Posted by: graemebird | February 23, 2009

The Impossibly Large Size Of Some Dinosaurs Is Convergent Evidence To An Expanding Planet.

Look at how wikipedia struggles to explain how the Brontosaurus could even get up in the mornings:

1. The poor bastard ought not have been able to breathe:

“With such a large body mass, combined with a long neck, physiologists encounter problems determining how these animals managed to breathe.”

2. How the poor bugger got any oxygen to its brain is a complete mystery:

“In the early 20th century, diplodocids like Apatosaurus were often portrayed with their necks held high up in the air, allowing them to graze from tall trees. More recently, scientists have argued that the heart would have had trouble sustaining sufficient blood pressure to oxygenate the brain. Furthermore, more recent studies have shown that the structure of the neck vertebrae would not have permitted the neck to bend far upwards.[14][15]”

Which is actually quite ludicrous. Because an animal would hardly evolve a long neck which it would not be able to use. We must assume a lesser gravity allowing it to use its neck to fullest advantage.

3. The poor bugger wouldn’t have been able to eat enough to sustain itself:

“It is not known how Apatosaurs ate enough food to satisfy their enormous bodies. It is likely that they ate constantly, pausing only to cool off, drink or to remove parasites. It is surmised that they slept standing upright. They likely relied on their enormous size and herd behavior to deter predators.”

There are other good reasons to believe that the earth has been expanding. But the size of the brontosaurus and many other dinosaurs is one valid reason. And there is not much use gainsaying that idea. There is a big problem with some of our young blokes who accept non-evidence as evidence. Like in the case of the IPCC. Or in the case of people trying to stooge others that there is a fiscal multiplier.

Its a variant of Greshams law again. You get used to accepting non-evidence ….. you no longer are able to recognise real evidence when you see it.

Supporter of Chinese communist nationalisation….. Jason Soon, has just lied and linked to this thread implying that I’m claiming an expanding planet on non-convergent evidence. He is claiming that I’m relying on the dinosaur evidence alone. This is a lie and shows him up as the failed analyst that he is.

I basically only consider an hypothesis as being worthy it if has three or more lines of convergence. So that therefore the Big Bang is not under consideration since it relies on red shift alone. Whereas the expanding planet thesis if a very good one with many lines of convergence. The impossible size of some dinosaurs being just one line of evidence.

Advertisements

Responses

  1. Bird,

    Umm where is the additional matter coming from to make the earth expand?

    There must be more mass if there is to be greater gravity as otherwise gravity would decrease.

    Howis this matter created?

  2. Right. That I don’t know. But there could be many different candidates. As you know according to current theory matter and energy are convertible one to the other.

    It could come from electric currents in the form of moving subatomic particles. Since as you know the earth has a magnetic field and magnetic fields and electric currents go hand in hand.

    It could come from other subatomic particles since as you know some subatomic particles are small enough to penetrate deep into the earth before they are stopped.

    That part of it doesn’t present a problem. The main problem is that the satellite people haven’t picked up any growth. Or if they have they have adjusted for it a long time ago and now its a hidden part of their calculations. That represents the only problem with the theory.

  3. And here we go again. Two guys make a YouTube animation and Birdy thinks he found a breakthrough.

    BULLSHIT. I DON’T THINK I FOUND ANYTHING. OTHER PEOPLE DISCOVERED THIS.

    As Steve has partially pointed out: gravity is proportional to mass and inversely to the square of distance.

    WELL I DON’T DISAGREE WITH THIS.

    Which means that for the same mass, force of gravity at the surface of a planet would be LARGER on a smaller planet and NOT LESSER.

    NOW THATS JUST ABSOLUTE LUNACY. THE GRAVITY AT THE SURFACE OF SMALLER PLANETS IS LESS THAN THE GRAVITY ON LARGER PLANETS. YOU STUPID FUCK. YOU HAVE LOST THE PLOT. THE GRAVITY ON THE MOON AND ON MARS IS LESS THAN THAT ON THE SURFACE OF THE EARTH.

