Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Hi, Sorry I wanted to look that up....this is what I got, so a correction:
How long ago did dinosaurs live?
Dinosaurs lived between 230 and 65 million years ago, in a time known as the Mesozoic Era.
It was way MORE!! Wow, I had no idea!
You are absolutely right Miss Hepburn, well spotted. Dinosaurs ruled the earth for 165 million years, not 65 million; my mistake. Surprised nobody else noticed that. Anyway they were here for a bloody long time. If anything, humans are the mistake. Dinosaurs adapted within their ecosystem and lived in harmony with the planet. All we have done as far as I can see is ruin the planet in our very short, blink-of-an-eye-by-comparison time here.
You are absolutely right Miss Hepburn, well spotted. Dinosaurs ruled the earth for 165 million years, not 65 million; my mistake. Surprised nobody else noticed that. Anyway they were here for a bloody long time. If anything, humans are the mistake. Dinosaurs adapted within their ecosystem and lived in harmony with the planet. All we have done as far as I can see is ruin the planet in our very short, blink-of-an-eye-by-comparison time here.
Well spotted, Miss H. Yes - 230 mya lasted until 65 Million years ago would have been more like it.
Mezozoic was rather the age of giant reptiles, early dinosaurs being as related to them as mammals were.
Yes, in fact Mammals appeared about the same time as early dinosaurs, but only got their chance to fill the niche left by the Dinosaurs 65 mya at the end of the Cretaceous, where in fact the creatures had become specialized that they had perhaps become unadaptable. As I recall the Hadrosaurs survived even the extinction because they were so successfully adapted, they didn't need to over -evolve and in fact lasted into the age of mammals.
Are you seriously saying no one can remember anything before age 5 or 6?
What about kids who read by age 4? By picking it up on their own. Without ever being taught.
It sounds like you are really uncomfortable with certain things you don't understand. Even something as benign as someone saying what happened in their house growing up.
I said I was skeptical. Per studies, only a small percentage of adults have memories between the ages of 2 and 5. Prior to 2, I suspect people are only remembering what others told them happened and have developed pseudo-memories.
You are absolutely right Miss Hepburn, well spotted. Dinosaurs ruled the earth for 165 million years, not 65 million; my mistake. Surprised nobody else noticed that. Anyway they were here for a bloody long time. If anything, humans are the mistake. Dinosaurs adapted within their ecosystem and lived in harmony with the planet. All we have done as far as I can see is ruin the planet in our very short, blink-of-an-eye-by-comparison time here.
I saw, it just didn't change your point.
65 million years to man is fast tho ... real fast.
"Hyperlexia is a syndrome characterized by a child's precocious ability to read. It was initially identified by Norman E. Silberberg and Margaret C. Silberberg (1967), who defined it as the precocious ability to read words without prior training in learning to read, typically before the age of 5. They indicated that children with hyperlexia have a significantly higher word-decoding ability than their reading comprehension levels.Children with hyperlexia also present with an intense fascination for written material at a very early age."
What I am noting and pointing out in this thread is how people with views like Rafius simply put their fingers in their ears and go la la la la with information they are uncomfortable with. That is a window to their bias and reveals a marked inability to intake and process information coherently and cogently.
Not at all. I simply ask for verifiable evidence for children reading without any outside influence. You have now supplied an article regarding Hyperlexia which I find acceptable although, on further research about Hyperlexia, yours is the only article I came upon that actually said.... "without prior training in learning to read". See the difference between us? Give me verifiable evidence for a claim and I'll accept it. What a far cry from you god-zombies who will not change no matter what verifiable evidence is shoved in your face.
Quote:
Yes "unhinged" is an apt adjective for the knee jerk bias put forth by rafius.
Me unhinged?? Let's not lose sight of the fact that YOU are the one that thinks ancient mythology is true and that angels are real.
phrases like this indicate "look elsewhere for intelligent conversation"
You said that before...but you still came back. This time, do me the favour of sticking to it. I would hate to contaminate your air of intellectual superiority.
I personally can not imagine my ex, a militant, angry atheist..(just as bad as
a militant angry vegetarian, btw...) ever believing in a some
sort of mystical, supernatural, Higher Omnipresent Consciousness unless I dropped LSD in his Jack and Coke.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Wow, I had no idea!
