First  Prev  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  Next  Last
Giants of the Attack on Titan Anime not that farfetched.
11497 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Offline
Posted 7/20/14

JuJuRoll wrote:


evilotakuneko wrote:

You keep trying to engage me in some sort of debate, OP.

I've read the previous pages in this thread. I've seen your ignorance, denialism, and lack of critical thinking skills already in the pathetic arguments you have used and continue to try to use, despite several other posters showing you just how wrong you are.

My only hope here is to see if someone else might fall into your trap and in doing so, post something that I might find interesting.

Aww, and I bet you thought I posted for you.
(Apologies to Carly Simon)



My arguments are not as pathetic as yours. You lack an open mind especially from ancient texts from all over the world for the past 10,000 years. But you dismiss them all. SO like I said before if they describe these giants from EVERY ANCIENT CIVILIZATION in the world and you find these to be untrue then you have dismiss EVERY HISTORICAL TEXT, TABLET OR WHATEVER is written on. But you know what you think you know, you don't know. The links I provided defies human thinking and what we know and scientist will continually change AS THEY ALWAYS HAVE.



Oh for fuck's sake.

I read, and quite enjoyed, Herodotus's Histories. I consider it to contain within it many interesting facts and perspectives of the ancient greek civilization and surrounding world.

... Does that mean I believe in giant gold mining ants in India, or that Egyptian women pee standing up while men sitting down (outside no less) or that Hippocleides actually didn't care?

Anyway no text from 10,000 years ago exists, all evidence indicates humans didn't have writing 10,000 years ago. Though why do I have reason to suspect that you are one of those people who claim the earth didn't exist until 10,000 years ago?

*Sigh* I dismiss historical texts or tablets because they are very hard to analyze and people thousands of years ago didn't have much understanding or even contact with their larger surroundings. Stories got twisted like massive games of telephone, learning about foreign lands or strange events wasn't as simple as turning on the television.

As humans progressively have become more connected with fewer games of telephones needed to pass on information, naturally the more fantastical stories of ancient mythology got cleaned up into progressively more mundane events.

I prefer robust evidence ground in current scientific understanding, than pretending that people of ancient times somehow had everything figured out and it was a land of magic and fantasy.

I don't get my understanding of reality from cartoons; as much as I appreciate escapism, I realize that escapism is an ESCAPE from reality, not a true description of reality.
11497 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Offline
Posted 7/20/14 , edited 7/20/14
I need to go deliver hard drives but don't currently know the address which has me kinda unable to do my job. So I'm going to continue to vent my frustrations now.


JuJuRoll wrote:

LOL for someone who is trying to prove a point and make fun of me, then you post links to Wikipedia. Like i've said for the last time.

1) Scientists have been wrong in the past about everything and theories keep changing. What was learned in the 1600's and on we have found out they were wrong today. So some guy with square cube law that HASN'T been proven with humans and been broken with animals especially dinosaurs. Oh ya dont tell me through evolution they grew to be like that so square cube law doesnt apply to them. But wait maybe through evolution humans became giants.


This is such a particularly loathsome idea that Issac Asimov had to write a particularly stunning essay to refute the backwards mentality of it.

http://chem.tufts.edu/answersinscience/relativityofwrong.htm

"When people thought the earth was flat, they were wrong. When people thought the earth was spherical, they were wrong. But if you think that thinking the earth is spherical is just as wrong as thinking the earth is flat, then your view is wronger than both of them put together."

Theories keep changing, but they change on the margins. What scientists learned in the 1600s was more accurate than what they learned in the 1500s, and the improvements made between the 1500s and 1600s STILL STAND even today.

For example, in the 1500s, no one had any concept of probability theory. Fluid dynamics and concepts like air being a fluid that exerts pressure didn't exist. Not until the work of people like Pascal and Torricelli and Guericke did we start to understand concepts like vacuums. This stands today. The improvements made between the 1500s and 1600s NEVER had us go back to a 1500s understanding of science. We always improved, never going back to what we had previously thought was right.

Same could be said with hundreds and of subjects and scientists from the 1600s to the 1700s, or 1700s to 1800s, or 1800s to 1900s, or 1900s to now.