    In other words, if dinosaurs couldn’t have existed on earth in its current size because of gravity, they couldn’t have existed on a smaller one.

    WELL YOU’VE JUST MADE A FOOL OF YOURSELF LIAM.

    GRAVITY IS ALWAYS LESS ON THE SURFACE OF A LESS MASSIVE PLANET.

  4. Right. You see the size of some of the dinosaurs falsifies the doctrine that the mass and gravity of the earth has always been the same.

    Thats a clean falsification and would really be the end of the story. But what we need is CONVERGENT falsification and we have that. Hence the doctrine that the mass and gravity of the earth has always been the same is falsified outright.

  5. “GRAVITY IS ALWAYS LESS ON THE SURFACE OF A LESS MASSIVE PLANET.”

    I don’t deny that, what I said is that FOR THE SAME MASS, gravity was higher on a smaller planet as on a larger one.

    WELL THATS JUST IRRELEVANT. YOU ARE BEING AN IDIOT.

  6. What we can say for sure is that the earth and its gravity has grown larger. Whether it has grown larger at the rate at which Neal Adams says it has is another matter and is not proven to my satisfaction. But the idea that the earths mass and gravity has been constant is falsified absolutely.

  7. “What we can say for sure is that the earth and its gravity has grown larger.”

    Based on what? As such it is not surer than arguing both stayed constant.

    THE IDEA THAT IT STAYED CONSTANT IS FALSIFIED. CERTAINLY BY THE SIZE OF DINOSAURS. BUT NOT ONLY BY THE SIZE OF DINOSAURS. BUT BY THE WAY IN WHICH THE CONTINENTS HAVE MOVED.

    I am even ready to accept SMALL variations in size, but am very doubtful of any significant variation of mass.

    WHAT ARE YOU BASING THAT CRAP ON? YOU ARE JUST MAKING IT UP. YOUR MENTAL PROBLEMS AREN’T EVIDENCE. THE PLANET HAS NOT STAYED THE SAME SIZE. THATS BEEN FALSIFIED. THE PLANET KEEPS GROWING. WE SEE THIS FROM THE “MOVEMENT” OF CONTINENTS AND THE WAY THEY FIT TOGETHER.

    WE SEE IT ON OTHER PLANETS. BY THE WAY, IF THE LOW LEVELS ARE TAKEN OUT, THE HIGHER LEVELS FIT TOGETHER. SHOWING CLEARLY THAT THE LOW LEVELS ARE STRETCH-MARKS.

  8. “THE IDEA THAT IT STAYED CONSTANT IS FALSIFIED. CERTAINLY BY THE SIZE OF DINOSAURS. BUT NOT ONLY BY THE SIZE OF DINOSAURS. BUT BY THE WAY IN WHICH THE CONTINENTS HAVE MOVED.”

    An idea can’t be falsified Birdy.

    THEORIES CAN IN FACT BE FALSIFIED. YOU SAY THE MOST STUPID THINGS.

    Further, YOU claim the size of dinosaurs is evidence that gravity substantially changed.

    YES THAT IS MY CLAIM. BUT ITS NOT THE ONLY EVIDENCE. I DON’T REALLY BELIEVE IN GOING ON EVIDENCE WITH LESS THAN 3 LINES OF CONVERGENCE. I’M PRETTY FASTIDIOUS WITH STUFF LIKE THAT. FOR EXAMPLE I COULD NEVER GO WITH THE BIG BANG WHICH LEANS ON A SINGLE LINE OF EVIDENCE, NOW FALSIFIED.

    And YOU and the authors of the animation claim that the movement of continents is explained by a substantial variation in size.

    A SUBSTANTIAL INCREASE IN SIZE YES. WHY THE INEXACTITUDE?

    “THE PLANET HAS NOT STAYED THE SAME SIZE. THATS BEEN FALSIFIED.”

