Rocksolid Light

Welcome to novaBBS (click a section below)

mail  files  register  newsreader  groups  login

Message-ID:  

"Besides, I think [Slackware] sounds better than 'Microsoft,' don't you?" (By Patrick Volkerding)


tech / sci.bio.paleontology / Re: The change in forest extincted dinosaurs.

SubjectAuthor
* The change in forest extincted dinosaurs.Mario Petrinovic
`* Re: The change in forest extincted dinosaurs.John Harshman
 +* Re: The change in forest extincted dinosaurs.Mario Petrinovic
 |`- Re: The change in forest extincted dinosaurs.Mario Petrinovic
 `* Re: The change in forest extincted dinosaurs.Oxyaena
  `* Re: The change in forest extincted dinosaurs.Mario Petrinovic
   `* Re: The change in forest extincted dinosaurs.nyik...@gmail.com
    `* Re: The change in forest extincted dinosaurs.Mario Petrinovic
     `* Re: The change in forest extincted dinosaurs.John Harshman
      `* Re: The change in forest extincted dinosaurs.Mario Petrinovic
       +* Re: The change in forest extincted dinosaurs.Mario Petrinovic
       |`- Re: The change in forest extincted dinosaurs.John Harshman
       `* Re: The change in forest extincted dinosaurs.John Harshman
        `* Re: The change in forest extincted dinosaurs.Mario Petrinovic
         `* Re: The change in forest extincted dinosaurs.John Harshman
          `* Re: The change in forest extincted dinosaurs.Mario Petrinovic
           +* Re: The change in forest extincted dinosaurs.John Harshman
           |`* Re: The change in forest extincted dinosaurs.Mario Petrinovic
           | +- Re: The change in forest extincted dinosaurs.Mario Petrinovic
           | `* Re: The change in forest extincted dinosaurs.John Harshman
           |  `* Re: The change in forest extincted dinosaurs.Mario Petrinovic
           |   `* Re: The change in forest extincted dinosaurs.John Harshman
           |    `- Re: The change in forest extincted dinosaurs.Mario Petrinovic
           `* Re: The change in forest extincted dinosaurs.nyik...@gmail.com
            `* Re: The change in forest extincted dinosaurs.Mario Petrinovic
             `* Re: The change in forest extincted dinosaurs.Mario Petrinovic
              `* Re: The change in forest extincted dinosaurs.John Harshman
               `* Re: The change in forest extincted dinosaurs.Mario Petrinovic
                +* Re: The change in forest extincted dinosaurs.Mario Petrinovic
                |`- Re: The change in forest extincted dinosaurs.Mario Petrinovic
                `* Re: The change in forest extincted dinosaurs.Mario Petrinovic
                 `- Re: The change in forest extincted dinosaurs.Mario Petrinovic

Pages:12
Re: The change in forest extincted dinosaurs.

<s6dbe6$jg1$1@sunce.iskon.hr>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/tech/article-flat.php?id=2999&group=sci.bio.paleontology#2999

 copy link   Newsgroups: sci.bio.paleontology
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!aioe.org!newsfeed.CARNet.hr!Iskon!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: mario.pe...@zg.htnet.hr (Mario Petrinovic)
Newsgroups: sci.bio.paleontology
Subject: Re: The change in forest extincted dinosaurs.
Date: Thu, 29 Apr 2021 06:07:34 +0200
Organization: Iskon Internet d.d.
Lines: 57
Message-ID: <s6dbe6$jg1$1@sunce.iskon.hr>
References: <s48f3i$kf3$1@sunce.iskon.hr>
<kPadnfdol8DOQfr9nZ2dnUU7-aPNnZ2d@giganews.com> <s49rd1$nde$3@solani.org>
<s4abee$14l$1@sunce.iskon.hr>
<4de36192-2b2c-4219-b30a-1e3684672d4fn@googlegroups.com>
<s6bl6b$bt0$1@sunce.iskon.hr> <B82dnZUlEqz_wBT9nZ2dnUU7-N_NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<s6bsho$h8h$1@sunce.iskon.hr> <ZYedna5mf7SG5hT9nZ2dnUU7-U3NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<s6bvt8$jp3$1@sunce.iskon.hr> <D_adnX-Jk-a3ABT9nZ2dnUU7-SHNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<s6c8tp$qfu$1@sunce.iskon.hr>
<df948712-dcb9-4236-a4c6-808cbefc8e58n@googlegroups.com>
<s6cmtm$59s$1@sunce.iskon.hr> <s6cr4g$8b4$1@sunce.iskon.hr>
<tPSdnZGYIvcFaRT9nZ2dnUU7-fOdnZ2d@giganews.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 93-136-92-4.adsl.net.t-com.hr
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Trace: sunce.iskon.hr 1619669254 19969 93.136.92.4 (29 Apr 2021 04:07:34 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: abuse@iskon.hr
NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 29 Apr 2021 04:07:34 +0000 (UTC)
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101
Thunderbird/78.10.0
In-Reply-To: <tPSdnZGYIvcFaRT9nZ2dnUU7-fOdnZ2d@giganews.com>
Content-Language: en-US
 by: Mario Petrinovic - Thu, 29 Apr 2021 04:07 UTC

On 29.4.2021. 1:49, John Harshman wrote:
> On 4/28/21 4:29 PM, Mario Petrinovic wrote:
>> On 29.4.2021. 0:17, Mario Petrinovic wrote:
>>> On 28.4.2021. 23:55, nyik...@gmail.com wrote:
>>>> On Wednesday, April 28, 2021 at 2:18:35 PM UTC-4, Mario Petrinovic
>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>> The question is why some dinosaurs actually went extinct.
>>>>
>>>> Plain and simple datum: all fauna over 50kg went extinct, on land
>>>> and sea.
>>>> Vertebrate (all reptiles, but no dinos) sea animals included,  and
>>>> invertebrates like the ammonites and other big mollusks.
>>>>
>>>> Most birds went extinct too. The seed eaters were the best situated
>>>> to survive,
>>>> and the insect eaters. John can probably give you a lowdown on which
>>>> branches of the bird tree survived and which didn't. He's still an
>>>> impressive storehouse of facts about ornithology.
>>>
>>>          Yes, thanks Peter.
>>>          Interesting fact, just we have to be careful not to jump the
>>> conclusion seeing this fact (of course).
>>
>>          BTW, I see, not only whole families of dinosaurs went
>> extinct, but even tribes of families of dinosaurs went extinct. For
>> sure those tribes had species that were smaller.
>
> There are no tribes of families. "Tribe" is a subdivision of "family".
> So it isn't clear what you're talking about.

My bad, I don't know those formal, administrative, classifications.
Yes, those are made to make things clear (the above example is an
excellent example of that), but, until I learn those "naturally" (see, I
learnt it now, hopefully I'll remember it, :) ), I will not pollute my
thinking with those.

>>          In extinction, bigger animals always go off first. But, each
>> of those families should have smaller members, which can easily grow
>> bigger later, no problemo, a piece of cake, and nothing would actually
>> change.
>>          Yes, the extinction targeted only some animals.
>
> How does that fit your scenario? Did these hypothetical small
> herbivorous dinosaurs, of which zero are known, eat ferns too?

Somebody ate those ferns. You say that you don't have the evidence for
it. Well, I believe you.
All those families probably had smaller relatives. You say that you
don't have the evidence for those, but you don't know the reason why
this shouldn't be so. Again, I believe you.
You are not including in your scenario species that eat ferns, and
that are smaller than 50 kg. Your scenario has all the preconditions to
be wrong, you are wasting your time, not me.

--
https://groups.google.com/g/human-evolution
human-evolution@googlegroups.com

Re: The change in forest extincted dinosaurs.

