Talk:2990: Late Cenozoic - Revision history

82.132.245.50 at 15:45, 22 July 2025

2025-07-22T15:45:38Z

Psychoticpotato at 16:03, 8 October 2024

2024-10-08T16:03:23Z

172.68.205.165 at 12:08, 1 October 2024

2024-10-01T12:08:39Z

162.158.41.229: arrrgh

2024-10-01T08:57:52Z

arrrgh

162.158.74.119 at 21:16, 30 September 2024

2024-09-30T21:16:48Z

172.69.214.109: An ancient museum has been dug up, at least once.

2024-09-30T13:27:59Z

An ancient museum has been dug up, at least once.

172.70.90.34 at 13:47, 28 September 2024

2024-09-28T13:47:51Z

NiceGuy1 at 06:55, 28 September 2024

2024-09-28T06:55:00Z

172.69.195.93 at 23:27, 26 September 2024

2024-09-26T23:27:43Z

Anthonyeleven: Genera

2024-09-26T21:19:04Z

Genera

← Older revision		Revision as of 15:45, 22 July 2025
Line 51:		Line 51:

	This makes me wonder what they'd think about graveyards. "Why are they in such neat lines? Were there mass-suicide sites for this species?" -[[User:Psychoticpotato\|P?sych??otic?pot??at???o ]] ([[User talk:Psychoticpotato\|talk]]) 16:03, 8 October 2024 (UTC)		This makes me wonder what they'd think about graveyards. "Why are they in such neat lines? Were there mass-suicide sites for this species?" -[[User:Psychoticpotato\|P?sych??otic?pot??at???o ]] ([[User talk:Psychoticpotato\|talk]]) 16:03, 8 October 2024 (UTC)
		+
		+	From an xenoergonomic perspective, just to clarify an edit right now. The lecturing alien/futurekind was written as sitting on a desk, the student ones were written as sitting on stools as high as the desk. From the tentacular bodyplan of these beings, it's clear that there's no benefit to have a separate work-platform (tabletop) as a separate and higher surface to a seating platform (the seat of a seat, with or without backrest). That they require furniture at all might only be a cultural thing about raising themselves above the flat ground that they could otherwise happily both sit and work upon.<br/>
		+	Furthermore, tables and chairs (including stools) can be splay-legged, have a solid mass (or enclosed cavity) or a singular central column (with either direct floor-fixing or splayed foot, for balance/stability), so we can't really define these furniture items as ''either'' tables or stools (let alone different, just from the hierarchy of their users). Functionally, they are 'whatever these creatures call their seating/working platforms' (distinctions from the importance of who uses them might ellicit similar words to throne vs. chair or desk vs. workbench, but we are already without information about such potential sociological distinction). By form, they clearly vary, but that could be for reasons far subtler than status (heavier 'teaching bench' that always acts as the dias at the front, more slender-legged 'learning benches' that might be moved around more, or even be pneumatically retracted into the floor, according to the needs of the class being taught).<br/>
		+	That they're at the ''same height'' is interesting (no perceived need to raise the tutor above the students, beyond any intrinsic bodyheight advantage, so not akin to a pulpit looking down upon a congregation or a monarchical seat of power symbolically towering over over the gathered subjects), but doesn't really resolve the sociological or symbolic mysteries behind why this classroom's furniture is ''sort'' of understandable from an anthropogenic perspective. Enough to convey the necessary scenario, though not enough to learn whether heights, widths and other design elements actually ''mean'' something, beyond practicality, or if (unseen) seating with even more importance might have {{w\|Peacock Throne\|further features}} to mark them (and their occupants) out against the less lavihly seated (or ground-standing) attendants to the scene. [[Special:Contributions/82.132.245.50\|82.132.245.50]] 15:45, 22 July 2025 (UTC)

← Older revision		Revision as of 16:03, 8 October 2024
Line 49:		Line 49:
	:Depends which bits you think aren't relevant. Someone thinks it's relevant that fossils ''can'' be found beyond their original era. Something thinks it's relevant that humans ''are'' probably imminently extinct. Someone thinks it's relevent to actually explain how stratological timelines are established in the first place. You could always remove something that you think isn't supposed to be there (but, equally, it's likely that someone else thought that it should be, and others may agree, disagree or not mind either way).		:Depends which bits you think aren't relevant. Someone thinks it's relevant that fossils ''can'' be found beyond their original era. Something thinks it's relevant that humans ''are'' probably imminently extinct. Someone thinks it's relevent to actually explain how stratological timelines are established in the first place. You could always remove something that you think isn't supposed to be there (but, equally, it's likely that someone else thought that it should be, and others may agree, disagree or not mind either way).
	:Sentiment appreciated, but it's like "there's too many instances of a certain letter", without even hinting which one it is you dislike. [[Special:Contributions/172.68.205.165\|172.68.205.165]] 12:08, 1 October 2024 (UTC)		:Sentiment appreciated, but it's like "there's too many instances of a certain letter", without even hinting which one it is you dislike. [[Special:Contributions/172.68.205.165\|172.68.205.165]] 12:08, 1 October 2024 (UTC)
		+
		+	This makes me wonder what they'd think about graveyards. "Why are they in such neat lines? Were there mass-suicide sites for this species?" -[[User:Psychoticpotato\|P?sych??otic?pot??at???o ]] ([[User talk:Psychoticpotato\|talk]]) 16:03, 8 October 2024 (UTC)

← Older revision		Revision as of 12:08, 1 October 2024
Line 47:		Line 47:

	Why is the explanation SO LONG and BARELY RELEVANT?!? [[Special:Contributions/162.158.41.229\|162.158.41.229]]		Why is the explanation SO LONG and BARELY RELEVANT?!? [[Special:Contributions/162.158.41.229\|162.158.41.229]]
		+	:Depends which bits you think aren't relevant. Someone thinks it's relevant that fossils ''can'' be found beyond their original era. Something thinks it's relevant that humans ''are'' probably imminently extinct. Someone thinks it's relevent to actually explain how stratological timelines are established in the first place. You could always remove something that you think isn't supposed to be there (but, equally, it's likely that someone else thought that it should be, and others may agree, disagree or not mind either way).
		+	:Sentiment appreciated, but it's like "there's too many instances of a certain letter", without even hinting which one it is you dislike. [[Special:Contributions/172.68.205.165\|172.68.205.165]] 12:08, 1 October 2024 (UTC)

← Older revision		Revision as of 08:57, 1 October 2024
Line 45:		Line 45:
	In the 1920s, archeologists dug up the 2500 year old museum of Ennigaldi-Nanna (see: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ennigaldi-Nanna%27s_museum). Apparently this was actually very confusing, until they noticed the labels. {{unsigned ip\|172.69.214.109\|13:27, 30 September 2024}}		In the 1920s, archeologists dug up the 2500 year old museum of Ennigaldi-Nanna (see: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ennigaldi-Nanna%27s_museum). Apparently this was actually very confusing, until they noticed the labels. {{unsigned ip\|172.69.214.109\|13:27, 30 September 2024}}
	:...a hint to that editor (above and beyond the one to sign), and others. Use the {{template\|w}}-template for wikilinks. Actual active examples abound, as it's probably one of the more commonly used templates in explainxkcd pages, but you could have used <code><nowiki>{{w\|Ennigaldi-Nanna's museum}}</nowiki></code> to give: {{w\|Ennigaldi-Nanna's museum}} ... [[Special:Contributions/162.158.74.119\|162.158.74.119]] 21:16, 30 September 2024 (UTC)		:...a hint to that editor (above and beyond the one to sign), and others. Use the {{template\|w}}-template for wikilinks. Actual active examples abound, as it's probably one of the more commonly used templates in explainxkcd pages, but you could have used <code><nowiki>{{w\|Ennigaldi-Nanna's museum}}</nowiki></code> to give: {{w\|Ennigaldi-Nanna's museum}} ... [[Special:Contributions/162.158.74.119\|162.158.74.119]] 21:16, 30 September 2024 (UTC)
		+
		+	Why is the explanation SO LONG and BARELY RELEVANT?!? [[Special:Contributions/162.158.41.229\|162.158.41.229]]

← Older revision		Revision as of 21:16, 30 September 2024
Line 43:		Line 43:
	:Or so I might suggest, for starters, if I were overanalytical about the comic. ;) [[Special:Contributions/172.70.90.34\|172.70.90.34]] 13:47, 28 September 2024 (UTC)		:Or so I might suggest, for starters, if I were overanalytical about the comic. ;) [[Special:Contributions/172.70.90.34\|172.70.90.34]] 13:47, 28 September 2024 (UTC)

−	In the 1920s, archeologists dug up the 2500 year old museum of Ennigaldi-Nanna (see: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ennigaldi-Nanna%27s_museum). Apparently this was actually very confusing, until they noticed the labels.	+	In the 1920s, archeologists dug up the 2500 year old museum of Ennigaldi-Nanna (see: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ennigaldi-Nanna%27s_museum). Apparently this was actually very confusing, until they noticed the labels. {{unsigned ip\|172.69.214.109\|13:27, 30 September 2024}}
		+	:...a hint to that editor (above and beyond the one to sign), and others. Use the {{template\|w}}-template for wikilinks. Actual active examples abound, as it's probably one of the more commonly used templates in explainxkcd pages, but you could have used <code><nowiki>{{w\|Ennigaldi-Nanna's museum}}</nowiki></code> to give: {{w\|Ennigaldi-Nanna's museum}} ... [[Special:Contributions/162.158.74.119\|162.158.74.119]] 21:16, 30 September 2024 (UTC)