    So there was a vast global conspiracy to falsify something in order to say the earth stayed the same size?

    NOT AT ALL. STUPID, BIGOTED SCIENTISTS ARE UPWARDLY MOBILE.THE PROBLEM IS A UNIVERSAL ONE WITH SOCIALIST SCIENCE. SOCIALIST SCIENCE DOESN’T WORK FOREVER. IT BREAKS DOWN AND IN THE END THE SCIENTISTS WIND UP GETTING IN THE WAY OF NEW KNOWLEDGE. 3 YEARS AGO I WAS SUSPICIOUS OF SOME MATTERS IN THE PHYSICAL SCIENCES. BUT I THOUGHT THE REAL SERIOUS PROBLEMS WERE ONLY IN THE HUMANITIES. I KNEW OF THE PROBLEMS IN ECONOMIC SCIENCE BECAUSE OF MY TRAINING IN THIS FIELD. WHAT I DID NOT KNOW IS THAT THESE SAME PROBLEMS WERE UBIQUITOUS IN ALL FIELDS OF LEARNING DOMINATED BY STOLEN-MONEY-FINANCING MORE GENERALLY. I TRUST THE CHEMISTS AND THE ELECTRICAL ENGINEERS. IT IS HARD TO TRUST TOO MANY PEOPLE IN OTHER AREAS.

    YOU CAN CALL IT A CONSPIRACY IF YOU WANT. IF YOU ARE SUCCESSFUL AT CHARACTERISING IT AS A CONSPIRACY THIS IS NEITHER EVIDENCE FOR OR AGAINST. YOU CAN CALL THEM THE SCIENCE-MAFIA AND MANY DO. BUT WE ARE MORE LOOKING AT THE CITY OF MAN OR POO-TOWN. OR IN OTHER WORDS WE ARE LOOKING AT THE FACT THAT ALMOST ALL HUMAN INSTITUTIONS TEND TOWARDS DYSFUNCTION. WHICH IS PRETTY MUCH A SAINT AUGUSTUS WAY OF LOOKING AT THINGS.

  9. I repeat, ideas and theories cannot be falsified.

    THATS OBVIOUSLY BOTH WRONG AND IDIOTIC. THE FLAT EARTH MODEL WAS FALSIFIED, JUST FOR ONE EXAMPLE. DR BIRD ADVISES THAT YOU THINK OF SOME OTHER EXAMPLES AND THEN GIVE YOURSELF AN UPPERCUT.

    THIS IS SUCH A STUPID IDEA OF YOURS, ONE WHICH I HAVE ALREADY FALSIFIED. THAT BEING THE CASE WE HAVE TO MOVE ON. I WILL CONSIDER THE REPETITION OF THIS WRONG IDEA AS MERELY YOU LYING.

    I AM FASTIDIOUS WITH PARADIGMS. YOUR PARADIGM ABOUT PARADIGMS NOT BEING FALSIFIABLE HAS BEEN FALSIFIED. WE MOVE ON AND WE DON’T ALLOW OURSELVES TO GET BOGGED DOWN BY MINDLESS LEFTIST FILIBUSTER.

  10. As you know according to current theory matter and energy are convertible one to the other.

    Yes but it also says you need fantastically large quantities of energy to increase mass.

    C^2 = 9*10^16 , ie to make 1 gram of matter you need 10^8 mega joules.

    I still think the killer thing you have to explain is why if the planet is expanding enough to meaningfully change the strength of gravity at the surface, you can reasonably expect dinosaur fossils not to have grown in proportion.

    Thirdly given we know practically zilch about the soft tissue I then its difficult to conclude that they couldn’t have walked.

  11. What makes you think you would get matter creation at the surface? Clearly you are being an idiot Edney. Since the planet grows by stretch-mark the last thing you are going to expect is matter creation at the surface. For the love of stupid people everywhere Edney pull yourself together.

