I think it's the hype. Every kid is fascinated with dinosaurs, which might lead to them learning actual science! So they have to race to pump out as much targeted disinformation as possible to keep the kids ignorant.
One especially crazy thing about their fixation on the Jurassic Park movies is that said films do not even purport to be accurate depictions of dinosaurs. A key part of the canon is that the park’s animals are genetically-engineered Frankenstein’s monsters with DNA from frogs & other extant species, *not* pure dinosaurs.
I think it was less the case in JP than in later entries. To my knowledge, no frog species does super-smort packhunting or frill-necked screams or whatever. Crichton was much more interested in headline-ripped and science-scared horror than anything else, and the movie (and TLW) just kind of followed suit but with more Spielbergian wonder
I'm ALWAYS game for a yodel break...there's one video where it happens like 3 or 4 times and I had to take a minute to compose myself while listening at work cause I was laughing so hard 😏
A cool thing about crocodilians is, they can control how much blood bypasses the 4th chamber of their heart. When holding your breath under water, an efficient 4 chambered heart is a really bad idea b/c you efficiently send all the oxygenated blood the cells to get used up & back to the lungs quite quickly. A 3 chambered heart is actually better for holding your breath, b/c the inefficient mixing of oxygenated & de-oxygenated blood effectively means some oxygenated red blood cells are held in reserve for a while. However, if a croc needs to run a short distance on land, like if a young croc is being chased by a larger predator, it can use the 4th heart chamber to have a burst of efficient oxygen delivery to the mussels. There is a Bachelor thesis titled "The functional anatomy of the crocodilian heart" by Jennifer Karlsson at Linköping University that goes into great detail about it.
I love this. Creationist: complains people don't engage with enough propoer science. Also creationist: proceeds to review Jurassic Park as proper science for 25 minutes. My man! To the best of my knowledge Jurassic Park was not released in a peer reviewed journal!
All quadrilaterals are polygons. Not all polygons are quadrilaterals. All rectangles are quadrilaterals, not all quadrilaterals are rectangles. That they can understand...why on earth do they insist on pretending to not understanding this?
The only things I took from the FICTIONAL Jurassic Park movie for my PhD defense, was the iconic image of Rexy roaring just after she broke through the fence, to illustrate the importance of containment of bioengineered organisms. And as an easter egg, the color scheme of Mr. DNA to color my image of a DNA structure.
Oh Dapper, I think we ALL know why they keep having people speak outside their expertise. Hard to keep a straight face when you have a doctorate in how your YEC script is wrong. Also nice Jaberwocky reference
You ask why they bring in people to talk outside their field of expertise? I would hazard a guess that the expertise places a distant second place, to looking like authority figures. And I also suspect that there are times they actively avoid using a person to speak inside their field of expertise. For some reason, getting a scientist to lie about their particular field, is harder.
Hypernym: a word with a broad meaning that includes words with narrower, more specific meanings. Hyponym: a word with a narrow meaning that has more general words that can refer to it. Dinosaur is a hypernym of bird. Birds are dinosaurs. Bird is a hyponym of dinosaur. Not all dinosaurs are birds. Bird and dinosaur are not synonyms. They do not have the same meaning.
I read Jurassic Park around August last year. I'm planning on reading Lost World fairly soon. And then later, some of Chrichton's other works like Andromeda. All throughout the book, it is patently evident that Crichton is a science fiction writer first and foremost. He wants to tell a fun and thrilling story. And he's willing to bend and twist and liberally interpret the facts to help facilitate the story. All the while giving everything a quasi-scientific explanation.
I do love my feathered Yutyrannus in Ark. My only issue is I couldn't figure out a good naming convention for them like the Allos (I had BigAl, Allen, AlCopone, Alcohol, and my fave, AlBeBack, but he got killed by an alpha rex and he didn't come back). (I literally just played the game to make huge breeding farms because I guess I'm weird, but also caused a ton of lag on our server whenever people were coming to my base).
I remember watching an ostrich when I was on safari she was trying to incubate her eggs and one kept rolling away again and again I in that moment I thought fuck me ostriches are dumb fucks. They're tasty though, a really fucking majestic when they run across the plain.
If we take apologist backstories and put them on a "sure buddy, I believe you" scale, then the top tier are that they were hardened who tried to disprove God but were flipped by the weight of the evidence, and tier 2 are that they were trying to take a balanced and honest appreciation of both sides of the argument.
