hazpat t1_j5kmklt wrote
Reply to comment by mr_jim_lahey in Trilobite tridents could be the oldest evidence of male sexual combat — Fighting for mates may be a behaviour that dates back over 400 million years by marketrent
Are you an author on this? You sound offended that a person can use the same visual comparison techniques as the authors and come up with a different speculation. Each time you redundantly quote the article, it is a section that uses visual assessment to say the structures on these aquatic creatures "looks like" what land creatures use in combat.
In your opinion once an article is published it can't be incorrect and nobody should question it? Jenny McCarthy vibes on that.
mr_jim_lahey t1_j5kqstq wrote
The thing I find offensive is the arrogance and disrespect for science in general to think that your non-expert, non-peer reviewed opinion that is specifically and methodically refuted in great detail by actual experts who wrote an actual peer-reviewed paper holds any weight. It's like telling an astronomer that they're wrong about the earth orbiting the sun because to you it looks like the sun is going around the earth.
hazpat t1_j5lfmm5 wrote
You realize they say multiple times they need more evidence to support their hypothesis right?. They aren't even sure if the species exhibits sexual dimorphism. You seem hyper invested in these authors initial untested hypothesis, you also seem to keep assuming this article has to be true because of peer review... it's literally a hypothesis open for discussion
[deleted] t1_j5lm65w wrote
[removed]
Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments