The (non-religious) dinosaur hoax question

Historical insights & thoughts about the world we live in - and the social conditioning exerted upon us by past and current propaganda.
lux
Member
Posts: 1913
Joined: Sat Oct 01, 2011 10:46 pm

Re: The (non-religious) dinosaur hoax question

Unread post by lux »

Just to clarify ...

Speaking for myself I didn't mean to imply that I thought all fossils were fake (I don't).

I'm also not of the opinion that there were no prehistoric animals so, yes, obviously there would be real fossils and there would be reason to study them. I don't believe that the people teaching and studying prehistoric life and digging up trilobites and such are part of an enormous conspiracy any more than are the people involved with the study of, for example, aerospace engineering, satellite communications, space exploration, planetology, etc. But that doesn't mean there aren't gigantic hoaxes connected with these subjects either.

The intended subject of the thread is really dinosaurs, not fossils per se nor even evolution though those subjects are related.

When I look at the Hollywood/media treatment of dinosaurs I see a familiar pattern of idea-pushing going on and this makes me suspicious. A great deal of money and effort has gone into these efforts and I want to know why and what is behind this.

Now, maybe people like Steven Spielberg simply and innocently wanted to make cool dinosaur movies purely and only with the purpose of entertainment and education ... but, in light of his track record of propaganda, I doubt that is the case.

I just think something underhanded is going on here regarding dinosaurs and I want to explore this with the bright minds that we have here on this forum.
nonhocapito wrote:
Final note: Despite the laudable intention of this thread, I am pretty sure that if there is a conspiracy behind this, a scientific and cultural conspiracy, it most certainly is about using the dinosaurs and in general the age of the planet to undermine religious beliefs, in particular christian ones since they (used to) hold so much power and are so invested, at least in certain denominations, in the idea of a creation and the design of the cosmos. I frankly cannot imagine any other reason but this general tendency of a certain top-down culture to undermine spiritual traditions that are now getting in the way of progress. Which is probably why dinosaurs and animals are today so big in elementary schools and even earlier. All other teachings are considered embarrassing.
You may be right. This may be all there is to it. I've considered this too.

But, for some reason this idea alone doesn't quite ring the bell for me. I can't help thinking there's more to it than that. I'm just not sure what it is.
hoi.polloi
Member
Posts: 5060
Joined: Sun Nov 14, 2010 7:24 pm

Re: The (non-religious) dinosaur hoax question

Unread post by hoi.polloi »

I'm also not of the opinion that there were no prehistoric animals so, yes, obviously there would be real fossils and there would be reason to study them. I don't believe that the people teaching and studying prehistoric life and digging up trilobites and such are part of an enormous conspiracy any more than are the people involved with the study of, for example, aerospace engineering, satellite communications, space exploration, planetology, etc. But that doesn't mean there aren't gigantic hoaxes connected with these subjects either.
I appreciate your skepticism but mine goes in the other direction.

Based on what we are learning about human nature and how we psychologically handle false information (and have historically done so) I find it hard to believe that the Big Bang, the 14 billion year old universe, Earth's formation and the dinosaurs are not just another Creation myth. Albeit one which incorporates specificity and detail to discourage doubt.

Creation myths are what we use to explain the world around us. It just so happens there is some truth in all of them, but plenty of legend and creativity in each of them. The number of people invested in an idea give power to its 'reality' in our collective consensus.

Do I think dinosaurs may be real, faked or something in between? Yes!

---

I once attended a very strange "Creationist debate" held at a micro-mega-church in a very conservative community. It was between the execrable hypocrite Michael Shermer (whose personality and whose magazine I greatly admired during my 'scientific awakening' before I met him in person - lulz), a die-hard Bible-thumping businessman preacher and a mild-mannered bespectacled professor representing the "middle way". The "debate" barely approached the rational exploration of science but focused entirely on the internal mystical beliefs of each of the three participants.