<s6dcsu$kg7$1@sunce.iskon.hr>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/tech/article-flat.php?id=3000&group=sci.bio.paleontology#3000

 copy link   Newsgroups: sci.bio.paleontology
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!aioe.org!newsfeed.CARNet.hr!Iskon!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: mario.pe...@zg.htnet.hr (Mario Petrinovic)
Newsgroups: sci.bio.paleontology
Subject: Re: The change in forest extincted dinosaurs.
Date: Thu, 29 Apr 2021 06:32:31 +0200
Organization: Iskon Internet d.d.
Lines: 64
Message-ID: <s6dcsu$kg7$1@sunce.iskon.hr>
References: <s48f3i$kf3$1@sunce.iskon.hr>
<kPadnfdol8DOQfr9nZ2dnUU7-aPNnZ2d@giganews.com> <s49rd1$nde$3@solani.org>
<s4abee$14l$1@sunce.iskon.hr>
<4de36192-2b2c-4219-b30a-1e3684672d4fn@googlegroups.com>
<s6bl6b$bt0$1@sunce.iskon.hr> <B82dnZUlEqz_wBT9nZ2dnUU7-N_NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<s6bsho$h8h$1@sunce.iskon.hr> <ZYedna5mf7SG5hT9nZ2dnUU7-U3NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<s6bvt8$jp3$1@sunce.iskon.hr> <D_adnX-Jk-a3ABT9nZ2dnUU7-SHNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<s6c8tp$qfu$1@sunce.iskon.hr>
<df948712-dcb9-4236-a4c6-808cbefc8e58n@googlegroups.com>
<s6cmtm$59s$1@sunce.iskon.hr> <s6cr4g$8b4$1@sunce.iskon.hr>
<tPSdnZGYIvcFaRT9nZ2dnUU7-fOdnZ2d@giganews.com> <s6dbe6$jg1$1@sunce.iskon.hr>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 93-136-92-4.adsl.net.t-com.hr
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Trace: sunce.iskon.hr 1619670750 20999 93.136.92.4 (29 Apr 2021 04:32:30 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: abuse@iskon.hr
NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 29 Apr 2021 04:32:30 +0000 (UTC)
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101
Thunderbird/78.10.0
In-Reply-To: <s6dbe6$jg1$1@sunce.iskon.hr>
Content-Language: en-US
 by: Mario Petrinovic - Thu, 29 Apr 2021 04:32 UTC

On 29.4.2021. 6:07, Mario Petrinovic wrote:
> On 29.4.2021. 1:49, John Harshman wrote:
>> On 4/28/21 4:29 PM, Mario Petrinovic wrote:
>>> On 29.4.2021. 0:17, Mario Petrinovic wrote:
>>>> On 28.4.2021. 23:55, nyik...@gmail.com wrote:
>>>>> On Wednesday, April 28, 2021 at 2:18:35 PM UTC-4, Mario Petrinovic
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>> The question is why some dinosaurs actually went extinct.
>>>>>
>>>>> Plain and simple datum: all fauna over 50kg went extinct, on land
>>>>> and sea.
>>>>> Vertebrate (all reptiles, but no dinos) sea animals included,  and
>>>>> invertebrates like the ammonites and other big mollusks.
>>>>>
>>>>> Most birds went extinct too. The seed eaters were the best situated
>>>>> to survive,
>>>>> and the insect eaters. John can probably give you a lowdown on which
>>>>> branches of the bird tree survived and which didn't. He's still an
>>>>> impressive storehouse of facts about ornithology.
>>>>
>>>>          Yes, thanks Peter.
>>>>          Interesting fact, just we have to be careful not to jump
>>>> the conclusion seeing this fact (of course).
>>>
>>>          BTW, I see, not only whole families of dinosaurs went
>>> extinct, but even tribes of families of dinosaurs went extinct. For
>>> sure those tribes had species that were smaller.
>>
>> There are no tribes of families. "Tribe" is a subdivision of "family".
>> So it isn't clear what you're talking about.
>
>         My bad, I don't know those formal, administrative,
> classifications. Yes, those are made to make things clear (the above
> example is an excellent example of that), but, until I learn those
> "naturally" (see, I learnt it now, hopefully I'll remember it, :) ), I
> will not pollute my thinking with those.
>
>>>          In extinction, bigger animals always go off first. But, each
>>> of those families should have smaller members, which can easily grow
>>> bigger later, no problemo, a piece of cake, and nothing would
>>> actually change.
>>>          Yes, the extinction targeted only some animals.
>>
>> How does that fit your scenario? Did these hypothetical small
>> herbivorous dinosaurs, of which zero are known, eat ferns too?
>
>         Somebody ate those ferns. You say that you don't have the
> evidence for it. Well, I believe you.
>         All those families probably had smaller relatives. You say that
> you don't have the evidence for those, but you don't know the reason why
> this shouldn't be so. Again, I believe you.
>         You are not including in your scenario species that eat ferns,
> and that are smaller than 50 kg. Your scenario has all the preconditions
> to be wrong, you are wasting your time, not me.

Oh yes, anybody who shares your view also wastes his time. You will
never have the evidence for everything, you even don't have a scenario,
and you will never have one, or, at least, one that is right. Whoever
introduced this "scientific" thinking (it was Vatican), screwed humanity
big time.

--
https://groups.google.com/g/human-evolution
human-evolution@googlegroups.com

Re: The change in forest extincted dinosaurs.

<s6dd2f$kqd$1@sunce.iskon.hr>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/tech/article-flat.php?id=3001&group=sci.bio.paleontology#3001

 copy link   Newsgroups: sci.bio.paleontology
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!aioe.org!newsfeed.CARNet.hr!Iskon!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: mario.pe...@zg.htnet.hr (Mario Petrinovic)
Newsgroups: sci.bio.paleontology
Subject: Re: The change in forest extincted dinosaurs.
Date: Thu, 29 Apr 2021 06:35:26 +0200
Organization: Iskon Internet d.d.
Lines: 70
Message-ID: <s6dd2f$kqd$1@sunce.iskon.hr>
References: <s48f3i$kf3$1@sunce.iskon.hr>
<kPadnfdol8DOQfr9nZ2dnUU7-aPNnZ2d@giganews.com> <s49rd1$nde$3@solani.org>
<s4abee$14l$1@sunce.iskon.hr>
<4de36192-2b2c-4219-b30a-1e3684672d4fn@googlegroups.com>
<s6bl6b$bt0$1@sunce.iskon.hr> <B82dnZUlEqz_wBT9nZ2dnUU7-N_NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<s6bsho$h8h$1@sunce.iskon.hr> <ZYedna5mf7SG5hT9nZ2dnUU7-U3NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<s6bvt8$jp3$1@sunce.iskon.hr> <D_adnX-Jk-a3ABT9nZ2dnUU7-SHNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<s6c8tp$qfu$1@sunce.iskon.hr>
<df948712-dcb9-4236-a4c6-808cbefc8e58n@googlegroups.com>
<s6cmtm$59s$1@sunce.iskon.hr> <s6cr4g$8b4$1@sunce.iskon.hr>
<tPSdnZGYIvcFaRT9nZ2dnUU7-fOdnZ2d@giganews.com> <s6dbe6$jg1$1@sunce.iskon.hr>
<s6dcsu$kg7$1@sunce.iskon.hr>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 93-136-92-4.adsl.net.t-com.hr
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Trace: sunce.iskon.hr 1619670927 21325 93.136.92.4 (29 Apr 2021 04:35:27 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: abuse@iskon.hr
NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 29 Apr 2021 04:35:27 +0000 (UTC)
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101
Thunderbird/78.10.0
In-Reply-To: <s6dcsu$kg7$1@sunce.iskon.hr>
Content-Language: en-US
 by: Mario Petrinovic - Thu, 29 Apr 2021 04:35 UTC