  12. “I DON’T REALLY BELIEVE IN GOING ON EVIDENCE WITH LESS THAN 3 LINES OF CONVERGENCE. I’M PRETTY FASTIDIOUS WITH STUFF LIKE THAT.”

    Shorter Bird: I must have read it on at least three websites.

    NO NO. YOU ARE JUST BEING AN IDIOT MATE. RIGHT FROM THE START THE BIG BANG WAS UNACCEPTABLE OR AT THE VERY LEAST DUBIOUS SINCE IT RELIED ON RED SHIFT ALONE. ONE LINE OF EVIDENCE AND THAT LINE NOW FALSIFIED.

    THE GENERAL THRUST OF THE THEORY OF EVOLUTION HAS VERY LITTLE DIRECT EVIDENCE IN ITS FAVOUR. ON THE OTHER HAND IT HAS MULTIPLE LINES OF CONVERGENT EVIDENCE. SO THERE REALLY IS NO GETTING AWAY FROM SOME FORM OF IT. YOU WILL SEE ME SAYING THIS THREE YEARS AGO BEFORE I HAD DECIDED THAT THERE WERE SERIOUS PROBLEMS IN THE NATURAL SCIENCES. YOU CAN SEARCH THIS BLOG FOR THE FIRST POST ON METHODOLOGY. THATS THREE YEARS AGO. AND YOU WILL SEE THERE THAT I DON’T REALLY CONSIDER SOMETHING VERY GOOD EVIDENCE UNLESS IT HAS THREE OR MORE LINES OF CONVERGENCE.

  13. From an evolutionary point of view the brontosaurus makes absolutely no sense without a lower gravity. Its a foolish idea to think that he has a neck that long that he would black out if he raised it above horizontal. Its a foolish idea to think that this creature has the most powerful cardio-vascular system ever evolved.

    If he cannot hold his head up at the vertical easily it is inconceivable that he would have evolved a neck that long. Since the neck is evolved to allow him to be able to get at unexploited food sources.

    They say he fended off predators by way of his herd instinct and size. This is ludicrous. Since if he couldn’t move about fast and fight his potential attackers would sort that fact out soon enough.

    The brontasaurus was around a long time ago. The wiki says about 150 million years. One imagines that the gravity must have been one half or even one quarter what it is today or that big fella makes no sense at all. His kneck would break. He would black out. He wouldn’t be able to get off the ground if he fell. He wouldn’t be able to feed himself sufficiently with that small mouth.

    A person lying down who has low blood pressure may feel almost like blacking out if he jumps to his feet too fast. Exatrapolate that sort of thinking to big bastard. It doesn’t work and there is no use being silly about it.

  14. “From an evolutionary point of view the brontosaurus makes absolutely no sense without a lower gravity. Its a foolish idea to think that he has a neck that long that he would black out if he raised it above horizontal. Its a foolish idea to think that this creature has the most powerful cardio-vascular system ever evolved.”

    Why is that foolish, or at least, more foolish than thinking the earth was so much smaller 65mil years ago that gravity was substantially less?

    Your normal technique is to make some weird supposition and then treat all criticism as being falsified by the stupid supposition. The person who starts with the silly claim is the one who needs to supply evidence. Given that we essentially know 3/5ths of fuck all about dinosaur soft tissue your expanding planet explanation is a bit of a stretch.

  15. Its foolish because its impossible under evolution. To have the longer-knecked creatures more powerfully successful then their cousins who merely take two steps closer to the tree and lift their kneck straight up. Meaning their heart doesn’t have to pump twice as hard to get blood and oxygen all away along the neck. So that dog won’t hunt evolutionary wise. The shorter necked brothers would have had to food, poked all the she-brontisauri and the longer-necked fellow would be jacking off and having immediate blackouts.

  16. “Why is that foolish, or at least, more foolish than thinking the earth was so much smaller 65mil years ago that gravity was substantially less?”

    You see thats just you being an idiot because there is NOTHING foolish about the above. In fact we can take it as a given. But the Brontasauraus was more like 150 million years ago.