Shermer responded to absurd audience questions like, "how does a crate of oranges dumped out create a perfect lined-up grid of oranges by coincidence?" and "How did God create the lawn chair?" (poor man, he sighed heavily at that one).

The dinosaur question was at the heart of the science being looked at to determine the creation of the entire universe! The preacher decided that dinosaurs had been put on Earth by demons to tempt us into Satanism, and that any bones found were actually of very large lizards that had grown very large because of their age. Shermer dismissed this point - and the allusion to humans living much longer lifespans - outright, and skipped to the connection between whale fins and human hands, showing a common design. The middleweight was very kind and didn't offer much except an attempt at diplomacy that nobody paid attention to because most people were there to apparently see some kind of fight. He presented me with a book, and he seemed to basically accept much of modern science but also continually point to the mysticism and/or Christian God as the source of a 14-billion year old universe.

This is why I really think it's our responsibility on this forum to stick to the facts, the evidence and what we've learned about psychology while not abusing the "diplomacy" of the middle way. I had the sense that all three of these people were basically just having an intellectual argument about how to approach the subject (with no basis in science) rather than an actual analysis of the forensics.

If we can manage to stick to literal forensics of propaganda, media culture, geology, fossilization, carbon dating and so forth, and resist going off into tangent theories about the Sun and Earth and the cosmos at large, I think we could really "dig" into some good stuff. Of course the subject of dinosaurs is connected to everything, but I think we can do it.

---

As an example, let's look at the NASA threads. Are there a small group of people who know something about aerospace technology? No, there are thousands - possibly millions - and hundreds of millions who at least think they know something because it's been told to them.

Why is there just one official President of the United States, when there could be two or three or a dozen all claiming to have been elected legitimately? Because the media keeps order and sets the ground rules. The power to control human power itself ... is massive. They have convinced us of not just "incidents" like 9/11, 7/7, Titanic, Hindenberg, etc. but the facts about entire periods of time like World Wars, pre-history and entire sciences: space travel, radiation, flight physics and cause-and-effect.

I don't think they're afraid to invent evidence. On the contrary, they seem to be gaining greater and greater confidence in their ability to do so, and to do it at the rate at which people's skepticism, inquiry and demand for evidence increases over time. With technology's help, and crowd control, and security -- coupled with our species' very easily-satisfied curiosity and slow rate of awakening -- I see there could easily be something to the idea of dinosaurs being an invention "spun off" of real geological science.
totalrecall
Member
Posts: 41
Joined: Fri Jan 04, 2013 11:23 am

Re: The (non-religious) dinosaur hoax question

Unread post by totalrecall »

I had the sense that all three of these people were basically just having an intellectual argument about how to approach the subject (with no basis in science) rather than an actual analysis of the forensics.
Bingo. The hardcore Christians quote the bible as "evidence" :lol: , while at the other end of the spectrum, the hard core educationalists (couldn't think of better word) quote equally erroneous textbooks as "evidence", double :lol:

Getting hard data to make sense of the world is really difficult in this era of propaganda. We practically have to do it ourselves to be sure.

If we can manage to stick to literal forensics of propaganda, media culture, geology, fossilization, carbon dating and so forth, and resist going off into tangent theories about the Sun and Earth and the cosmos at large, I think we could really "dig" into some good stuff. Of course the subject of dinosaurs is connected to everything, but I think we can do it.
Here I agree and disagree. This thread should stick to just dinosaurs and not veer off topic, but nothing is isolated. If some truth can be found elsewhere, it is a great reference point which often shines a light on other subjects which had previously confounded us.

I'll start the sun thread now, but it will take me a while to map at cohesively so I will display it in parts. Bare with me.
hoi.polloi
Member
Posts: 5060
Joined: Sun Nov 14, 2010 7:24 pm

Re: The (non-religious) dinosaur hoax question

Unread post by hoi.polloi »

Nice pun. I believe you mean 'bear with me' but I'll happily lay bare the facts with you as we find them.

I don't mean confining ourselves to dinosaurs all over the forum, just to keep it on topic here, in the dino thread. That's my self-appointed 'job' here on this thing after all, so can't blame me for trying to keep it all readable.
Dcopymope
Banned
Posts: 670
Joined: Sat Apr 10, 2010 1:59 am
Contact:

Re: The (non-religious) dinosaur hoax question

Unread post by Dcopymope »

lux wrote:Just to clarify ...

Speaking for myself I didn't mean to imply that I thought all fossils were fake (I don't).

I'm also not of the opinion that there were no prehistoric animals so, yes, obviously there would be real fossils and there would be reason to study them. I don't believe that the people teaching and studying prehistoric life and digging up trilobites and such are part of an enormous conspiracy any more than are the people involved with the study of, for example, aerospace engineering, satellite communications, space exploration, planetology, etc. But that doesn't mean there aren't gigantic hoaxes connected with these subjects either.

The intended subject of the thread is really dinosaurs, not fossils per se nor even evolution though those subjects are related.

When I look at the Hollywood/media treatment of dinosaurs I see a familiar pattern of idea-pushing going on and this makes me suspicious. A great deal of money and effort has gone into these efforts and I want to know why and what is behind this.

Now, maybe people like Steven Spielberg simply and innocently wanted to make cool dinosaur movies purely and only with the purpose of entertainment and education ... but, in light of his track record of propaganda, I doubt that is the case.

I just think something underhanded is going on here regarding dinosaurs and I want to explore this with the bright minds that we have here on this forum.
nonhocapito wrote:
Final note: Despite the laudable intention of this thread, I am pretty sure that if there is a conspiracy behind this, a scientific and cultural conspiracy, it most certainly is about using the dinosaurs and in general the age of the planet to undermine religious beliefs, in particular christian ones since they (used to) hold so much power and are so invested, at least in certain denominations, in the idea of a creation and the design of the cosmos. I frankly cannot imagine any other reason but this general tendency of a certain top-down culture to undermine spiritual traditions that are now getting in the way of progress. Which is probably why dinosaurs and animals are today so big in elementary schools and even earlier. All other teachings are considered embarrassing.
You may be right. This may be all there is to it. I've considered this too.

But, for some reason this idea alone doesn't quite ring the bell for me. I can't help thinking there's more to it than that. I'm just not sure what it is.
This most certainly is not all there is to it. Every agenda currently being pushed serves a long term agenda that may not be clear. They have to keep this charade going for as long as they can until they are ready to come out with their Trojan horse concerning the origin of life. If life evolved here, and the dinosaurs prove it, according to those we call scientists, then life must have evolved somewhere else in space, and the rest is history, as now the theory is thrown off into outer space. Who defines what is science? I thought science was about observation and testable theories and not based on old religious philosophies. We are living in one of the most superstitious societies that ever existed. There are two things that I cannot prove regarding this method called science, and that is the God of the Bible and this ancient eastern mysticism dressed up as science called evolution, pushed by creatures who ironically call themselves secularists and atheists. It makes my blood boil that this absolute garbage is taught as a testable theory, and at present they are using dinosaurs as their main foundation as "evidence", but this won't be the case for much longer.
simonshack
Administrator
Posts: 7341
Joined: Sun Oct 18, 2009 8:09 pm
Location: italy
Contact:

Re: The (non-religious) dinosaur hoax question

Unread post by simonshack »

Dcopymope wrote: There are two things that I cannot prove regarding this method called science, and that is the God of the Bible and this ancient eastern mysticism dressed up as science called evolution, pushed by creatures who ironically call themselves secularists and atheists..
Interesting sentence, Dcopymope.

All in all, I agree that there are lots of unprovable things on this planet.

This is why this forum tries to stick with the rationally provable things.

The "rational" word, though, may sound boring, unspiritual and close-minded. How about "intelligent"?

