what's the problem with modern paleontology? and how does it compare to its old self?

what's the problem with modern paleontology? and how does it compare to its old self?

Shopping Cart Returner Shirt $21.68

Black Rifle Cuck Company, Conservative Humor Shirt $21.68

Shopping Cart Returner Shirt $21.68

  1. 2 years ago
    Anonymous

    >this thread

    America needs to add lithium to its water.

  2. 2 years ago
    Anonymous

    Stop going off your medication.

  3. 2 years ago
    Anonymous

    [...]

    >NO, they literally fricking did not. This is a bullshit "theory" that one moron made up and everyone just repeats. There is ZERO and I want to know that you understand this, THERE IS FRICKING ZERO ACTUAL, PHYSICAL, FOSSIL EVIDENCE FOR THIS CLAIM. IT'S NOT REAL.
    Picrel

  4. 2 years ago
    Anonymous

    I believe that Paleoshizo is actually Jack Horner.

  5. 2 years ago
    Anonymous

    Why are grown ass adults so fascinated
    Although, to be honest, it’s probably the one same autist who makes all these threads

    • 2 years ago
      Anonymous

      >to be honest, it’s probably the one same autist who makes all these threads
      yep

      I imagine he lives in a wheelchair and channels his sexual frustration into opinions about dinosaur cartoons.
      strong opinions.

      • 2 years ago
        Anonymous

        Imagine being so horny for scaly porn that you go into a multi-thread crusade against modern academia (somewhere he never stepped a foot into) in an obscure board of a mongolian basket weaving forum.

        • 2 years ago
          Anonymous

          He makes me laugh.
          I like when he says he's a scientist but b***hes about competing hypotheses which he confuses for some disjointed synthesis. Or treats any and all science as authoritative. Or b***hes about progressives in science. Or any of the other hundreds of little misunderstandings that mark him clearly as an outsider. It's good fun and it makes me think about how a stupid person might succeed in passing as a not-stupid one if they were so inclined.

  6. 2 years ago
    Anonymous

    not even the biggest feathergay thinks the t.rex looked like this (i hope)

  7. 2 years ago
    Anonymous

    [...]

    >Feathers CAN NOT TURN INTO SCALES
    The scutes on bird feet are feathers that became scales

  8. 2 years ago
    Anonymous

    [...]

    1. feathers evolved into scales in birds, so we know for a fact that it can happen and has happened.

    2. the most likely explanation is simply that Yutyrannus isn't an ancestor of T. rex, and possibly no tyrannosauroids are ancestors of T. rex.

    these facts escape your notice, so you're just as stupid and dogmatic as the creationists.

  9. 2 years ago
    Anonymous

    i cant believe that not only is nick longrich posting on Wauf, but he railed this guys mother.

  10. 2 years ago
    Anonymous

    How do the chinese fake feather impressions again?

    Mad sharpie skills?

    Usually when people have a meltdown they are very right or very wrong. In this case they are very wrong.

    • 2 years ago
      Anonymous

      >Mad sharpie skills?
      You believe their skills are that good? What a homosexual. Are you Nick Longrich?

      • 2 years ago
        Anonymous

        Yes. I am Nick Longrich. And I fricked your mother.

        • 2 years ago
          Anonymous

          I doubt you fricked my mother, but you do seem moronic enough to actually be Longrich.

          • 2 years ago
            Anonymous

            Not that your mother's standards are high enough to make that an issue. I mean, just look at you.

            • 2 years ago
              Anonymous

              My taste for moronation is becoming quite sensitive. How are all those false names coming that literally nobody cares about and everyone ignores?

  11. 2 years ago
    Anonymous

    The problem is that paleontology used to be mostly about brachiopods, but most modern enthusiasts don't even know what a brachiopod is.

  12. 2 years ago
    Anonymous

    Ancient animals most likely didn't look like our modern reconstructions at all, pic related

    • 2 years ago
      Anonymous
  13. 2 years ago
    Anonymous

    dunno, I find that color scheme rather nice. I persoanlly envision the rex along those lines with a deep neonish red and and white zebra like pattern.

  14. 2 years ago
    Anonymous

    Basically, University used to be about either the wealthiest eccentrics or literal genius level types advancing the sciences. The people that attend University these days are so moronic they can only do so through social means because they aren't intelligent enough to actually push science forward. On top of this they rely on common consensus, they don't challenge the narrative and they do not question their peers but rather fall in line lest they be blacklisted. It gets very political the deeper you look at it, University has long since stopped being about the scientific method and since become about trusting THE science. The approved science. This is why the chinks have an artificial sun and we have morons teaching young boys that they have female biology.

