Are dinosaur bones radioactive?

[Agent Mulder's Hair]

He is a dumb troll

He might be a troll. He might be a Poe. Or he might be serious. Either way, i think he's entertaining.

 

[fdswer]

He might be a troll. He might be a Poe. Or he might be serious. Either way, i think he's entertaining.

Its stupid he just posts the same 4 things in every thread

 

[Tyrannosaurus rex]

I don't remember verbatim, but u really should watch some of that video scyther posted. I did awhile back and some parts were compelling. I do remembrr the bone wars, between a harvard grad and a yale grad who were competitors in finding new dino species fossils. They spent a fortune trying to outdo and eventually wreck/discredit each other. There is also apparently big business in faking dino fossils. And there have been all manner of scientific blunders over the years. From the bronto- (or maybe bracheo-) saurus having been misindentified and never having actually existed. There was some sort of raptor species fossil found recently that fooled scientists for awhile before they realized it was a fake.

It actually is interesting how jacked up that field seems to be. I'm not sold on dinos not existing. But i stand by my statement that it would not surprise me. You really should look into it a little. It's pretty interesting.

I've seen the arguments from that video. None of them proof dinosaurs were fake. Or even remotely indicate that.

Yes, mistakes happen in that field. Like they do in every other field that ever existed and will ever exist. Same with corruption and fakes. Yes, some people are good at making fake fossils. What does that have to do with the other fossils? Are all of them fake?

Also, what does misidentifying a species have to do with anything? The fossils were still real. They just assigned it to a species that the fossils did not belong too. They later found the mistake and corrected it.

Scientific blunders happen in pretty much every field dude.

 

[Agent Mulder's Hair]

I've seen the arguments from that video. None of them proof dinosaurs were fake. Or even remotely indicate that.

Yes, mistakes happen in that field. Like they do in every other field that ever existed and will ever exist. Same with corruption and fakes. Yes, some people are good at making fake fossils. What does that have to do with the other fossils? Are all of them fake?

Also, what does misidentifying a species have to do with anything? The fossils were still real. They just assigned it to a species that the fossils did not belong too. They later found the mistake and corrected it.

Scientific blunders happen in pretty much every field dude.

Where did i say the video proves dinos were fake? In fact i mentioned that i am in no way sold on the idea. Just that i wouldn't be too surprised.

Dude, this is what drives me crazy. "There are blunders in every field." Yes. But there have been a LOT of huge blunders in this field. From forgeries, the 2 competitors i mentioned during the bone wars, the misidentifications, now we hear some dinos had freaking feathers, were hearing that many skeletons u see in museums aren't even the real fossils, i mean shit. What does it take for someone to become skeptical of a scientific field these days? We should question everything. But for so many, that seems to exclude scientific fields of study.

Again, I'm not saying I'm sold on dinos being fake. But i have found out enough that I'm highly skeptical of the business of discovering/identifying dino fossils.

 

[Tyrannosaurus rex]

Where did i say the video proves dinos were fake? In fact i mentioned that i am in no way sold on the idea. Just that i wouldn't be too surprised.

Dude, this is what drives me crazy. "There are blunders in every field." Yes. But there have been a LOT of huge blunders in this field. From forgeries, the 2 competitors i mentioned during the bone wars, the misidentifications, now we hear some dinos had freaking feathers, were hearing that many skeletons u see in museums aren't even the real fossils, i mean shit. What does it take for someone to become skeptical of a scientific field these days? We should question everything. But for so many, that seems to exclude scientific fields of study.

Again, I'm not saying I'm sold on dinos being fake. But i have found out enough that I'm highly skeptical of the business of discovering/identifying dino fossils.

The reason there might be more blunders in paleontology might be the fact that they are dealing with very old fossils. A lot of them are not complete, do it is easier to make mistakes.

The reason many skeletons are not the real ones is that they keep the real ones safe and/or for more research. Also, sometimes they make multiple copies of one Skeleton so multiple museums can display them, or so they can sell them to wealthy people.

Of course we should question everything. If you want to question whether or not a fossil is assigned to the proper species that's fine.

Questioning if dinosaurs were real at all is a bit stupid though. There is just no way that all dinosaur bones were fake. So to say that it would not surprise you, would mean you must think there is a chance that they are all fake.

Also, sorry for any spelling or grammar mistakes. I can't type for shit on my phone and autocorrect is fucking with me.

 

[Agent Mulder's Hair]

The reason there might be more blunders in paleontology might be the fact that they are dealing with very old fossils. A lot of them are not complete, do it is easier to make mistakes.

