There are so many things wrong with this post, it's hard to know where to begin.
I suppose I'll start with the fallacy that no complete dinosaur skeletons have ever been found. I don't know what kind of bubble you needed to live in to believe this, but ANOTHER complete skeleton was just discovered a few years ago, and there was a lot of publicity about it. The first complete one was actually found before the term 'dinosaurus' was ever used. There is a short article you can read here about that skeleton, and how it led to the current classification of dinosaurs.
As you state yourself in this blog, and then back up with facts, dinosaurs were in fact discovered long before the 1800's. They simply were not categorized and classified before then, largely because of a lack of work in the field. We still haven't named all the species currently alive on earth, it only follows naturally that we would be even further behind in naming extinct species, especially since so many of them are (as you mentioned) incomplete. This makes valid classification very difficult.
Next, I'd like to address the fallacy that 'only a select group of people' discover dinosaur bones. Most modern finds are first discovered by contractors, like me, who are excavating for new construction. Paleontologists come in after, (usually after much of the skeleton has already been destroyed by equipment, hence the lack of 'complete' skeletons) and continue the excavation. It is exceedingly rare for a paleontologist to just start digging in a place where someone (NOT in the scientific community) hasn't already found something worth investigating further. Because there is so little money invested in paleontology, scientists in the field nearly always employ volunteers to help with their excavations. It does not require a special degree or training, they will teach you all you need to know the morning you show up. Go ahead and give it a try, you will probably learn much more in one day on a dig site than you will learn from years of watching disinformation videos.
I'll touch briefly on your belief that lack of mention of them in the bible is a red flag. The truth is, you have no idea if they were mentioned in the bible, because the bible you have access to has been HEAVILY redacted (and added to) over the centuries by people in power who wanted to change what people believed about history and the divine.
I'll end on another easy one... your belief that people aren't digging up dinosaur bones all the time. Where I live, you CAN'T dig anywhere without finding marine fossils. In Ridgeland, SC, the sandy soil is literally littered with fossilized shark teeth. There are parts of the Ozarks where dinosaur bones are so common, they just ignore them now. The truth is, people DO dig up dinosaur bones all the time, and have no idea what they are. Most will just look like a piece of stone to the average observer, because they've been fossilized. Bones that still resemble bone are brittle, very easily broken, and often just look like a regular small animal bone.
As for the geocentric vs. heliocentric model (of the solar system, not the universe), the reason that the heliocentric model was EVENTUALLY adopted (Copernicus was excommunicated from the church, and ridiculed for years for this idea, according to history) was because it actually explained what we can observe in the sky. Likewise, the knowledge that the earth is indeed a globe was hard to impress on people, but it is the ONLY shape that explains observable phenomenon. After centuries of scientific observation proving the heliocentric model AND the shape and size of the glove we call Earth (and the moon, and other planets in the solar system) some people STILL don't believe it. All of the first experiments used to measure the size of the earth can be easily replicated, if you care to understand the science.
As Mark Twain said, it's easier to fool people than convince them they're being fooled. Nowhere is this more true than in the realm of religious indoctrination.
I would love to hear more about these "first experiments to measure the size of the earth" coz many people have failed recently to find even an inch of curvature, anywhere....
Fluid dynamics of water indicate that bendy oceans can't be a real thing. Clock Towers can be seen from 100's of miles, lighthouses too. White cliffs of Dover can be seen from Calais, France... Etc. I've never heard of an experiment to measure the earth, so I am intrigued to know more, thank you.
(I truly appreciate your time and typing... Please be aware your CAPS LOCK seems to get stuck now and then tho :)
The Greeks successfully used two sticks of the same length at different latitudes, and measured the length of the shadow they each cast at noon. By using the distance between the sticks, and the lengths of the different shadows, they calculated the diameter and circumference of the earth within 1% of accuracy. I think that was around 600BC, it's an easy thing to look up.
If someone recently tried and failed to measure the circumference of the earth, that doesn't mean it can't be done, or that it hasn't been done, many times. Several of the experiments are not hard to find and duplicate yourself. As so many people are fond of saying these days... do your own research.
So many things about that video were easily disproven assumptions, that I'm wondering if you're trolling me with this. All he proves with this video is that under very specific circumstances, you could 'replicate' the experiment on a flat earth. He absolutely ignores the issue of N/S and E/W alignment, because that's where his silly little video falls completely apart.
This guy. or others, seem to have convinced you that doing your own research is hard, or, in the case of fossils, impossible. Neither of these are true. Online classes geared at teaching STEM concepts to children can clear up all your confusion about this very quickly, you just have to be willing to learn, and trust what you see, not what you're told.
Not really sure what trolling means in this context? Aren't we just having a conversation?