    • 2 years ago
      Anonymous

      The consensus horseshit is really getting on my nerves. Papers now are NEVER criticized. Even if they totally contradict established theories in their field, all those homosexuals in that field just accept the new bullshit and try to cram it all together like they're new authors of biblical books. Every field is full of totally contradictory theory now. It's fricking appalling.

      • 2 years ago
        Anonymous

        What are some good recent examples of this?

        • 2 years ago
          Anonymous

          The fact that they came up with the size of the limbs in the spinosaurus by literally scaling them proportionally to a single hip bone without having any idea of what they were doing, making the animal look like it could hardly sustain itself, much less walk? Nobody said anything on the matter, everyone praised it instead, because the spinosaurus is just a big crocodile for them, and that's how they want to portray it.

          • 2 years ago
            Anonymous

            How much of those "scalings" are derived from data on modern animals whose complete skeletal structure and behavior is known?

            And how accurate/consistent is that scaling when applied to said modern animals?

            I get the desire to come up with a complete construction for ancient creatures, and that scaling/proxy systems can be anything from pretty accurate to not very accurate within science. I hope they at least make it clear which parts are known and which are estimations, like in the image.

          • 2 years ago
            Anonymous

            If only they had limbs from Baryonyx, Suchomimus, Irritator and other relatives they could use to extrapolate from.

            • 2 years ago
              Anonymous

              he's lying, the leg bones were found along with the hip. And lots of people, in fact most people, have argued that they're too small to fit with the rest of the skeleton.

              The T. rex / Yutyrannus clusterfrick is probably the best example and will likely bring down modern paleontology. The featherhomosexual fiasco in general is this in a nutshell. ALL evidence points to scales being the ancestral condition of Dinosaurs, yet everyone and their dog is trying to claim otherwise - a belief that shits all over all ACTUAL, PHYSICAL evidence we have. These homosexuals have made it their life's work to replace physical, paleontological evidence with wieneramamie DNA experiments and guesswork. In living species, there are many papers making arguments for naming new species from existing populations of species that contradict other evidence BLATANTLY, but nobody cares because nobody critically reviews anyone's work anymore. Modern physics is the most famous example of this though. That's how we get dark matter and dark energy, which are totally fake. Because the theories don't match the observations, but the "REAL SCIENTISTS™" utterly refuse to abandon fricking nonsense like the big bang - a LITERAL christian mythological position created by a catholic priest.

              [...]
              You don't seem to understand that making shit up is how underpaid wagies try to get ahead. They're the same people.

              >will likely bring down modern paleontology
              kek

          • 2 years ago
            Anonymous

            >believing someone named "Ibrahim"

        • 2 years ago
          Anonymous

          The T. rex / Yutyrannus clusterfrick is probably the best example and will likely bring down modern paleontology. The featherhomosexual fiasco in general is this in a nutshell. ALL evidence points to scales being the ancestral condition of Dinosaurs, yet everyone and their dog is trying to claim otherwise - a belief that shits all over all ACTUAL, PHYSICAL evidence we have. These homosexuals have made it their life's work to replace physical, paleontological evidence with wieneramamie DNA experiments and guesswork. In living species, there are many papers making arguments for naming new species from existing populations of species that contradict other evidence BLATANTLY, but nobody cares because nobody critically reviews anyone's work anymore. Modern physics is the most famous example of this though. That's how we get dark matter and dark energy, which are totally fake. Because the theories don't match the observations, but the "REAL SCIENTISTS™" utterly refuse to abandon fricking nonsense like the big bang - a LITERAL christian mythological position created by a catholic priest.

          Making bullshit up and being hypercompetitive was more of a thing of the past. Modern researchers are underpaid wagies that slave away for those old boomers that wrestled their way to the desk either through connections or catching lightning in a bottle like Jack Horner that became a celebrity for being the consultant behind Jurassic Park (even though he absolutely loathes the t rex).

          You don't seem to understand that making shit up is how underpaid wagies try to get ahead. They're the same people.

          • 2 years ago
            Anonymous

            >The T. rex / Yutyrannus clusterfrick is probably the best example

            The Yutyrannus paper says that T. rex did NOT have feathers, and proposes a couple reasons why it didn't.

            In fact it's morons like you that can't read that are the actual problem, not paleontology.

