[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / g / ic / jp / lit / sci / tg / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports / report a bug ] [ 4plebs / archived.moe / rbt ]

Due to resource constraints, /g/ and /tg/ will no longer be archived or available. Other archivers continue to archive these boards.Become a Patron!

/sci/ - Science & Math

View post   

[ Toggle deleted replies ]
File: 48 KB, 322x400, image.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
8131665 No.8131665 [Reply] [Original] [archived.moe]

Is this reconstruction just a buncha hooey? Just look at how fragmented it was.

>> No.8131670
File: 727 KB, 1537x1944, image.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

Another example.

>> No.8131674
File: 135 KB, 969x486, image.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

The evolution of a myth.

>> No.8131705

It's pretty normal for bones to come out the ground like that.

if the fragments were raked up over an area of 20 square feet and then glued back together in that shape then, yes, that would be a buncha hooey.

in reality they're found in a lump having that shape and they're glued together in the ground. You brush or scrape off some soil to expose the fragmented bone, then you immediately soak that bone in superglue or some equivalent so the fragments stay in place. Then you scrape off a bit more, glue it again, repeat until the whole thing is out of the dirt or rock in roughly the same shape it went in.

>> No.8131727

if you're instead asking, as this guy seems to be: >>8131670 ,
whether or not the bones preserve diagnostic information in such a fragmented state,

then the answer is, probably. Diagnostic traits are an interesting mix of very large and very small morphologies, so there's a strong chance that either the overall shape or some tiny detail or both will be preserved that allows us to classify the animal.

As to which diagnostic traits in particular were found in any particular bone I'd just refer you to the author's text. They'll tell you what the bones indicated to them, and you're free to agree or disagree or have no clue what the fuck they're talking about.

as is traditional in science.

>> No.8131736

Evolutionary biologists know what they are looking for, they're just trying to fit their data to the trend. It's an endless task, there will always be one more "missing link" between each collected sample until they have a full family tree. It's pretty pointless.

>> No.8131750

>It's pretty pointless.
it's mostly just pokemon collecting, but every time an intermediate form is found you've got another test of theory of evolution that it has passed.

Which doesn't matter to the scientific community because nobody seriously doubts evolution.

Might be useful with fundamentalist muslims and christinas that deny evolution though. They are a threat to human growth, and it's good to provide knowledge that destroys their silly and dangerous ideas.

>> No.8131757
File: 129 KB, 960x720, slide_63.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

Same with the feminists. Also, I found this.
There are a few more pics after this.

>> No.8131762
File: 147 KB, 960x720, slide_60.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]


>> No.8131765
File: 130 KB, 960x720, slide_61.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]


>> No.8131774

your pic is one of the classical blunders when the public views paleontology.

if gross morphology was all that we used to classify animals, then dolphins would be sharks.

also, >>>/pol/

>> No.8131786
File: 14 KB, 296x170, images.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

Nah, /pol/ wouldn't be necessary unless I said that evolution was racist.

>> No.8131866
File: 1023 KB, 1354x1015, 20160608_172607.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

Then there's this.

>> No.8131872
File: 1.04 MB, 1337x1008, 20160608_173206.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

And this.

>> No.8132445
File: 30 KB, 590x350, chimp-god-649894.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]


>> No.8132455

I don't have any reason to be here I just want to try something.

[math] \displaystyle \usepackage{slashed} \slashed{partial} [/math]

>> No.8132509
File: 225 KB, 1084x643, Ardipithecus-ramidus.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

>> No.8132517
File: 10 KB, 360x265, how to be observant.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]


>> No.8132650

Honestly i can't even tell what you asking. The reconstructions looks plausible. It would be helpful to see the source and understand the assumptions being made to create it. A picture alone doesn't mean much.

>> No.8132658

Also not sure what those slides are trying to prove? Most of that stuff actually supports Darwin's theories of evolution. His books are worth the read. The history of the biology/Ecology is really interesting actually.

>> No.8132661

I just wondered if it was found in its current condition, or if they had to put it together piece by piece.
These might help understand the two sides.


>> No.8132663

The presentation itself is trying to say that evolution is very wobbly and that the Bible is a firm foundation, ergo forsake evolutionary biology and turn to the Bible.

>> No.8132665

*help you understand

>> No.8132678

Evolutionary biology isn't shown to be wobbly in those slides. The fact that there are ape like creatures similar to humans but not directly related to their ancestry is further proof of darwins theory. I would guess that the author of those slides never actually read any of the literature on evolutionary biology.