    So no if the animal evolves a long neck its only to be able to use it. Once he cannot use it fully he dies out or the neck gets shorter.

    And no its not the least bit credible that he would black out if he lifted his neck up high. And no its not the least bit credible that he had by far the best cardio-vascular system ever and all that jive.

    We have the evidence that the gravity was less and we have to follow the evidence.

  17. Pedro. What was the point of that quote? Its the wiki. Its idiocy. And the evidence points totally against plate techtonics. It makes no sense. Try thinking how much force it would take to push India into Asia from the far side and lift up the Himalayas. They cannot explain where that force is coming from.

  18. The wiki is getting evidence mixed up with opinion. Five times I changed the word evidence to opinion to retrieve the dignity of the entry. Five times they changed it back. They don’t have the evidence. So they were lying.

  19. Pedro you fuckwit? What was the point of the quote.

    You are not really that smart are you pedro. No you are not.

  20. Come on pedro you fuckwit. What was the point of the quote? If you cannot come up with a point to it I’m wiping it. Because thats one sentence that I myself tried to change one word in a number of times and these communist bastards wouldn’t let me.

  21. NO YOU ARE JUST FUCKING LYING PEDRO. THEY DON’T HAVE ANY EVIDENCE TO BEST THE EXPANSION THEORY. THEY DON’T. ANY EVIDENCE THEY HAVE ALSO SUPPORTS THE EXPANSION THEORY. THEY DON’T HAVE ANY EVIDENCE THAT SUPPORTS THE MOVING PLATES GIG AND NOT THE EXPANSION GIG.

    SO YOU ARE JUST LYING. AND THERE WAS NO POINT TO THE QUOTE. THE QUOTE WAS A TOTAL LIE. I TRIED TO GET IT CHANGED. AND THE LYING CUNTS KEPT CHANGING IT BACK WITHOUT JUSTIFICATION.

    THE QUOTE CANNOT STAY BECAUSE IT IS A LIE.

    NOW COME UP WITH SOME FUCKING REASONING YOU USELESS CUNT, IN YOUR OWN WORDS, OR FUCK OFF.

    DON’T PRETEND TO HAVE EVIDENCE OR ARGUMENT WHEN YOU DON’T HAVE ANY AND YOU ARE JUST LYING.

    STOP BEING A DISHONEST CUNT.

  22. So lets have your case direct. And stop fucking around.

    You think these plates pushing with some unknown force is better because…..

    because why……..

    In your own words.

    GO!!!!!!!!

    I cannot stand idiots who do not have a case and just play childish games like that.

  23. So lets have the relative advantage of the plate techtonic version in your own words pedro.

    GO!!!!!

  24. So you didn’t have anything did you pedro? You were just fucking around? Is that right?

    Fucking lunatic.

    • How about that? What do yo know? Pedro just hiding behind his finger.

  25. Correct, all planets, including earth, accrue mass by precipitation from ether, exponentially at the centers of gravitational field strength. The best explanation of this is given by Neal Adams in a series of videos on youtube. Granted, Mr. Adams is a cartoonist, but that can be an advantage when confronting the reality of science having remained the same socialist dogma that existed in the days of Galileo.

  26. Right. Well I’m not quite sure HOW it happens. But the evidence suggests that it happens.

    Not that hard an idea to come to grips with once your realise what utter nonsense the big bang theory is.

  27. An “INDEPENDENT” (ho ho) audit of the Spanish Banking system say they need billions and billions of dollars subsidy. Which they are going to get. And which the moron Joseph Cambria will support.

    Why not just wind these banks up? Why not replace their ponzi money with cash, institute 100% backing, and wind them up if they cannot survive on that basis? There is never any reason to bail out banks on a fiat currency. This is just a fact.

  28. Reading about the great success story of Byzantine. A success story in terms of surviving for so many centuries surrounded by enemies. They had a land tax!!!! The emperors also favoured small landholders in this land-tax. Almost too good to be true. Also the tax was in gold. So in effect they had both the land tax, a bit of a break for the little guy, and a gold standard. No wonder they seemed to have nine-hundred lives to spare. They were run on such a sound basis.