Science improves. It doesn't go backwards. The details that change always change the fringes of what we don't know, not the stuff that we have already established. Things like "it isn't possible for there to have been giant 50 foot tall human bipeds thousands of years ago" isn't going to change.

That'd be like going from a 20th century understanding of science back to a 0AD understanding. That's quite backwards.


2) Modern humans are growing bigger and taller WITHOUT Gigantism so therefore as they get bigger and taller they shouldnt be able to play basketball and other sports. But wait! Even at 7'5 being 16 years old their body should be failing!! He's only going to grow more and still play basketball well.


... Even two feet above average causes people to have major health problems down the line, and yet you're talking about 30 foot giants. They don't compare. You require a three fold increase in size. I mean holy crap that's dumb.


3) Dinosaurs prove that square cube law is invalid.


Only if you have no idea what it means. Biped dinosaur bones are thicker than quadraped dinosaur bones. You can't explain this fact without the square cube law. The bone by your old man is rather thin. Look at any biped dinosaur bone. Are they thin? Why do you think large bipeds need thicker bones compared to large quadrapeds?


4) Things we thought as humans were impossible have been possible or found out later it was true.


The opposite hasn't happened really, however... in that "we thought this was possible, found out later it wasn't, then revisited and found out we were right all along way back when!"

Again, science doesn't go backwards. Science from the 1600s is more accurate than the 1500s. Science from the 1700s is more accurate than from the 1600s.


5) Square cube law hasn't been proven with humans.


Which is a lot like saying "math hasn't been proven with humans, thus counting is impossible!"


6) Gravity does decrease with the increase in altitude separation from Earth. The square-cubes laws defies common sense observation that our Earth is a neither a square or a cube, but an oblate spheroid and huge ass dinosaurs prove this.


... Gravity decreases with an inverse square of the radius from the center of mass. The earth has a large radius. The atmosphere isn't very high up. The percentage difference between gravity at the top of the atmosphere, versus on the bottom of earth, is a fraction of a percent. Enough for accurate measurements to be made, but not enough to affect life on any significant basis. The problems with super large life are more basic and require more fundamental changes to body structure.


7) Again the Earth is neither a square or cube.


I thought your understanding of evolution was bad, but apparently your understanding of mathematics is non-existent. You don't seem to grasp the concept of dimensionality.

It's amazing that people like you can function, your teachers have all failed you miserably.
13652 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
こ ~ じ ~ か
Offline
Posted 7/20/14


Ne, Silva-san, I think you borked up your quote tags in there somewhere.

698 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
44 / M
Offline
Posted 7/20/14

SilvaZoldyck wrote:


JuJuRoll wrote:


evilotakuneko wrote:

You keep trying to engage me in some sort of debate, OP.

I've read the previous pages in this thread. I've seen your ignorance, denialism, and lack of critical thinking skills already in the pathetic arguments you have used and continue to try to use, despite several other posters showing you just how wrong you are.

My only hope here is to see if someone else might fall into your trap and in doing so, post something that I might find interesting.

Aww, and I bet you thought I posted for you.
(Apologies to Carly Simon)



My arguments are not as pathetic as yours. You lack an open mind especially from ancient texts from all over the world for the past 10,000 years. But you dismiss them all. SO like I said before if they describe these giants from EVERY ANCIENT CIVILIZATION in the world and you find these to be untrue then you have dismiss EVERY HISTORICAL TEXT, TABLET OR WHATEVER is written on. But you know what you think you know, you don't know. The links I provided defies human thinking and what we know and scientist will continually change AS THEY ALWAYS HAVE.



Oh for fuck's sake.

I read, and quite enjoyed, Herodotus's Histories. I consider it to contain within it many interesting facts and perspectives of the ancient greek civilization and surrounding world.

... Does that mean I believe in giant gold mining ants in India, or that Egyptian women pee standing up while men sitting down (outside no less) or that Hippocleides actually didn't care?

Anyway no text from 10,000 years ago exists, all evidence indicates humans didn't have writing 10,000 years ago. Though why do I have reason to suspect that you are one of those people who claim the earth didn't exist until 10,000 years ago?

*Sigh* I dismiss historical texts or tablets because they are very hard to analyze and people thousands of years ago didn't have much understanding or even contact with their larger surroundings. Stories got twisted like massive games of telephone, learning about foreign lands or strange events wasn't as simple as turning on the television.

As humans progressively have become more connected with fewer games of telephones needed to pass on information, naturally the more fantastical stories of ancient mythology got cleaned up into progressively more mundane events.

I prefer robust evidence ground in current scientific understanding, than pretending that people of ancient times somehow had everything figured out and it was a land of magic and fantasy.

I don't get my understanding of reality from cartoons; as much as I appreciate escapism, I realize that escapism is an ESCAPE from reality, not a true description of reality.


You make it seem like ancient civilization was so dumb. They knew about the stars, planets and knew the world was round. They moved 23 ton CUT stone slabs without machinery. They knew about the constellations and so much stuff even our so called scientist dismissed in the 1700-1900's. They had maps that detailed coastal lines. They built pyramids we cant even do today. To totally dismiss anything from ancient times suggest thats stupid as the scientist who said the world was flat. They did have writing 10,000 years ago on stone tablets. Just because its hard to analyze doesn't mean it cant be analyze which they have been by people smarter than me and you. I understand looking at things from a scientific view, Im all for it. But I am also open to the understanding of what the ancients knew and talked about. If every culture and every ancient civilization talked about giants then we have to go find the evidence which there is some out there now, regardless of anyones believe we cant dismiss the possibilities because it has been written.

698 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
44 / M
Offline
Posted 7/20/14 , edited 7/20/14

SilvaZoldyck wrote:

I need to go deliver hard drives but don't currently know the address which has me kinda unable to do my job. So I'm going to continue to vent my frustrations now.


JuJuRoll wrote:

LOL for someone who is trying to prove a point and make fun of me, then you post links to Wikipedia. Like i've said for the last time.

1) Scientists have been wrong in the past about everything and theories keep changing. What was learned in the 1600's and on we have found out they were wrong today. So some guy with square cube law that HASN'T been proven with humans and been broken with animals especially dinosaurs. Oh ya dont tell me through evolution they grew to be like that so square cube law doesnt apply to them. But wait maybe through evolution humans became giants.


This is such a particularly loathsome idea that Issac Asimov had to write a particularly stunning essay to refute the backwards mentality of it.

http://chem.tufts.edu/answersinscience/relativityofwrong.htm

"When people thought the earth was flat, they were wrong. When people thought the earth was spherical, they were wrong. But if you think that thinking the earth is spherical is just as wrong as thinking the earth is flat, then your view is wronger than both of them put together."

Theories keep changing, but they change on the margins. What scientists learned in the 1600s was more accurate than what they learned in the 1500s, and the improvements made between the 1500s and 1600s STILL STAND even today.

For example, in the 1500s, no one had any concept of probability theory. Fluid dynamics and concepts like air being a fluid that exerts pressure didn't exist. Not until the work of people like Pascal and Torricelli and Guericke did we start to understand concepts like vacuums. This stands today. The improvements made between the 1500s and 1600s NEVER had us go back to a 1500s understanding of science. We always improved, never going back to what we had previously thought was right.

"Thats wrong the Egyptians and Mayans knew and understood about airflows, otherwise they would have suffocated in the Pyramids" So we actually went backwards, they actually built better structures that stood the test of time, with all types of advanced sewer systems etc, which the scientist didnt even realize until the 1900's


Same could be said with hundreds and of subjects and scientists from the 1600s to the 1700s, or 1700s to 1800s, or 1800s to 1900s, or 1900s to now.

Science improves. It doesn't go backwards. The details that change always change the fringes of what we don't know, not the stuff that we have already established. Things like "it isn't possible for there to have been giant 50 foot tall human bipeds thousands of years ago" isn't going to change.


That'd be like going from a 20th century understanding of science back to a 0AD understanding. That's quite backwards.


2) Modern humans are growing bigger and taller WITHOUT Gigantism so therefore as they get bigger and taller they shouldnt be able to play basketball and other sports. But wait! Even at 7'5 being 16 years old their body should be failing!! He's only going to grow more and still play basketball well.


... Even two feet above average causes people to have major health problems down the line, and yet you're talking about 30 foot giants. They don't compare. You require a three fold increase in size. I mean holy crap that's dumb.

