Today’s Teabagger News: Only 41% of Texans know humans did not live with dinosaurs

[Cypress]

Dixie,

If you don't have any confidence in the ability of science to collect representative samples....then next time you go to the Doctor for a blood test, make sure you insist they take all of your blood.

Because, a tiny representative sample, comprising less than 1% of your total blood, is not sufficient to prove or provide a conclusive chemical analysis of your blood.

Make sure they drain you, bro'.

 

[zappasguitar]

Dixie,

If you don't have any confidence in the ability of science to collect representative samples....then next time you go to the Doctor for a blood test, make sure you insist they take all of your blood.

Because, a tiny representative sample, comprising less than 1% of your total blood, is not sufficient to prove or provide a conclusive chemical analysis of your blood.

Make sure they drain you, bro'.

OH MAN THAT IS JUST TOO GOOD!!

BWAAAAAAAAAA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA!!!

 

[Timshel]

Dixie,

If you don't have any confidence in the ability of science to collect representative samples....then next time you go to the Doctor for a blood test, make sure you insist they take all of your blood.

Because, a tiny representative sample, comprising less than 1% of your total blood, is not sufficient to prove or provide a conclusive chemical analysis of your blood.

Make sure they drain you, bro'.

LOL.

Or just tell them to ignore their knowledge entirely, since it is all possibly wrong, and use the force to heal you.

 

[Timshel]

Your "evidence that shows otherwise" is incomplete. If you go look in your toilet and see no turd, does this prove the water is safe to drink?

Here's a thought... humans could have existed way before dinosaurs! Earth was destroyed and millions of years later, dinosaurs emerged.... then Earth was destroyed again and millions of years later, humans emerged! Can you prove this didn't happen? It's even possible these pre-dinosaur humans could have been smarter than we are! They may have done and achieved more than we ever dreamed of! Then one day... POOF, it was gone in an instant! We have found no remnants because we can't dig that deep... or they are in places we can't reach or even know to look in. The evidence has slipped into the subduction zone and disappeared forever... can you PROVE this hasn't happened? If you can, show your evidence!

The point is, we simply don't KNOW the complete picture. If you read the opening post of this thread, you see a condescending smart ass, making fun of "teabaggers" who dared to say they weren't sure or didn't know for sure, when it came to this question. I happen to think "I DON'T KNOW" is a perfectly normal and rational answer to that particular question, and ANYONE who claims either of the other two options as FACT are IDIOTS!

Are you saying human evolution occurred twice? Or maybe you took up my advice on the time traveling Hoffa?

 

[FUCK THE POLICE]

Your "evidence that shows otherwise" is incomplete. If you go look in your toilet and see no turd, does this prove the water is safe to drink?

Here's a thought... humans could have existed way before dinosaurs! Earth was destroyed and millions of years later, dinosaurs emerged.... then Earth was destroyed again and millions of years later, humans emerged! Can you prove this didn't happen? It's even possible these pre-dinosaur humans could have been smarter than we are! They may have done and achieved more than we ever dreamed of! Then one day... POOF, it was gone in an instant! We have found no remnants because we can't dig that deep... or they are in places we can't reach or even know to look in. The evidence has slipped into the subduction zone and disappeared forever... can you PROVE this hasn't happened? If you can, show your evidence!

The point is, we simply don't KNOW the complete picture. If you read the opening post of this thread, you see a condescending smart ass, making fun of "teabaggers" who dared to say they weren't sure or didn't know for sure, when it came to this question. I happen to think "I DON'T KNOW" is a perfectly normal and rational answer to that particular question, and ANYONE who claims either of the other two options as FACT are IDIOTS!

There is a point at which you are just coming up with silly hypothesis's with the express purpose of making them as impossible to test for as possible, and at that point, you are no longer contributing to science.

Dinosaurs may have had a civilization greater than humans and it all magically dissappeared? It's not even wrong.

 

[Dixie - In Memoriam]

The Air... Seawater... Your Blood.... All things that are relatively consistent among any number of samples. Fossil remains? Not so! We are constantly discovering new things, stuff we never knew before, stuff that wasn't revealed in the last discovery! So we can see these silly comparisons are like apples to oranges.

 

[Minister of Truth]

The Air... Seawater... Your Blood.... All things that are relatively consistent among any number of samples. Fossil remains? Not so! We are constantly discovering new things, stuff we never knew before, stuff that wasn't revealed in the last discovery! So we can see these silly comparisons are like apples to oranges.

 

[Dixie - In Memoriam]

Really? How is what I stated a "failure" by ANY stretch? We can sample the air in Australia and in Canada, and they are made up of the same components... We can sample water from the Atlantic ocean and the Pacific ocean and the components are the same... We can take a blood sample from your finger or your toe, and the components are consistently the same... BUT, we can dig up a fossil in Russia and a fossil in Texas, and they may be entirely different. The analogies given are what have FAILED here.

