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

Dixie said:
It is amazing how much you KNOW would have happened, as well as what could have happened. The problem is, you are stupid. In relative terms, of course. I am sure you have a modicum of education, and you seem to be well versed enough to carry on an intellectual conversation, but in terms of what you actually know regarding our universe, you are stupid. There are vastly more things you DON'T KNOW than things you do know for certain.

Whether the relationship between how much we've excavated on Earth is comparable to how much we've excavated (explored) space, is irrelevant. The point is, in neither case have we FULLY explored everything, and we probably never will. It is very important... no, it is VITAL, that we keep an open mind regarding science and exploration of possibilities. This is how every breakthrough that has ever been, was made possible... by someone not 'accepting' what we thought we KNEW! By refusing to convince themselves, as you and Prissy have done, that we already KNOW it all! When you have closed your mind to any possibility, you have sealed your fate in ignorance.
Click to expand...

it amazes he doesn't get this
 
HUGO STIGLITZ said:
:lolup:

Dixie is so fucking dumb. The first human civilization was 7k years ago, in Sumer. God, what a fucking idiot.
Click to expand...

ah, you're one of those "young civilizationists"?.......thinks civilization was created only 7000 years ago?.....I hear 50-70% of seculars think the same way......

WASHINGTON (AFP) — A collar made of shell beads estimated to be 75,000 years old and found in a cave in South Africa is believed to be the oldest known jewelry, appearing 30,000 years before what had previously been considered the first signs of civilization, researchers said.

Archaeologists discovered 41 beads the size of peas with holes bored in them in the Blombos Cave on the Indian Ocean coast, according to an article in Friday's edition of the journal Science.

The discovery was made in a layer of sediment dating from the middle of the Stone Age, researchers said.

The beads were made from the shells of a mollusk native to nearby waters, and contained traces of red ochre, indicating they were colored with pigment.
Click to expand...

http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_kmafp/is_200404/ai_kepm442902/
 
Last edited:
Dixie said:
Beefyass, let me educate you a little here... (I am older and wiser.)

There are TWO ways to abuse and pervert science. You seem to only be aware of one. The Russel's Teapot analogy is how some people will refuse to accept things in science they don't want to accept. You are familiar with this, because you constantly accuse me and others of using it. I acknowledge that some people do indeed do this.

There is another way to abuse and pervert science, and that is what you, waterhead, prissy, mott, and others do on a routine basis. This is where you take a premise or theory of science, and turn it into an irrefutable fact that no one can contest without facing harsh ridicule. One of the best examples of this, is the Global Warming issue, where you and your "science" nearly convinced the world that something was a fact, when it wasn't a fact at all. You are constantly doing this with the debate on intelligent design, and here, on the possibility humans could have existed during the time of the dinosaurs.

Science is very simple. It doesn't make determinations of proof, it only provides evidence... the raw data... WE make the conclusions from that, not the science. It is important to remember that science does give us insight, but equally important to remember science is not infallible and has often been wrong. Less than 100 years ago, our smartest scientists thought the oldest human civilizations were around 30k years old. We now know they were much older. There is nothing to say that in another 100 years, we may find that human civilizations existed way beyond anything we can imagine currently, perhaps even back as far as the dinosaurs... all it would take would be a single discovery. Just because we haven't yet discovered it, doesn't mean it's not possible, and that is the only point I have tried to make.
Click to expand...

Dixie - we know enough in the fossil record to know the rough timeline on evolution for not just man, but mammals in general. With the evidence that currently exists, they can arrive at a pretty solid conclusion that man existed well after the reign of the dinosaurs. In terms of science, it would be pretty crazy if they were 60 million years off on that.

But you're ignoring the larger point, which is that the respondents to the survey seem to be saying that, based on what we know now, man lived during the time of the dinosaurs.

I realize that's embarassing for a self-described "spiritualist" to try to defend, but it is what it is.
 
Onceler said:
Dixie - we know enough in the fossil record to know the rough timeline on evolution for not just man, but mammals in general. With the evidence that currently exists, they can arrive at a pretty solid conclusion that man existed well after the reign of the dinosaurs. In terms of science, it would be pretty crazy if they were 60 million years off on that.

But you're ignoring the larger point, which is that the respondents to the survey seem to be saying that, based on what we know now, man lived during the time of the dinosaurs.

I realize that's embarassing for a self-described "spiritualist" to try to defend, but it is what it is.
Click to expand...

When we say we "know" something or that it is "fact", we really mean that it has the best solid evidence for it at this point. If you were presented with two options on a test "Man walked with dinosaurs", and "Man didn't walk with dinosaurs", and you choose the first option, you're an idiot.
 
HUGO STIGLITZ said:
:lolup:

Dixie is so fucking dumb. The first human civilization was 7k years ago, in Sumer. God, what a fucking idiot.
Click to expand...
It would be more accurate to say that the earliest known human civilization was in Sumer, this knowledge could easily change by finding a new dig site from an earlier date.
 