On 29.4.2021. 6:32, Mario Petrinovic wrote:
> On 29.4.2021. 6:07, Mario Petrinovic wrote:
>> On 29.4.2021. 1:49, John Harshman wrote:
>>> On 4/28/21 4:29 PM, Mario Petrinovic wrote:
>>>> On 29.4.2021. 0:17, Mario Petrinovic wrote:
>>>>> On 28.4.2021. 23:55, nyik...@gmail.com wrote:
>>>>>> On Wednesday, April 28, 2021 at 2:18:35 PM UTC-4, Mario Petrinovic
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>> The question is why some dinosaurs actually went extinct.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Plain and simple datum: all fauna over 50kg went extinct, on land
>>>>>> and sea.
>>>>>> Vertebrate (all reptiles, but no dinos) sea animals included,  and
>>>>>> invertebrates like the ammonites and other big mollusks.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Most birds went extinct too. The seed eaters were the best
>>>>>> situated to survive,
>>>>>> and the insect eaters. John can probably give you a lowdown on which
>>>>>> branches of the bird tree survived and which didn't. He's still an
>>>>>> impressive storehouse of facts about ornithology.
>>>>>
>>>>>          Yes, thanks Peter.
>>>>>          Interesting fact, just we have to be careful not to jump
>>>>> the conclusion seeing this fact (of course).
>>>>
>>>>          BTW, I see, not only whole families of dinosaurs went
>>>> extinct, but even tribes of families of dinosaurs went extinct. For
>>>> sure those tribes had species that were smaller.
>>>
>>> There are no tribes of families. "Tribe" is a subdivision of
>>> "family". So it isn't clear what you're talking about.
>>
>>          My bad, I don't know those formal, administrative,
>> classifications. Yes, those are made to make things clear (the above
>> example is an excellent example of that), but, until I learn those
>> "naturally" (see, I learnt it now, hopefully I'll remember it, :) ), I
>> will not pollute my thinking with those.
>>
>>>>          In extinction, bigger animals always go off first. But,
>>>> each of those families should have smaller members, which can easily
>>>> grow bigger later, no problemo, a piece of cake, and nothing would
>>>> actually change.
>>>>          Yes, the extinction targeted only some animals.
>>>
>>> How does that fit your scenario? Did these hypothetical small
>>> herbivorous dinosaurs, of which zero are known, eat ferns too?
>>
>>          Somebody ate those ferns. You say that you don't have the
>> evidence for it. Well, I believe you.
>>          All those families probably had smaller relatives. You say
>> that you don't have the evidence for those, but you don't know the
>> reason why this shouldn't be so. Again, I believe you.
>>          You are not including in your scenario species that eat
>> ferns, and that are smaller than 50 kg. Your scenario has all the
>> preconditions to be wrong, you are wasting your time, not me.
>
>         Oh yes, anybody who shares your view also wastes his time. You
> will never have the evidence for everything, you even don't have a
> scenario, and you will never have one, or, at least, one that is right.
> Whoever introduced this "scientific" thinking (it was Vatican), screwed
> humanity big time.

And yes, they are juts making fools out of the whole humanity, because
they know that humans are idiots. They, themselves, have no evidence at
all. They sneaked on you this "evidence based" thinking, and made idiots
out of you.

--
https://groups.google.com/g/human-evolution
human-evolution@googlegroups.com

Re: The change in forest extincted dinosaurs.

<s6dksu$qit$1@sunce.iskon.hr>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/tech/article-flat.php?id=3002&group=sci.bio.paleontology#3002

 copy link   Newsgroups: sci.bio.paleontology
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!aioe.org!newsfeed.CARNet.hr!Iskon!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: mario.pe...@zg.htnet.hr (Mario Petrinovic)
Newsgroups: sci.bio.paleontology
Subject: Re: The change in forest extincted dinosaurs.
Date: Thu, 29 Apr 2021 08:49:03 +0200
Organization: Iskon Internet d.d.
Lines: 29
Message-ID: <s6dksu$qit$1@sunce.iskon.hr>
References: <s48f3i$kf3$1@sunce.iskon.hr>
<kPadnfdol8DOQfr9nZ2dnUU7-aPNnZ2d@giganews.com> <s49rd1$nde$3@solani.org>
<s4abee$14l$1@sunce.iskon.hr>
<4de36192-2b2c-4219-b30a-1e3684672d4fn@googlegroups.com>
<s6bl6b$bt0$1@sunce.iskon.hr> <B82dnZUlEqz_wBT9nZ2dnUU7-N_NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<s6bsho$h8h$1@sunce.iskon.hr> <ZYedna5mf7SG5hT9nZ2dnUU7-U3NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<s6bvt8$jp3$1@sunce.iskon.hr> <D_adnX-Jk-a3ABT9nZ2dnUU7-SHNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<s6c8tp$qfu$1@sunce.iskon.hr>
<df948712-dcb9-4236-a4c6-808cbefc8e58n@googlegroups.com>
<s6cmtm$59s$1@sunce.iskon.hr> <s6cr4g$8b4$1@sunce.iskon.hr>
<tPSdnZGYIvcFaRT9nZ2dnUU7-fOdnZ2d@giganews.com> <s6dbe6$jg1$1@sunce.iskon.hr>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 93-136-92-4.adsl.net.t-com.hr
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Trace: sunce.iskon.hr 1619678942 27229 93.136.92.4 (29 Apr 2021 06:49:02 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: abuse@iskon.hr
NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 29 Apr 2021 06:49:02 +0000 (UTC)
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101
Thunderbird/78.10.0
In-Reply-To: <s6dbe6$jg1$1@sunce.iskon.hr>
Content-Language: en-US
 by: Mario Petrinovic - Thu, 29 Apr 2021 06:49 UTC

On 29.4.2021. 6:07, Mario Petrinovic wrote:
> On 29.4.2021. 1:49, John Harshman wrote:
>> On 4/28/21 4:29 PM, Mario Petrinovic wrote:
>>>          BTW, I see, not only whole families of dinosaurs went
>>> extinct, but even tribes of families of dinosaurs went extinct. For
>>> sure those tribes had species that were smaller.
>>
>> There are no tribes of families. "Tribe" is a subdivision of "family".
>> So it isn't clear what you're talking about.
>
>         My bad, I don't know those formal, administrative,
> classifications. Yes, those are made to make things clear (the above
> example is an excellent example of that), but, until I learn those
> "naturally" (see, I learnt it now, hopefully I'll remember it, :) ), I
> will not pollute my thinking with those.

Ha, ha, this reminds me on one thing. I am a big Beatle fan. And I
always wandered how come they cannot read music. I mean, they were in
music business for so long, this would immensely help them, for sure it
occurred to them that it would be very useful to learn to read music.
But no.
And just recently I heard about it. When they first came to London
they didn't know to read music. And then they met their producer, George
Martin, who had excellent music knowledge. And it was him who advised
them to not learn to read music. And the rest is history... , lol.

--
https://groups.google.com/g/human-evolution
human-evolution@googlegroups.com

Re: The change in forest extincted dinosaurs.

<s6dm0t$rca$1@sunce.iskon.hr>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/tech/article-flat.php?id=3003&group=sci.bio.paleontology#3003

 copy link   Newsgroups: sci.bio.paleontology
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!aioe.org!newsfeed.CARNet.hr!Iskon!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: mario.pe...@zg.htnet.hr (Mario Petrinovic)
Newsgroups: sci.bio.paleontology
Subject: Re: The change in forest extincted dinosaurs.
Date: Thu, 29 Apr 2021 09:08:14 +0200
Organization: Iskon Internet d.d.
Lines: 34
Message-ID: <s6dm0t$rca$1@sunce.iskon.hr>
References: <s48f3i$kf3$1@sunce.iskon.hr>
<kPadnfdol8DOQfr9nZ2dnUU7-aPNnZ2d@giganews.com> <s49rd1$nde$3@solani.org>
<s4abee$14l$1@sunce.iskon.hr>
<4de36192-2b2c-4219-b30a-1e3684672d4fn@googlegroups.com>
<s6bl6b$bt0$1@sunce.iskon.hr> <B82dnZUlEqz_wBT9nZ2dnUU7-N_NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<s6bsho$h8h$1@sunce.iskon.hr> <ZYedna5mf7SG5hT9nZ2dnUU7-U3NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<s6bvt8$jp3$1@sunce.iskon.hr> <D_adnX-Jk-a3ABT9nZ2dnUU7-SHNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<s6c8tp$qfu$1@sunce.iskon.hr>
<df948712-dcb9-4236-a4c6-808cbefc8e58n@googlegroups.com>
<s6cmtm$59s$1@sunce.iskon.hr> <s6cr4g$8b4$1@sunce.iskon.hr>
<tPSdnZGYIvcFaRT9nZ2dnUU7-fOdnZ2d@giganews.com> <s6dbe6$jg1$1@sunce.iskon.hr>
<s6dksu$qit$1@sunce.iskon.hr>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 93-136-92-4.adsl.net.t-com.hr
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Trace: sunce.iskon.hr 1619680093 28042 93.136.92.4 (29 Apr 2021 07:08:13 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: abuse@iskon.hr
NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 29 Apr 2021 07:08:13 +0000 (UTC)
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101
Thunderbird/78.10.0
In-Reply-To: <s6dksu$qit$1@sunce.iskon.hr>
Content-Language: en-US
 by: Mario Petrinovic - Thu, 29 Apr 2021 07:08 UTC