Well you see dinosaurs are actually very smort though, a certain specimen of species Corvus corax, nicknamed Okuu, has the ability to control nuclear fusion to some extent. Another specimen of the same species, actually the type specimen (named Corvus corax) lead XIXth space marine legion.
By the way, alligators aren't dumb. Alligators build artificial ponds to help them survive the dry season called Alligator holes and balance sticks on their heads during nesting season for water birds so they can ambush the birds while they are looking for nest building materials. Alligators also have some rudimentary pack hunting tactics to take down prey too large for a lone Alligator to defeat. To be clear, alligators, crocodiles, and caimans are nowhere near as smart as cats, dogs, and ravens.
Approx 18:13 The whole takeaway ethic of the first Jurassic Park movie, and then revisited in the second Jurassic World movie, was that there was something unconscionably cruel about cloning dinosaurs, ie bringing into existence a creature that is living outside its own timeline, and doesn't have a means to survive and live in this presentday world on its own natural terms. And that the only reason humans did all this in the first place was to satisfy our ravenous egos, so to demonstrate just how clever we really are. Creating mutated chicken embryos sure sounds just like what Dr Wu was doing to the dinosaurs. It sounds like humanity still hasn't learned the lessons of Jurassic Park. How many times do we have to depict scientists getting eaten by dinosaurs before you stop committing disgusting acts upon innocent animals?
To be accurate, if you look at the research itself, the birds are not mutated. Their embryological development is altered by experimentally introducing inhibitors or activators of specific pathways that are hypothesized to create the bird-specific morphology. And for example in Bhart-Anjan S. Bhullar et al, 2015, this made the premaxillae more like the ancestral shape. No genetic manipulation involved. It's specifically for hypothesis testing about how beaks evolved. The goal is not "freaky chicken, lol".
It's very telling how often they will mention *movies* rather than *papers*. Because they can watch movies and criticise them and that's not hard, but reading papers and understanding them is hard. You can see the same thing in flat earth and alex jones spaces. They'll talk about movies and TV shows and never about hard research.
4:25 is he really gonna sit there and say "I looked into it a little bit by myself, and I have no real idea what I'm talking about. So I wrote a book about it." with a straight face like none of their intended audience is gonna catch how stupid that is? And are their intended audience of pseudo-sentient flesh blobs really gonna insist on proving them right? Does this count as an _unforced error_ or is the fact that they were threatened with violence as children if they asked questions or used their brain enough to disqualify the 'unforced' bit?
If you want to make yourself sad, imagine if creationists took just the time they use to argue that dinosaurs don't have feathers to do anything of value to society. Even in the context of the pseudoscience of creationism it really has to be one of the biggest wastes of effort. Even if every scientist threw up their hands and agreed with them about the feathers, it wouldn't change anything else. And even if every creationist admitted that some dinosaurs have feathers, THAT wouldn't change anything else for THEM!
These conversations really amount to nothing. It's disappointing, really. The problem with this, is that Hovind at an Comfort at least make a point. They lie and all, but this is to bland in comparison.
Off topic but I need to say this. Some one gifted me a membership which was lovely of them but its stressing me out I have tried to cancel it but have only managed to turn off it happening in future even unsubscribing & resubscribing did not work. So I am going to be bailing until it expires accepting charity which is what this feels like some what triggers me.
@@DapperDinosaur Sadly it does not, its like a YEC not amenable to reason but thank you & I will be watching any ways & be back as a subscriber in February
I think... though can not be sure that the g/mm^3 is supposed to be (for some values of 'supposed') 1000s mm^3, based on 78% of the height x width x length x pi/4 just for fun.... 61% of the 'block'. It is really stupid that it looks like this might be a thing that was intended and then fumbled. (What is wrong with cm^3 - or these people?).
@@DapperDinosaur so my thought is the volume is k mm^3, (which is an odd way of saying cm^3), but got mangled during write-up to g/mm^3. It looks plausible for a roughly ellipsoid form of the proportions given if that is what it is.