← Older revision		Revision as of 13:27, 30 September 2024
Line 42:		Line 42:
	:In various ways, I'm assuming far enough in the future to make thesevkinds of clues less trivially obvious, at least to the level of paleological understanding these blobs seem to have. In others (the detection of actual H. Sapiens DNA traces, but seemingly not so advanced to wonder about the comparative lack of DNA in the 'twice buried' skeletons), maybe not so far ahead. Unless their science is ''so'' good in some areas (rescue of trace DNA well beyond what we're currently capable of) but with relatively inexplicable gaps (reasonable analysis of the degradations it suffers through both time and circumstances) that N-years-ago vs. (N+65million+more)-years-ago is an apparently insignificant chronological departure.		:In various ways, I'm assuming far enough in the future to make thesevkinds of clues less trivially obvious, at least to the level of paleological understanding these blobs seem to have. In others (the detection of actual H. Sapiens DNA traces, but seemingly not so advanced to wonder about the comparative lack of DNA in the 'twice buried' skeletons), maybe not so far ahead. Unless their science is ''so'' good in some areas (rescue of trace DNA well beyond what we're currently capable of) but with relatively inexplicable gaps (reasonable analysis of the degradations it suffers through both time and circumstances) that N-years-ago vs. (N+65million+more)-years-ago is an apparently insignificant chronological departure.
	:Or so I might suggest, for starters, if I were overanalytical about the comic. ;) [[Special:Contributions/172.70.90.34\|172.70.90.34]] 13:47, 28 September 2024 (UTC)		:Or so I might suggest, for starters, if I were overanalytical about the comic. ;) [[Special:Contributions/172.70.90.34\|172.70.90.34]] 13:47, 28 September 2024 (UTC)
		+
		+	In the 1920s, archeologists dug up the 2500 year old museum of Ennigaldi-Nanna (see: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ennigaldi-Nanna%27s_museum). Apparently this was actually very confusing, until they noticed the labels.

← Older revision		Revision as of 13:47, 28 September 2024
Line 38:		Line 38:

	I'm no expert, but firstly, I would think the fossils keep aging even once unearthed, so that analysis would reveal their actual age, not placing them at modern day (despite what burial depth they were found) and would be more upright than the originals. Secondly, don't museums use things to hold the skeletons in place? Like metal frames? Wouldn't those be present and evident as well, revealing that these skeletons were being held together artificially? Thirdly, with Hallowe'en NEXT month I would think a comic about dinosaur skeletons would have been better NEXT week or later, :) [[User:NiceGuy1\|NiceGuy1]] ([[User talk:NiceGuy1\|talk]]) 06:55, 28 September 2024 (UTC)		I'm no expert, but firstly, I would think the fossils keep aging even once unearthed, so that analysis would reveal their actual age, not placing them at modern day (despite what burial depth they were found) and would be more upright than the originals. Secondly, don't museums use things to hold the skeletons in place? Like metal frames? Wouldn't those be present and evident as well, revealing that these skeletons were being held together artificially? Thirdly, with Hallowe'en NEXT month I would think a comic about dinosaur skeletons would have been better NEXT week or later, :) [[User:NiceGuy1\|NiceGuy1]] ([[User talk:NiceGuy1\|talk]]) 06:55, 28 September 2024 (UTC)
		+	:Those bits of 'fossil' that are not (modern) plaster/resin/etc would tend to be rock (exact details variable, as endocasting, ichnofossilisation and permineralisation are just three ways among many of generating a recognisable fossil from remains). You'd have to do isotope self-replacement analysis to establish the differential between the presumed 'native' strata and the material of the 'bone's. Complicated by the post-WW2 isotope 'blips' (and, if applicable, post-WW3+ and/or cosmic-sourced irradiations from within or beyond humanity's further future).
		+	:Uprightness would depend upon how the museum (itself perhaps significantly made of stone formed prior to the holocene, which might or might not be correctly established) maybe collapsed upon its exhibits. Which <blob-and-tentacle>kind's paleoarchitects may or may not be able to disentangle. Ditto (or, rather, ''correctly'' leave entangled) the wires, brackets and supporting props of all kinds, possibly distinguishable from the roof-work/light fittings superimposed upon the dinosaur skeleton.
		+	:In various ways, I'm assuming far enough in the future to make thesevkinds of clues less trivially obvious, at least to the level of paleological understanding these blobs seem to have. In others (the detection of actual H. Sapiens DNA traces, but seemingly not so advanced to wonder about the comparative lack of DNA in the 'twice buried' skeletons), maybe not so far ahead. Unless their science is ''so'' good in some areas (rescue of trace DNA well beyond what we're currently capable of) but with relatively inexplicable gaps (reasonable analysis of the degradations it suffers through both time and circumstances) that N-years-ago vs. (N+65million+more)-years-ago is an apparently insignificant chronological departure.
		+	:Or so I might suggest, for starters, if I were overanalytical about the comic. ;) [[Special:Contributions/172.70.90.34\|172.70.90.34]] 13:47, 28 September 2024 (UTC)

← Older revision		Revision as of 06:55, 28 September 2024
Line 36:		Line 36:
	Re earlier comments, please spell "pristine" correctly. There has actually been found altered soft tissue, but not DNA as such.		Re earlier comments, please spell "pristine" correctly. There has actually been found altered soft tissue, but not DNA as such.
	Indeed some museum displays are 100% casts, others vary in the amount of original material. My first thought re human DNA was just from visitors coughing, sneezing, and touching but resin prep seems plausible. {{unsigned\|Anthonyeleven\|21:19, 26 September 2024}}		Indeed some museum displays are 100% casts, others vary in the amount of original material. My first thought re human DNA was just from visitors coughing, sneezing, and touching but resin prep seems plausible. {{unsigned\|Anthonyeleven\|21:19, 26 September 2024}}
		+
		+	I'm no expert, but firstly, I would think the fossils keep aging even once unearthed, so that analysis would reveal their actual age, not placing them at modern day (despite what burial depth they were found) and would be more upright than the originals. Secondly, don't museums use things to hold the skeletons in place? Like metal frames? Wouldn't those be present and evident as well, revealing that these skeletons were being held together artificially? Thirdly, with Hallowe'en NEXT month I would think a comic about dinosaur skeletons would have been better NEXT week or later, :) [[User:NiceGuy1\|NiceGuy1]] ([[User talk:NiceGuy1\|talk]]) 06:55, 28 September 2024 (UTC)

@@ Line 35: / Line 35: @@
 The biggest problem with this edition is that it names genera but speaks of species.
 Re earlier comments, please spell "pristine" correctly.  There has actually been found altered soft tissue, but not DNA as such.
-Indeed some museum displays are 100% casts, others vary in the amount of original material.  My first thought re human DNA was just from visitors coughing, sneezing, and touching but resin prep seems plausible.
+Indeed some museum displays are 100% casts, others vary in the amount of original material.  My first thought re human DNA was just from visitors coughing, sneezing, and touching but resin prep seems plausible. {{unsigned|Anthonyeleven|21:19, 26 September 2024}}

← Older revision		Revision as of 21:19, 26 September 2024
Line 32:		Line 32:
	: Though actually believing in this God Of Logic is not what He wants. Feel free to theorise about him, but you can never find any proof of Him because He never left any. All those false trails to various other deities, to catch the insufficiently thoughtful out, but the 'true' mysteries of the universe are the only ones you should pay attention to. And, through His omnipotence, He has left ''so many'' logical 'facts' and measurements for you to find and appreciate.		: Though actually believing in this God Of Logic is not what He wants. Feel free to theorise about him, but you can never find any proof of Him because He never left any. All those false trails to various other deities, to catch the insufficiently thoughtful out, but the 'true' mysteries of the universe are the only ones you should pay attention to. And, through His omnipotence, He has left ''so many'' logical 'facts' and measurements for you to find and appreciate.
	: ...this explains all observable data, but of course is unproven. Naturally, I don't say that it's true. I would instead preach that you ''look around and make your own mind up''. Which is something that more people could try doing. And there's no reason why GOL would not want you to do this. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.86.206\|172.70.86.206]] 20:30, 26 September 2024 (UTC)		: ...this explains all observable data, but of course is unproven. Naturally, I don't say that it's true. I would instead preach that you ''look around and make your own mind up''. Which is something that more people could try doing. And there's no reason why GOL would not want you to do this. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.86.206\|172.70.86.206]] 20:30, 26 September 2024 (UTC)
		+
		+	The biggest problem with this edition is that it names genera but speaks of species.
		+	Re earlier comments, please spell "pristine" correctly. There has actually been found altered soft tissue, but not DNA as such.
		+	Indeed some museum displays are 100% casts, others vary in the amount of original material. My first thought re human DNA was just from visitors coughing, sneezing, and touching but resin prep seems plausible.