4 ms·

"They obviously are wrong in this case, as you can see if you take a look to the photos." I believe they might be wrong too, but using the term "obviously" bas

by soneca 8y ago

"They obviously are wrong in this case, as you can see if you take a look to the photos." I believe they might be wrong too, but using the term "obviously" based on a look to the photos of an article is just arrogant. No matter if you are right in the future about they being wrong.

dkersten 8y ago
I've also come to learn that many things that seem obvious to a layperson often turn out to be false. So just because something seems obvious to somebody or common sense seems to suggest something or their gut instinct says so, really doesn't make it true.
puranjay 8y ago
"X looks like Y, thus, it must be made by Y" - that's the kind of inane logic I see on so many YouTube conspiracy videos. It's absurd to assume that just because something looks like something to a layperson, an expert would see them in the same way. Not to mention that this line of logic has been used by everything from conspiracy nuts to eugenicists
- Uhhrrr 8y ago
  And also the original article.
  - DonHopkins 8y ago
    So you're saying that you know for a fact that Amilcar Adamy, a geologist with the Brazilian Geological Survey (known by its Portuguese acronym, CPRM), is actually a layperson? What evidence do you have that he was lying about his qualifications and actually is a layperson who has no idea what he's talking about? Are you an expert in spotting fraudulent researchers who lie about their qualifications in multiple magazine articles and peer reviewed scientific publications? What are your own qualifications in that field, and can you prove your accusations? Or are you doing exactly what you're baselessly accusing someone else of doing, without any evidence? Do you have an instinct for debunking fake science? Is his biography and all these research papers and articles he's published fake too? If it's not true, somebody sure went to quite a lot of effort to perpetrate this fraud... What do you think their motivations were? Perhaps you should report him? https://www.escavador.com/sobre/2015231/amilcar-adamy https://www.escavador.com/sobre/2015231/amilcar-adamy https://www.linkedin.com/in/amilcar-adamy-90b71b25/?originalSubdomain=br https://www.linkedin.com/in/amilcar-adamy-90b71b25/?original... https://nl.pinterest.com/gsarisoy/ https://nl.pinterest.com/gsarisoy/ https://www.natureworldnews.com/articles/36983/20170403/mysterious-megatunnels-in-south-america-were-dug-by-giant-sloths.htm https://www.natureworldnews.com/articles/36983/20170403/myst... https://www.beyondsciencetv.com/2017/07/05/hundreds-of-giant-mysterious-tunnels-discovered-in-brazil/ https://www.beyondsciencetv.com/2017/07/05/hundreds-of-giant... http://www.look4ward.co.uk/animals/giant-tunnels-in-south-america-dug-by-ancient-mega-sloths/ http://www.look4ward.co.uk/animals/giant-tunnels-in-south-am... https://www.iflscience.com/plants-and-animals/extinct-megafauna-dug-these-incredible-tunnels-in-brazil/ https://www.iflscience.com/plants-and-animals/extinct-megafa...
    - Uhhrrr 8y ago
      He literally says, "Although the exact identity of the producers of the burrows is yet unknown, the dimensions and morphology point to ground sloths and giant armadillos." https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/10420940.2016.1223654?scroll=top&needAccess=true https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/10420940.2016.1... That is exactly "Looks like Y, must be made by Y." I'm not saying it's a bad heuristic. It's fine for coming up with ideas. But they apparently haven't yet found bones or fossilized poop or other signs of habitation by giant fauna.
      - dragonwriter 8y ago
        > I'm not saying it's a bad heuristic. It's fine for coming up with ideas. But they apparently haven't yet found bones or fossilized poop or other signs of habitation by giant fauna. Technically, finding that where you'd expect to find it were they the diggers is still “Looks like Y, must be Y”. Fundamentally, that's the only way to draw conclusions about a process you aren't directly observing. Heck, even conclusions from direct observation are quite literally “Looks like Y, must be Y”.
      - DonHopkins 8y ago
        And that makes him not an expert but actually a layperson and an incompetent liar about his credentials how? Did you directly observe that he's lying about his expertise? Can you refer me to someone more qualified, with a time machine, who directly observed what happened millions of years ago, and disagrees with him?
  - posterboy 8y ago
    Which is pretty much just a travel report so it doesn't wield much authority.