Sand People are NOT from Africa. Sand People are from Tatooine! You’re obviously not a “real”(tm) scientist, because any good scientist would know this from the countless movies they watch in order to advance their careers, human knowledge, and to garner scientific data. (/s) hehehehehe
Second time I've said it today, but it's still relevant:
"Birds aren't dinosaurs" is a weird hill to die on
It really is
It is apparently a lucrative hill
I think it's the hype. Every kid is fascinated with dinosaurs, which might lead to them learning actual science! So they have to race to pump out as much targeted disinformation as possible to keep the kids ignorant.
Birds aren’t even birds!
They spend so much time citing Jurassic Park, I suspect they're the kind of movie watcher to hear "Based on a true story" and think its 100% accurate.
LOL
I love that I can tell when we're getting close to the end of a video because Dapper has to bleep himself.
Lol my patience gets so severely tested.
I feel like calling Timothy Clarey a bird brain is a serious insult to actual birds. 🤣
True
@ Calling him as dumb as a box of rocks is an insult to boxes and rockses.
Ikr, some birds are pretty smart
1:02:52 I’m old enough to remember my church switching from dinosaurs never existed to dinosaurs were here with people 😂
Wow!
Flintstones, meet the Flintstones... 🎶
That must have caused cognitive whiplash
@@katinapac-baez5083 They're a modern stone-age fa-mi-ly♫
Which puts them ahead of
Average churches by six cen-tu-rieeeees♪
@ probably the first time I started to question
One especially crazy thing about their fixation on the Jurassic Park movies is that said films do not even purport to be accurate depictions of dinosaurs. A key part of the canon is that the park’s animals are genetically-engineered Frankenstein’s monsters with DNA from frogs & other extant species, *not* pure dinosaurs.
But that's unwelcome nuance!
I think it was less the case in JP than in later entries. To my knowledge, no frog species does super-smort packhunting or frill-necked screams or whatever. Crichton was much more interested in headline-ripped and science-scared horror than anything else, and the movie (and TLW) just kind of followed suit but with more Spielbergian wonder
I thought the frog DNA was to explain how some of the dinosaurs changed sex.
When you said you had evidence that at least some dinosaurs had feathers I was almost expecting a slideshow of modern birds
Lol that would have been good
Thanks. I fefinitely needed that yodel interval.
Same over here. It's been a while since Kitty has come running for a dance break.
I'm ALWAYS game for a yodel break...there's one video where it happens like 3 or 4 times and I had to take a minute to compose myself while listening at work cause I was laughing so hard 😏
You're welcome
A cool thing about crocodilians is, they can control how much blood bypasses the 4th chamber of their heart. When holding your breath under water, an efficient 4 chambered heart is a really bad idea b/c you efficiently send all the oxygenated blood the cells to get used up & back to the lungs quite quickly. A 3 chambered heart is actually better for holding your breath, b/c the inefficient mixing of oxygenated & de-oxygenated blood effectively means some oxygenated red blood cells are held in reserve for a while. However, if a croc needs to run a short distance on land, like if a young croc is being chased by a larger predator, it can use the 4th heart chamber to have a burst of efficient oxygen delivery to the mussels. There is a Bachelor thesis titled "The functional anatomy of the crocodilian heart" by Jennifer Karlsson at Linköping University that goes into great detail about it.
Archosaurs are so cool.
45:06 ooooooh!! Uncensored, sweary Dapper!!! (Sweary Dapper is best Dapper)
Lol thanks
I came from the hospital, why are there still hospitals??
😆 🤣 😂
I love this.
Creationist: complains people don't engage with enough propoer science.
Also creationist: proceeds to review Jurassic Park as proper science for 25 minutes.
My man! To the best of my knowledge Jurassic Park was not released in a peer reviewed journal!
It wasn't? 😮
Sometimes I wish the Dino model had arms long enough to allow it to facepalm
Model? That's just me!
All quadrilaterals are polygons. Not all polygons are quadrilaterals. All rectangles are quadrilaterals, not all quadrilaterals are rectangles.
That they can understand...why on earth do they insist on pretending to not understanding this?
The only things I took from the FICTIONAL Jurassic Park movie for my PhD defense, was the iconic image of Rexy roaring just after she broke through the fence, to illustrate the importance of containment of bioengineered organisms. And as an easter egg, the color scheme of Mr. DNA to color my image of a DNA structure.
Thanks!
You're welcome!
10:08 “scientists don’t compare the data too much.”
Riiiiiiight, and truck drivers don’t drive much..