Is there intelligent life on Earth? ^_^
Dcopymope
Banned
Posts: 670
Joined: Sat Apr 10, 2010 1:59 am
Contact:

Re: The (non-religious) dinosaur hoax question

Unread post by Dcopymope »

simonshack wrote:
Dcopymope wrote: There are two things that I cannot prove regarding this method called science, and that is the God of the Bible and this ancient eastern mysticism dressed up as science called evolution, pushed by creatures who ironically call themselves secularists and atheists..
Interesting sentence, Dcopymope.

All in all, I agree that there are lots of unprovable things on this planet.

This is why this forum tries to stick with the rationally provable things.

The "rational" word, though, may sound boring, unspiritual and close-minded. How about "intelligent"?

Is there intelligent life on Earth? ^_^
Given that we are reverting back to old Pagan beliefs for a long term agenda, I would say there isn't much intelligent life on this planet at all. How they got this crap in the so called science text books without arousing suspicion is beyond my understanding. Whoever was involved in this scam was extraordinarily clever.
brianv
Member
Posts: 3971
Joined: Sun Oct 18, 2009 10:19 pm
Contact:

Re: The (non-religious) dinosaur hoax question

Unread post by brianv »

"Pagan beliefs"

Isn't this a contradiction?

What beliefs do "Pagans" hold?
lux
Member
Posts: 1913
Joined: Sat Oct 01, 2011 10:46 pm

Re: The (non-religious) dinosaur hoax question

Unread post by lux »

Our old creepy gatekeeper and propaganda-scientist, Michio Kaka, weighs in on the future possibilities of dinosaur science.


full link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8c-EWSmOgDc

Of course, he has no credentials in anything related to dinosaurs, paleontology or genetics but once you become a TV scientist you automatically know everything about everything. :rolleyes:
sublimity
Member
Posts: 56
Joined: Mon Feb 27, 2012 9:33 am

Re: The (non-religious) dinosaur hoax question

Unread post by sublimity »

A few weeks ago I watched a behind the scenes video on Jurassic Park and In terms of Hollywood propaganda, I find it interesting that Steven Spielberg was finishing up Schindler's List, whilst working on the film. Spielberg said that during the final stages of production on 'Jurassic', the crew was trapped inside a hotel "for nine hours" when Hurricane Iniki struck their island, Kaua'i, on September 11, 1992. He goes on to reiterate several times, that dinosaurs were indeed real and not just mythological creatures. Considering his track record of being a power-player in historical hoax narratives, I'd say this just adds another point toward dinosaurs being a lie.
anonjedi2
Member
Posts: 860
Joined: Mon Dec 31, 2012 5:50 am

Re: The (non-religious) dinosaur hoax question

Unread post by anonjedi2 »

The Jurassic Park series has already made well over a billion dollars in revenue. While it is by far the most lucrative and well known of dinosaur films, it certainly isn't the first. Curiously, Jurassic Park: The Lost World borrows its subtitle from on of the first Hollywood films to push the dinosaur legend, Sir Arthur Conan Doyle's The Lost World (1925).

Image


Coincidentally (or not), Doyle is one of the leading suspects of the Piltdown Hoax. In fact, the Piltdown hoax may very well have been the inspiration for The Lost World, or vice versa. The film was a huge success at the time and played a role in educating the public about these mysterious creatures called Dinosaurs.

For those unfamiliar with the Piltdown hoax, the nuthsell version of the story is as follows: In 1908, fragments of skull were discovered by an amateur archaeologist/geologist by the name of Charles Dawson and his colleague Arthur Smith Woodward who then claimed that the bone fragments were proof of an early ancestor of human and linked this creature as the missing step between ape and man. In 1953, it was determined that the bone fragments were not what Dawson claimed they were and both men quickly became suspects of fraud. Other suspects included Sir Arthur Conan Doyle, an amateur paleontologist who happened to live near Dawson at the time and also claimed to have discovered several fossilized dinosaur footprints and bones in the area near their homes.