by soneca 8y ago

dkersten 8y ago

I've also come to learn that many things that seem obvious to a layperson often turn out to be false. So just because something seems obvious to somebody or common sense seems to suggest something or their gut instinct says so, really doesn't make it true.

puranjay 8y ago

"X looks like Y, thus, it must be made by Y" - that's the kind of inane logic I see on so many YouTube conspiracy videos. It's absurd to assume that just because something looks like something to a layperson, an expert would see them in the same way. Not to mention that this line of logic has been used by everything from conspiracy nuts to eugenicists

Uhhrrr 8y ago
And also the original article.
- DonHopkins 8y ago
  So you're saying that you know for a fact that Amilcar Adamy, a geologist with the Brazilian Geological Survey (known by its Portuguese acronym, CPRM), is actually a layperson? What evidence do you have that he was lying about his qualifications and actually is a layperson who has no idea what he's talking about? Are you an expert in spotting fraudulent researchers who lie about their qualifications in multiple magazine articles and peer reviewed scientific publications? What are your own qualifications in that field, and can you prove your accusations? Or are you doing exactly what you're baselessly accusing someone else of doing, without any evidence? Do you have an instinct for debunking fake science? Is his biography and all these research papers and articles he's published fake too? If it's not true, somebody sure went to quite a lot of effort to perpetrate this fraud... What do you think their motivations were? Perhaps you should report him? https://www.escavador.com/sobre/2015231/amilcar-adamy https://www.escavador.com/sobre/2015231/amilcar-adamy https://www.linkedin.com/in/amilcar-adamy-90b71b25/?originalSubdomain=br https://www.linkedin.com/in/amilcar-adamy-90b71b25/?original... https://nl.pinterest.com/gsarisoy/ https://nl.pinterest.com/gsarisoy/ https://www.natureworldnews.com/articles/36983/20170403/mysterious-megatunnels-in-south-america-were-dug-by-giant-sloths.htm https://www.natureworldnews.com/articles/36983/20170403/myst... https://www.beyondsciencetv.com/2017/07/05/hundreds-of-giant-mysterious-tunnels-discovered-in-brazil/ https://www.beyondsciencetv.com/2017/07/05/hundreds-of-giant... http://www.look4ward.co.uk/animals/giant-tunnels-in-south-america-dug-by-ancient-mega-sloths/ http://www.look4ward.co.uk/animals/giant-tunnels-in-south-am... https://www.iflscience.com/plants-and-animals/extinct-megafauna-dug-these-incredible-tunnels-in-brazil/ https://www.iflscience.com/plants-and-animals/extinct-megafa...
  - Uhhrrr 8y ago
    He literally says, "Although the exact identity of the producers of the burrows is yet unknown, the dimensions and morphology point to ground sloths and giant armadillos." https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/10420940.2016.1223654?scroll=top&needAccess=true https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/10420940.2016.1... That is exactly "Looks like Y, must be made by Y." I'm not saying it's a bad heuristic. It's fine for coming up with ideas. But they apparently haven't yet found bones or fossilized poop or other signs of habitation by giant fauna.
    - dragonwriter 8y ago
      > I'm not saying it's a bad heuristic. It's fine for coming up with ideas. But they apparently haven't yet found bones or fossilized poop or other signs of habitation by giant fauna. Technically, finding that where you'd expect to find it were they the diggers is still “Looks like Y, must be Y”. Fundamentally, that's the only way to draw conclusions about a process you aren't directly observing. Heck, even conclusions from direct observation are quite literally “Looks like Y, must be Y”.
    - DonHopkins 8y ago
      And that makes him not an expert but actually a layperson and an incompetent liar about his credentials how? Did you directly observe that he's lying about his expertise? Can you refer me to someone more qualified, with a time machine, who directly observed what happened millions of years ago, and disagrees with him?
- posterboy 8y ago
  Which is pretty much just a travel report so it doesn't wield much authority.