 

[Dixie - In Memoriam]

Here's the more proper analogy from the pinhead perspective.... We know that cancer kills people, therefore, all people who die, that is the cause of their death! End of debate!

 

[/MSG/]

Here's the more proper analogy from the pinhead perspective.... We know that cancer kills people, therefore, all people who die, that is the cause of their death! End of debate!

Actually the cause of death is a failure of your body to continue it's bodily functions. Which is universal.

FAIL

 

[Dixie - In Memoriam]

Actually the cause of death is a failure of your body to continue it's bodily functions. Which is universal.

Yes I know this, dimwit. And actually, the fossil findings on earth are not a complete history of everything that ever roamed the planet for all of time. That was the point of presenting the absurd analogy, to compare it with the absurd analogies being presented by pinheads... or have you not read the thread?

The argument seems to be, since we've excavated less than 1% of the planet, and found no evidence of dinosaurs and humans coexistence, it is a fact that it didn't happen. I personally think that is absurd, what about you?

 

[Cypress]

Fixed

The Air... Seawater... Your Blood, Presence of Dino fossils below the K/T rock boundary, and the complete absence of Dino fossils above the K/T rock boundary.... All things that are relatively 100% consistent among any number tens of thousands of samples, and 200 years of paleontologic research.

8th grade remedial science education for Pixie: In 200 years of paleontology, and field research, there's never been one single plausible Dino fossil above the K/T boundary.....nor, have any primate fossils ever been found that predate the Miocene

In science, that is called a scientific fact that is beyond any plausible dispute.

 

[FUCK THE POLICE]

Dixie, you promised us you were going to move to a tax shelter country. I'm still waiting.

 

[Cancel 2018. 3]

Fixed







8th grade remedial science education for Pixie: In 200 years of paleontology, and field research, there's never been one single plausible Dino fossil above the K/T boundary.....nor, have any primate fossils ever been found that predate the Miocene

In science, that is called a scientific fact that is beyond any plausible dispute.

LOL....and for over 200 years virtually all scientific evidence stated the earth was flat, the sun rotated around the earth....so that of course must be a scientific fact that is beyond any plausible dispute...

 

[/MSG/]

Yes I know this, dimwit. And actually, the fossil findings on earth are not a complete history of everything that ever roamed the planet for all of time. That was the point of presenting the absurd analogy, to compare it with the absurd analogies being presented by pinheads... or have you not read the thread?

The argument seems to be, since we've excavated less than 1% of the planet, and found no evidence of dinosaurs and humans coexistence, it is a fact that it didn't happen. I personally think that is absurd, what about you?

No, I haven't read this thread. I couldn't care less about dinosaurs. I just pop in to see the argument every now and then and make a smart ass comment. I'm not a archeologist, nor do I have any interest in it, so I'm not going to argue about an issue that I'm not knowledgeable on. You'd do well to follow my example.

 

[Cypress]

LOL....and for over 200 years virtually all scientific evidence stated the earth was flat, the sun rotated around the earth....so that of course must be a scientific fact that is beyond any plausible dispute...

The scientific method wasn't invented and practiced widely until about 300-400 years ago.

 

[Cancel 2018. 3]

The scientific method wasn't invented and practiced widely until about 300-400 years ago.

nice try....you said for 200 years something hasn't been found, thus it is scientific fact....using that logic, it is scientific fact the earth is flat and the sun revolves around the earth...

 

[Cypress]

nice try....you said for 200 years something hasn't been found, thus it is scientific fact....using that logic, it is scientific fact the earth is flat and the sun revolves around the earth...

Try to get this through your head:

The scientific method wasn't practiced in the dark ages, when people thought the sun moved around the earth. Or that the alchemists could make gold out of tin. The practice of the scientific method didn't happen to any large extent or in any sustained way in the western world until the 1600s. And the scientific method wasn't widely and universally applied until the 19th century.

The idiots who thought the sun went around the earth weren't practicing the scientific method. They were, in that respect, the ancestors of modern republicans.

 

[Cancel 2018. 3]

Try to get this through your head:

The scientific method wasn't practiced in the dark ages, when people thought the sun moved around the earth. Or that the alchemists could make gold out of tin. The practice of the scientific method didn't happen to any large extent or in any sustained way in the western world until the 1600s. And the scientific method wasn't widely and universally applied until the 19th century.

The idiots who thought the sun went around the earth weren't practicing the scientific method. They were, in that respect, the ancestors of modern republicans.

yawn...you're spinning madly but its not working

for over 200 years we haven't discovered sentient life outside of this planet, it is thus a scientific fact no sentient life exists outside this planet....

just admit you made dumbass statement and move on

 

[Dixie - In Memoriam]

yawn...you're spinning madly but its not working

for over 200 years we haven't discovered sentient life outside of this planet, it is thus a scientific fact no sentient life exists outside this planet....

just admit you made dumbass statement and move on

Excellent example!