The reason many skeletons are not the real ones is that they keep the real ones safe and/or for more research. Also, sometimes they make multiple copies of one Skeleton so multiple museums can display them, or so they can sell them to wealthy people.

Of course we should question everything. If you want to question whether or not a fossil is assigned to the proper species that's fine.

Questioning if dinosaurs were real at all is a bit stupid though. There is just no way that all dinosaur bones were fake. So to say that it would not surprise you, would mean you must think there is a chance that they are all fake.

Also, sorry for any spelling or grammar mistakes. I can't type for shit on my phone and autocorrect is fucking with me.

No problem on the typos, same thing happens to me on my phone.

I stand by my statement that i wouldn't be surprised. How many of us actually take any time to study paleontology? How many of us have read peer reviewed papers on the subject? Not many. Most everybody, if they're being honest, are going off of what we were taught in elementary school, and a few headlines we may have seen over the years. That's about the depth of most people's knowledge on the subject, imo.

Do u know where most dino fossil info has come from? The 2 men i mentioned from the bone wars. Before they got into the field, there were only 9 dinos known in north america. Combined, the two men are responsible for discovering 142 new species. 142!!! Do u know how many of those species are considered valid today? 32. One of the men is also responsible for the theory that birds evolved from some dinos. That is still upheld today. Most of their theories however, are not.

On top of that, in their haste to outdo each other, Cope and Marsh haphazardly assembled the bones of their own discoveries. Their descriptions of new species, based on their reconstructions, led to confusion and misconceptions that lasted for decades after their deaths.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bone_Wars





Again, I'm not saying I'm sold, and I'm not saying ALL dino fossils are fake or misidentified. But when so much of the evidence came from 2 guys like i talked about above, and in today's environment a person can make millions selling dino fossils to private collectors, or they can gain recognition for discovering new species by selling forgeries to museums, etc. Etc......its just easy for me to be skeptical. And that's all i am, is skeptical. Not sold that they never existed. But it wouldn't shock me to learn they didn't.

 

[Tyrannosaurus rex]

No problem on the typos, same thing happens to me on my phone.

I stand by my statement that i wouldn't be surprised. How many of us actually take any time to study paleontology? How many of us have read peer reviewed papers on the subject? Not many. Most everybody, if they're being honest, are going off of what we were taught in elementary school, and a few headlines we may have seen over the years. That's about the depth of most people's knowledge on the subject, imo.

Do u know where most dino fossil info has come from? The 2 men i mentioned from the bone wars. Before they got into the field, there were only 9 dinos known in north america. Combined, the two men are responsible for discovering 142 new species. 142!!! Do u know how many of those species are considered valid today? 32. One of the men is also responsible for the theory that birds evolved from some dinos. That is still upheld today. Most of their theories however, are not.

On top of that, in their haste to outdo each other, Cope and Marsh haphazardly assembled the bones of their own discoveries. Their descriptions of new species, based on their reconstructions, led to confusion and misconceptions that lasted for decades after their deaths.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bone_Wars





Again, I'm not saying I'm sold, and I'm not saying ALL dino fossils are fake or misidentified. But when so much of the evidence came from 2 guys like i talked about above, and in today's environment a person can make millions selling dino fossils to private collectors, or they can gain recognition for discovering new species by selling forgeries to museums, etc. Etc......its just easy for me to be skeptical. And that's all i am, is skeptical. Not sold that they never existed. But it wouldn't shock me to learn they didn't.

I definitely agree that there was some fishy stuff going on during the bone wars. The thing is, scientists are willing to admit when they are wrong. Which is demonstrated by the fact that a lot of species are not considered valid anymore. When new fossils/evidence/knowledge comes to light, they adjust their reconstructions.

The thing is, if you wouldn't be shocked that they didn't exist at all, that means you think there is a chance that all dinosaur bones are somehow fake. Otherwise, if you thought there was no chance for that you would be very shocked if they turned out to be fake right? So if they are not dinosaur bones, what would they be in that scenario?

 

[Turtlejuice]

Since I have a degree in Geology I always enjoy the faux Dinosaur stories and listen to the proof. There are two outright lies in the first minutes of this. I didn't listen any further. You would do well to fact check stuff like this and see if any (unbiased) facts are around.

One of his main early points is the lack of Indians finding/explaining of dino bones. There are literally books written about Indian stories explaining dinosaur bones. Anyone I've ever spoken to about young earth, fossils disproving the rock record, etc. are easily explained...to those willing to accept facts.

