Reply to Re: Is there a name for Dink's world?
If you don't have an account, just leave the password field blank.
I very much disagree. In my experience, the DN is one of the friendliest communities on the internet.
This community the friendliest? Where people gang up on certain people and make fun of them? Pick on them endlessly? Where you can't even state your opinions in a passing sentence without having someone immediately come and basically insult you for it? Yeah, right. I've seen the question "how do all these idiots always find The Dink Network" asked many times. And the answer is they don't, this website and its people are what make those people act like idiots.
Most of the time, yes. Where did you get the idea that turtles and dinosaurs lived in the same era?
From the same scientists, I'm not afraid to admit that. But here's the fun part: I don't have to believe that turtles existed back then, but because these are the same scientists making that claim, that would mean they'd be unreliable and that dinosaurs didn't necessarily exist back then either. However, if you want to count this information as reliable, you'll have to believe that both of them did exist back then. So they're basically talking against themselves. If you trust their conclusions that dinosaurs existed back then, you'll have to trust that turtles did too. If you don't trust their conclusions that turtles existed back then, then you can't trust that dinosaurs did either. And if there was a huge catastrophe that wiped the entire planet out of dinosaurs, then it wouldn't have left turtles or crocodiles alive either. Or are you suggesting the catastrophe thought out loud: "Hmm... these things will not be called dinosaurs in the future, even though they technically are, so I'm gonna spare them". Sadly, that's what most people seem to believe, even though that's the biggest hole in pretty much any theory ever.
There's also this thing called instinct, in which you can tell just by looking at an animal if it's inhabited this planet long.
Of course! If a smart person who has spent a lot of time understanding the world has researched this specific topic and found that, they are very likely right. But just someone saying it isn't enough. They have to explain why, and it must be convincing. That's how science works.
Well now you've lost all respect from me. Talk about going with scientists' beliefs. Why the hell would you believe that snow isn't water even if a million highly educated scientists said so after a decade of research, when you can use common sense, go to a place where there's snow, put it in a warm place and see that it's water with your own eyes!
Science is based on pure assumption and is more often wrong than right. If you want to talk about science, and since we're on the subject of dinosaurs, let's talk about the T-Rex: One of the biggest mistakes historians, scientists and archeologists together have ever made. That thing came together by an accident and never even existed, and yet scientists claim that thing walked on our planet millions of years ago.
And whoever compared dinosaurs to dragons, I never said dinosaurs were dragons. But I wouldn't rule out the possibility of some form of a descendant of dinosaurs, that could've flown and/or spit fire. Not to mention, dragons usually weren't referred to as big winged creatures which spat fire. They were often small lizard-like beings about the height of a man's knee. There's millions of records of dragons throughout history. I wouldn't be so quick to judge them out. Stranger animals have been discovered, even during modern days.
This community the friendliest? Where people gang up on certain people and make fun of them? Pick on them endlessly? Where you can't even state your opinions in a passing sentence without having someone immediately come and basically insult you for it? Yeah, right. I've seen the question "how do all these idiots always find The Dink Network" asked many times. And the answer is they don't, this website and its people are what make those people act like idiots.
Most of the time, yes. Where did you get the idea that turtles and dinosaurs lived in the same era?
From the same scientists, I'm not afraid to admit that. But here's the fun part: I don't have to believe that turtles existed back then, but because these are the same scientists making that claim, that would mean they'd be unreliable and that dinosaurs didn't necessarily exist back then either. However, if you want to count this information as reliable, you'll have to believe that both of them did exist back then. So they're basically talking against themselves. If you trust their conclusions that dinosaurs existed back then, you'll have to trust that turtles did too. If you don't trust their conclusions that turtles existed back then, then you can't trust that dinosaurs did either. And if there was a huge catastrophe that wiped the entire planet out of dinosaurs, then it wouldn't have left turtles or crocodiles alive either. Or are you suggesting the catastrophe thought out loud: "Hmm... these things will not be called dinosaurs in the future, even though they technically are, so I'm gonna spare them". Sadly, that's what most people seem to believe, even though that's the biggest hole in pretty much any theory ever.
There's also this thing called instinct, in which you can tell just by looking at an animal if it's inhabited this planet long.
Of course! If a smart person who has spent a lot of time understanding the world has researched this specific topic and found that, they are very likely right. But just someone saying it isn't enough. They have to explain why, and it must be convincing. That's how science works.
Well now you've lost all respect from me. Talk about going with scientists' beliefs. Why the hell would you believe that snow isn't water even if a million highly educated scientists said so after a decade of research, when you can use common sense, go to a place where there's snow, put it in a warm place and see that it's water with your own eyes!
Science is based on pure assumption and is more often wrong than right. If you want to talk about science, and since we're on the subject of dinosaurs, let's talk about the T-Rex: One of the biggest mistakes historians, scientists and archeologists together have ever made. That thing came together by an accident and never even existed, and yet scientists claim that thing walked on our planet millions of years ago.
And whoever compared dinosaurs to dragons, I never said dinosaurs were dragons. But I wouldn't rule out the possibility of some form of a descendant of dinosaurs, that could've flown and/or spit fire. Not to mention, dragons usually weren't referred to as big winged creatures which spat fire. They were often small lizard-like beings about the height of a man's knee. There's millions of records of dragons throughout history. I wouldn't be so quick to judge them out. Stranger animals have been discovered, even during modern days.