[b]"Many people have health problems without being very tall. There is no proof that normal humans who are above height have any more problems than normal people. If that was the case of taller people having problems like basketball players would be falling dead all the time. Its only those with gigantism that have the really bad problems"


3) Dinosaurs prove that square cube law is invalid. ]/quote]

Only if you have no idea what it means. Biped dinosaur bones are thicker than quadraped dinosaur bones. You can't explain this fact without the square cube law. The bone by your old man is rather thin. Look at any biped dinosaur bone. Are they thin? Why do you think large bipeds need thicker bones compared to large quadrapeds?

That doesnt mean giants didnt have thicker bones. Obviously they would have to.


4) Things we thought as humans were impossible have been possible or found out later it was true.


The opposite hasn't happened really, however... in that "we thought this was possible, found out later it wasn't, then revisited and found out we were right all along way back when!"

Again, science doesn't go backwards. Science from the 1600s is more accurate than the 1500s. Science from the 1700s is more accurate than from the 1600s.


5) Square cube law hasn't been proven with humans.


Which is a lot like saying "math hasn't been proven with humans, thus counting is impossible!"

The truth is square cube law STILL hasn't been proved with humans, give me proof not a mathematical equation.



6) Gravity does decrease with the increase in altitude separation from Earth. The square-cubes laws defies common sense observation that our Earth is a neither a square or a cube, but an oblate spheroid and huge ass dinosaurs prove this.


... Gravity decreases with an inverse square of the radius from the center of mass. The earth has a large radius. The atmosphere isn't very high up. The percentage difference between gravity at the top of the atmosphere, versus on the bottom of earth, is a fraction of a percent. Enough for accurate measurements to be made, but not enough to affect life on any significant basis. The problems with super large life are more basic and require more fundamental changes to body structure.

[red]You also have to consider the fact that the oxygen levels were much thicker and caused everything from animals to plants and humans to grow much bigger. Thats a proven fact that has been replicated with oxygen and plant life. SO what I am saying that giants, not humans had different bones structures than normal humans


7) Again the Earth is neither a square or cube.


I thought your understanding of evolution was bad, but apparently your understanding of mathematics is non-existent. You don't seem to grasp the concept of dimensionality.

[red]Like I stated square cubed law apllying to humans have yet to be proven! "If everything could be solved mathematically it would have been done already. I understand evolution very well, my problem with it is that there is no evidence (like you say about giants)of the transitional creatures found that we can say "look here". Animal change in their environment doesnt mean thats evolution. And since everyone wants to bash me on aliens. If evolution is true then and the earth is very young they should be very many intelligent creatures older than us. But scientist from the 1600-1900 said we were alone. Hummmm. Even science is saying know that DNA from bones found 50-100k years ago are similar to our DNA which was thought to be impossible. [/red]

It's amazing that people like you can function, your teachers have all failed you miserably.

No the school system didn't fail me. I am not a sheeple and think that just because so smart ass scientists who have been wrong, I just dont accept anything because things change and always have changed. If we just accepted what every scientist said we would still be thinking the world was flat. No one was here at the time of creation of human beings so you can theorize all you want neither you or me or anyone else was there.
13652 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
こ ~ じ ~ か
Offline
Posted 7/20/14

JuJuRoll wrote: I understand looking at things from a scientific view, Im all for it.



MRW

3910 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
26 / M / Pandemonium
Offline
Posted 7/20/14 , edited 7/20/14

JuJuRoll
I understand looking at things from a scientific view, Im all for it.


No, you're not. You're all for looking at things in a way that supports your pre-concieved notion, while rejecting everything that contradicts it.
As made evident by your repeated ramblings about how the square cube law hasn't been proven on humans. It applies to EVERYTHING. It's math. That's how it works.

Your argument is comparable to that of someone trying to claim that we don't know what orbit Pluto is going to take because we've never seen it complete an orbit. Or claiming that we can't know that evolution is true because "we weren't there", and because we've never seen a lesser ape turn into a human.
You're like a religious fundamentalist, desperately using every obsolete, easily disprovable argument in the book in order to try and deny evolution, even though its existence is so obvious and the evidence for it so solid.
I mean -- you even tried to use the "argument from ignorance" fallacy to argue your case, for crying out loud...