Oh Dapper, I think we ALL know why they keep having people speak outside their expertise. Hard to keep a straight face when you have a doctorate in how your YEC script is wrong.
Also nice Jaberwocky reference
You ask why they bring in people to talk outside their field of expertise?
I would hazard a guess that the expertise places a distant second place, to looking like authority figures.
And I also suspect that there are times they actively avoid using a person to speak inside their field of expertise. For some reason, getting a scientist to lie about their particular field, is harder.
I think you may be right.
Physicists are eagerly awaiting Disney to produce a movie about quantum turtles so that we can at last have a proper Unified Field Theory..
36:30 LOL you can see what happened in his brain right there :D "Oh crap, abort, abort, do a quick 180°!"
Hypernym: a word with a broad meaning that includes words with narrower, more specific meanings.
Hyponym: a word with a narrow meaning that has more general words that can refer to it.
Dinosaur is a hypernym of bird. Birds are dinosaurs.
Bird is a hyponym of dinosaur. Not all dinosaurs are birds.
Bird and dinosaur are not synonyms. They do not have the same meaning.
Exactly!
Hypnonym: a large set of words otherwise known as Sermons.
Dapper, BEING a Dinosaur doesn't count as STUDYING Dinosaurs! 😝
I read Jurassic Park around August last year. I'm planning on reading Lost World fairly soon. And then later, some of Chrichton's other works like Andromeda.
All throughout the book, it is patently evident that Crichton is a science fiction writer first and foremost.
He wants to tell a fun and thrilling story. And he's willing to bend and twist and liberally interpret the facts to help facilitate the story. All the while giving everything a quasi-scientific explanation.
I still haven't read it.
I do love my feathered Yutyrannus in Ark.
My only issue is I couldn't figure out a good naming convention for them like the Allos (I had BigAl, Allen, AlCopone, Alcohol, and my fave, AlBeBack, but he got killed by an alpha rex and he didn't come back).
(I literally just played the game to make huge breeding farms because I guess I'm weird, but also caused a ton of lag on our server whenever people were coming to my base).
I haven't played Ark in forever.
Uh Ostriches aren’t cold blooded, also Crocodilians evolved from endothermic ancestors creationists!
Yup!
T. Cleary Dictionary : Scientist, - a movie goer.
I remember watching an ostrich when I was on safari she was trying to incubate her eggs and one kept rolling away again and again I in that moment I thought fuck me ostriches are dumb fucks. They're tasty though, a really fucking majestic when they run across the plain.
They really are very dumb. I've never eaten one though.
If we take apologist backstories and put them on a "sure buddy, I believe you" scale, then the top tier are that they were hardened who tried to disprove God but were flipped by the weight of the evidence, and tier 2 are that they were trying to take a balanced and honest appreciation of both sides of the argument.
I've never actually looked into the first group.
How are they letting you get away with that "Stories that don't go anywhere" clip so much???
I do not know, but I am also not complaining.
@DapperDinosaur as someone who's old enough to have seen that episode first run on TV...I am endlessly entertained when it pops up 😏
Rumor has it that under 20 seconds is “acceptable” to the algorithm..
Well you see dinosaurs are actually very smort though, a certain specimen of species Corvus corax, nicknamed Okuu, has the ability to control nuclear fusion to some extent. Another specimen of the same species, actually the type specimen (named Corvus corax) lead XIXth space marine legion.
Lol
By the way, alligators aren't dumb. Alligators build artificial ponds to help them survive the dry season called Alligator holes and balance sticks on their heads during nesting season for water birds so they can ambush the birds while they are looking for nest building materials. Alligators also have some rudimentary pack hunting tactics to take down prey too large for a lone Alligator to defeat.
To be clear, alligators, crocodiles, and caimans are nowhere near as smart as cats, dogs, and ravens.
I guess it's all relative
I'm confused as to why he asserts that t. rex were active and agile - why would a cold blooded plant eater need to be so agile? 🤔
Good question!
Watermelon trees have lightening reflexes.
35:47 But what if I am an alligator? D: Or I want to share your content with an alligator?
You definitely want to share it with alligators
Is “in the year of the lord” your version of “bless your heart”?
Kind of. I mostly use it to emphasize just how out of date YECs are, plus it's just fun to say.
“They always have to go back and do better” - so you’re saying that they get better over time then?
Yes
45:08 Did you forget to do your bleep thing or that’s not considered a UA-cam banned word?
