So you have (as usual) no answers to my last set of points. Quelle surprise!

Sticking with fossils, do try to catch the documentary Stan - you can watch the actual fossil being actually dug up, then encased in protective coating, transported, and in the lab. You'll also see how and why they make replicas.

Though why you would think there is something odd or sinister in a person photographing a replica and saying: "Here's a replica" is a mystery!

Here ya go - originals partly excavated, still on site, where the dinosaur died. Not replicas.

Ironically, you've just summarized the basic requirement for the devout, regardless of which brand of imaginary friend they believe in; blind faith, with no facts, evidence or proof to back up any of the crazy claims they depend on.

[iHahaha still unemployed butch...Awe poor lad

[/i

Why do you keep saying I'm unemployed? You don't know anything about me except what I've chosen to tell you. Seems a poor way of brushing off anything Bren writes, and a weird dig at me seeing as I actually told you what I was employed as. You see, it's quite easy to keep tabs on a forum throughout the day because science has made it possible to carry around a personal pc in your pocket, so that whatever you need is only a button press away. Somewhat ironic that the sum total of human knowledge is even at your fingertips, yet you choose to use it to further a life of fantasy and mental illness.

Do you have any evidence that this is factually incorrect? No.


Er, not even remotely the case. Not within a seven day camel ride of the facts. I mean, given that most people understand at least the basics of sedimentary layers, how they form, and how they are moved to the surface by tectonic activity, I'd suggest you developed at least a basic understanding of the first principles before making moronic comments.


Look, if a dinosaur died in one spot then it would be plainly obvious, even to the average cretin, that, being dead, its remains would broadly speaking remain around that spot. If for example its femur is in Patagonia, where would you expect its tibia to be - Poland?

Whenever any bodily remains are discovered, it is not astonishing that by carefully excavating the immediate spot, you'll find most of the remaining bones. You would have to be a moron not to get that.


Is it? What about this moron-level idea for displaying an anything
1. Dismantle and pack
2. Take somewhere else
3. Re-assemble and display.

Only a moron would fail to understand something so totally simple.



Your number skills are a bit off, but making allowance for your moronicity I suppose I should give due credit that you got the 1 before the zeros. But, what is the reason why a bone of a dead anything might not be sticking out of the ground? Lots of things stick out of the ground, often exposed when erosion takes place - you know, wind, water, that sort of stuff. The mere fact of something sticking out of the ground is not a valid objection. It is you who oozes bull.

PS It would be "carcass", and it wasn't, it was a fossilised bone.

Which seems entirely plausible when pitted against, say, a lone shepherd being spoken to by god through the medium of a burning bush...

Flat Stanley's posts on the whole appear to be series of Copy/Pastes from the Internet.

I'm not trying to troll by saying this, but are you plagiarising other people's work because you can't articulate your arguments so eloquently?

Quote ="bandgeekmafia78"Flat Stanley's posts on the whole appear to be series of Copy/Pastes from the Internet. I'm not trying to troll by saying this, but are you plagiarising other people's work because you can't articulate your arguments so eloquently?'" Yep. Take his last post for example on Dinosaur bones: Quote ="FLAT STANLEY""David "Eugenics pioneer of bull Sir Freemasoic Attenborough" has recently been in a BBC documentary called 'Attenborough and the Giant Dinosaur' which I had the misfortune of watching the whole programme as i downloaded this work of fiction just to see/hear their claims. It starts with the romantic story of a lone Patagonian farmer looking for a lost sheep and chances upon the largest bone ever found just sticking out of the ground. Apparently this bone has been buried for around 100 million years under a few inches of dirt! A team is assembled and cameras are all over it. But you only see them digging and chipping at rock. Not once do you see a bone being uncovered for the first time. You only see them after they have been completely excavated/put in place. By digging a few feet down they manage to find 200 bones belonging to a Totalbullasaur (Sorry, Titanosaur). Then the show ends with them assembling and welding together the 120ft long dinosaur in a warehouse. How they plan to get it out of there and on display is a total mystery to me. But too many people just eat this crap up. To me it looks like carved rock. As if a 1000.000 year old carcous is going to be stuck out the ground like a sore thumb just oozes bull.'" This was copy and pasted from here; ifers.ace.st/t56-dinosaur-hoax-d ... er-existed Scroll down towards the bottom to a post from someone called 'Paranoid Gramdroid'. It's pretty much word for word, except Stanley has replaced certain bits of wording, such as; "which I had the misfortune of watching the end of whilst round at a friends house. Today I downloaded this work of fiction just to see/hear their claims", to; "which I had the misfortune of watching the whole programme as i downloaded this work of fiction just to see/hear their claims". Pretty sad really. I caught Alice at it the other day too, who has mysteriously vanished.

Quote ="bandgeekmafia78"Flat Stanley's posts on the whole appear to be series of Copy/Pastes from the Internet. I'm not trying to troll by saying this, but are you plagiarising other people's work because you can't articulate your arguments so eloquently?'" Yep. Take his last post for example on Dinosaur bones: Quote ="FLAT STANLEY""David "Eugenics pioneer of bull Sir Freemasoic Attenborough" has recently been in a BBC documentary called 'Attenborough and the Giant Dinosaur' which I had the misfortune of watching the whole programme as i downloaded this work of fiction just to see/hear their claims. It starts with the romantic story of a lone Patagonian farmer looking for a lost sheep and chances upon the largest bone ever found just sticking out of the ground. Apparently this bone has been buried for around 100 million years under a few inches of dirt! A team is assembled and cameras are all over it. But you only see them digging and chipping at rock. Not once do you see a bone being uncovered for the first time. You only see them after they have been completely excavated/put in place. By digging a few feet down they manage to find 200 bones belonging to a Totalbullasaur (Sorry, Titanosaur). Then the show ends with them assembling and welding together the 120ft long dinosaur in a warehouse. How they plan to get it out of there and on display is a total mystery to me. But too many people just eat this crap up. To me it looks like carved rock. As if a 1000.000 year old carcous is going to be stuck out the ground like a sore thumb just oozes bull.'" This was copy and pasted from here; ifers.ace.st/t56-dinosaur-hoax-d ... er-existed Scroll down towards the bottom to a post from someone called 'Paranoid Gramdroid'. It's pretty much word for word, except Stanley has replaced certain bits of wording, such as; "which I had the misfortune of watching the end of whilst round at a friends house. Today I downloaded this work of fiction just to see/hear their claims", to; "which I had the misfortune of watching the whole programme as i downloaded this work of fiction just to see/hear their claims". Pretty sad really. I caught Alice at it the other day too, who has mysteriously vanished.

He/She/It will be back as soon as Stan forgets to take the meds.

Hahaha get a job.

I already have one, ta.



Is the chemist shut, Stan?

I heard a commentator on TalkSport this morning mention the "four corners of the Globe" and instantly thought about you, Stan.

It must be true then...Baaaaah

Well you can't be very efficient at it, all you do is stalk me with angst cranial insults. Firearms officer yeah right my bullet you are.

You can believe whatever you want, Stan. You plainly do with everything else.

That youtube clip is utter nonsense. You do realise that any scientific theory that has been changed due to new evidence has never been done so by some sad virgin sitting in his basement posting tripe on youtube.

Best thing about that video is Rowdy Roddy Piper around 4 and half minutes! Oh, and Henning Wehn doing the voice over.

Dear Mr Stanley, or can I call you Flat?
I'm confused.
On Wednesday morning I'm going to Central Sulawesi to witness the 'total solar eclipse'. [urlhttp://www.timeanddate.com/eclipse/in/indonesia/palu[/url I've heard some stories about this phenomenon and how they know exactly where and when they are visible but these seem to rely on calculations based on the false science and their model of the 'solar system'.
I'd like to know how it really works. How can millions of people see it exactly as predicted. Where I live in South Sulawesi they say there will be only 90% coverage. Which is why I'm driving 14 hours to a suitable viewing position.
I guess it's something to do with NASA, but how they do it? Particularly over such a wide area and perfectly choreographed and timed to perfection. This must have been even more difficult to achieve in the millions of years before computers and NASA existed. I guess they could have faked the photos and bribed the billions of eye witnesses who are still alive?[urlhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_eclipse_of_July_28,_1851[/url .
Please explain.
Thanks
Coco

Hmmm. Unlike your technique of swallowing whole whatever your delusional mates publish, I considered that video.

Obviously it's a fake, because he's forgotten to put in the stars. CGI bullcrap. Etc.




Sorry, just winding you up, although the reasons no stars are visible in his video is the same as why no stars are seen in The Blue Marble, or in moon photographs.

1. It proves the Earth is a globe, since you tell us that however high we go, our eyes are always level with the horizon - yet at only 73 miles, the view of the curve of the globe is abundantly clear
2. If the Earth were flat then the whole of the flat Earth should be visibletrailing away in all directions. It's not. The local area and some distance in all directions from it can be seen, but no further than that. Exactly what you'd expect, as you go higher, you can see further around the curve of the globe, but still you can't see that far, as the curve of the globe drops away over all horizons.
3. The idiot who made the video thinks that the ground position of the moon (i.e., the place on Earth where the moon would appear directly overhead) means you can only see the moon from there. In fact, the moon is approx a quarter of a million miles away and as such at any given time can be seen from not far off half the Earth.

4. Here's a screenshot of the view of the sky from the approximate launch location, on the date in question, at approximately the time he says the rocket was launched, and from an altitude of 120km. I used the fantastic free resource Stellarium.



What's that thing I see in the south east, easily visible above the horizon? Well, I never. It's the Moon.

Oddly enough, in just the same direction, from the perspective of the launch site, as the "moon dot" on your idiot mate's map.

Epic fail Stan, although not your fault, save for being so gullible; you just uncritically wanted to believe your idiot mate, but it turns out that he has no idea what he is talking about.

HTH

Prescription must have been sorted this week...

Spot The Common Denominators, Then Apply Occam's Razor. ? And it's not the Masonic Hand Signal.

Indeed it's not a Masonic hand signal. Or, it may for all i know, also be one, but what it is on this particular occasion was the Vulcan salute, in tribute to Leonard Nimoy. The image is Samantha Cristoforetti, who lived on the ISS between November 2014-June 2015. The giveaway is she's wearing a Star trek top. Here she is again: She spent 200 days in space, here's a brief article, complete with video of the ISS toilet www.haaretz.com/israel-news/science/1.701324

Indeed it's not a Masonic hand signal. Or, it may for all i know, also be one, but what it is on this particular occasion was the Vulcan salute, in tribute to Leonard Nimoy. The image is Samantha Cristoforetti, who lived on the ISS between November 2014-June 2015. The giveaway is she's wearing a Star trek top. Here she is again: She spent 200 days in space, here's a brief article, complete with video of the ISS toilet www.haaretz.com/israel-news/science/1.701324

I knew Mr Spock was part of the heliocentric Masonic cabal that dictates all aspects of modern life; he had funny ears - dead giveaway.