            • 2 years ago
              Anonymous

              >being both a chink and a troony

          • 2 years ago
            Anonymous

            Never read that before, and the topic is really interesting
            What is the reason why scales can not develop from feather-bearing tissue? I guess so, but is it the same case with hair? What is the difference between "scales" and whatever Armadillos have?
            Also, which Dinosaur clades have been found with fossil remains of feathers? Besides birds, of course

            • 2 years ago
              Anonymous

              >What is the reason why scales can not develop from feather-bearing tissue?
              Noone really knows to be honest, we just know that feather and hair-like structures have evolved from scales multiple times. But never the other way around. Dollo's Law seems to come into play. For whatever reason, pavement scale just seems to be too difficult to evolve again once lost. I'm sure it's possible, but it would likely take the right conditions and we've never seen this.

              https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dollo%27s_law_of_irreversibility

              >but is it the same case with hair?
              Not quite. Hair possibly(?) didn't evolve from scales - the jury's still kind of out on that. The old theory is that it did, but newer ideas claim it didn't, so it's hard to know. And the changeover from reptile to mammal is MUCH less distinct and takes up a longer span of time from reptile to bird. Nugays don't even think mammalian ancestors were reptiles (they were).

              >I guess so, but is it the same case with hair? What is the difference between "scales" and whatever Armadillos have?
              This is where language gets people into trouble. When most people say "scales", they're talking about a very specific integumentary structure that evolved as a body armor in reptiles (or fish, depending on context). Colloquially, all sorts of things can be called "scales" including the covering structures of pangolins, but they're very different structures from reptilian or bird scales.

              • 2 years ago
                Anonymous

                Interesting shit, thanks anon!

              • 2 years ago
                Anonymous

                I'm always happy to actually discuss the actual details. Most of Wauf like most blue boards is full of morons that either don't know anything about the topic or are careerist parasites actively harming the science to make money.

              • 2 years ago
                Anonymous

                *THAN from reptile to bird

                dropped a word

            • 2 years ago
              Anonymous

              >Also, which Dinosaur clades have been found with fossil remains of feathers? Besides birds, of course
              A select group of closely related later Theropods. And the birds that descend from this group. Basically "Coelurosaurs", although this word doesn't really mean much scientifically since cladists made it up and cladists change what their clades mean about daily at this point. T. rex is supposedly a "Coelurosaur" which is why ever moron and their dog IS STILL CONVINCED it has feathers (it's just peachfuzz now and THE SCIENCE IS SETTLED! T. REX "CHICKS" HAVE FEATHERS!!!!!!).

              There has been a massive propaganda campaign by featherhomosexuals to claim that everything from Sauropods to Ankylosaurs had feathers, but none of them really ever did. One of the ways they get away with this is by calling literally everything feathers. Unfortunately for them, we have scale impressions from every major group: Thyreophorans, Sauropods, the overwhelming majority of Theropods, Marginocephalians, Ornithopods (lots of these - anyone claiming something like Hadrosaurs had feathers will nearly get executed even by their own featherhomosexual peers).

      • 2 years ago
        Anonymous

        YOU ARE NOT A SCIENTIST
        YOU DID NOT GO TO UNIVERSITY
        YOU HAVE NO DEGREES
        YOU HAVE NO BUSINESS EVEN COMMENTING ON THIS TOPIC

  15. 2 years ago
    Anonymous

    There’s this massive problem that involves a certain gay constantly making threads seething about dead animals being depicted in a way that offends him on a certain board

  16. 2 years ago
    sage

    >another milliennial assmad that science is progressing and that their childhood memories are literally being raped
    IT GOES IN ALL FIELDS

    • 2 years ago
      Anonymous

      b***h you don't even know what science is.

  17. 2 years ago
    Anonymous

    [...]

    I swear to fricking god if these jannies don't do something about all these fricking animalfrickers on this board, there are going to be consequences.

  18. 2 years ago
    Anonymous

    It's the same problem with all the sciences these days. homosexual soientists are much more worried about advancing their careers than devoting themselves to the fricking work. And stupid shit, outrageous headlines and contrarianism get attention. Not only that, but making a bunch of made up synonyms for animals that already exist, living or extinct is a super easy way to advance your career in the life sciences. Basically, all the bad behaviors are being rewarded by our society and none of the good ones.

    • 2 years ago
      Anonymous

      Making bullshit up and being hypercompetitive was more of a thing of the past. Modern researchers are underpaid wagies that slave away for those old boomers that wrestled their way to the desk either through connections or catching lightning in a bottle like Jack Horner that became a celebrity for being the consultant behind Jurassic Park (even though he absolutely loathes the t rex).

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *