Fossil "Mummy" gives glimpse of dinosaur skin.

[BCP1928]

Then, for crying out loud, what's all this hullabaloo about?

You seem to be under the impression that science claims to present absolute truth and then complain when it changes.

 

[dlamberth]

I've never taken any visual representation of dinosaurs as factual. From their fossilized bones we can get a pretty good idea of their body shape. Which I've always enjoyed learning. But we don't know the color of their skin, it's texture, it's thickness or anything like that. I understand all of that, and so does the scientific community. So I really appreciate it when we get even the smallest window that fills in the gaps of those unknowns. Science is a wonderful tool towards that end.

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

I was just being facetious.

When you demand exacting wording like that, I consider the conversation over.

Then maybe you should keep quiet on something like that in the future. Would do you a world of wonders.

 

[Lost4words]

An abomination for sure. You need to change your jokes.

Joke!!! How dare you!!! Thats a very famous relative of mine!!!

 

[Lost4words]

Is this related to a croc-a-duck?

Woof?

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

Joke!!! How dare you!!! Thats a very famous relative of mine!!!

Change your jokes.

 

[Ophiolite]

Then, for crying out loud, what's all this hullabaloo about?

I respectfully disagree with @BCP1928 . You are absolutely wrong. You persist in conflating random illustrations, from undefined sources with the definitive, peer reviewed, evidence based descriptions made by the expert scientists. These are not the same things. The illustrations, in most cases, have as much relationship to the research conclusions as your posts do to rational, informed conversation. i.e. precious little.

The hulllabaloo is about your intransigent, decade spanning impersonation of a fool which, while worthy of an Oscar, is not worthy of respect.

 

[AV1611VET]

The hulllabaloo is about your intransigent, decade spanning impersonation of a fool which, while worthy of an Oscar, is not worthy of respect.

Whose respect?

I ask this because you joined two years after I, but I have five times more likes than you.

I'm not saying this to toot my own horn, but to make a point.

Perhaps not your brand of respect, but whatever.

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

Whose respect?

I ask this because you joined two years after I, but I have five times more likes than you.

I'm not saying this to toot my own horn, but to make a point.

Perhaps not your brand of respect, but whatever.

That definitely sounds like vanity on your part.

 

[AV1611VET]

The hulllabaloo is about your intransigent, decade spanning impersonation of a fool which, while worthy of an Oscar, is not worthy of respect.

That definitely sounds like vanity on your part.

Hey, we're on a roll!

But lest you think it's all me, qv please:

Respect to AV1611VET

And others deserve respect just as well, but don't get it.

I'm sure we're not going to lose any sleep over it though.

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

Hey, we're on a roll!

But lest you think it's all me, qv please:

Respect to AV1611VET

And others deserve respect just as well, but don't get it.

I'm sure we're not going to lose any sleep over it though.

That thread is not saying what you think it's saying at all.

 

[Lost4words]

Change your jokes.

Its not a joke though!!

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

Its not a joke though!!

Change your jokes, or just stop them altogether. You're not a corgi.

 

[Lost4words]

Change your jokes, or just stop them altogether. You're not a corgi.

Woof!!!!!!

 

[Ophiolite]

I ask this because you joined two years after I, but I have five times more likes than you.

I'm not saying this to toot my own horn, but to make a point.

Perhaps not your brand of respect, but whatever.

Oh dear. You made, as of this writing, 3,851,272 posts and received 52,418 reactions. So what?
I made 9,134 posts and received 10,039 reactions.

Now many of your posts, apparently were some kind of junk "counting" posts. Most of the rest are rarely more than four or five sentences long. Nevetheless, this means that for every 1000 posts you've made you got an average of 13.6 reactions. For every 1000 posts I made I got an average of 1003 reactions. So what? Irrelevant, other than as an example of how to distort facts with statistics. (I may use these in the next data analysis course I give.)

But lest you think it's all me, qv please:

Respect to AV1611VET

If you follow the subsequent posts it becomes quite clear that the poster was reflecting on the lack of respect for your posting record. It's just a little sad that you did not recognise this.

/deviation

Finis.

 

[sjastro]

Oh dear. You made, as of this writing, 3,851,272 posts and received 52,418 reactions. So what?
I made 9,134 posts and received 10,039 reactions.

Now many of your posts, apparently were some kind of junk "counting" posts. Most of the rest are rarely more than four or five sentences long. Nevetheless, this means that for every 1000 posts you've made you got an average of 13.6 reactions. For every 1000 posts I made I got an average of 1003 reactions. So what? Irrelevant, other than as an example of how to distort facts with statistics. (I may use these in the next data analysis course I give.)



If you follow the subsequent posts it becomes quite clear that the poster was reflecting on the lack of respect for your posting record. It's just a little sad that you did not recognise this.

/deviation

Finis.

Your record is far more impressive, you have 1.099 reactions per post as opposed to 0.014 reactions per post.
Where AV most likely holds the record is in the number of individuals who have him on their ignore list.