I could have explained to you that in Flat Earth cosmology the sun & moon are not millions of miles away but local (as demonstrated by the phenomena known as crepuscular rays), but it was simpler to drop the video and I thought you & future readers might enjoy the dulcet tones of Dubay ;)
Those "very specific" circumstances you mentioned just happen to be exactly what everyone believed in the years prior to the globe Earth story. So, probably worth taking into account when making an experiment to disprove them.
Let's not get into the INSANELY specific circumstances required to produce a sun & moon which appear exactly the same size from Earth, despite (supposedly) being at different distances from Earth (especially when combined with the odds of being on a 'planet' which is at exactly the right distance from the sun to produce life). The odds of this are unimaginable. While the odds of the two orbs which create day & night (two halves of a whole) being the same size & distance from Earth does not seem so unimaginable at all. Even a child would concede this.
You are fast to cite your evidence with the N/S E/W alignment, yet all this proves is that you are unfamiliar with the subject. No doubt you believe the Mercator projection map to be the most accurate map of this realm to date? Well, even wiki acknowledge "There is some controversy over the origins of the Mercator". Indeed. That's because it looked rather different prior to this.
On a Flat Earth map everything lines up. Confirmed by looking at modern flight times & re-fuelling ports, which on a mercator map don't make any sense. I don't just watch videos in fact. Have spent a huge amount of time on this.
I am a photographer/filmmaker by trade and in Indonesia five years ago I ran tests with my most powerful telescopic lens over large expanses of water where with the lens it was possible to see the white sand of beaches on far away islands when technically they should have been below the curvature of the Earth, which is easily worked out using the maths provided by today's 'science'. It is probably worth mentioning that at the time I was trying desperately to disprove the Flat Earth! Because just as it is for you, every part of my body was pushing me away from the idea (years of conditioning tend to have this effect). Yet no matter how hard I tried, I simply could not disprove it.
So, I suppose my challenge to you is simple. See if you can personally disprove the Flat Earth.
Should be easy right?
The sun and moon do not appear to be the same size from earth, if you bother to measure them. The do not even always appear to be the same size themselves... both will look larger close to the horizon, because of atmospheric lensing effect. This is part of the same phenomenon that causes corpuscular rays (and why corpuscular rays do not always appear to have the same angle, which they should if it was a close sun shining through a flat atmosphere).
As for your telescope experiment, I don't know how far away your white sand beaches, and I didn't get a chance to double check the math. I know that when you approach the Rockies by car you don't just suddenly see the whole mountain, you see the tops first. When you approach a city from the see you don't see the beaches first, because they're closer, you see the building first, because they're taller. And I know that you cannot point a laser at Antarctica from America, because of the curve of the earth. It's the reason broadcast signals cover the whole planet. It's the reason you can't see Europe with a telescope from America, which should be easy, right, since you can see the moon so easily, and that's supposed to closer AND smaller than Europe.
I've already personally disproven the Flat Earth. I was a science geek of a kid who was into astronomy, and I couldn't afford formal education. I read books, and did my own experiments. Can I prove it beyond ANY shadow of a doubt? No, that wouldn't be science. Science dictates that there is always room for doubt. People have doubted the idea that the earth is round for as long as people have been on this earth, but as people have tried to prove which is true, the shape of an oblate spheriod is the only one that has never been proved false. There are literally thousands of years worth of research on this, and much of it is available for you to double check.
The reason I thought you might be trolling me with that video is because that guy doesn't back up anything he says with actual science, he just reinforces the false assumptions that scientist spent centuries trying to understand, and have since spent millenia trying to find a deeper understanding of. That, and Dubay's 'dulcet tones' sound like he's trying to mock Carl Sagan.
But eclipses fit together perfectly? I have photographed many. So when the sun & moon both experience the same atmospheric distortion from our perspective they appear the same size. Which is undeniably a mighty big coincidence.
Can you see how the same would be true on a flat earth? The atmosphere becomes clearer the higher we go.
And of course you can't see Europe from America ;) Even the best telescope cannot see through that much haze. Same problem for a laser.
The distance I was looking at in Indonesia was around 50 km. (196.20 meters curvature). And even this was hard to see due to haze. It was just observable due to the colour contrast between the white sand against the dark green of the jungle behind it.
No trolling here my friend. I am genuinely keen to learn as much as I can from any humans who who believe themselves to have knowledge (or even better, first hand experience!) in subjects which also interest me.
There is a good article
here
that summarizes the ancient Greek attempts to calculate the circumference of the earth.
I can understand your skepticism and I do appreciate you taking the time to voice the opposing argument in detail. I expected this and you have done a marvellous job.