Not to mention, almost every ancient civilization has some form or representation of dinosaurs in their mythology, ranging from dragons to various large lizard type creatures. A little coincidental that civilizations separated by thousands of miles, with no communication between them, have very similar creatures in their mythology.

While dinosaurs not existing is not entirely implausible, the "I don't understand it so it must be fake" narrative that he presents, just doesn't wash. He talks about facts so much, I'm hoping one day, he presents one.

 

[Jack Reacheround]

I don't remember verbatim, but u really should watch some of that video scyther posted. I did awhile back and some parts were compelling. I do remembrr the bone wars, between a harvard grad and a yale grad who were competitors in finding new dino species fossils. They spent a fortune trying to outdo and eventually wreck/discredit each other. There is also apparently big business in faking dino fossils. And there have been all manner of scientific blunders over the years. From the bronto- (or maybe bracheo-) saurus having been misindentified and never having actually existed. There was some sort of raptor species fossil found recently that fooled scientists for awhile before they realized it was a fake.

It actually is interesting how jacked up that field seems to be. I'm not sold on dinos not existing. But i stand by my statement that it would not surprise me. You really should look into it a little. It's pretty interesting.

This is the problem. The video says this is all true. But has anyone qualified that information? Can you produce any of the papers supposedly written by those scholars? Can you confirm that was actually them on the video?

There is a reason for the rigid process you have to go through to get theories and scholarly research papers published, and why on those papers you can't just link to a YouTube video as a citation. YouTube videos are not credible evidence in academia. And if you're making the claim that dinosaurs never existed, an extraordinary claim, you had better provide extraordinary evidence. A YouTube video in which some people claim to be Harvard educated paleontologists is not that.

 

[JBSchroeds]

Even when tissue is preserved in amber DNA will still degrade. DNA has a pretty short half life, only about 500 years. It will be very difficult assembling the genome of wooly mammoths to the point where scientists can realistically hope to clone them, and they've only been extinct for 10,000 years. For dinosaurs it will be pretty much impossible to clone them because after about a million years there should be pretty much no DNA left at all, and dinosaurs have been extinct for 65 million years.

So no recoverable DNA = no cloning = no dinosaurs. Sorry.

Why bother cloning them when you can stuff a plunger on a chicken's ass and call it a day?

 

[Turtlejuice]

This is the problem. The video says this is all true. But has anyone qualified that information? Can you produce any of the papers supposedly written by those scholars? Can you confirm that was actually them on the video?

There is a reason for the rigid process you have to go through to get theories and scholarly research papers published, and why on those papers you can't just link to a YouTube video as a citation. YouTube videos are not credible evidence in academia. And if you're making the claim that dinosaurs never existed, an extraordinary claim, you had better provide extraordinary evidence. A YouTube video in which some people claim to be Harvard educated paleontologists is not that.

Here's the issue with that video, and it presents itself within the first 20-30 seconds. Either the host/author did not do a basic level of research into the subject matter or he researched it well and intentionally lies to create a fraudulent narrative, which he then filled with buzz words to make it sound more legitimate. Either way, 30 seconds in to the video he already proves himself an unreliable source of information, at best.

There's no peer reviewing, there's no sources, there's no experimentation, there's no actual evidence, because most of it is made up.

 

[Jack Reacheround]

Here's the issue with that video, and it presents itself within the first 20-30 seconds. Either the host/author did not do a basic level of research into the subject matter or he researched it well and intentionally lies to create a fraudulent narrative, which he then filled with buzz words to make it sound more legitimate. Either way, 30 seconds in to the video he already proves himself an unreliable source of information, at best.

There's no peer reviewing, there's no sources, there's no experimentation, there's no actual evidence, because most of it is made up.

Exactly. I've never seen the video, but I could have guessed.

Millenials, and people in general, but mostly millenials need to learn how to qualify sources of information. Anyone can make a YouTube video. Sure, maybe this one is well done so it looks official. But there are actual "official" sources of information out there. YouTube isn't one of those.

Any claim should be able to be backed up by peer reviewed research. For things outside academia, there are court cases that can be referenced or news articles from credible outlets (not fucking Breitbart).

Which brings me to my next point. Fly by night online news agencies don't have any reputation established. Therefore, they don't worry about damaging their credibility and can publish bullshit with no retraction ever to follow.

