408
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 167:
Line 167: + +
→thanks!
:The extinct species bit is simply to counter the objection that some do make that the mere fact that dinosaurs were last in the fossil record 65 million years ago (on the evolutionary timescale) indicates that they died out that long ago. The examples show that this is not a valid argument. Can I make that clearer somehow?
:The extinct species bit is simply to counter the objection that some do make that the mere fact that dinosaurs were last in the fossil record 65 million years ago (on the evolutionary timescale) indicates that they died out that long ago. The examples show that this is not a valid argument. Can I make that clearer somehow?
:[[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 12:00, 3 May 2007 (EDT)
:[[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 12:00, 3 May 2007 (EDT)
Oh, uh, well, I don't know how that follows from that evidence. I just don't like the one sentence about the extinct species, because it is there is no valid conclusion by logic (like syllogism, if you know what that is) to conclude anything about dinosaurs from the other "previously thought of as extinct" species. There's no connect between alive or dead squirrels and dinosaurs. The empirical evidence (by sightings) is as good as the observers credibility, but there is no logical conclusion to be made about dinosaurs from the info. I don't know how to "discount" the fossil record from the data given. (Sorry!) I would still rather rid of the extinct species sentence. [[User:Sterile|Sterile]] 20:10, 3 May 2007 (EDT)