Yes, the info in this post came from videos made by an independent researcher, unaffiliated with mainstream institutions. I just happen to trust this particular researcher and have found over the years that truth is not so much identified with words but with feelings and I personally feel this one to be true. No doubt if I were to volunteer my services in the field I would learn lots about the small fossilised fragments one might be told by the experts are definitely dino bones, but would I personally ever discover the clearly identifiable form of any dinosaur? Something tells me not. Perhaps you know of a volunteer who did? If most modern finds are as you say made first by contractors you must have discovered quite a few yourself? Or at the very least know contractors who have? Sounds like the job to be in, knowing how much dino bones sell for!
Love that Twain quote. Have used it in previous posts. From my perspective it fits perfectly for a person who still believes science has merit in this world. Unfortunately science was sold to the highest bidder a long time ago and serves now only as a control mechanism for our minds.
I wonder if you trust the same science which pushed a vaccine on everyone recently? There are a lot of injured people out there now (or worse) because they did.
So, the idea of a Flat Earth is nothing new to me but the dinosaur story is and I will not be able to respond to your points as well as Eric Dubay himself who seems like a decent chap and would no doubt respond to you directly over on Odysey if you were to drop this same message under one of the films I have posted below.
There is one thing I can say. I thought the same thing as you about the heliocentric model placing the sun at the centre of the solar system, not the universe. However, I took that quote directly from wiki, so am not sure why it's written that way?
Thanks again for your time on this! Sorry I cannot better address your points.
Next time I'm browsing on LBRY I'll give Eric Dubay a look, and maybe engage with him in the comments there.
Where I live, actual bones are very rare. I have personally uncovered bones that caused us to have to stop the dig and call someone, but that was because they appeared to be human remains. I was on a project (but did not personally do the excavation) that was shut down for a short while so paleontologists could come and remove some bones. If I remember right, they were identified as mastodon bones, which are tens (maybe hundreds?) of millions of years more recent than dinosaur fossils. My father did excavation work in Arizona for years, and he said that some dinosaur fossils were so common out there that they ignored them.
As a guy who has always enjoyed science, and participated in many experiments, as a volunteer, as a researcher, and as a subject, I want to address something you bring up in this comment.
The phrase 'Trust The Science' is propaganda, and it IS NOT pushed by scientists. Scientists DO NOT just trust science, they prove it. Any scientist will think you're joking if they hear someone say 'Trust the science'. The phrase that is used (and has been for centuries) in the scientific community is 'PROVE the science'.
Of course, there are people within the scientific community who take a more 'faith based' approach to science, or simply use it to further their own goals, just as there are people of ill will in every community. These people aren't scientists, any more than pedosadist priests are men of God.
A better way to put it would be 'trust the people who prove the science'. Which I don't. There is too much to gain from lying and no independent bodies to verify evidence. The centralisation of information in a capitalist world has but one effect in the long run, poetically demonstrated by the likes of Orwell & Huxley.
I like your dad's story, but I don't get it. Why if dino bones sell for so much money would anyone just ignore them?
Just to clarify your own personal experience, you were on a dig when unidentified bones were discovered. The experts arrived, confirmed they were dino bones, shut down the dig, excavated, published the find as mastodon bones & sold to a museum making a ton of money. Can you see how easy it would be to manipulate the truth in this situation? If I as an independent researcher wanted to verify this find by examining those same bones I would not be able to. Unless I am not understanding this situation clearly?
Even if I am working excitedly as a volunteer on this same excavation, seeing giant bones being unearthed, will I personally ever get the chance to examine these bones and verify they are what the experts claim them to be? Don't think so.
So it seems to me that if any system or institution is able to deny external scrutiny, it is highly susceptible to foul play. And usually the simplest answer is the right one.
Dinosaur fossils aren't usually worth much money, and paleontology is not a secretive science. Wherever you're getting this information from, it's just false. The mastodon bones weren't sold to anybody, they were taken to Cornell for study. Cornell usually either keeps their bones, or donates them to a museum.
A lot of paleontological research of available for free download from universities. All you need, to get permission to look at most college's collections, is a stated research purpose. You do not need credentials, or money, just a 'permission slip'. They will either just give you what you ask for (if it isn't rare) or loan it to you, if they're confident you'll return it.
Errr... this one sold for $31M https://www.nytimes.com/2020/10/06/arts/design/t-rex-skeleton-brings-31-8-million-at-christies-auction.html
Is this therefore false information?
Just to clarify, what you're saying is that in fact anyone can get their hands on dino bones to examine them?
There are some rare finds that are worth big money, just like some coins are considered rare and valuable. These may be hard to acquire.
For the most part, yes, the idea that they're all insanely valuable is false information, and yes, anybody can study most of the fossils that have been found.
Thank you for clearing that up.