Unless of course, you have an actual reason to believe that humans are magically exempt from the square cube law, even though it applies to everything else. In which case you should present your reasons as to why, and with some solid arguments behind it as well.
Other than your pre-concieved notions and wisfull thinking that is...
698 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
44 / M
Offline
Posted 7/20/14

Syndicaidramon wrote:


JuJuRoll
I understand looking at things from a scientific view, Im all for it.


No, you're not. You're all for looking at things in a way that supports your pre-concieved notion, while rejecting everything that contradicts it.
As made evident by your repeated ramblings about how the square cube law hasn't been proven on humans. It applies to EVERYTHING. It's math. That's how it works.
Your argument is comparable to that of someone trying to claim that we don't know what orbit Pluto is going to take because we've never seen it complete an orbit.

Unless of course, you have an actual reason to believe that humans are magically exempt from the square cube law, even though it applies to everything else. In which case you should present your reasons as to why, and with some solid arguments behind it as well.
Other than your pre-concieved notions and wisfull thinking that is...


It may apply to some things but not all things. This galaxy has yet to be explored and when we do everything we know will change, We try to apply the things of Earth to other planets and then we see something different we cant explain it. So just because some scientists says thats the way it is and then another discovery is made that contradicts what they said before then we say oh ya they were wrong again, So whatever we think now just like they thought in 1600's will be different in the future. There are so many things to mathematics that's evolving that will blow everyone away in the future. Without evolution of math we wouldn't be here now. Its so ignorant to think that we have solved everything when out there in the universe that our humanistic minds wont and cant comprehend.

3910 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
26 / M / Pandemonium
Offline
Posted 7/20/14 , edited 7/20/14

JuJuRoll wrote:


Syndicaidramon wrote:


JuJuRoll
I understand looking at things from a scientific view, Im all for it.


No, you're not. You're all for looking at things in a way that supports your pre-concieved notion, while rejecting everything that contradicts it.
As made evident by your repeated ramblings about how the square cube law hasn't been proven on humans. It applies to EVERYTHING. It's math. That's how it works.
Your argument is comparable to that of someone trying to claim that we don't know what orbit Pluto is going to take because we've never seen it complete an orbit.

Unless of course, you have an actual reason to believe that humans are magically exempt from the square cube law, even though it applies to everything else. In which case you should present your reasons as to why, and with some solid arguments behind it as well.
Other than your pre-concieved notions and wisfull thinking that is...


It may apply to some things but not all things. This galaxy has yet to be explored and when we do everything we know will change, We try to apply the things of Earth to other planets and then we see something different we cant explain it. So just because some scientists says thats the way it is and then another discovery is made that contradicts what they said before then we say oh ya they were wrong again, So whatever we think now just like they thought in 1600's will be different in the future. There are so many things to mathematics that's evolving that will blow everyone away in the future. Without evolution of math we wouldn't be here now. Its so ignorant to think that we have solved everything when out there in the universe that our humanistic minds wont and cant comprehend.



Just because we haven't seen every part of the galaxy doesn't mean anything. It's like saying that just because of that, we should believe that there are celestial bodies out there to which gravity does not apply. It's ludicrous.

And once again, I will tell you: unless you have any actual REASON to believe that the square cube law doesn't apply to humans, even though it applies to everything else, then you have to present your reasoning and your scientific basis for such reasoning. If you cannot, or if you have no reason beyond that of wishfull thinking, then your case will be dismissed by default. Because it's entirely baseless.

And also, we can TOTALLY build structures equal to that of the pyramids today. No problem.
And ALSO -- just because some knowledge is lost throughout history, doesn't mean science goes backwards. If the state of scientific knowledge goes down, it is because of the loss of knowledge, not because scientists researched more and became more wrong than they were before.
13652 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
こ ~ じ ~ か
Offline
Posted 7/20/14 , edited 7/20/14
@Syndicaidramon: Why do you think my participation in this thread has been limited to poking fun at the OP? ;)

He doesn't get it. Not one little bit. Nothing anyone has said to him has been able to get past his blindfold of ignorance. And by way of rebuttal all he offers are logical fallacies, ancient storybooks, and steaming piles of woo.

