• The Dinosaur Megathread (XING)
    216 replies, posted
[QUOTE=ChestyMcGee;21346055]And are fictional.[/QUOTE] The only thing that bends my mind is that almost every civilization had a version of the dragon, and they were all strikingly similar, but no one had means of communication. Not saying I believe in them though.
[QUOTE=DudeGuyKT;21346036]I really like the idea proposed in Michael Crichton's [i]The Lost World[/i] (the book, the movie was a disgrace), that the dinosaurs died out because of behavioral change. Maybe two dinosaur species that had learned to behave together suddenly changed a small behavior. Perhaps there was a species of small dinosaurs that would drink water, and a larger species would protect them while drinking, and in turn the small dinosaurs would warn the larger if there was a predator near when they began feeding. Maybe, instead of small dinosaurs drinking while larger moved around them and protected them, the larger began to drink instead. That would leave the small dinosaurs open to attack by predators, meaning that the population would go down significantly, which means the larger species doesn't have a warning that predators are watching them, which causes a decrease in their population. That means that the predators begin to die, which causes the death of the scavengers that follow in the predators' wake, then the herbivore population grows without the predators to keep them in check, they eat all the plants in the area and begin to starve, forcing them into other areas they may not be adapted to. . . .[/QUOTE] Michael Crichton, as good an author as he was, was no scientist. It's a nice idea, sure, but the dinosaurs did not die out because they got stupid. They died out due to environmental change, a big-ass meteorite and evolution. Well, if you want to be really technical, they didn't die out entirely because modern avians are maniraptors.
[QUOTE=ChestyMcGee;21346084]Michael Crichton, as good an author as he was, was no scientist. It's a nice idea, sure, but the dinosaurs did not die out because they got stupid. They died out due to environmental change, a big-ass meteorite and evolution. Well, if you want to be really technical, they didn't die out entirely because modern avians are maniraptors.[/QUOTE] If you read the book, it's talking more in-depth about behavioral adaptation. That entire second paragraph was just me making connections. Velociraptors are supposed to be good parents, right? Well, in the book, the velociraptor adults would just kick and slice at the children, and not feed them, because they were first generations and hadn't learned from the past about "feeding children or they die". And it doesn't just say that that was the only reason that could have caused the extinction, it was just proposing an idea.
[QUOTE=DudeGuyKT;21346149]Velociraptors are supposed to be good parents, right?[/QUOTE] In Crichton's world... yes. There's no evidence for Velociraptors or, as far as I know, any dromaeosaurs being good parents. Or even any theropods being good parents. There is plenty of evidence for certain ceratopsians being good parents, as well as sauropods and hadrosaurs though.
[QUOTE=ChestyMcGee;21346183]In Crichton's world... yes. There's no evidence for Velociraptors or, as far as I know, any dromaeosaurs being good parents. Or even any theropods being good parents. There is plenty of evidence for certain ceratopsians being good parents, as well as sauropods and hadrosaurs though.[/QUOTE] Fine, be that way.
Dilophosauruses spit some kind of acid, Or so i remember.
[QUOTE=DudeGuyKT;21346081]The only thing that bends my mind is that almost every civilization had a version of the dragon, and they were all strikingly similar, but no one had means of communication. Not saying I believe in them though.[/QUOTE] Same thought was conjured when the pyramids were discovered. The similarities between the Mayan and Egyptian pyramids were remarkable, yet they could not have been in communication.
[QUOTE=DudeGuyKT;21346198]Fine, be that way.[/QUOTE] Okay. I thought we were having a discussion about dinosaurs in a dinosaur thread in the general discussions section though... not a childish argument at recess. [QUOTE=Hoboharry;21346203]Dilophosauruses spit some kind of acid, Or so i remember.[/QUOTE] Oh God there needs to be a part in this thread that says [B]99% OF THE STUFF THAT IS SAID OR HAPPENS IN [I]JURASSIC PARK[/I] HAS NO REAL EVIDENCE SUPPORTING IT[/B].
[QUOTE=ChestyMcGee;21346209]Okay. I thought we were having a discussion about dinosaurs in a dinosaur thread in the general discussions section though... not a childish argument at recess. [/QUOTE] Wait, since when were we having an argument?
[QUOTE=Hoboharry;21346203]Dilophosauruses spit some kind of acid, Or so i remember.[/QUOTE] As rumor would have us believe. Oh, Chesty got there first.
[QUOTE=DudeGuyKT;21346270]Wait, since when were we having an argument?[/QUOTE] Since you said "k be like that :saddowns:". If we weren't though then I apologise; it's just your response made it seem that way. Perhaps you were being ironic and I didn't pick it up.
[QUOTE=ChestyMcGee;21346285]Since you said "k be like that :saddowns:". If we weren't though then I apologise; it's just your response made it seem that way. Perhaps you were being ironic and I didn't pick it up.[/QUOTE] Eh, I was just being stupid. It seems I have killed the thread.
[QUOTE=DudeGuyKT;21346432]Eh, I was just being stupid. It seems I have killed the thread.[/QUOTE] Hell naw. I'll post some extra info: --------------------------------- [B]Early Palaeontology[/B] [I]Dinosaur fossils have been known of and documented for millennia but their true nature was not even remotely understood until the early 19th century. In China, dinosaur bones were believed to be those of mythical dragons. Meanwhile in Europe, the general consensus was that the bones were of large beasts that roamed the Earth before the great biblical deluge myth, The Great Flood. Real scholarly analyses of dinosaur bones did not begin until the 1600s, first in England when part of a [/I]Megalosaurus[I] femur bone was sent to the professor of chemistry at the University of Oxford, Robert Plot. Plot correctly identified the type of bone and deduced that it was too large to belong to any animal on the planet but, in much the fashion of those before him, decided it belonged to some sort of giant human. Just prior to the turn of the 18th century, Isaac Newton was the first to publish scientific treatment of what now would be recognised as a dinosaur bone. It wasn’t until the 1800s however that dinosaur genera were being identified and published in scientific journals as “great fossil lizards” with attributes not dissimilar to modern iguanas. In 1842, the iconic Richard Owen first coined the term “dinosaur” and spotted the common features of the then only three dinosaur genera; [/I]Megalosaurus, Iguanodon and Hylaeosaurus[I]. The new study of Palaeontology took off with a blast with scientists racing to discover the next big genus, the public gripped by the marvellous beasts of old. Americans Edward Drinker Cope and Othniel Charles Marsh became the two great rivals, discovering a huge total of 142 species between them in the US alone. The image of dinosaurs in the 19th century couldn’t have been more different from today’s view. In the 1800s, dinosaurs were viewed as fat, lumbering beasts with their legs sprawled out to the sides like a modern crocodile. This almost comic view of the creatures fit the explanation that the dinosaurs became extinct because they were so biologically defunct. Usefully, this view also fit the ever pressured religious view that God would never allow one of his beautiful creations to die out. Today the most popular dinosaurs with the public, like[/I] Velociraptor[I], are known for their rapidity, keen vision and sharp minds, quite the opposite of the Victorian dinosaur stereotype. The difference between illustrations then and now of the first identified dinosaur species, [/I]Megalosaurus[I], is laughable. 19th century Palaeontologists portrayed the species as a quadruped dragging its bulking tail lazily across the ground. 20th century Palaeontologists now know, however, [/I]that Megalosaurus[I] was a fast bipedal that kept its long tail high above the ground for balance at high speeds.[/I] And so ends a wall of text.
I can't remember the name of that one documentary that followed the life of a velociraptor. I think it was Walking with dinosaurs but I'm not sure.
[img]http://29.media.tumblr.com/MRcXpQ0mrkyjk85gNXTLc2Ivo1_500.jpg[/img]
[QUOTE=ChestyMcGee;21346978]Hell naw. I'll post some extra info: --------------------------------- [B]Early Palaeontology[/B] [I]Dinosaur fossils have been known of and documented for millennia but their true nature was not even remotely understood until the early 19th century. In China, dinosaur bones were believed to be those of mythical dragons. Meanwhile in Europe, the general consensus was that the bones were of large beasts that roamed the Earth before the great biblical deluge myth, The Great Flood. Real scholarly analyses of dinosaur bones did not begin until the 1600s, first in England when part of a [/I]Megalosaurus[I] femur bone was sent to the professor of chemistry at the University of Oxford, Robert Plot. Plot correctly identified the type of bone and deduced that it was too large to belong to any animal on the planet but, in much the fashion of those before him, decided it belonged to some sort of giant human. Just prior to the turn of the 18th century, Isaac Newton was the first to publish scientific treatment of what now would be recognised as a dinosaur bone. It wasn’t until the 1800s however that dinosaur genera were being identified and published in scientific journals as “great fossil lizards” with attributes not dissimilar to modern iguanas. In 1842, the iconic Richard Owen first coined the term “dinosaur” and spotted the common features of the then only three dinosaur genera; [/I]Megalosaurus, Iguanodon and Hylaeosaurus[I]. The new study of Palaeontology took off with a blast with scientists racing to discover the next big genus, the public gripped by the marvellous beasts of old. Americans Edward Drinker Cope and Othniel Charles Marsh became the two great rivals, discovering a huge total of 142 species between them in the US alone. The image of dinosaurs in the 19th century couldn’t have been more different from today’s view. In the 1800s, dinosaurs were viewed as fat, lumbering beasts with their legs sprawled out to the sides like a modern crocodile. This almost comic view of the creatures fit the explanation that the dinosaurs became extinct because they were so biologically defunct. Usefully, this view also fit the ever pressured religious view that God would never allow one of his beautiful creations to die out. Today the most popular dinosaurs with the public, like[/I] Velociraptor[I], are known for their rapidity, keen vision and sharp minds, quite the opposite of the Victorian dinosaur stereotype. The difference between illustrations then and now of the first identified dinosaur species, [/I]Megalosaurus[I], is laughable. 19th century Palaeontologists portrayed the species as a quadruped dragging its bulking tail lazily across the ground. 20th century Palaeontologists now know, however, [/I]that Megalosaurus[I] was a fast bipedal that kept its long tail high above the ground for balance at high speeds.[/I] And so ends a wall of text.[/QUOTE] I thought our idea of Paleontology took off much earlier than 1842. Surely someone must have had the idea to document and study dinosaur remnants beforehand.
