Did Dinosaurs live with man?

Now, how dense a learned skull can be? - wonders the Cheshire. How do you mean you have got a "fact" about dragons here, Vatican? There is no single eternal fact in science. Any presentation includes a number of interpreted assumptions taken by the presenter and the audience for granted for the sake of enjoying the exchange of presentations in hope of possible understanding. Those may be called facts for the sake of that particular presentation only. The "facts" are not doubted and examined by the presenter and the audience any too much simply because if each and every assumption were to be thoroughly examined first, no presentation of a hypothesis would be possible at all. No theorising would ever be started. That is all there is to the "facts", Vatican.

The feline is envious of your certainty, Vatican. You've got such a lovely timetable there to believe in. A pyramid with the wolves, rabbits and simians on top. Accelerating towards the apex. You believe to know who went with and who went without who and how many of those going with and without were there and for how long they all kept going with and without. The Cheshire knows nothing of the sort. All he knows is that most are food to be eaten and fossils is but food beyond reach of any. What fraction of it is ever beyond reach of any? And for how long? And who knows what is the real rate of food decay and disintegration? And what is the longest distance beyond which there is no trace of any memory at all? What is the exact rate of forgetting, Vatican? - wonders the moggy.

Come on, Coy Boy, let's face it, it's only a random chance you and the cat don't agree on everything. The feline could easily be a good crypto-creo atheist quackademician with the back for you to pat. Or you could have been a contrary crank joining the cat in deriding the quackademia. You never know who you could have been.

The only point the feline is pursuing here is spreading some doubt and confusion about the current quackademic dogma on dragons, Larn. So as to encourage more consideration and research about the issue. The Cheshire is a curious cat, he is quite intrigued by the dinosaur business and he would love to hear more different proposals to explain the fate of the beasts.

Inadequate, I know you lot's brains are fossilised so the state of current quackademic dogma can be examined by its student through simple picking of them on any subject. The cat is not as naive as to hope to have seeded any doubt in that mineralised area. But there are visitors here outnumbering you presumptuous baboonish lot. Birds are birds and dragons are dragons for the purposes of the feline. In any case, any such classifications and categorising is to be taken with a pinch of salt.
Also it is unfortunate, that it is only bible-pushers who carry on any doubt on this particular issue. The rest seem to be impressed with the quacks' assurance the quackademia have already figured it out once and for all. The feline would love to see those without either type of preconceptions joining the doubters. Simians like Charles Hapgood who had a lovely hypothesis to explain those phenomena. What do you reckon about Hapgood's ideas, Inadequate? Lovely, aren't they? It's actually Newton who first outlined the concept of shifting crust, if you don't know that.Edited by Alfred Maddenstein, : No reason given.

Inadequate, why do you care so much about irrelevant issues? The Cheshire's being possibly mad and the bible-pushers being possibly wrong should be the least of your concerns and aspirations. As it is, you lot are hopelessly fixated on the bible and bible-pushers. You are totally dependent on them having no autonomous being of your own. You need to relax and cut the umbilical belt chaining you to the bible, Inadequate.

What delusions about you and the dragons does the cat have, Inadequate? It's you who got firm opinions on those two subjects - the dragons and yourself. Not the feline. The feline can't have his opinions any too firm. He is investigating these issues while having firm opinions on anything interferes with any inquiry. Your opinions may be very delusionary or not. They are not quite yours anyway. They are the current official line on what you and dragons are that you need to toe in your line of business to remain functional in its framework. You have little choice about what you have to assert and what you can have any doubts about. You can't question and investigate certain official figures and facts for yourself, can you? Even if you wanted to which you might not. Maybe you can on the sly. Doing it in the open will cost you your teaching job or whatever learned post you occupy.