Thread 16810094

Paleontology is a pseudoscience.

>>16810094 (OP)
We use animals that are alive today as references for what extinct animals probably looked like. We don't just drape skin over the skeleton like retards.

You can literally see the anchor points on a rabbit's skull that would suggest to a paleontologist that it probably had large ears (or at least ear muscles) for example.

>>16810100
>We use animals that are alive today as references for what extinct animals probably looked like.
And yet for two-hundred years scientists missed that dinosaurs had feathers.

>>16810102
Knowledge of feathered dinosaurs existed since the 1850's, shortly after "dinosaur" was even coined as a term and still before the scientific process as we know it today.
We more recently discovered that more dinosaurs had feathers than we thought (though, to be clear, most dinosaurs probably didn't have feathers) because those groups had more subtle feathers that didn't fossilize as well.

Basically, we knew theropod dinosaurs were the ancestors of birds since we first started studying dinosaurs. We just underestimated how long ago feathers developed.

>>16810094 (OP)
>>16810100
id like to see how an ai model trained on modern skeletons would predict what an old skeleton would look like.

>>16810106
>We more recently discovered
You didn't "discover" anything, you think dinosaurs had more feathers. In another year the scientific consensus might flip again thanks to some new piece of evidence. This is because paleontology is a pseudoscience.

>>16810112
Ah yes, the public skeleton digital library of over 5 billion skeletons for training.
Seriously?

>>16810094 (OP)
>paleontology is when you draw animals according to their skeletons
4chan is becoming dumber with each year

>>16810114
Nigger are you retarded? They found feather like structures. A lot of them you probably wouldn't recognize as "feathers" but they're absolutely there. Just take like 5 minutes to google "evolution of feathers."

>>16810118
They found evidence that makes them think dinosaurs had feathers. In a year, they might change their mind. Soft sciences are capricious.

>>16810116
You think creationism was invented recently?

>>16810127
People misinterpret creationism.
The bible only really claims that the Adamites were created.
If you actually read the relevant section it's pretty clear someone was doing freaky genetic engineering experiments a couple thousand years ago

>>16810119
You keep repeating yourself because you don't know what you're talking about. You lost and are coping.

>>16810136
Lol, kys

>>16810114
>the consensus might flip again thanks to some New piece of evidence
This has happened to All sciences in all of sciences history

>>16810119
Dinosaurs had feathers after a certain point, it really isn't even up for debate.

>>16810190
Dark matter isnt up for debate either that doesnt mean any compelling evidence exists. Its abscribed properties are literally outside the standars realm.of physics

>>16810094 (OP)
Are Foraminifera real?

>>16810115
...so what do the scientists study if there is no skeleton library?

>>16810094 (OP)
Other than the ears, it doesn't look all that far off.

>>16810249
https://history.army.mil/Army-Museum-Enterprise/Find-an-Army-Museum/US-Army-Medical-Museum/
I took a guest lecturer series in forensic sciences a lifetime ago. The head of this place was one of the lecturers.
World's largest collection of battlefield amputation skeletons. Lots of Civil War era skeletons available for study.

>>16810287
The biggest issue alone is the lack of life. You can see how your picrel corresponds to OPs. But yours lacks the uncanny valley of OPs.

>>16810094 (OP)
I mean fur and fat distribution can make an animal look vastly different than what it's skeleton would imply, but fur and fat don't leave fossils so we just make an educated guess

>>16810610
made me chuckle

>>16810119
>They found evidence and changed their models to conform to their discovery! That's not real science!

>>16810551
florida reindeer

>>16810115
training ais isnt hard when youve got a library card.

>>16811114
If you ever need a job making cool "with it" Saturday morning educational music videos for minority audiences then give me a call. You've got mad skillz, bro.

>>16810114
>the scientific consensus might flip again thanks to some new piece of evidence
Paleontology would only be a pseudoscience if new evidence didn't change the consensus.

>>16810114
>scientific consensus might flip again thanks to some new piece of evidence
That's literally just the core principle of science, nothing more, nothing less

>>16811356
It would also be a pseudoscience if you had no way to test its body of hypotheses.

>>16811370
How can there be "settled" science?

Fossil Explosions in the History of Life: Paleontologist Günter Bechly

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=izzNeLFTyKU

>>16811469
That's just a phrase morons parrot around and doesn't actually mean anything.
What is more correct to say is "there are some things which are so rigorously backed up by present observations that it would take something rather revolutionary to upend current conclusions on the matter."

>>16810094 (OP)
Shrinkwrapping is a well known problem in paleontology. You're not clever.

>>16810192
Cool. That has literally no bearing on the fact that there is physical fossil evidence of feathers in multiple dinosaur lineages

>>16811114
this nigga knows whatsupp