[QUOTE=ffffff-;21347312]I thought our idea of Paleontology took off much earlier than 1842. Surely someone must have had the idea to document and study dinosaur remnants beforehand.[/QUOTE] Not according to my little research, although there is always the possibility that I am incorrect. Note, however, that I do mention some scientific analysis prior to the 1800s... just that it wasn't realised that the fossils were that of dinosaurs. Also, I wrote that it wasn't until the 1800s that dinosaur research was being properly published; it's possible, or even probable, that research was being conducted before this date but was not documented officially.
Crocodiles co-existed with dinosaurs as well. Or a prehistoric version of them at least.
And turtles. Cute turtles.
Leedsichthys is fucking HUGE! i found it interesting, when i was a kid i loved dinosaurs.
[QUOTE=The Pink Scotti;21340834]Obligatory sad post [media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pPTUA_wdp78[/media][/QUOTE] Jeez, I forgot that they all just fucking die at the end. What a way to end a sitcom.
Rrrreeerrrrr
[QUOTE=ChestyMcGee;21346209]Oh God there needs to be a part in this thread that says [B]99% OF THE STUFF THAT IS SAID OR HAPPENS IN [I]JURASSIC PARK[/I] HAS NO REAL EVIDENCE SUPPORTING IT[/B].[/QUOTE] Would you mind giving us the real reason instead of just bluntly pointing out how stupid i am? It doesn't seem too unpractical for a dinosaur like it to spit acid.
[QUOTE=Hoboharry;21348030]Would you mind giving us the real reason instead of just bluntly pointing out how stupid i am? It doesn't seem too unpractical for a dinosaur like it to spit acid.[/QUOTE] Well it's difficult to give a reason as to why they don't spit venom. Probably because they didn't need to is the best answer I can provide. [QUOTE=DrLuke;21348001]Rrrreeerrrrr[/QUOTE] Migration from the Dragon megathread eh. I think the two threads should merge sooner or later.
very informative OP. :golfclap:
[QUOTE=ffffff-;21348259]Well it's difficult to give a reason as to why they don't spit venom. Probably because they didn't need to is the best answer I can provide.[/QUOTE] But if they didn't, what would be their defense mechanic? The same of a velociraptor or was it passive? I mean a dinosaur has to have some way to protect itself out there, if the dilophosaurus didn't spit venom or use any defense mechanic, it'd just be plain retarded.
Well some animals have these passive defense mechanisms you talk about. Case in point: the Robin. Its red colour is the natural dominant colour. Thus it can deter potential fights by appearing strong and aggressive. I can only assume the dilophosaurus had a similar kind of defense.
[QUOTE=Deadly-Virus;21344655]That makes me wonder, was the Dragon thread always full of porn?[/QUOTE] No, it wasn't. Also, the T-Rex and the Brontosaurus were my favorite dinosaurs when I was growing up.
[QUOTE=ffffff-;21348477]Well some animals have these passive defense mechanisms you talk about. Case in point: the Robin. Its red colour is the natural dominant colour. Thus it can deter potential fights by appearing strong and aggressive. I can only assume the dilophosaurus had a similar kind of defense.[/QUOTE] Well i noticed the big shell on it's head, or whatever it is? Could it be that it used the same attack as to just headbutt it's enemies?
[QUOTE=Hoboharry;21348030]Would you mind giving us the real reason instead of just bluntly pointing out how stupid i am? It doesn't seem too unpractical for a dinosaur like it to spit acid.[/QUOTE] No it doesn't seem too [I]im[/I]practical. The fact is though that Crichton made it up using what is called 'artistic license'. I'm not saying it's entirely impossible, although improbable, I'm simply saying that seeing something in a film or reading it in a science-fiction novel does not make something true. The only line of argument I can think of for the hypothesis, or fantastical fiction, that Dilophosaurus spat venom (not acid, that would seem quite impractical because the animal would have to have developed some sort of throat and glands capable of withstanding very high concentration acid) is that some lizards and snakes can do the same. But that line of argument is flawed because theropods like Dilophosaurus are more closely related to birds than to lizards.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.