The only proper response to such tripe is ridicule.
3910 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
26 / M / Pandemonium
Offline
Posted 7/20/14 , edited 7/20/14

evilotakuneko wrote:

@Syndicaidramon: Why do you think my participation in this thread has been limited to poking fun at the OP? ;)

He doesn't get it. Not one little bit. Nothing anyone has said to him has been able to get past his blindfold of ignorance. And by way of rebuttal all he offers are logical fallacies, ancient storybooks, and steaming piles of woo.

The only proper response to such tripe is ridicule.


I'm not so sure I agree. Ridicule, at least in this way, is like hostility. It will get you nowhere.
I believe he can be reasoned with... Maybe.
I remember I used to be a religious fool who denied evolution and who couldn't criticize my own beliefs in any way that mattered. Yet I'm not there anymore.

I believe if only worded the right way, it is possible to get through to people.
698 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
44 / M
Offline
Posted 7/20/14

Syndicaidramon wrote:


Just because we haven't seen every part of the galaxy doesn't mean anything. It's like saying that just because of that, we should believe that there are celestial bodies out there to which gravity does not apply. It's ludicrous.

And once again, I will tell you: unless you have any actual REASON to believe that the square cube law doesn't apply to humans, even though it applies to everything else, then you have to present your reasoning and your scientific basis for such reasoning. If you cannot, or if you have no reason beyond that of wishfull thinking, then your case will be dismissed by default. Because it's entirely baseless.

And also, we can TOTALLY build structures equal to that of the pyramids today. No problem.
And ALSO -- just because some knowledge is lost throughout history, doesn't mean science goes backwards. If the state of scientific knowledge goes down, it is because of the loss of knowledge, not because scientists researched more and became more wrong than they were before.


As to gravity, things are changing rapidly especially when it comes to dark matter. There are tons on new theories that are changing the way we think about gravity. Yes might know some things about gravity here but there are many things coming in research thats changing the way we think. There have been changes on Earth like the Earth axial tilt when maybe it wasnt before that would have changed gravitational pulls.

We might be able to build structures equal to pyramids but we cannot build pyramids. And yes lets try to build them without modern machinary which engineers have all said it would take massive equipment to do such a feat. All attempts have failed. Once again the square cube law doesnt apply to everything IMO. And if it applies to humans there is no proof of that until someone gets the tall without Gigantism, but Im speaking as if the giants were all human either because if you read the article they are not all human.

13652 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
こ ~ じ ~ か
Offline
Posted 7/20/14


I shall sit back and watch. I do not believe reason and logic will get through to him, especially if, as his profile claims, he's 42. I think one would have to undermine his beliefs using his own tools against him, come at him from some angle already within his comfort zone. I ain't got time for that. It's a beautiful thing to see when done right though. I used to know a guy who skewered creationists with their own scriptures.
11497 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Offline
Posted 7/20/14 , edited 7/20/14
As a side note, your formatting is somehow worse than your understanding of science. You're just about the most loathsome type of individual I can know, a walking example of the dunning-kruger effect who believe yourself far more competent in subjects you haven't studied than you actually are.



"Thats wrong the Egyptians and Mayans knew and understood about airflows, otherwise they would have suffocated in the Pyramids" So we actually went backwards, they actually built better structures that stood the test of time, with all types of advanced sewer systems etc, which the scientist didnt even realize until the 1900's


... What the fucking hell are you talking about? "airflows"? Understood what? That stuffy rooms are unpleasant? Understanding "hey, we need air to breath" went back a lot further than fluid dynamics or understanding lower pressure/higher pressure environments.

Picking up a rock and dropping it, saying "hey I discovered gravity!" doesn't mean you understand the first thing about gravity.

Until you have an ability to describe what is actually happening, and robustly, you are at best accepting things as are with only ad hoc explanations.


2) Modern humans are growing bigger and taller WITHOUT Gigantism so therefore as they get bigger and taller they shouldnt be able to play basketball and other sports. But wait! Even at 7'5 being 16 years old their body should be failing!! He's only going to grow more and still play basketball well.



"Many people have health problems without being very tall. There is no proof that normal humans who are above height have any more problems than normal people. If that was the case of taller people having problems like basketball players would be falling dead all the time. Its only those with gigantism that have the really bad problems"


WHICH IS EXACTLY WHY YOU COMPARE THEM TO THE AVERAGE! Did you not bother to read the article I linked? Oh, wait, of course not, because that would require you educate yourself and it seems you are quite loathed to do so without having some nonsense spoon fed to you by either an old dusty book or cartoons on screen.





Only if you have no idea what it means. Biped dinosaur bones are thicker than quadraped dinosaur bones. You can't explain this fact without the square cube law. The bone by your old man is rather thin. Look at any biped dinosaur bone. Are they thin? Why do you think large bipeds need thicker bones compared to large quadrapeds?


That doesnt mean giants didnt have thicker bones. Obviously they would have to.


CORRECT! That's very VERY good. Now, with that in mind, look at the bone next to your old man. Is that a much thicker bone proportionally to a humans? If not, then you can be pretty sure it's not a large quadraped.

I'm still waiting for a single fossil that actually looks like a large human bone cause the one you showed, if you claim it belongs to a biped, violates basic biomechanics.


4) Things we thought as humans were impossible have been possible or found out later it was true.


The opposite hasn't happened really, however... in that "we thought this was possible, found out later it wasn't, then revisited and found out we were right all along way back when!"

Again, science doesn't go backwards. Science from the 1600s is more accurate than the 1500s. Science from the 1700s is more accurate than from the 1600s.




5) Square cube law hasn't been proven with humans.


Which is a lot like saying "math hasn't been proven with humans, thus counting is impossible!"


The truth is square cube law STILL hasn't been proved with humans, give me proof not a mathematical equation.



@_@

.... I don't think there is a word to describe the feeling I'm having right now reading that line. I... don't understand how people like you can function.

Somehow the bible and an old bone next to an old man count as proof to you, but math, nah, that's just voodoo? The fuck?



You also have to consider the fact that the oxygen levels were much thicker and caused everything from animals to plants and humans to grow much bigger. Thats a proven fact that has been replicated with oxygen and plant life. SO what I am saying that giants, not humans had different bones structures than normal humans


Again, YOU HAVEN'T CITED ANY INSTANCES. Your old man is standing next to a fossil that clearly can't belong to a massive biped, let alone a human-like giant.

Honestly how can you possibly ask for 'proof' while propping nonsense up as your standard of evidence? What the hell creates such cognitive dissonance? You are honestly a poster-boy against religion.



Like I stated square cubed law apllying to humans have yet to be proven! "If everything could be solved mathematically it would have been done already. I understand evolution very well, my problem with it is that there is no evidence (like you say about giants)of the transitional creatures found that we can say "look here". Animal change in their environment doesnt mean thats evolution. And since everyone wants to bash me on aliens. If evolution is true then and the earth is very young they should be very many intelligent creatures older than us. But scientist from the 1600-1900 said we were alone. Hummmm. Even science is saying know that DNA from bones found 50-100k years ago are similar to our DNA which was thought to be impossible.


Because unlike all other animals on earth, apparently, to you, humans are magical. Basic biomechanics and laws of physics don't apply to humans!

*sigh*

Find me a humanoid massive biped bone and you might have a case, but the evidence you've provided looks like people selling snake oil to very gullible individuals.




No the school system didn't fail me. I am not a sheeple and think that just because so smart ass scientists who have been wrong, I just dont accept anything because things change and always have changed. If we just accepted what every scientist said we would still be thinking the world was flat. No one was here at the time of creation of human beings so you can theorize all you want neither you or me or anyone else was there.



Oh AND use of the word 'sheeple', holy fuck, http://xkcd.com/610/

You really are delusional.

The school system failed you so badly you don't even understand how. And the most tragic thing seems to be that you are an adult with a functional life.
11497 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Offline
Posted 7/20/14

evilotakuneko wrote:



Ne, Silva-san, I think you borked up your quote tags in there somewhere.



Probably, I posted that right before heading out, didn't preview. It's been a very busy day for me. He's my stress relief because I've been dealing with a lot of incompetence and it's nice to see something that is leagues above the rest.
First  Prev  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  Next  Last
You must be logged in to post.