  29. The Battle Of Los Angeles:

    Here’s what the Wiki says:

    “The Battle of Los Angeles, also known as The Great Los Angeles Air Raid, is the name given by contemporary sources to the rumored enemy attack and subsequent anti-aircraft artillery barrage which took place from late 24 February to early 25 February 1942 over Los Angeles, California.[2][3] The incident occurred less than three months after the United States entered World War II as a result of the Japanese Imperial Navy’s attack on Pearl Harbor, and one day after the Bombardment of Ellwood on 23 February.”

    Actually this was a successful attack by the Japanese on the US, using dirigibles, with planes attached. They were able to make it across the Pacific, do some damage (in other occasions setting off bushfires) and make it all the way back. I’ve just heard a recorded local newscast at the time which makes the wiki version sound ridiculous.

    http://www.damninteresting.com/the-battle-of-los-angeles/

  30. I’M NOT THE IDIOT MATE. THIS IS SIMPLE FACT. TECTONIC PLATES IDEOLOGY IS WRONG BECAUSE IT CANNOT BE TRUE. SOMETHING THAT CANNOT BE TRUE ISN’T TRUE. OR IS THAT GOING PAST YOUR EDUCATION LEVEL?

    • Go back to New Zealand you retarded wop cunt fuckwit.

  31. Here is a lecture on the idiocy of our current banking system, from 1998. So the disaster of 2008 and beyond was something perfectly well known back then. This fellow talking about it in 1998, saying the same things I was saying to Catallaxy in 2005.

  32. Why is thorium the perfect fission fuel? Can anyone answer that? Why is it fundamentally treasonous to the species to oppose Thorium while there is room to debate either way o Uranium?
    It’s important that all good people can give a clear answer to these questions.

  33. “Ozone is a powerful oxidant (far more so than dioxygen) and has many industrial and consumer applications related to oxidization…….”

    You would think this would have implications for rocketry. Like you have your large “Spruce Goose” sized jet. This jet run by way of a thorium reactor which would essentially be steam driven. And this would carry your smaller rocket. But you would think that if you were using liquid ozone rather than liquid oxygen, and the above being true, you could have a more energy-packed and more stable fuel then hydrogen. So supposing you’ve got liquid ozone and kerosene. Or supposing (and this is not likely) that ozone was even more of a powerful oxidant, you could match it up with diesel. Of course I don’t think you could. I’m just talking about the principle here. I’m wondering if experiments have been done with this.

  34. Even though the theory of evolution, considered in a broad sense, is pretty good theory, its modern proponents are often dropkicks. But here is one fellow who is really smart and good to listen to.

    Here is Nick Lane.

  35. Clearly there are matters fishy about the holocaust. Notice here how the revisionist takes a scientific approach while the self-proclaimed “skeptic” isn’t skeptical about anything!!!

  36. Here’s Carl Sagan. A dopehead and no scientist. Here is the THC-head “billions and billions” basically making it all up. The greenhouse hyper-myth. Like Einstein, we are talking about science as an extension of navel-gazing. Carl having a few tokes of the gunja and birthing this bullshit straight from his brow, fully-grown.

  37. Here is Hawking getting in on this racket. This fellow is not anyones scientist. Hawking has never been a scientist, and no evidence exists that he knows anything about the scientific method. Quite apart from that, we don’t even have independent verification that its Hawking talking this unscientific nonsense. Then we have everyones favourite dope-smoker again. His diagnosis of Venus is completely wrong. Venus is heated from the inside out. Its still hot from when it was a comet. This fact is no longer open to challenge because we have the entire heat profile of the Venus atmosphere to prove it.

  38. Dirty Jew Bastards.

    • Hawking is not a Jew is he? He’s a cripple right?


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Categories

%d bloggers like this: