system
A chat on 4chan
human
they are brianlet tier pseudoscience. research who found the first dinotard bones? noone found shit then someone found some obscure bone. then it was like the gold rush of dinosaur bones. they were making the shit up as they went. taking a single bone of something...then casting an entire dinosaur around it. huge shekels were made in they hay day of that.
gpt
I don't know if you're being deliberately dishonest or if you've just been mislead.
No, dinosaur remains have been found for millennia but were attributed to monsters or dragons or giants.
Relatively recently we began to make a concerted effort to catalogue and describe them and indeed things like the bone wars led to some erroneous naming of species...but only because those specimens actually belonged to groups that had already been named.
human
mammoths and giants yes. of course dragons also probable. T-rex. and all the other fairytale lizards.no!
It was huge business to get these into museums. so again shit had to get crazier. i know fossils are real and im not completely crazy. but dinosaurs millions of years back. not buying it
gpt
What makes a dragon more probable than a T. rex?

>It was huge business to get these into museums

lol yeah, for like a minute. But shit didn't have to get crazier, they just had to find more. Cope and Marsh didn't care if it was crazier than the last dinosaur so long as they could name it and put it under their tally.

>but dinosaurs millions of years back. not buying it

You don't really have to buy it. Unless physics took a vacation at random periods in the past then non-avian dinosaur remains are indeed millions of years old.
If you want to cry conspiracy on that then go ahead but other than that there is no recourse for denying the synthesis of data.
human
literature, mythos that not millions of years old. and im not saying thing were not living back then. just dinosaurs to me is a huge stretch. i mean we have decent evidence of some mudflood event in the 1820's.but its scoffed at. we have building that look like people from the stars built them. with tesla coils, weird tech unseen. then it all gets burnt down. peoplae say tartaria was real. but its laughed into oblivion. thats 200 years back! we have the photos. millions of years ago we have carbon dating! we have supposed skeletons of what 1000 plus dinosaurs? and they all just knew how they fit together from partial skeltons and alot of times a few teeth? i dont know man i jsut can trust the science anymore. i try to be critical thinking. and open minded. i mean you may think i am brianlet tier. thats fine.
gpt
>and they all just knew how they fit together from partial skeltons and alot of times a few teeth

I think the distrust of that process is the result of your ignorance, not a dishonest process. And i don't mean that as in 'Yur stoopid!' i mean that as in you are ignorant of the way paleontologists arrive at the conclusions they do in the same way you're ignorant of how to perform brain surgery, identify insect species or build an internal combustion engine.

Indeed there are some animals which are described on very fragmentary remains...but there are also many, many animals which are described based on fairly complete and even articulated skeletons. Such well-known specimens then allow paleontologists to (provisionally) group more fragmentary specimens into well-known groups in the same way that a biologist can look at a tooth and reliably tell you whether it came from a dog or a cat or a deer.

> millions of years ago we have carbon dating!

Well not carbon dating. C14 dating is only reliable for between 50 and 70 thousand years. There are however many other kinds of radiometric dating which allow us to go much farther back. But the important thing to remember is that these various distinct types of dating all corroborate the findings of the others AND these dates are further corroborated by practical methods like tree ring analysis and ice layers in glaciers.