Why aren't Veeky Forums talking about this groundbreaking discovery?

nice falseflag

le Dog says there were no dinosaures because le zombie stickman says the earth is 400 years old.
republicans btfo
Fuck you dad im free now \m/

Veeky Forums in a nutshell. So, what happened?

Amazing

it's just so cool that we are looking at how the dinosaur ACTUALLY looked
those spikes, that armored skin, the shape of the head

Veeky Forums here, that fossil could explain the myths about dragons in different civilizations.

omg omg its just like in the movies!

Not likely, how would ancient civilizations know about a fossil that has just now been uncovered?

maybe they were hunted to extinction?
History shows they were hunted as a rite of passage.

I'm willing to bet Unicorns were hunted to extinction also. Not truly magical unicorns, I mean large goats with 1 horn type unicorns that's used in "traditional" medicine like black rhino horn.

maybe some learn to spit fire like the bombardier beetle. It's venom sacs in the mouth replaced with a similar organ to the insect.

Where are the feathers? Dumb ""science"" idiots can't even be consistent with their own hoax....

>groundbreaking discovery

So what happens next? It's very important to know stuff, but even more important is to understand how to capitalize any information to money

Pretty cool. I wonder what the crust has swallowed up that we will never get to see.

Proto-feathers are not actual feathers.

>So what happens next?

Creationists use it as evidence for the "great flood" because apparently the dinosaur may have been washed out to sea and then sank and preserved.

Oh you are talking about some micro-community-level phenomena. I thought there was some industry or service that could utilize this information.

I'll mentally label this to the "Academics" folder. It means "useless knowledge that is result from an useful process"

>but even more important is to understand how to capitalize any information to money

Ahhh, no, not all science is done just to make money. What you suggest is of little importance in this particular case.

looks like a big crocodile with large spiky scales

Would it be possible to learn anything about pigmentation from this kind of fossil? Are there chemical signatures to let us know what these may have been colored like?

>maybe they (dinosaurs) were hunted to extinction?

the dinos that survived the extinction 65 million years ago were small and evolved into birds.

Feathered dinosaurs could have been brightly coloured, just like modern birds. As for a scaly dino like in OP's pic, possibly was dull coloured like modern Rhino's and Elephants.

>In a 2016 study, examination of melanosomes preserved in the specimen of Psittacosaurus sp. preserved with integument indicated that the animal was countershaded, likely due to preferring a habitat in dense forests with little light, much like many modern species of forest-dwelling deer and antelope; stripes and spots on the limbs may represent disruptive coloration. The specimen also had dense clusters of pigment on its shoulders, face (possibly for display), and cloaca (which may have had an antimicrobial function), as well as large patagia on its hind legs that connected to the base of the tail. Its large eyes indicate that it also likely had good vision, which would have been useful in finding food and/or avoiding predators.

are they gonna clone it?

DNA doesn't last that long.

fuck you science

you aint worth shit
dumbasses

Not all is lost.

Chickens are dinosaurs, they have DNA relics from when they were dinosaurs in them. We can switch genes on or off to turn a chicken into a T-Rex. E.g. turn on the gene for claws and hands.

the state of Veeky Forums...
there was literally a more informed discussion going on at /pol/

Didn't they recently do something like that? Made chickens with teeth and snouts instead of beaks, but didn't hatch them because of muh ethics.

Featherfags BTFO

Do you get your news from those "Has science gone too far?" clickbait ads?

Came to post exactly that

I saw it on the news a while back
>bbc.com/earth/story/20150512-bird-grows-face-of-dinosaur
And heres the journal it was published in.
>onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/evo.12684/abstract;jsessionid=DA5F2F045D1EEFAE5524858EBBB8B3D4.f04t04

Holy FUCK.

PLS BE REAL

That's a fucking ankylosaur, we already knew they didn't have feathers.

Damn that's cool

>tfw never uncovering ancient dino cities and other cool shit

Except dragons are flying snake in all ancient civilizations.

AWW ya, lets get some DNA.

F A K E

youtube.com/watch?v=4ZyIG_jZzBs

friendly reminder to denounce science and become a zealot and get a big tittied lass to make babies with

sweet Jesus

Oh god the comments.

The earths first attempts at life that were snuffed out during the heavy bombardment period.

Hmm but where are the feathers? FAKE

As a Christian bio-nerd, I refuse to believe this isn't some form of extremely subtle satire

>as a Christian bio-nerd
lmao that is the biggest contradiction I have read today

k

Too busy trying to prove 0.999...=/=1

oh my, a contradiction
user will implode

He either has to deny biology or deny the bible.
The bibles teachings and biology are mutually exclusive and directly contradict each other in a myriad of ways.
For instance, the origin of life and the origin of man.
Believing in both is ludicrous and would create a dissonance

OR (stay with me here) OR Christians should just accept the fact that the people who wrote the Bible had no idea about how the fuck species originate

you don't have interpret mythology literally in order to extract some truth to it
Genesis is a creation account, but the message is to explain how Mankind is fallen and why the rest of the fucking religion is required

