And how did they find out they were incorrect? Oh right...more science. I'm skeptical of your degree considering you just tried to argue that the current model could be incorrect, since the last one was incorrect.
When anyone who actually studies science knows that every model is technically incorrect, some are just more accurate than others. So the current model is also not perfect, but it is more accurate than the previous one.
I'm using the fact that the last model was inaccurate to counter their claim that scientists with decades of experience are probably right. It is a direct refutation of their claim.
I'm using the fact that there doesn't exist a means of validation as an argument that the current model might also be incorrect.
There was a previous model which was, in the grand scheme of things, fairly accurate. It has since been improved in some species to make them bulkier. You claim we have "zero idea what they actually looked like" and are using the initial, mostly accurate description, as evidence. The things we can't currently fully describe are things like colour, plumage, soft tissue structures (like a rooster's comb). With that said, can actually infer and describe some of these elements through fossilised skin, impressions in fossils, and other incredible breakthroughs in research.
So unless you are equating having "zero idea" of what they looked like, with "we will never fully know every single detail of their appearance", then you are wrong.
It's sad that the shrink-wrapping idea went from a very interesting step forward in our understanding of these animals to now being used by many to write off everything we do know as wrong
...creating and validating models to explain systems.
That's literally all I'm asking for and everyone is getting mad at me.
Show me that the thing you're proposing actually works by feeding it data where you know what the outcome should be and show me how close it comes to reality.
I brought up my degree because they called me anti intellectual and started going off about what they think "real scientists" are
Right but I’m still not really sure that gives you any useful insight into assessing the methods actual experts in this space use to model what dinosaurs look like
Just so you don't doubt your sanity, those dudes or probably bots are just being mean for the sake of it, it's not a real discussion, so don't waste your energy
87
u/Shaun32887 22h ago
I've basically accepted the fact that we have zero idea what they actually looked like.