>> No.8132694

The funny part is that the presentation that these slides come from is still being used by him.

>> No.8132709
File: 968 KB, 500x218, sunny_sciencebitch.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

Its true, I found a clip of him presenting actually

>> No.8132735
File: 9 KB, 200x300, image.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

I think this is him. David Prentice

>> No.8132801
File: 345 KB, 1280x955, image.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

Here's a bit of an antithesis to that proposition.

>> No.8133380


>> No.8133492

>it's good to provide knowledge that destroys their silly and dangerous ideas.

Don't kid yourself. Their ideas are totally immune to this.

>> No.8133505

I guess you could say they "evolved."

>> No.8133960
File: 69 KB, 900x642, early-hominid-ardipithecus-ramidus-mauricio-anton.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

>> No.8133969

their kids aren't immune.

I was raised a creationist (Jehovah's Witness), I grew up to be a paleontologist.

>> No.8133976

So is it a lot of hands-on work or mainly studying?

>> No.8133990
File: 100 KB, 962x524, temp.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

either. both.

huge amounts of dissection in school. Lots of digging and fossil prep as a grad student. Lots more digging or screenwashing or sorting collections as an intern. I didn't move past that part, so I can't really tell you what it's like running digs or curating or teaching for decades on end.

the usual academia bullshit as far as I could tell.

>> No.8134005
File: 119 KB, 409x359, Dmanisi.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

Interesting. I'm somewhat surprised, though I didn't know what to expect.

>> No.8134024
File: 179 KB, 512x463, alioramus.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

It really depends on where you go to school and what curriculum you pursue.

but it's a huge discipline with lots of little niches to specialize in so you can wind up doing nothing but research or more field work or even running a museum or teaching.

Basically there's a lot of geology and anatomy though. Then a bit of waiting for someone to die so you can have their position.

>> No.8134032
File: 243 KB, 1000x1500, IMG_3807_1.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

So does paleoanthropology fall under a certain feild of study, or do you have to learn paleontology in general to do so?

>> No.8134041
File: 360 KB, 2479x2676, 1-allosaurusfe.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

I don't know of any schools that have a specific 4 year paleo-anthro program, but I haven't really checked. When I was in school a million years ago nobody was teaching a vert-paleo program and now there's a handful of colleges that have it.

But yeah, my guess would be a BS in paleontology and then specialize. Paleontology isn't strict about credentials though, pretty much anyone with any degree or even without a degree can get published. A lot of interdisciplinary stuff gets done.

>> No.8134050
File: 13 KB, 320x240, gigantopithecus full skull.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

I think I'll leave this stuff to the professionals, but if I find a fossil somewhere by accident, you bet your sweet ass I'm gonna tell people. I need something that my children can tell their children about.
I think an North American great ape would get people excited, considering little to no evidence has been found.

>> No.8134052

Also, I know that's an Asian great ape.

>> No.8134056
File: 191 KB, 848x1092, fossil finds.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

A lot of the actual finding gets done by amateurs hunting on private property. Identifying a vertebrate and determining if it's a new species or unknown elements of a previously known animal takes a lot of education and research though.

>> No.8134060
File: 844 KB, 1758x1800, piltdown-skull1.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

Could you make a believable fossil hoax at this time? I think it'd be more fun to be the huxter than the amatuer.

>> No.8134062
File: 21 KB, 250x250, 10-finds-that-define-human-evolution-2.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

I'm not really an expert on apes or mammals even. You probably know more about that guy than I do.

I just look at it and see a huge sagittal crest, beefy zygomatic arches and surprisingly short canines. An unusually robust jaw.

I'm more of an archosaur guy myself, and even then I mostly just know my theropod crania.

>> No.8134067
File: 591 KB, 857x1024, Lythronax (2) (857x1024).jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

no. the best you could probably do now is mixing up different species and making a chimaera. Even that would be figured out really quickly.

That's what happened with "Archaeoraptor." It took less than a week for that one to be discovered.

>> No.8134075
File: 100 KB, 900x900, variants_large_3886.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

I just didn't want to seem like an idiot for putting an Asian ape when I was talking about an American one. So what would you define as the best transitional form, Yi Qi or Archaeopteryx?

Perhaps a phony cryptid fossil would get people's attention. That "American Ape" idea could fool bigfoot enthusiasts.