I forgot
Approx 18:13
The whole takeaway ethic of the first Jurassic Park movie, and then revisited in the second Jurassic World movie, was that there was something unconscionably cruel about cloning dinosaurs, ie bringing into existence a creature that is living outside its own timeline, and doesn't have a means to survive and live in this presentday world on its own natural terms. And that the only reason humans did all this in the first place was to satisfy our ravenous egos, so to demonstrate just how clever we really are.
Creating mutated chicken embryos sure sounds just like what Dr Wu was doing to the dinosaurs.
It sounds like humanity still hasn't learned the lessons of Jurassic Park. How many times do we have to depict scientists getting eaten by dinosaurs before you stop committing disgusting acts upon innocent animals?
There probably is no such number.
To be accurate, if you look at the research itself, the birds are not mutated. Their embryological development is altered by experimentally introducing inhibitors or activators of specific pathways that are hypothesized to create the bird-specific morphology. And for example in Bhart-Anjan S. Bhullar et al, 2015, this made the premaxillae more like the ancestral shape. No genetic manipulation involved.
It's specifically for hypothesis testing about how beaks evolved. The goal is not "freaky chicken, lol".
It's very telling how often they will mention *movies* rather than *papers*. Because they can watch movies and criticise them and that's not hard, but reading papers and understanding them is hard. You can see the same thing in flat earth and alex jones spaces. They'll talk about movies and TV shows and never about hard research.
4:25 is he really gonna sit there and say "I looked into it a little bit by myself, and I have no real idea what I'm talking about. So I wrote a book about it." with a straight face like none of their intended audience is gonna catch how stupid that is?
And are their intended audience of pseudo-sentient flesh blobs really gonna insist on proving them right?
Does this count as an _unforced error_ or is the fact that they were threatened with violence as children if they asked questions or used their brain enough to disqualify the 'unforced' bit?
Yes he is.
Yes they are.
Yes it does.
If you want to make yourself sad, imagine if creationists took just the time they use to argue that dinosaurs don't have feathers to do anything of value to society.
Even in the context of the pseudoscience of creationism it really has to be one of the biggest wastes of effort. Even if every scientist threw up their hands and agreed with them about the feathers, it wouldn't change anything else. And even if every creationist admitted that some dinosaurs have feathers, THAT wouldn't change anything else for THEM!
Hey! I attended that university! 9:55
Nice!
1:03:49 You accidentally called him Tomkins.
Oops, they all blend together after this long.
1:04:30 as demonstrated AGAIN recently by Dr. Dan 😂 lie and gaslight or die
Yup!
These conversations really amount to nothing. It's disappointing, really. The problem with this, is that Hovind at an Comfort at least make a point. They lie and all, but this is to bland in comparison.
Off topic but I need to say this. Some one gifted me a membership which was lovely of them but its stressing me out I have tried to cancel it but have only managed to turn off it happening in future even unsubscribing & resubscribing did not work. So I am going to be bailing until it expires accepting charity which is what this feels like some what triggers me.
It is randomly assigned by UA-cam. If it helps, they are more tipping me than gifting you since they can't choose you as a recipient
@@DapperDinosaur Sadly it does not, its like a YEC not amenable to reason but thank you & I will be watching any ways & be back as a subscriber in February
Wait, you don't accept alligator subscribers?
Nah I do
I think... though can not be sure that the g/mm^3 is supposed to be (for some values of 'supposed') 1000s mm^3, based on 78% of the height x width x length x pi/4 just for fun.... 61% of the 'block'.
It is really stupid that it looks like this might be a thing that was intended and then fumbled. (What is wrong with cm^3 - or these people?).
It was listed as a volume.
@@DapperDinosaur so my thought is the volume is k mm^3, (which is an odd way of saying cm^3), but got mangled during write-up to g/mm^3. It looks plausible for a roughly ellipsoid form of the proportions given if that is what it is.
@ I guess we are lucky it wasn't marked as dB
Everyone in these ICR interviews sounds so bored.
Maybe they are.
Sand People are NOT from Africa.
Sand People are from Tatooine!
You’re obviously not a “real”(tm) scientist, because any good scientist would know this from the countless movies they watch in order to advance their careers, human knowledge, and to garner scientific data.
(/s) hehehehehe
Good point ha ha
Thank you.
You're welcome!