On 29.4.2021. 8:49, Mario Petrinovic wrote:
> On 29.4.2021. 6:07, Mario Petrinovic wrote:
>> On 29.4.2021. 1:49, John Harshman wrote:
>>> On 4/28/21 4:29 PM, Mario Petrinovic wrote:
>>>>          BTW, I see, not only whole families of dinosaurs went
>>>> extinct, but even tribes of families of dinosaurs went extinct. For
>>>> sure those tribes had species that were smaller.
>>>
>>> There are no tribes of families. "Tribe" is a subdivision of
>>> "family". So it isn't clear what you're talking about.
>>
>>          My bad, I don't know those formal, administrative,
>> classifications. Yes, those are made to make things clear (the above
>> example is an excellent example of that), but, until I learn those
>> "naturally" (see, I learnt it now, hopefully I'll remember it, :) ), I
>> will not pollute my thinking with those.
>
>         Ha, ha, this reminds me on one thing. I am a big Beatle fan.
> And I always wandered how come they cannot read music. I mean, they were
> in music business for so long, this would immensely help them, for sure
> it occurred to them that it would be very useful to learn to read music.
> But no.
>         And just recently I heard about it. When they first came to
> London they didn't know to read music. And then they met their producer,
> George Martin, who had excellent music knowledge. And it was him who
> advised them to not learn to read music. And the rest is history... , lol.

The Beatles and Martha (the dog). (There was a song written for
Martha, "Martha My Dear".):
https://youtu.be/HtUH9z_Oey8

--
https://groups.google.com/g/human-evolution
human-evolution@googlegroups.com

Re: The change in forest extincted dinosaurs.

<c7GdnZRWqtPxTBf9nZ2dnUU7-SOdnZ2d@giganews.com>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/tech/article-flat.php?id=3004&group=sci.bio.paleontology#3004

 copy link   Newsgroups: sci.bio.paleontology
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!weretis.net!feeder6.news.weretis.net!news.snarked.org!border2.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!buffer2.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!news.giganews.com.POSTED!not-for-mail
NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 29 Apr 2021 10:31:55 -0500
Subject: Re: The change in forest extincted dinosaurs.
Newsgroups: sci.bio.paleontology
References: <s48f3i$kf3$1@sunce.iskon.hr>
<kPadnfdol8DOQfr9nZ2dnUU7-aPNnZ2d@giganews.com> <s49rd1$nde$3@solani.org>
<s4abee$14l$1@sunce.iskon.hr>
<4de36192-2b2c-4219-b30a-1e3684672d4fn@googlegroups.com>
<s6bl6b$bt0$1@sunce.iskon.hr> <B82dnZUlEqz_wBT9nZ2dnUU7-N_NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<s6bsho$h8h$1@sunce.iskon.hr> <ZYedna5mf7SG5hT9nZ2dnUU7-U3NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<s6bvt8$jp3$1@sunce.iskon.hr> <D_adnX-Jk-a3ABT9nZ2dnUU7-SHNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<s6c8tp$qfu$1@sunce.iskon.hr> <Yt-dnTzgwp6xWhT9nZ2dnUU7-aGdnZ2d@giganews.com>
<s6clng$4di$1@sunce.iskon.hr> <tPSdnZaYIvcZbhT9nZ2dnUU7-fOdnZ2d@giganews.com>
<s6damg$j00$1@sunce.iskon.hr>
From: jharsh...@pacbell.net (John Harshman)
Date: Thu, 29 Apr 2021 08:31:55 -0700
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.15; rv:78.0)
Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.10.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <s6damg$j00$1@sunce.iskon.hr>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Message-ID: <c7GdnZRWqtPxTBf9nZ2dnUU7-SOdnZ2d@giganews.com>
Lines: 323
X-Usenet-Provider: http://www.giganews.com
X-Trace: sv3-v1P41lqSRWmBmDCOMywXybCOzCEqFbk8M8OrYJ5dxVDqUAQrt2qD1ikKKZyx7ovXc8XhIzcysjFAFEN!n+LfSiS32VNo5Fvf4+8fN88UbPHQHi5KYY7CmJDm2lIxV5XRl12c+tP5cEXcgiwCt0qMITOE/yk=
X-Complaints-To: abuse@giganews.com
X-DMCA-Notifications: http://www.giganews.com/info/dmca.html
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly
X-Postfilter: 1.3.40
X-Original-Bytes: 19651
 by: John Harshman - Thu, 29 Apr 2021 15:31 UTC

On 4/28/21 8:54 PM, Mario Petrinovic wrote:
> On 29.4.2021. 1:45, John Harshman wrote:
>> On 4/28/21 2:57 PM, Mario Petrinovic wrote:
>>> On 28.4.2021. 22:35, John Harshman wrote:
>>>> On 4/28/21 11:18 AM, Mario Petrinovic wrote:
>>>>> On 28.4.2021. 19:36, John Harshman wrote:
>>>>>> On 4/28/21 8:44 AM, Mario Petrinovic wrote:
>>>>>>> On 28.4.2021. 17:11, John Harshman wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 4/28/21 7:47 AM, Mario Petrinovic wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On 28.4.2021. 15:04, John Harshman wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> On 4/28/21 5:41 AM, Mario Petrinovic wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> On 28.4.2021. 2:05, nyik...@gmail.com wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi, Mario!  I hope you didn't give up waiting around for me
>>>>>>>>>>>> and are still reading s.b.p.
>>>>>>>>>>>> I didn't emerge anywhere on Usenet for three and a half
>>>>>>>>>>>> months of 2021, and then
>>>>>>>>>>>> I put in a few sporadic posts to talk.origins. But it's
>>>>>>>>>>>> close to a week since I was there last,
>>>>>>>>>>>> and this is my first post of 2021 to sci.bio.paleontology.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> On Saturday, April 3, 2021 at 2:16:47 PM UTC-4, Mario
>>>>>>>>>>>> Petrinovic wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 3.4.2021. 15:42, Oxyaena wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 4/2/2021 11:09 PM, John Harshman wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 4/2/21 6:06 PM, Mario Petrinovic wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Just like I said it here, so many months (or could it be,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> years?) ago.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> So many new scientific ideas originated in my head, but
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> nobody, ever, gives me any credit for this (except for
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> few people).
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Fortunately, I am well enough known in several branches of
>>>>>>>>>>>> mathematics not to
>>>>>>>>>>>> be concerned about getting credit for general ideas,
>>>>>>>>>>>> anywhere. For instance, I thought
>>>>>>>>>>>> I had coined the term "mega-evolution" to denote evolution
>>>>>>>>>>>> that produces new orders,
>>>>>>>>>>>> classes, or phyla of animals, plants, or fungi.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> That makes it the most interesting kind of macroevolution,
>>>>>>>>>>>> which some take to
>>>>>>>>>>>> mean "speciation".
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Anyway, Hemidactylus surprised me by posting a
>>>>>>>>>>>> once-in-a-blue moon (for him)
>>>>>>>>>>>> on-topic post in talk.origins, telling me that George
>>>>>>>>>>>> Gaylord Simpson had coined
>>>>>>>>>>>> the word long ago -- perhaps even before I was born.  But I
>>>>>>>>>>>> didn't mind.
>>>>>>>>>>>> In fact, I was sort of relieved to learn that a world-class
>>>>>>>>>>>> evolutionary theorist
>>>>>>>>>>>> had come up with the term, but I'll save the reason why for
>>>>>>>>>>>> another post.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-56617409
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> But that isn't what the story says. You have it exactly
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> backwards.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Harshman often hides behind the claim that he has a bad memory,
>>>>>>>>>>>> but here he shows that he remembers something I didn't. You
>>>>>>>>>>>> said nothing in your OP  that could be construed as backwards
>>>>>>>>>>>> from the following.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The story says that the asteroid impact caused dinosaur
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> extinction, and
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the absence of dinosaurs could have resulted in a change
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> in the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> character of Amazon forests.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> It's some of both, but the article definitely leans in
>>>>>>>>>>>> John's direction. But, to use a colloquialism,
>>>>>>>>>>>> that has diddly-squat to do with the ACTUAL relative
>>>>>>>>>>>> strength of the two directions.
>>>>>>>>>>>> Problem is, I may be missing out on some fine points of the
>>>>>>>>>>>> opposite direction that you had, Mario.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Now Oxyaena puts in her two cents' worth:
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Well, I mean, the extinction *did* result in a turnover of
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> flora and
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> fauna, and for a not-insignificant period of time there
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> were no large
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> herbivores to affect the Amazon's plant life, and by
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> extension, the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> world's. Just because biodiversity will invariably recover
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> after a mass
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> extinction doesn't mean that said biodiversity will be of
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the same
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> character as it was prior to the extinction event in
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> question.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Harshman has been showing less and less interest in
>>>>>>>>>>>> exploring scientific
>>>>>>>>>>>> issues, so he hasn't replied to either Oxyaena or to you.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> As for Oxyaena, she started her own new thread on the
>>>>>>>>>>>> extinction less
>>>>>>>>>>>> than 15 minutes after posting the above, but Harshman' never
>>>>>>>>>>>> showed
>>>>>>>>>>>> interest in it. In fact, nobody has posted there after that
>>>>>>>>>>>> OP of hers.
>>>>>>>>>>>> Not even her comrade-in-arms, Erik Simpson.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> It should have been (of the same character). I discussed
>>>>>>>>>>>>> this already
>>>>>>>>>>>>> (with Peter, I believe). There is no reason for herbivores
>>>>>>>>>>>>> to evolve out
>>>>>>>>>>>>> of mammals, and it took 10 million years for mammals to
>>>>>>>>>>>>> acquire that
>>>>>>>>>>>>> niche, if you already had seeds of dinosaur herbivores
>>>>>>>>>>>>> alive. Why would
>>>>>>>>>>>>> life wait for 10 million years for mammals to adapt for
>>>>>>>>>>>>> that, dinos were
>>>>>>>>>>>>> already adapted?
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> There actually were mammalian herbivores that survived the
>>>>>>>>>>>> K-T extinction,
>>>>>>>>>>>> among the Multituberculata and a number of other now-extinct
>>>>>>>>>>>> branches of
>>>>>>>>>>>> mammalia.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> But if you are thinking of *large* herbivores, yes, I
>>>>>>>>>>>> believe the first really
>>>>>>>>>>>> large ones were among the Pantodonta, and it took them 10
>>>>>>>>>>>> million years to get to that point.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> No, this was a system failure. Failure of the character
>>>>>>>>>>>>> that prevented
>>>>>>>>>>>>> plants which couldn't reach the sunlight to grow, and this
>>>>>>>>>>>>> is what,
>>>>>>>>>>>>> actually, killed *all* the dinosaurs, without leaving
>>>>>>>>>>>>> pockets of them
>>>>>>>>>>>>> alive, here or there. And that happened when avian
>>>>>>>>>>>>> dinosaurs (or, I
>>>>>>>>>>>>> would say, dinosaurs which had bills) survived.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> You ought to be a little more specific here: "survived"
>>>>>>>>>>>> doesn't hit the spot.
>>>>>>>>>>>> "Evolved into more fearsome forms" might be closer to what
>>>>>>>>>>>> you had in mind, Mario.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> There are other problems with what you wrote in the
>>>>>>>>>>>> preceding sentence, but I need to get
>>>>>>>>>>>> back to grading the last test I've given ca. 75 students, so
>>>>>>>>>>>> I'll tackle them another day, hopefully tomorrow.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>          Thanks, Peter.
>>>>>>>>>>>          Well, so far I don't see a problem here. They did
>>>>>>>>>>> survive, and they did evolve, everybody who survives evolves.
>>>>>>>>>>> The point is, they didn't go extinct. You don't go extinct
>>>>>>>>>>> without a reason. Herbivores of mammalian type didn't go
>>>>>>>>>>> extinct (as you mentioned), large herbivores of mammalian
>>>>>>>>>>> type didn't exist (as far as I can grasp), or, at least,
>>>>>>>>>>> didn't exist in areas where they emerged 10 my later. The
>>>>>>>>>>> fact is that all fern eaters of a dino type (and their
>>>>>>>>>>> predators) went extinct, while not all dinos went extinct.
>>>>>>>>>>> So, the problem was in eating ferns.
>>>>>>>>>>>          The fact that ecology changed is in tune with that.
>>>>>>>>>>> The question was, did ecology change because of dinos went
>>>>>>>>>>> extinct? There is no reason for just a specific type of dinos
>>>>>>>>>>> to go extinct, or, at least, nobody mentioned it anywhere,
>>>>>>>>>>> nobody knows for the reason, there is no theory about that
>>>>>>>>>>> reason, there is no idea about the reason, there is no
>>>>>>>>>>> just-so story about the reason, absolutely nothing, there is
>>>>>>>>>>> only a "possibility" that this could have happened (but no
>>>>>>>>>>> reason for that). I mean, there is a possibility that life on
>>>>>>>>>>> Earth was started by aliens, but, hey, are we at that level
>>>>>>>>>>> of reasoning? Or, is science on that level of reasoning? If
>>>>>>>>>>> it shouldn't be, then why it behaves like they are on that
>>>>>>>>>>> level?
>>>>>>>>>>>          On the other hand, there could be some reason for
>>>>>>>>>>> ecology to change. My *idea* is that plants that crave for
>>>>>>>>>>> sunlight already evolved at poles (definitely there is some
>>>>>>>>>>> logic in it). The impact created the lack of sunlight (there
>>>>>>>>>>> were already some theories about that), so the plants that
>>>>>>>>>>> are able to collect more sunlight prevailed over ferns. This
>>>>>>>>>>> is one simple and logical explanation for this mechanism. For
>>>>>>>>>>> the mechanism that only some types of dinosaurs went extinct
>>>>>>>>>>> there is no explanation of mechanism.
>>>>>>>>>>>          I believe that I am clear enough.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> How is that group coming along?
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>          Ah, thanks, :). Besides me there are two more
>>>>>>>>>>> members, Daud Deden and Marc Verhaegen, but there is no
>>>>>>>>>>> discussion going on at all. So far I am happy, this is a good
>>>>>>>>>>> start, :) .
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> One problem with your theory is the post-Cretaceous "fern
>>>>>>>>>> spike". For a short time after the impact ferns dominated the
>>>>>>>>>> terrestrial vegetation. Another problem is that the poles get
>>>>>>>>>> much less sunlight than the tropics, so plants that "crave
>>>>>>>>>> for" sunlight would be less likely to be located there than
>>>>>>>>>> elsewhere. And third, the post-K-T lack of sunlight could have
>>>>>>>>>> lasted a couple of years at most. Finally, you have no
>>>>>>>>>> evidence that herbivorous dinosaurs were dependent on ferns,
>>>>>>>>>> which seems very unlikely on its face.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> There also are theories about why the dinosaurs and not birds
>>>>>>>>>> or mammals went extinct. They were large. If, as is commonly
>>>>>>>>>> thought, extinctions mostly happened as a result of radiant
>>>>>>>>>> heat from the sky resulting from the re-entry of small ejecta,
>>>>>>>>>> big animals would be less able to hide under rocks and in
>>>>>>>>>> burrows than small ones. And there you have the filter to
>>>>>>>>>> explain the extinction.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>          Thanks John.
>>>>>>>>>          "Fern spike", I'll have to examine this.
>>>>>>>>>          Not necessarily "crave" for sunlight, but definitely
>>>>>>>>> being better in scooping the sunlight. Like hemoglobin in
>>>>>>>>> blood, which extracts oxygen. If oxygen levels fall, obviously
>>>>>>>>> the animals adapted to low levels will thrive.
>>>>>>>>>          A couple of years could be enough.
>>>>>>>>>          I believe the teeth of dinosaurs were adapted just to
>>>>>>>>> strip ferns (but I am not sure about it).
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Yeah, you should check out the fern spike. Do you have any
>>>>>>>> evidence that arctic plants are better at scooping up sunlight
>>>>>>>> than tropical ones? You should probably check out the difference
>>>>>>>> between C3 and C4 plants. And no, a couple of years isn't enough
>>>>>>>> at all; you should probably check out the term "seed bank". In
>>>>>>>> general, you should learn something about botany. And what you
>>>>>>>> believe about the teeth of dinosaurs is not supported by
>>>>>>>> anything that I know of and, I strongly suspect, not anything
>>>>>>>> that you know of.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>          I don't need evidence that at poles you would have,
>>>>>>> both, plants and animals adapted to better scoop sunlight.
>>>>>>>          I know the difference between C3 and C4 pathways, but I
>>>>>>> don't see your point.
>>>>>>>          About the teeth I heard, in one documentary, a long time
>>>>>>> ago. And, it looks logical. Those teeth look like they are for
>>>>>>> stripping ferns, those dinosaurs ate ferns, so, I would presume
>>>>>>> that they are adapted to eat it. I see no problem in this,
>>>>>>> whichever way you put it.
>>>>>>>          Regarding "a couple of years", here it is a scenario for
>>>>>>> "many years", and it involves what you just said. Yes, dinosaurs
>>>>>>> were pretty damaged by the event. All the dinosaurs, all the
>>>>>>> birds, all other animals, all plants, everybody. The question is
>>>>>>> why some dinosaurs actually went extinct.
>>>>>>>          The answer is in trees. Narrow canopy trees didn't grow
>>>>>>> anymore? Why? Well, ferns deprived them from sunlight. In normal
>>>>>>> conditions those ferns were eaten by dinosaurs. But now,
>>>>>>> dinosaurs were very damaged, not a lot of dinosaurs left. So, not
>>>>>>> a lot of narrow canopy trees grew among all those uneaten ferns.
>>>>>>> But, some other types of trees were better adapted to the
>>>>>>> conditions, so those types of trees started to grow. And those
>>>>>>> types overwhelmed ferns.
>>>>>>>          I'll take a look at what happens after fern spike in
>>>>>>> real world, what kind of plants grow in such a situation, and why.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> C4 plants are the ones adapted to high temperature, high
>>>>>> insolation environments, and they're the plants that are most
>>>>>> efficient at photosynthesis in such environments. Needless to say,
>>>>>> they aren't found at the poles.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I will have to agree that if you heard something in a documentary
>>>>>> some time long ago it must be true and is decisive confirmation
>>>>>> for your theory.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Then again, your theory is hopelessly confused. The dinosaurs kept
>>>>>> the ferns down? The ferns kept the angiosperms from growing? The
>>>>>> angiosperms killed ferns and that killed the dinosaurs? What?
>>>>>
>>>>>          Well, it may be complicated, but, of course, this is why
>>>>> it isn't obvious, and this is why this is still a question that
>>>>> needs the answer.
>>>>>          I know that this story is much simpler, asteroid came, and
>>>>> killed just the right animals. Nice and simple, just like 'God
>>>>> said: Let there be light.", and it was light.'. Everybody likes
>>>>> simple explanations. Sheer beauty.
>>>>>          So, simple is nice, complicated is complicated. The only
>>>>> problem is, simple has no logic, and the complicated way has much
>>>>> more sense, and it is a better theory.
>>>>>
>>>> Please provide a coherent and complete explanation of your theory,
>>>> which you have never managed to do so far. Try to use complete
>>>> sentences with grammatical English, as best you can. Try to provide
>>>> a clear cause-and-effect scenario.
>>>
>>>          But why? Use what you've got. You should be more than
>>> satisfied with what I already provided.
>>
>> No, what you've already provided is disjointed and incoherent. If
>> that's the best you can do, then there's nowhere to go.
>>
>>>          I thank you for all your help, but I cannot work by
>>> providing "coherent and complete explanation". This isn't actually my
>>> theory, I am trying to figure out what actually happened.
>>>          I cannot concentrate on my work if I am concentrating on how
>>> this will sound to English speaking people.
>>>          Clear cause-and-effect scenario I can provide for my launch
>>> (I cooked it, I ate it), how to provide clear cause-and-effect
>>> scenario for something I know so little about, and which happened 66
>>> mya? I am doing the best I can.
>>
>> If so, that's unfortunate.
>
>         Yes, I agree.
>         This is similar to that Nazism/communism discussion that we had
> recently. I am liberal democrat, but if I am discussing Nazism/communism
> I, simply, *have to* say that Nazism is better than communism. Now, I
> knew that 100 % of people will immediately call me a nazist, simply,
> because I said that, but, I didn't have a choice, I had to be right. I
> learnt a long time ago (remember, I am the sole soul that claims that
> the West is the best, in a country full with people who claim that the
> East is the best) that, if seven billion people says one thing, and I
> say the other thing, and if I am the right one, I, alone, am stronger
> than seven billion people. And, if I cannot get along with seven billion
> people, that's really unfortunate,... for them.
>         So, you are asking me to *bias* my ideas towards that they are
> perceived more clearly by the rest, but, if I am biasing my thinking,
> this will steer me away from the truth. I don't want to do that, because
> doing this, I am, actually, wasting my time.
>         And, lastly, notice this, I am doing all this in your language,
> and I am not complaining. You are communicating with me in your
> language, and you are full with complains. Try to complain in Croatian,
> so that I have a little laugh, ;) .
>
I'm sorry, but that was an insane rant.


Click here to read the complete article
Re: The change in forest extincted dinosaurs.

<s6ek7a$i28$1@sunce.iskon.hr>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/tech/article-flat.php?id=3005&group=sci.bio.paleontology#3005

 copy link   Newsgroups: sci.bio.paleontology
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!aioe.org!newsfeed.CARNet.hr!Iskon!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: mario.pe...@zg.htnet.hr (Mario Petrinovic)
Newsgroups: sci.bio.paleontology
Subject: Re: The change in forest extincted dinosaurs.
Date: Thu, 29 Apr 2021 17:43:39 +0200
Organization: Iskon Internet d.d.
Lines: 332
Message-ID: <s6ek7a$i28$1@sunce.iskon.hr>
References: <s48f3i$kf3$1@sunce.iskon.hr>
<kPadnfdol8DOQfr9nZ2dnUU7-aPNnZ2d@giganews.com> <s49rd1$nde$3@solani.org>
<s4abee$14l$1@sunce.iskon.hr>
<4de36192-2b2c-4219-b30a-1e3684672d4fn@googlegroups.com>
<s6bl6b$bt0$1@sunce.iskon.hr> <B82dnZUlEqz_wBT9nZ2dnUU7-N_NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<s6bsho$h8h$1@sunce.iskon.hr> <ZYedna5mf7SG5hT9nZ2dnUU7-U3NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<s6bvt8$jp3$1@sunce.iskon.hr> <D_adnX-Jk-a3ABT9nZ2dnUU7-SHNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<s6c8tp$qfu$1@sunce.iskon.hr> <Yt-dnTzgwp6xWhT9nZ2dnUU7-aGdnZ2d@giganews.com>
<s6clng$4di$1@sunce.iskon.hr> <tPSdnZaYIvcZbhT9nZ2dnUU7-fOdnZ2d@giganews.com>
<s6damg$j00$1@sunce.iskon.hr> <c7GdnZRWqtPxTBf9nZ2dnUU7-SOdnZ2d@giganews.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 93-136-92-4.adsl.net.t-com.hr
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Trace: sunce.iskon.hr 1619711018 18504 93.136.92.4 (29 Apr 2021 15:43:38 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: abuse@iskon.hr
NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 29 Apr 2021 15:43:38 +0000 (UTC)
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101
Thunderbird/78.10.0
In-Reply-To: <c7GdnZRWqtPxTBf9nZ2dnUU7-SOdnZ2d@giganews.com>
Content-Language: en-US
 by: Mario Petrinovic - Thu, 29 Apr 2021 15:43 UTC