>> No.8134098
File: 608 KB, 1582x885, Yi qi.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

>Yi Qi or Archaeopteryx?
Archaeopteryx is closer but neither of them is ancestral to modern birds. Presumably birds evolved several millions of years before either of those guys showed up.

>That "American Ape" idea could fool bigfoot enthusiasts.
yeah, but then so can a good fursuit. Not a very high bar.

>> No.8134106

I need to make some kind of dent in the collective interest. What do you think could work (besides a chimaera)?

>> No.8134109
File: 118 KB, 382x638, Hadrosaurus_foulkii.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

Forgot the pic.

>> No.8134128

Finding a new species will get your name in the papers for five minutes.

other than that any legit fame will come from either decades of serious study and publication or one fabulous discovery that everyone else is currently overlooking (Alvarez and Alvarez).

If all you want is fame with fanboys write a children's book. Or maybe fantasy fiction about speculative alternate realities.

Or make billions of dollars off of oil, chemicals and paper and then buy new buildings for famous museums and universities while also underwriting tens of millions of dollars in science.

>> No.8134144
File: 974 KB, 2268x2820, Dinornis1387.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

I just want my discovery to live on in my absence, like Johansen with Lucy or the Leakys with their multiple finds.
Even something like the word "dinosaur" becoming a colloquial term would be enough for me.

>> No.8134153
File: 787 KB, 800x1148, 1391023666163.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

well from 1840-1960 there was never more than ten vertebrate paleontologists publishing at any one time.

Now there's probably over a thousand.

every little contribution moves science forward, but the odds of making a name for yourself are pretty fucking slim.

>> No.8134163
File: 107 KB, 1248x892, tracks-acambaro-mayors-office-dino-group1.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

That's why I think I should be a huxter. I mean look at half the shit the crazies come up with. It's bound to get someone's attention.

>> No.8134167

Also, nice gif.

>> No.8134174
File: 65 KB, 330x428, dinocheirus.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

it makes me smile cuz I used to work for the guy when he was at DMNS.

Regarding hoaxes, we had this discussion on /an/ a few months back. I was trying to figure out how you'd make a convincing fake. You'd have to start with real bone and then I guess sculpt it into new shapes. But then you'd have to come up with a convincing fake periosteum, I'm not even sure how you'd do that.

>> No.8134184
File: 130 KB, 970x823, gideon_mantell_and_his_iguanodon_by_pelycosaur24-d826xjg.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

You're very most welcome, sir. May the Lord shine brightly upon your harvest (if you're fine with that).

Also, could using acidic liquids on it and blaming the environment work?

>> No.8134192
File: 23 KB, 350x404, scrotum-humanum.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

yeah, it's possible.

some bones are missing periosteum either because they were eaten and partially digested or because they were tumbled in a river, but both cases will wear the bone down to the point where it's probably useless for identifying a new species.

also residue from the acid as well as microscopic etching marks will show up. Those aren't normal things to find in most dinosaur-bearing sediments.

did you make that gif?

>> No.8134202
File: 142 KB, 669x938, Sydenham_studio.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

Nah, I'm not even sure how to do those.

>> No.8134206
File: 171 KB, 606x780, cope_l.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

I got it off here years ago.
was curious since I see you're posting a few pics I also have.

>> No.8134212
File: 649 KB, 1000x669, tumblr_lzu222sLR81r6q9d2o1_1280.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

I'm just a fan of the times of old, that's all.

>> No.8134667
File: 17 KB, 250x188, image.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]


>> No.8135279

>> No.8135326

Of course. All 'fossils' are merely red herrings placed there by G-d to test our faith. If you disagree you're a fat autistic fedora.

>> No.8135333


>> No.8135750

I just found this weird site that tries to tie religion, hominid fossils, and bigfoot all together.

>> No.8135773

Kindly to this board a favour and piss the fuck off to /pol/

>> No.8135779

I was just pointing out that he uses the "G-d" thing, which I've heard it a primarily Jewish tradition.
>kindly do

>> No.8135790

Except you know many people use it ironically unless you're a complete mong.

Well, are you a complete mong anon?

>> No.8135795


>> No.8135799

Primarily Cauc, some Neg, and the tiniest bit of Aus.

>> No.8135810

You've just been awarded honorary status then, congratulations.

>> No.8135998

>> No.8136506
File: 10 KB, 143x154, image.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

Asu! My ancestor!

>> No.8137240


>> No.8137970
File: 112 KB, 648x518, sahelanthropustchadensis.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

Name (leave empty)
Comment (leave empty)
Password [?]Password used for file deletion.