So denial of the bible
You cannot treat one section of the bible has being myth and the others as being divine, it simply does not work that way and if you treat it that way you are literally a heretic.
You have to treat the entire work as being true others the entire thing is false.
If god did not create the heavens and the earth in seven days than what else does god not do?
So okay you can dismiss the creation story as being myth because we know it is clearly false, so how about the flood story?
How about the plagues?
Now how about the scriptures of jesus?
How about revelations?
What about the REINCARNATION of Jesus "And if Christ has not been raised, then our preaching is in vain and your faith is in vain."- Corinthians 15:14
>so let's just treat it has philosophy instead
>the bible teaches about the nature of mankind itself
Except no one treats it that way when they go to a building every sunday and pray to a deity lmao
The middle eastern christians certainly believe in the validity of god and his teaches as being 100% true and they kill each other because of the religion. Or even the Eastern Orthodox sect that blesses AKMs and BTRs before going into battle.
The bible demands total belief and total submission to it and god as it is the word of GOD.
And if you treat it as a myth, as a philosophy, as just teachings about mankind and his nature than you are no more a christian than someone how finds the nature of mankind in greek mythology is a pagan.
Take that quasi christian shit out of here

so by your logic everything is false or everything is true?
emperor Augustus is mentioned in the Gospels, does that mean that he did not exist because you don't believe in the Bible?

you are being dumb
the Bible is not ONE book, it is a compendium of texts, stretching thousands of years
not every author wrote in the same style, and we ought to find out how they were to be read

worshiping the Book to the letter is only found in Protestantism and Islam

No you fool, just because you use historical events to give context to your god does not make your god anymore real.
>wow you do not believe in Zeus
>you must think the mount olympus is fake too!
But the difference in what you are comparing is insurmountable
>an emperor who lived is mentioned
>gods creation of heaven and earth
What you are comparing is teachings derived, historical events, and the acts of GOD itself.
Disbelief in the acts of god is a disbelief in god itself in accordance with the bible.
That is a pretty damn important part of the bible mate

depends on if he keeps his theology and objective reasoning separate. Plenty of people do, but the few who don't make blogs about it and get reported on

And that is what you call cognitive dissonance

most of Veeky Forums literally believes this.

okay, l'll explain myself better
just for clarity: I am not a Christian, no really I am not
I believe that Jesus is a historical figure, but I don't accept the resurrection, not the accounts of his deeds
I don't even believe in a god
so I am not defending Christianity per se, I'm just defending that a non-literal reading of the Bible is perfectly acceptable by a Christian

first, reading the Bible literally, with every sentence being a scientific fact, is a modern trend
every school of Orthodox and Catholic tradition has had people devoting their lives to interpret the texts and communicate it to the masses
they were very aware of the mythological framework form which the texts were written, and thus interpreted them in light of this

the point of Christianity is that Jesus fulfills Jewish prophecies, and when the Bible was compiled, they included Genesis because it sets up the fallen nature of Man, and why we need a saviour
it was not added because it is a scientific account of exactly how the world was created
and even if it was, the people who wrote it had no idea what evolution is

Genesis is obviously adapted from myths around the middle-east
the Gospels were written and intended to be biographical texts
you see?
different texts, and different intentions
so a Christian can read about Jesus literally, and still accept modern science

I'm guess you're American, where Protestant bible literalism is rampant
that is not traditional Christianity

This is the average intellect of your Veeky Forumsfag.
They are literally this ignorant of basic natural history.

>heresy is acceptable because others are also heretics
Not believing in the literal meaning of the bible is, in accordance with bible itself, wrong.
But hey, I guess since they are already ignoring the major parts like, gods creation of the heavens and earth, gods creation of man, gods various punishments of man, jesus rising from the dead, and many many others....what is one more thing to ignore, right?
I really ponder what is the point of being a christian at all if you are just going to cherrypick things you like and dismiss everything else...oh wait lol

I remember reading some Baxtor(?) sci-fi book about being able to look back in time (using micro wormholes). It showed what you could call and ebb and flow of life between planet-wide annihilation where only deep underground bacteria would survive to start evolving again. At least one of them had a huge sentient culture.

There hasn't been a real christian in nearly 2 thousand years.
>I fucking hate those gays and Abortion is WRONG
>But I wont treat my body like a temple and instead become really fat
>or I will perform sodomy
>Or I will masturbate
And of course they will make up a billion excuses why it's ok for THEM to not follow everything in the bible.

nigga u crazy?

So beautiful! For the first time ever in hamnity's history we have the chance to see how dinosaurs really looked like! Amazing! Too bad that cloning dinosaurs is just SciFi.

Bullshit!
There is no God! It's just the Nature!

Even groundbreakinger.

Prehistoric Spirituality: We have seen the veil flutter and awakened to the presence of the Other.

21st century Science: tHEre ismore dinoosaur guys!1

>why aren't Veeky Forums talking about this groundbreaking discovery?
The whole fields of paleozoology hasn't contributed anything to humanity. So what if people found cool fossil here and there, these animals are long dead

>groundbreakinger.
sorry but thats not a word

He kind of looks like American Godzilla :"|