly any morphological change since mankind created the written word.
This is entirely wrong, if a strong selection factor suddenly appears in an environment, such as a long-term shift in weather patterns or natural disaster, or even human influences, this can cause the behavior and morphology of a species to change rapidly in just a few generations. This is even ignoring the phenomenon of artificial selection, whereby breeding certain individuals of a species we can curate certain traits we see in them. If natural selection didn't exist artificial selection would not be possible, and that happens on a very human time scale.
I think you're conflating adaptation with evolution. Creating a new dog breed isn't evolution, because it's still a dog cross-breedable with all other dogs.
I shouldn't have used "morphological" but what I was trying to say is that it is (currently) impossible to observe the emergence of a new species. That happens on a timescale of hundreds of thousands of years, rendering direct observation impossible. Evidence can be inferred through fossil records and extrapolating observation of short-term adaptation but it's the height of scientific arrogance to say we *know* anything about evolution other than that it is most likely real.
Evolution is changes in allele frequency in populations over time and it is an observed phenomenon. We have observed this many times. Look at something like Richard Lenski's experiments if you want something experimental instead of observational. You are talking about speciation, which has also been observed but less frequently due to the difficulties you touched on.
And the passion of the Christ was really about him enjoying and being excited about being tortured.
Words can have several meanings idiot.
And theories are pretty secure in their factuality. I blame colloquialisms hyperbolizing theories to also mean hypothesis or just basic ass "I thinks".
>And theories are pretty secure in their factuality.
That depends on the theory. Phlogiston theory is about as far from factual as empiricism can get. The various gravitational theories are contradictory and so most are far from factual. Relativity and quantum theory are both widely accepted and yet contradictory, so we know at least one has some strong element of non-factual. A theory is just a bundle of assumptions that attempts to describe observed phenomena. You can have good theories or bad theories but both are still theories.
There were plenty of large dromaeosaurids, just pick one.
>born too early to have a pet velociraptor with genetically enhanced intelligence
...not fair.
I could kill them all with medieval armor and a spear
The smaller ones look domesticable as frick, although i prefer terror birds as my giant feathered bastards and raptors with quills
well done HOWEVER
I’m sad they’ve never shown these in the films before. They need more new dinosaurs and not the same 5 we’ve been seeing constantly.
i think its due time the chad makes an appearance
Dinosaurs don't have feathers. I don't give a frick what theories you've heard, none of them make any sense. What possible evolutionary advantage could feathers be on a fricking dinosaur that weighs way too much to ever fly? And don't point at Emus and Ostriches today, they evolved FROM birds. Dinosaurs evolved INTO birds. Emus and Ostriches have feathers because they're a remnant of their previous incarnations, but dinosaurs came before birds. There's no way they had feathers.
Feathers provide warmth and protection from water
HAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
FRICK YOU FRICK YOU FRICK YOU
So does fur, and a lot more effectively. Where's the furry dinosaurs?
The cretaceous period was in a greenhouse climate, the only place dinosaurs would need feathers for warmth would be at the poles
>And don't point at Emus and Ostriches today, they evolved FROM birds. Dinosaurs evolved INTO birds. Emus and Ostriches have feathers because they're a remnant of their previous incarnations
and feathers are ancestral to Dinosauria
brainlet
No they're not, moron. Are you trying to tell me birds came before dinosaurs? Frick off.
No, I'm trying to tell you that feathers aren't a trait unique to birds. moron.
>No, I'm trying to tell you that feathers aren't a trait unique to birds.
Well you'd be wrong, moron. Post all the gay cartoons you want, it won't change anything.
You can keep baiting as long as you want, you'll always be a massive moron. It won't change anything.
At least I don't use infographics to justify a theory about something from 100 million years ago that is utterly moronic to anyone that spends 5 seconds thinking about it.
>infographics
You're truly ignorant as shit
There's physical proof certain dinosaurs had feathers. Quit thinking that means ALL dinosaurs had feathers.
>Quit thinking that means ALL dinosaurs had feathers.
I'll quit thinking that when morons stop putting fricking feathers on any creature larger than a person just to be contrarian morons pretending they know something that never happened.
Dinosaurs are fake, bro.