On 29.4.2021. 17:31, John Harshman wrote:
> On 4/28/21 8:54 PM, Mario Petrinovic wrote:
>> On 29.4.2021. 1:45, John Harshman wrote:
>>> On 4/28/21 2:57 PM, Mario Petrinovic wrote:
>>>> On 28.4.2021. 22:35, John Harshman wrote:
>>>>> On 4/28/21 11:18 AM, Mario Petrinovic wrote:
>>>>>> On 28.4.2021. 19:36, John Harshman wrote:
>>>>>>> On 4/28/21 8:44 AM, Mario Petrinovic wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 28.4.2021. 17:11, John Harshman wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On 4/28/21 7:47 AM, Mario Petrinovic wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> On 28.4.2021. 15:04, John Harshman wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> On 4/28/21 5:41 AM, Mario Petrinovic wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> On 28.4.2021. 2:05, nyik...@gmail.com wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi, Mario!  I hope you didn't give up waiting around for me
>>>>>>>>>>>>> and are still reading s.b.p.
>>>>>>>>>>>>> I didn't emerge anywhere on Usenet for three and a half
>>>>>>>>>>>>> months of 2021, and then
>>>>>>>>>>>>> I put in a few sporadic posts to talk.origins. But it's
>>>>>>>>>>>>> close to a week since I was there last,
>>>>>>>>>>>>> and this is my first post of 2021 to sci.bio.paleontology.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Saturday, April 3, 2021 at 2:16:47 PM UTC-4, Mario
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Petrinovic wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 3.4.2021. 15:42, Oxyaena wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 4/2/2021 11:09 PM, John Harshman wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 4/2/21 6:06 PM, Mario Petrinovic wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Just like I said it here, so many months (or could it be,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> years?) ago.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> So many new scientific ideas originated in my head, but
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> nobody, ever, gives me any credit for this (except for
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> few people).
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Fortunately, I am well enough known in several branches of
>>>>>>>>>>>>> mathematics not to
>>>>>>>>>>>>> be concerned about getting credit for general ideas,
>>>>>>>>>>>>> anywhere. For instance, I thought
>>>>>>>>>>>>> I had coined the term "mega-evolution" to denote evolution
>>>>>>>>>>>>> that produces new orders,
>>>>>>>>>>>>> classes, or phyla of animals, plants, or fungi.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> That makes it the most interesting kind of macroevolution,
>>>>>>>>>>>>> which some take to
>>>>>>>>>>>>> mean "speciation".
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Anyway, Hemidactylus surprised me by posting a
>>>>>>>>>>>>> once-in-a-blue moon (for him)
>>>>>>>>>>>>> on-topic post in talk.origins, telling me that George
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Gaylord Simpson had coined
>>>>>>>>>>>>> the word long ago -- perhaps even before I was born.  But I
>>>>>>>>>>>>> didn't mind.
>>>>>>>>>>>>> In fact, I was sort of relieved to learn that a world-class
>>>>>>>>>>>>> evolutionary theorist
>>>>>>>>>>>>> had come up with the term, but I'll save the reason why for
>>>>>>>>>>>>> another post.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-56617409
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> But that isn't what the story says. You have it exactly
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> backwards.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Harshman often hides behind the claim that he has a bad
>>>>>>>>>>>>> memory,
>>>>>>>>>>>>> but here he shows that he remembers something I didn't. You
>>>>>>>>>>>>> said nothing in your OP  that could be construed as backwards
>>>>>>>>>>>>> from the following.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The story says that the asteroid impact caused dinosaur
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> extinction, and
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the absence of dinosaurs could have resulted in a change
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> in the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> character of Amazon forests.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> It's some of both, but the article definitely leans in
>>>>>>>>>>>>> John's direction. But, to use a colloquialism,
>>>>>>>>>>>>> that has diddly-squat to do with the ACTUAL relative
>>>>>>>>>>>>> strength of the two directions.
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Problem is, I may be missing out on some fine points of the
>>>>>>>>>>>>> opposite direction that you had, Mario.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Now Oxyaena puts in her two cents' worth:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Well, I mean, the extinction *did* result in a turnover
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of flora and
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> fauna, and for a not-insignificant period of time there
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> were no large
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> herbivores to affect the Amazon's plant life, and by
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> extension, the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> world's. Just because biodiversity will invariably
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> recover after a mass
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> extinction doesn't mean that said biodiversity will be of
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the same
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> character as it was prior to the extinction event in
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> question.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Harshman has been showing less and less interest in
>>>>>>>>>>>>> exploring scientific
>>>>>>>>>>>>> issues, so he hasn't replied to either Oxyaena or to you.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> As for Oxyaena, she started her own new thread on the
>>>>>>>>>>>>> extinction less
>>>>>>>>>>>>> than 15 minutes after posting the above, but Harshman'
>>>>>>>>>>>>> never showed
>>>>>>>>>>>>> interest in it. In fact, nobody has posted there after that
>>>>>>>>>>>>> OP of hers.
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Not even her comrade-in-arms, Erik Simpson.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> It should have been (of the same character). I discussed
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> this already
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (with Peter, I believe). There is no reason for herbivores
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to evolve out
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of mammals, and it took 10 million years for mammals to
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> acquire that
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> niche, if you already had seeds of dinosaur herbivores
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> alive. Why would
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> life wait for 10 million years for mammals to adapt for
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that, dinos were
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> already adapted?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> There actually were mammalian herbivores that survived the
>>>>>>>>>>>>> K-T extinction,
>>>>>>>>>>>>> among the Multituberculata and a number of other
>>>>>>>>>>>>> now-extinct branches of
>>>>>>>>>>>>> mammalia.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> But if you are thinking of *large* herbivores, yes, I
>>>>>>>>>>>>> believe the first really
>>>>>>>>>>>>> large ones were among the Pantodonta, and it took them 10
>>>>>>>>>>>>> million years to get to that point.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> No, this was a system failure. Failure of the character
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that prevented
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> plants which couldn't reach the sunlight to grow, and this
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> is what,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> actually, killed *all* the dinosaurs, without leaving
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> pockets of them
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> alive, here or there. And that happened when avian
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> dinosaurs (or, I
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> would say, dinosaurs which had bills) survived.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> You ought to be a little more specific here: "survived"
>>>>>>>>>>>>> doesn't hit the spot.
>>>>>>>>>>>>> "Evolved into more fearsome forms" might be closer to what
>>>>>>>>>>>>> you had in mind, Mario.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> There are other problems with what you wrote in the
>>>>>>>>>>>>> preceding sentence, but I need to get
>>>>>>>>>>>>> back to grading the last test I've given ca. 75 students,
>>>>>>>>>>>>> so I'll tackle them another day, hopefully tomorrow.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>          Thanks, Peter.
>>>>>>>>>>>>          Well, so far I don't see a problem here. They did
>>>>>>>>>>>> survive, and they did evolve, everybody who survives
>>>>>>>>>>>> evolves. The point is, they didn't go extinct. You don't go
>>>>>>>>>>>> extinct without a reason. Herbivores of mammalian type
>>>>>>>>>>>> didn't go extinct (as you mentioned), large herbivores of
>>>>>>>>>>>> mammalian type didn't exist (as far as I can grasp), or, at
>>>>>>>>>>>> least, didn't exist in areas where they emerged 10 my later.
>>>>>>>>>>>> The fact is that all fern eaters of a dino type (and their
>>>>>>>>>>>> predators) went extinct, while not all dinos went extinct.
>>>>>>>>>>>> So, the problem was in eating ferns.
>>>>>>>>>>>>          The fact that ecology changed is in tune with that.
>>>>>>>>>>>> The question was, did ecology change because of dinos went
>>>>>>>>>>>> extinct? There is no reason for just a specific type of
>>>>>>>>>>>> dinos to go extinct, or, at least, nobody mentioned it
>>>>>>>>>>>> anywhere, nobody knows for the reason, there is no theory
>>>>>>>>>>>> about that reason, there is no idea about the reason, there
>>>>>>>>>>>> is no just-so story about the reason, absolutely nothing,
>>>>>>>>>>>> there is only a "possibility" that this could have happened
>>>>>>>>>>>> (but no reason for that). I mean, there is a possibility
>>>>>>>>>>>> that life on Earth was started by aliens, but, hey, are we
>>>>>>>>>>>> at that level of reasoning? Or, is science on that level of
>>>>>>>>>>>> reasoning? If it shouldn't be, then why it behaves like they
>>>>>>>>>>>> are on that level?
>>>>>>>>>>>>          On the other hand, there could be some reason for
>>>>>>>>>>>> ecology to change. My *idea* is that plants that crave for
>>>>>>>>>>>> sunlight already evolved at poles (definitely there is some
>>>>>>>>>>>> logic in it). The impact created the lack of sunlight (there
>>>>>>>>>>>> were already some theories about that), so the plants that
>>>>>>>>>>>> are able to collect more sunlight prevailed over ferns. This
>>>>>>>>>>>> is one simple and logical explanation for this mechanism.
>>>>>>>>>>>> For the mechanism that only some types of dinosaurs went
>>>>>>>>>>>> extinct there is no explanation of mechanism.
>>>>>>>>>>>>          I believe that I am clear enough.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> How is that group coming along?
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>          Ah, thanks, :). Besides me there are two more
>>>>>>>>>>>> members, Daud Deden and Marc Verhaegen, but there is no
>>>>>>>>>>>> discussion going on at all. So far I am happy, this is a
>>>>>>>>>>>> good start, :) .
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> One problem with your theory is the post-Cretaceous "fern
>>>>>>>>>>> spike". For a short time after the impact ferns dominated the
>>>>>>>>>>> terrestrial vegetation. Another problem is that the poles get
>>>>>>>>>>> much less sunlight than the tropics, so plants that "crave
>>>>>>>>>>> for" sunlight would be less likely to be located there than
>>>>>>>>>>> elsewhere. And third, the post-K-T lack of sunlight could
>>>>>>>>>>> have lasted a couple of years at most. Finally, you have no
>>>>>>>>>>> evidence that herbivorous dinosaurs were dependent on ferns,
>>>>>>>>>>> which seems very unlikely on its face.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> There also are theories about why the dinosaurs and not birds
>>>>>>>>>>> or mammals went extinct. They were large. If, as is commonly
>>>>>>>>>>> thought, extinctions mostly happened as a result of radiant
>>>>>>>>>>> heat from the sky resulting from the re-entry of small
>>>>>>>>>>> ejecta, big animals would be less able to hide under rocks
>>>>>>>>>>> and in burrows than small ones. And there you have the filter
>>>>>>>>>>> to explain the extinction.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>          Thanks John.
>>>>>>>>>>          "Fern spike", I'll have to examine this.
>>>>>>>>>>          Not necessarily "crave" for sunlight, but definitely
>>>>>>>>>> being better in scooping the sunlight. Like hemoglobin in
>>>>>>>>>> blood, which extracts oxygen. If oxygen levels fall, obviously
>>>>>>>>>> the animals adapted to low levels will thrive.
>>>>>>>>>>          A couple of years could be enough.
>>>>>>>>>>          I believe the teeth of dinosaurs were adapted just to
>>>>>>>>>> strip ferns (but I am not sure about it).
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Yeah, you should check out the fern spike. Do you have any
>>>>>>>>> evidence that arctic plants are better at scooping up sunlight
>>>>>>>>> than tropical ones? You should probably check out the
>>>>>>>>> difference between C3 and C4 plants. And no, a couple of years
>>>>>>>>> isn't enough at all; you should probably check out the term
>>>>>>>>> "seed bank". In general, you should learn something about
>>>>>>>>> botany. And what you believe about the teeth of dinosaurs is
>>>>>>>>> not supported by anything that I know of and, I strongly
>>>>>>>>> suspect, not anything that you know of.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>          I don't need evidence that at poles you would have,
>>>>>>>> both, plants and animals adapted to better scoop sunlight.
>>>>>>>>          I know the difference between C3 and C4 pathways, but I
>>>>>>>> don't see your point.
>>>>>>>>          About the teeth I heard, in one documentary, a long
>>>>>>>> time ago. And, it looks logical. Those teeth look like they are
>>>>>>>> for stripping ferns, those dinosaurs ate ferns, so, I would
>>>>>>>> presume that they are adapted to eat it. I see no problem in
>>>>>>>> this, whichever way you put it.
>>>>>>>>          Regarding "a couple of years", here it is a scenario
>>>>>>>> for "many years", and it involves what you just said. Yes,
>>>>>>>> dinosaurs were pretty damaged by the event. All the dinosaurs,
>>>>>>>> all the birds, all other animals, all plants, everybody. The
>>>>>>>> question is why some dinosaurs actually went extinct.
>>>>>>>>          The answer is in trees. Narrow canopy trees didn't grow
>>>>>>>> anymore? Why? Well, ferns deprived them from sunlight. In normal
>>>>>>>> conditions those ferns were eaten by dinosaurs. But now,
>>>>>>>> dinosaurs were very damaged, not a lot of dinosaurs left. So,
>>>>>>>> not a lot of narrow canopy trees grew among all those uneaten
>>>>>>>> ferns. But, some other types of trees were better adapted to the
>>>>>>>> conditions, so those types of trees started to grow. And those
>>>>>>>> types overwhelmed ferns.
>>>>>>>>          I'll take a look at what happens after fern spike in
>>>>>>>> real world, what kind of plants grow in such a situation, and why.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> C4 plants are the ones adapted to high temperature, high
>>>>>>> insolation environments, and they're the plants that are most
>>>>>>> efficient at photosynthesis in such environments. Needless to
>>>>>>> say, they aren't found at the poles.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I will have to agree that if you heard something in a documentary
>>>>>>> some time long ago it must be true and is decisive confirmation
>>>>>>> for your theory.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Then again, your theory is hopelessly confused. The dinosaurs
>>>>>>> kept the ferns down? The ferns kept the angiosperms from growing?
>>>>>>> The angiosperms killed ferns and that killed the dinosaurs? What?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>          Well, it may be complicated, but, of course, this is why
>>>>>> it isn't obvious, and this is why this is still a question that
>>>>>> needs the answer.
>>>>>>          I know that this story is much simpler, asteroid came,
>>>>>> and killed just the right animals. Nice and simple, just like 'God
>>>>>> said: Let there be light.", and it was light.'. Everybody likes
>>>>>> simple explanations. Sheer beauty.
>>>>>>          So, simple is nice, complicated is complicated. The only
>>>>>> problem is, simple has no logic, and the complicated way has much
>>>>>> more sense, and it is a better theory.
>>>>>>
>>>>> Please provide a coherent and complete explanation of your theory,
>>>>> which you have never managed to do so far. Try to use complete
>>>>> sentences with grammatical English, as best you can. Try to provide
>>>>> a clear cause-and-effect scenario.
>>>>
>>>>          But why? Use what you've got. You should be more than
>>>> satisfied with what I already provided.
>>>
>>> No, what you've already provided is disjointed and incoherent. If
>>> that's the best you can do, then there's nowhere to go.
>>>
>>>>          I thank you for all your help, but I cannot work by
>>>> providing "coherent and complete explanation". This isn't actually
>>>> my theory, I am trying to figure out what actually happened.
>>>>          I cannot concentrate on my work if I am concentrating on
>>>> how this will sound to English speaking people.
>>>>          Clear cause-and-effect scenario I can provide for my launch
>>>> (I cooked it, I ate it), how to provide clear cause-and-effect
>>>> scenario for something I know so little about, and which happened 66
>>>> mya? I am doing the best I can.
>>>
>>> If so, that's unfortunate.
>>
>>          Yes, I agree.
>>          This is similar to that Nazism/communism discussion that we
>> had recently. I am liberal democrat, but if I am discussing
>> Nazism/communism I, simply, *have to* say that Nazism is better than
>> communism. Now, I knew that 100 % of people will immediately call me a
>> nazist, simply, because I said that, but, I didn't have a choice, I
>> had to be right. I learnt a long time ago (remember, I am the sole
>> soul that claims that the West is the best, in a country full with
>> people who claim that the East is the best) that, if seven billion
>> people says one thing, and I say the other thing, and if I am the
>> right one, I, alone, am stronger than seven billion people. And, if I
>> cannot get along with seven billion people, that's really
>> unfortunate,... for them.
>>          So, you are asking me to *bias* my ideas towards that they
>> are perceived more clearly by the rest, but, if I am biasing my
>> thinking, this will steer me away from the truth. I don't want to do
>> that, because doing this, I am, actually, wasting my time.
>>          And, lastly, notice this, I am doing all this in your
>> language, and I am not complaining. You are communicating with me in
>> your language, and you are full with complains. Try to complain in
>> Croatian, so that I have a little laugh, ;) .
>>
> I'm sorry, but that was an insane rant.


Click here to read the complete article
Pages:12
server_pubkey.txt

rocksolid light 0.9.7
clearnet tor