In The Lost World, one of the characters makes the following statement: "If you are clever and you know your business you can fake a bone as easily as you can a photograph."

Source - http://public.wsu.edu/~delahoyd/piltdown.html

I highly recommend reading the link above for more details about Doyle and the Piltdown Hoax, it's a short read and includes the following:
The plateau that makes up "the lost world" is described as an area "as large perhaps as Sussex, [which] has been lifted en bloc with all its living contents." A map of the basin-topped plateau shows it to bear a fairly close resemblance to the horseshoe-rimmed basin known as the Weald in southeastern England. The Weald, which includes most of Sussex and parts of Surry and Kent, is where Piltdown Man was found.

But consider the possibility that the Piltdown hoax was inspired by The Lost World. On Aug. 15, 1910 at a time when the Piltdown site had yielded nothing but a single skull fragment and no public announcements had yet been made, Doyle outlined his plans for The Lost World. He completed the novel in December of 1911. It was published in April of 1912 and in December of 1912 Dawson and Woodward made the first announcement of their discovery. Hmm.

-- Sidira Sisich
Some other notable Hollywood films to push the dinosaur story (agenda?) include

Gojira, 1954
The Land that Time Forgot, 1975
The Land Before Time, 1988
When Dinosaurs Ruled the Earth, 1970

The writers for these films are another set of interesting characters worth looking into as well.
Dcopymope
Banned
Posts: 670
Joined: Sat Apr 10, 2010 1:59 am
Contact:

Re: The (non-religious) dinosaur hoax question

Unread post by Dcopymope »

brianv wrote:"Pagan beliefs"

Isn't this a contradiction?

What beliefs do "Pagans" hold?
Evolutionary ideas in Hinduism, one of the oldest religions in existence:

The Big Bang Theory or Cosmic Evolution:
By Tapas, the power of meditation, Brahman attains expansion and then comes primeval matter. And from this comes life and mind, the elements and the worlds and the immortality of ritual action. - mundaka upanishad
'Brahma is the effulgent seed from which, existing as it does by itself, hath sprung the whole universe consisting of two kinds of being, viz., the mobile and the immobile. - Mokshadharma Parva Section 232
These, one after another, acquire the attributes of the immediately preceding ones from which they have sprung. Each has not only its own special attribute but each succeeding one has the attributes of all the preceding ones. - Mokshadharma Parva Section 232
Brahman (that is the universe) expands by means of austerity, and from It primal matter is produced; from matter, Prana; from Prana, mind; from mind, the elements; from the elements, the worlds; thence works, and from the works, their immortal fruits.
(Mundaka Upanishad, I.i.8)
In short its saying that:
I am the source of evolution and also of the dissolution of the entire universe. - Bhagavad Gita Chapter VII
Life from non-life:
"Mosquitoes and gnats, lice, flies and maggots, and other species of this sort which originate from heat are born of sweat." Laws of Manu 1:45
From the lowest protoplasm to the most perfect human being there is really but one life. Just as in one life we have so many various phases of expression, the protoplasm developing into the baby, the child, the young man, the old man, so, from that protoplasm up to the most perfect man we get one continuous life, one chain. This is evolution, but we have seen that each evolution presupposes an involution. The whole of this life which slowly manifests itself evolves itself from the protoplasm to the perfected human being---the Incarnation of God on earth the whole of this series is but one life, and the whole of this manifestation must have been involved in that very protoplasm. This whole life, this very God on earth, was involved in it and slowly came out, manifesting itself slowly, slowly, slowly. - Complete Works of Swami Vivekananda


The quote below also sounds a lot like the beginning of the movie Prometheus, the main difference is that of course aliens were the cause of this process, which is clearly where the entire theory is going.

The Princess and the Frog:
20,000 species of non-mobile plants etc. Sthavara); 900,000 species of aquatic creatures; 900,000 species of amphibian and reptiles, 1,000,000 species of birds, etc.; 3,000,000 species of other creatures such as animals, etc.; 400,000 species of anthropoids (Vanaras), after which the human species (Manushya) of 200,000 varieties come into being, and Man then engages in purposeful activity to attain perfection. - Brihad Vishnu Purana
As a scientific theory, Darwinism would have been jettisoned long ago. The point, however, is that the doctrine of evolution has swept the world, not on the strength of its scientific merits, but precisely in its capacity as a Gnostic myth. It affirms, in effect, that living beings created themselves, which is in essence a metaphysical claim… Thus, in the final analysis, evolutionism is in truth a metaphysical doctrine decked out in scientific garb. In other words, it is a scientistic myth. - Wolfgang Smith
TrutherInTX
Member
Posts: 102
Joined: Fri Nov 11, 2011 12:38 am

Re: The (non-religious) dinosaur hoax question

Unread post by TrutherInTX »

As this thread has been going I have seen more news about dinosaurs. This video came up on MSN for me today, http://msnvideo.msn.com/?channelindex=4 ... 08a8dd7ad2. It seems Clive Palmer the billionaire who is reviving the Titanic is also creating his own Jurrasic Park with 117 Chinese built robot dinosaurs. In this article from last year he wanted to clone dinosaurs but apparently that has turned out not possible because in the MSN video they say DNA half life is 520 years, http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/ ... -Park.html.

Another video related to the story:


full link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4jF4U-uWVfo
Pug
Member
Posts: 116
Joined: Wed Aug 10, 2011 10:57 am

Re: The (non-religious) dinosaur hoax question

Unread post by Pug »

Hey guys,

Before this thread came about, I did wonder whether I was nuts or not in thinking if my own personal denial that dinosaurs existed at all or at best they were a severely manipulated existence. But..

.. why would their 'existence' be manipulated or faked?

Some recent movie news reported a fourth installment of Jurassic Park - Jurassic Park IV - is going into producing. Relatively unknown 36 year old director Colin Trevorrow was the surprise choice for directing duties. I've not heard of him nor his films, but he seems to be quite into time travel, space and war.

Colin Trevorrow - writer / director http://www.imdb.com/name/nm1119880/ IMDB

Jurassic Park IV (in production 2014)

Intelligent Life (in development): An employee at a department of the United Nation that monitors Outer Space inadvertently makes contact w/ beautiful woman, who may be an alien.

Tester (in development): A young war vet who is suffering from post-traumatic stress disorder opts to participate in top-secret clinical experiment designed to cure PTSD

World War X (in development): The government recruits a man to prevent a terrorist from the future who is using time travel in order to reshape history.

Safety Not Guaranteed (2012): Three magazine employees head out on an assignment to interview a guy who placed a classified ad seeking a companion for time travel


Balancing my work in film and education, an oddball teen at the school I teach at bizarrely said to me the other week: "You know that giants were real. In fact, we were all giants so therefore dinosaurs seemed to be normal sized lizards, like they are now. Do you think giants were real, sir?"

Me: "I don't think dinosaurs were particularly real. OK, put your books away. Time for break."

Cheers,
Pug.
simonshack
Administrator
Posts: 7341
Joined: Sun Oct 18, 2009 8:09 pm
Location: italy
Contact:

Re: The (non-religious) dinosaur hoax question

Unread post by simonshack »

*

Extinction-mystery elegantly solved ...
"LONDON – Dinosaurs may have farted themselves to extinction, according to a new study from British scientists."

Image

The researchers calculated that the prehistoric beasts pumped out more than 520 million tons (472 million tonnes) of methane a year -- enough to warm the planet and hasten their own eventual demise.

http://www.foxnews.com/scitech/2012/05/ ... tists-say/
I smell a whiff of Al Gore-backing behind those British boffins ...

Shucks! if only some smart troglodyte had carbon-taxed the dinos - the charming beasts would still be here with us, to the delight of zoo-goers - and hey - maybe our cars would be dinofart-powered! ^_^
Post Reply