Seething Christcuck detected
O. K.
Have you ever wondered why no one ever found any "dinosaur bone fossils" before the nineteenth century?
People did but they were morons that thought they found dragons, cyclops, griffins and other wacky shit, plus it's not like the fossils are just laying around most of the time you have to dig to find them.
O. K.
t-rex bros...they did us dirty
Lmao. Years of T-Rex fans whining about Spinochad kicking his ass in JP3 only for Spinochad being a fish eater.
Makes sense considering the thin long snout and smaller teeth like a gharial snout
As always, JP ruined spino. There’s hardly anything known about it since the remains are so fragmented.
Literally every aspect of dinosaurs except the basic skeleton is entirely made up
So why not make it look cool?
Stop with the fricking feathers.
Cope
You watch anime
Feathers are cool and closer to what dinos probably looked like irl. I bet there were idiots complaining in 1995 that the t-rex wasn't a cumbersome godzilla-like creature dragging its tail on the ground.
You're a literal moron. Do kangaroos drag their tails across the ground?
they look even cooler you gay
I don't think it does but it makes scalies seethe so i'm okay with it.
You watch anime
This is an anime website
Everyone who uses this website watches anime
It's an imageboard. With specific boards for anime. Not everyone watches your Hachimachi Ching Chong Jupiter Revolution Re:Nutsack nonsense.
Here is your reddit gold kind sir
Based
Cringe
Anime watchers are malformed manchildren who place undue value on novelty, hence why you like feathers.
yes but what does that have to do with anything
something I like to point out that's basically being Jurassic Park's advocate, but: in the movie they are not dinosaurs, they are just (genetic) chimeras, so that's a point for them being the way they are
This is my favorite (genetic) chimera from the series
I watch movie for she
I'm glad that she has been built to be a protagonist
I'll keep watching as long as she is featured
What doesn't make sense to me is why people keep demanding them in Jurassic Park when that was never the point to begin with?
The scaled designs always allowed for more creativity a la mad scientist experiments and using real reptiles and their characteristics as a point of reference to make them seem more alien but natural.
Well, actually I should say more exotic but familiar.
theyre even bigger in the new ones. also i noticed the size of the dinosaurs constantly change throughout the movie, usually depending on the plot, the mosasaurus was gigantic in the beginning and then they shrunk it down for the last scene
They were Utahraptors. Hell, if you really want to get pedantic about it, they were genetic abominations designed to 'look' like dinos (due to the missing dna). Not that it matters really. because try and enrage a chicken. I dare you. See how those little shits can frick you up.
They were Deinonychus. Utah raptor wasn’t discovered until after the movie. They just changed the name because the original is lame
Deinonychus is a cool name. Velociraptor is the pop music name of Dromaeasaurs
...
normies need to stay the frick away from speculative science
frick feather redditors so much
based thing that explains things to me
ummmm sweatie they found fossils in China therefore dinosaurs are a communist conspiracy
The more we understand dinosaurs, the more the JW stuff feels offensive.
bros…. what’s the go with the raptors thighs and why do i feel the massive urge to wanna frick a raptor?
LMAO this was a meme in TLOU2 (great game by the way
For the last time.
There are no dinosaurs in Jurassic Park.
There are reconstructions of dinosaurs made with fragments of dino DNA plus DNA from other species, with a trial-and-error strategy.
Those are what Dr. Wu thought a Raptor would look like. Maybe it even intentionally selected for bigger ones because Hammond asked.
Where my flyboi bros at?
>thinks dinosaurs flew
C'mon, dummy. If dinosaurs could really fly how come we never found any fossils in the clouds? Use your brain, stupid.
Dumbass the meteor came from the sky too. It wiped out the flying dinosaurs on the way down and destroyed the fossil
moron, space is fake, the israelites killed the dinosaurs and everyone knows israelites can't fly.
>he’s so bluepilled he denies the helicopterjew
That was a Pollack in a funny hat who lost his foreskin in a fishing accident AND I AM SICK TO DEATH OF HAVING TO REUTE THIS NONSENSE ASSERTION.
The sad or rather truly upsetting part is that THERE IS a dinosaur that looks like the movie Velociraptor, it just has a different name and I forgot which. Why don't scienbreasts just swap the name so that the cool one can be called Velociraptor? But no they keep things as is because then they can go into an autistic sperg every now and then to correct us real people when we want to enjoy our large raptors. But I will not comply. I will keep on saying Velociraptors are big and cool. I hate science
Sorry that your favourite dinosaur turned out to be a dinolet lol. Stegochads are not used to losing like you
homie ur stego be 10 feet tall and his head is still below my butthole
That’s how he gets ya. Impalement is the alpha fighting style
deinonychus
My fav dinosaur
>established and well documented scientific names should be swapped because of my nostalgia for 90s goyslop
Imagine future archeologists.
why would the hips go that way, there are clear sockets.
Cute cat.
so… literally the inflatable orange neck sauropods from Prehistoric Planet
Damn, science is a sham. How the frick did they come up with this abomination?
Hey, that's me.
I always liked pachys
Hindflier betas STILL haven’t recovered from this post
Nothing beats the Troodon, the smartest dino that has ever existed
Is that an actual game he's playing? Reminds me of a modern, multiplayer version of that Big Al flash game they had on discoverychannel.com.
link related is a full recreation
https://www.jenniferedwards.co.uk/unitygames/BigAlGame/
>Is that an actual game he's playing?
no
The one from JP isn't a velociraptor, it's a deinonychus, but they thought velociraptors had a cooler name. So what?
Would it save the Jurassic franchise if they just started crossing the dinosaur DNA with sexy women?
They already did
I was hoping in the last movie for them to say she had dino dna and was begining to change suddenly having Species Reboot Electric Boogaloo or some shit
Next movie she'll get herself pregnant
Think about it, she can will it at any time...
Added bonus is that she doesn't have periods because of the differing reproduction methods
Aren't the more accurate reconstructions those tiny things running around in dominion?
Welcome to 1993, anon.
Is this an actual real body suit?
I imagine it would have a very rough scratchy texture like a rug.
Couldn't we just send a camera out far enough into space, look back at earth with an advanced telescope, and observe dinosaurs because of light time shit?
Its only possible if we had the ability to travel faster than the speed of light and if you can move at ftl you can just violate causality and go back in time and hang out with the dinos in person.
It would be possible if we found some convoluted set of gravitational lenses that redirected the light toward some point closer to us, essentially being giant space mirrors, but obviously that's absurdly farfetched even if physically imaginable.
>movie based on a book made on the 80s
>with theories based on the knowledge back then
>knowledge based on discoveries back then
>discoveries based on technology back then
>people surprised it isn't up to date
Dinosaurs don't really have to outweigh you. A Cassowary today can walk up to you and use a toe claw to casually unzip you.
Is Cassowary code for hot girl?
Another cassowary might think so.
Apparently so.
What the frick is that skeleton behind its neck? Is that a human skull?
>mogs every mammal land predator in existence
>climbs up your back and claws and then bite the shit out of you
>hunted giant iguanadonts
If the theory that Utahraptors hunted in packs is true, they would be the apex predator if transported in the modern world.
Jurassic park embellished the size of the raptor for the film. What they didnt know is that utahraptor, an even bigger one than they made up, would be discovered later
Its extremely gay that the later movies dont use it, but then again, the later movies are extremely gay
The Velociraptor is based on the Deinonychus, they just gave it the name Velociraptor because it sounds cooler
more like they gave it that name because when the book was writen Crichton was a subscriber of the Velocirraptor=Deinonychus Antirrophus theory
He was really stretching with that lumping. I think he just went with Velociraptor because it sounded cooler and he was honestly a bit of a hack writer.
>Gojira doesn't actually exist
Fricking lying chinks, I'll never forgive them for this
Real question. How do christgays explain dinosaur bones? Doesn't that mean that dinosaurs lived side by side with humans if god created everything in 7 days? How do they cope with this? Or do they say Noah and the ark wiped out dinosaurs? Even though god commanded Noah to grab two of every animal? lol?
Not every Christian is a c*tholic
idk what that even means. What is the difference between a catholic and a christian? don't they both believe in the bible and god?
Catholics are the true religion approved the vatican, christians are homosexuals americans and british that don't follow the pope
Truth is catholics believe in the pope,saints, virgins, jesus and god while christians only believe in jesus and god
>the vatican
Is this supposed to be a selling point? HAHAHAHAHA!
That settles it
The numbers spake
The Vatican and Church are an unholy manipulation of faith
and Prodies are no better than Godless pagans worshiping trees
Catholics accept dinosaurs unlike moron christians that don't believe in them
Catholics are the ones who act like evolution is incompatible with God
More people should be like Chris Pratt, believe in God without the church
America is filled with christians and that's the where morons don't believe in evolution and such
>Catholics are the ones who act like evolution is incompatible with God
Listen here, homosexual. I basically grew up in the Catholic church. At no point did any of the priests, monsignor or nuns deny evolution or encourage anyone else in the church to do so. The only "Christians" I have met that have also been creationist / anti-evolution lunatics are Southern Baptists and Mormons.
Nondenominational is still the way to go
Chris Pratt gets it
Lmao. It's basically just evangelicals that are anti-evolution.
Isn't that the robot thing?
put there by satan
Nobody here has ever met anyone that unironically believes in creationism. You may as well ask what a flat earther thinks when they fly high enough to see the curve of the earth. Who the frick cares what morons that are 0.0001% of the population thinks?
Why do people think of God as linear? Relatability?
Jurassic Park's raptor is based on Deinonychus.
it does not matter
if dinosaurs are ever in movies again, they're going to look like Jurassic Park dinosaurs, because no one is going to greenlight chicken dinosaurs
Sure they will, make a kids movie with friendlier dinosaurs and make them cute and fluffy.
dinosaurs were "discovered" by two prominent freemasons in order to push more anti religious sentiment and to push the works of charles darwin
>[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Henry_Huxley](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Henry_Huxley) Aldous Huxleys grandfather, found a lot of dinosaur bones
was pro evolution, anti religion
>his rival [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Owen](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Owen) another dinosaur guy
these two guys really knew were to dig to find the bones, everywhere they went, dinosaur bones popped up
really makes me think
lol
>Aldous Huxleys grandfather,
This guy was a big eugenicist too, if I recall correctly. Another evil Anglo.
Don't care for this woke troony dinoshit
I know what a dinosaur is and no gay scientist is going to tell me otherwise
There were dromaeosaurs as large as the movie velociraptor, so its all good.
We;ve been over this.
The species in the book was identified as Velociraptor antirrhopus. This was because when Crichton wrote the book it looked like Deinonychus antirrhopus was going to be reclassified as a species of Velociraptor like it's close relative Velociraptor mongoliensis. That never happened but the name stuck because Crichton and Spielberg thought the name was cooler.
The dinosaurs in the book and by extension the film are Deinonychus. Deal with it.
>That never happened but the name stuck because Crichton and Spielberg thought the name was cooler.
It objectively is, and you know what it is before you even see it.
based post
even dinosaurs got pozzed. Nothing is sacred
There should be a part of ethics dedicated to stuff being cool. Like if you discover something, and it's not cool, just fricking keep it to yourself.
>uhm well actually some people think the reality of dinosaurs being pathetic feathery cucks is very cool
nah
Only leftist troons think dinosaurs having feathers is cool.
Are there really people who don't believe dinosaurs existed?
Not everyone believes the lies of this world, thankfully.
>christcuck is having a melty again
I believe in God and dinosaurs
This guy is just moronic
Wait till he hears about Helicoprions
How did they even live so long?
It is like a shittier version of a narwhal yet lived for millions of years.
Not doubting it or anything, just a genuine question
How do modern birds and lizards even have sex...?
I don't know. Why?
They would have similar tail problems to the ones depicted in the image
I see.
Sometimes I think humanity slowly dying off isn't such a bad thing, especially with people overall having less kids. Better for everyone.
Okay?
Reminder: the current scientific understanding of T. rex has souped it up so much that it effortlessly mogs the T. rex and Spinosaurus from JP1-3. The ONLY thing the JP T. rex has over it is roadrunner level speed.
The T-Rex is mostly powerful in the movies because it only attacks a few panicking people at a time. A lot of its real life abilities would make it too powerful in the movies, plus, it may not have some of those because of being a hybrid and living in isolation.