Onceler said:
The debate here has taken a weird turn. Again - I think it's pretty clear what the respondents to this survey are saying.

If you want to argue that they're saying "a few stray dinosaurs may have made it through the mass extinction, and they may have lived alongside man, but we just haven't discovered that," have at it. But I really think it's a stretch.

They're saying this is a young earth, and that man lived in the TIME of dinosaurs, and vice versa. That's how I read the question & response.
Click to expand...

The "I don't knows" might be saying that. Do we have the exact question?

It's funny that Dixie's stupid scenarios argue the reverse, i.e., that man was around before the mass extinction. The stray dinosaur notion seems far more plausible.
 
I believe this was the question:

"Please tell us whether you agree or disagree with the following statement: "The earliest humans lived at the same time as the dinosaurs." "
 
RStringfield said:
The "I don't knows" might be saying that. Do we have the exact question?

It's funny that Dixie's stupid scenarios argue the reverse, i.e., that man was around before the mass extinction. The stray dinosaur notion seems far more plausible.
Click to expand...

Dixies scenarios represent POSSIBILITY, nothing more. Don't try to read too much into that. I am not claiming this is the case, or even that I believe it might be the case, just that it is a possibility and we don't know for certain.

As I said, the Earth is 4.5 billion years old, there is a LOT of time there for things to have happened LONG before the dinosaurs, and to act like the finding of some bones means we've answered all the questions, is stupid. I doubt we could identify the remains of something the size of a human that lived on Earth 200-300 million years ago, much less a billion years ago or more.

Let me tell you what this is about... It's nitwits who want to believe we all evolved from a single-cell organism, who have developed a theory of a timeline for how that is the case, and the existence of humans at the time of dinosaurs or before, is something that would destroy their models for this. That is the ONLY reason you see people taking the unreasonable and illogical position of proclaiming something a fact and something else as an impossibility. Ironically, it is a prime example of FAITH over SCIENCE!
 
Dixie said:
Dixies scenarios represent POSSIBILITY, nothing more. Don't try to read too much into that. I am not claiming this is the case, or even that I believe it might be the case, just that it is a possibility and we don't know for certain.

As I said, the Earth is 4.5 billion years old, there is a LOT of time there for things to have happened LONG before the dinosaurs, and to act like the finding of some bones means we've answered all the questions, is stupid. I doubt we could identify the remains of something the size of a human that lived on Earth 200-300 million years ago, much less a billion years ago or more.

Let me tell you what this is about... It's nitwits who want to believe we all evolved from a single-cell organism, who have developed a theory of a timeline for how that is the case, and the existence of humans at the time of dinosaurs or before, is something that would destroy their models for this. That is the ONLY reason you see people taking the unreasonable and illogical position of proclaiming something a fact and something else as an impossibility. Ironically, it is a prime example of FAITH over SCIENCE!
Click to expand...

Does that make me a halfwit nitwit; because while I don't beleive that mankind was around at the same time as dinosaurs, I do believe that life on this world began as a single cell organism.
 
Onceler said:
I believe this was the question:

"Please tell us whether you agree or disagree with the following statement: "The earliest humans lived at the same time as the dinosaurs." "
Click to expand...

And 71% ...7 out of 10, said they either didn't believe this or were not sure.

As several have pointed out, we have critters presently here with us, which evolved from their dinosaur ancestors. Technically speaking, even if the first humans came about 30k years ago, they were here at the same time as the dinosaurs, or at least the close ancestors of the dinosaurs. I don't profess to know what these people were thinking when they answered the question, and I don't know what kind of people were asked, or who asked the question. Just like I don't know that humans may have inhabited the earth a billion years before the dinosaurs, and something wiped them out. Do you KNOW that didn't happen?
 
Onceler said:
I believe this was the question:

"Please tell us whether you agree or disagree with the following statement: "The earliest humans lived at the same time as the dinosaurs." "
Click to expand...

My reading of that sort of rules out the stray dinosaur. Still I would guess some people may have answered "I don't know" with that in mind.
 
USFREEDOM911 said:
Does that make me a halfwit nitwit; because while I don't beleive that mankind was around at the same time as dinosaurs, I do believe that life on this world began as a single cell organism.
Click to expand...

Yes, that makes you a half-wit nitwit.

Nothing in science indicates this theory is even possible, let alone likely.
 
Dixie said:
And 71% ...7 out of 10, said they either didn't believe this or were not sure.

As several have pointed out, we have critters presently here with us, which evolved from their dinosaur ancestors. Technically speaking, even if the first humans came about 30k years ago, they were here at the same time as the dinosaurs, or at least the close ancestors of the dinosaurs. I don't profess to know what these people were thinking when they answered the question, and I don't know what kind of people were asked, or who asked the question. Just like I don't know that humans may have inhabited the earth a billion years before the dinosaurs, and something wiped them out. Do you KNOW that didn't happen?
Click to expand...

If the theory that birds evolved is correct then that happened long before humans appeared. A bird is not a dinosaur. If you answered with that in mind then you misunderstood the question.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top