 

[Agent Mulder's Hair]

This is the problem. The video says this is all true. But has anyone qualified that information? Can you produce any of the papers supposedly written by those scholars? Can you confirm that was actually them on the video?

There is a reason for the rigid process you have to go through to get theories and scholarly research papers published, and why on those papers you can't just link to a YouTube video as a citation. YouTube videos are not credible evidence in academia. And if you're making the claim that dinosaurs never existed, an extraordinary claim, you had better provide extraordinary evidence. A YouTube video in which some people claim to be Harvard educated paleontologists is not that.

I just gave u a wikipedia link. I haven't even watched the vid you're referring to in many months. So no, I'm not citing a yt video.



Edit: that wasn't u i was talking to when i posted that wiki link, it was another poster. But that posts are a few above this one. And the link is there if u want to read it

 

[Turtlejuice]

Exactly. I've never seen the video, but I could have guessed.

Millenials, and people in general, but mostly millenials need to learn how to qualify sources of information. Anyone can make a YouTube video. Sure, maybe this one is well done so it looks official. But there are actual "official" sources of information out there. YouTube isn't one of those.

Any claim should be able to be backed up by peer reviewed research. For things outside academia, there are court cases that can be referenced or news articles from credible outlets (not fucking Breitbart).

Which brings me to my next point. Fly by night online news agencies don't have any reputation established. Therefore, they don't worry about damaging their credibility and can publish bullshit with no retraction ever to follow.

All the video was designed for, is to sell copies of his book. There's no interest in truth, or fact, or proof. They're basically budget scientologists.

 

[CerebralKnievel]

You have more patience for that shit than I do.

When someone has the opportunity to contribute something meaningful and insightful and they instead choose to waste that opportunity for a stab at cheap humor, I find that very frustrating.

....how long have you been posting here??? How dare you deprecate the spirit of our fine community.

 

[Agent Mulder's Hair]

All the video was designed for, is to sell copies of his book. There's no interest in truth, or fact, or proof. They're basically budget scientologists.

U guys need to get off that video. I didn't post it and i only watched it once, like a year ago.

I laid out the few things i found compelling that i remembered from the video. And posted a link about the bone wars, and how much effect it had on the entire field. And a few other things i posted can be easily dug up and verified or disproven but i don't want to link anymore shit itt because NOBODY is bothering to read. I posted no less than 6 links from credible sources about some dino fossils being highly radioactive, which is the subject of the thread. And the 1st link was from the American Museum of Natural History. Seems most didn't look at those, either.

Be honest, u all can't even be bothered to watch a video these days. Are u gonna read ANY of an actual article other than the title? No, because i tried that already.

And i talked about that very thing (only reading headlines and accepting it as fact) in a post i made itt. Which most evidently didn't bother to read! Lol

 

[Turtlejuice]

U guys need to get off that video. I didn't post it and i only watched it once, like a year ago.

I laid out the few things i found compelling that i remembered from the video. And posted a link about the bone wars, and how much effect it had on the entire field. And a few other things i posted can be easily dug up and verified or disproven but i don't want to link anymore shit itt because NOBODY is bothering to read.

Be honest, u all can't even be bothered to watch a video these days. Are u gonna read ANY of an actual article other than the title? No, because i tried that already
And i talked about that very thing (only reading headlines and accepting it as fact) in a post i made itt. Which most evidently didn't bother to read! Lol

I've watched the video, what are you on about? I never even addressed your post so I've no idea why you think I was talking about it.

RE the bone wars. Think of it like precious metals. There was a time that there was very little precious metals circulating, then suddenly people became aware of the potential value of these metals and how to find them, and actively began searching for it, after a relatively short period of time the amount of precious metal circulating had increased by orders of magnitude. There has been articles of jewellry made with fake gold sold for very large sums of money, there are people who have admitted making fake gold, there are replica pieces used for display purposes made with fake gold. Now, if we follow the "dinosaur deniers" logic, gold does not exist.

 

[Guestx]

....how long have you been posting here??? How dare you deprecate the spirit of our fine community.

I just call 'em like I see 'em, pal. . .

 

[minute bull]

Yes. If you go to a dinosaur museum and get too close to the bones, you become a dinosaur. That's why they have the velvet rope.

 

[00 Buck]

I have NEVER heard of this stupid idea outside of that dumb show.

They wanna imply that the aliens zapped all the dinos as part of a mass genocide to make way for mammals?

So they can eventually become apes and then hybridized with shit to become humans, just to dig gold for dem dere sky godz?

Science, not even once.