flat assembler
Message board for the users of flat assembler.

Index > Heap > What would life be like if the dinosaurs were here with us?

Author
Thread Post new topic Reply to topic
revolution
When all else fails, read the source


Joined: 24 Aug 2004
Posts: 17284
Location: In your JS exploiting you and your system
revolution
  • Would humans be the dominant species?
  • Would humans have docile pet T-Rex's?
  • Would houses need to be built very very strong?
  • Would humans have exterminated the largest dinosaurs (like with the mammoth)?
  • Would T-Rex's taste really yummy?
  • Would zoo keepers need really huge slop buckets?
  • How high would a fence on a Brontosaurus farm need to be?
Post 21 Mar 2008, 13:37
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website Reply with quote
edfed



Joined: 20 Feb 2006
Posts: 4237
Location: 2018
edfed
. no
. no, just some little lizard
. cannot build houses
. no, dino exterminate humans
. reverse the question
. zoo for human
. no idea.

dinosaursare really amazing... but now they are mostlly dead.
now, there are only some species like turtule or snake.
Post 21 Mar 2008, 14:02
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website Reply with quote
vid
Verbosity in development


Joined: 05 Sep 2003
Posts: 7105
Location: Slovakia
vid
your question is intriquing... did you mean "if dinosaur extinction never happened 64 million years ago"? In that case

. no - primates would hardly have chance to evolve in such measure, if millions years of dinosaur rule wouldn't end.
. no humans around
. no one to build houses (unless dinos evolved to completely different more intelligent species)
. no humans around to exterminate dinosaurs (but they would)
. no humans around judge taste of dino meat
. no humans around to build/keep zoo
. no humans around to build farms


Last edited by vid on 21 Mar 2008, 16:56; edited 1 time in total
Post 21 Mar 2008, 16:53
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website AIM Address MSN Messenger ICQ Number Reply with quote
vid
Verbosity in development


Joined: 05 Sep 2003
Posts: 7105
Location: Slovakia
vid
btw:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dinosaur wrote:

There is an almost universal consensus among paleontologists that birds are the descendants of theropod dinosaurs. Using the strict cladistical definition that all descendants of a single common ancestor must be included in a group for that group to be natural, birds are dinosaurs and dinosaurs are, therefore, not extinct.
Post 21 Mar 2008, 16:54
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website AIM Address MSN Messenger ICQ Number Reply with quote
edfed



Joined: 20 Feb 2006
Posts: 4237
Location: 2018
edfed
bird = dino of the future:
what can be the explanations of this?
pteropods can fly, then, if an asteroid hit the globe, they can fly and are not in danger of suffocation, they can fly over the dust cloud.

after, the temperature decrease, then, they need some prtotection, and as their is not a lot of things to eat, they change. they become little, and start to eat the seeds of first flowers.. etc...
Post 21 Mar 2008, 17:57
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website Reply with quote
tom tobias



Joined: 09 Sep 2003
Posts: 1320
Location: usa
tom tobias
Just my two cents. I don't consider birds to be equal to dinosaurs, anymore than humans are equal to lemurs. Common ancestors, perhaps, probably, but equality, NO.
Birds are quite unique. They have an interesting brain, quite unique, and I urge FASM forumers to read about the WULST. Smile

http://hjerison.bol.ucla.edu/pdf/dinobrain2.pdf
Post 21 Mar 2008, 18:30
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
revolution
When all else fails, read the source


Joined: 24 Aug 2004
Posts: 17284
Location: In your JS exploiting you and your system
revolution
Alright I need to clarify. Let's say dinosaurs are around today (and have been for all of human history) and also humans are around today just as we are. Okay, don't ask me how it happened, let's just say that humans still managed to evolve and the dinosaurs didn't die.

Now, can humans still be the arrogant selfish race that we are today or would we have learned some manners and respect? T-Rex's probably won't take kindly to humans but can we outsmart them with intelligence?

I expect that much like with lions and tigers we would have developed means to kill whatever dinosaur gets in our way, no matter the size.
Post 22 Mar 2008, 07:00
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website Reply with quote
vid
Verbosity in development


Joined: 05 Sep 2003
Posts: 7105
Location: Slovakia
vid
in that case, i think humans would have found way to kill most dinosaurs, like they did with mammoth and others.
Post 22 Mar 2008, 08:47
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website AIM Address MSN Messenger ICQ Number Reply with quote
vid
Verbosity in development


Joined: 05 Sep 2003
Posts: 7105
Location: Slovakia
vid
tom: humans didn't evolve from lemurs. Bird did evolve from something belonging to "dinosaur" group. Therefor, it's not "common ancestor", one of dinosaurs was direct ancestor of birds.
Post 22 Mar 2008, 08:51
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website AIM Address MSN Messenger ICQ Number Reply with quote
victor



Joined: 31 Dec 2005
Posts: 126
Location: Utopia
victor
vid wrote:
...humans would have found ways to kill most dinosaurs...
Yes, but that's not the end of the story.

After humans have exterminated all dinosaurs, they would still not live in peace. Humans would start to challenge each other, like what we do on this board. Then, violence begins to take place everywhere. Finally, weapons of mass destruction are deployed. And you know the end results. Crying or Very sad
Post 22 Mar 2008, 09:02
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
revolution
When all else fails, read the source


Joined: 24 Aug 2004
Posts: 17284
Location: In your JS exploiting you and your system
revolution
No no, I'm not talking about the future, I'm talking about now. Currently humans have the means to kill any animal on the planet but we don't. Animals still thrive, mosquitoes thrive because they are so numerous regardless of our efforts to kill them, lions thrive because we decide not to kill them, cows survive because we like to eat them etc. Individual animals may get killed either because they are a nuisance or for us to eat but the species still survive. That is why I mentioned "I expect that much like with lions and tigers we would have developed means to kill whatever dinosaur gets in our way, no matter the size.", not to say we would kill them all, but to say we can kill some if desired.

So if the dinosaurs were around, what sort of treatment would they get/deserve.
Post 22 Mar 2008, 09:39
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website Reply with quote
tom tobias



Joined: 09 Sep 2003
Posts: 1320
Location: usa
tom tobias
vid wrote:
...one of dinosaurs was direct ancestor of birds.
You may be correct, and I may be in error. I am a good ten years behind the times here, vid. The last bit of evidence I had studied, came from China, as I recall,
http://www.cnn.com/TECH/science/9806/23/feathered.dinosaur/
and while the conclusion of the authors was in harmony with what you have suggested, I believed then, and still now, today, that other explanations are also possible, for example, feathers on dinosaurs as an independent accommodation to the environment, just as raccoons possess an opposable thumb, the only other creature besides humans with that capability. Raccoons are VERY intelligent, and also have an opposable thumb, so isn't that evidence that we share a common ancestor?? No. I don't think bears (raccoons) and primates share a close common ancestor. Well, ultimately, all living creatures share a common ancestor, but in the context of whether birds represent a lineage arising from dinosaurs or both groups evolved separately from a common ancestor, I think the jury is still out....(more data is needed)
A bit closer to home, lemurs and human evolution:
http://anthro.palomar.edu/earlyprimates/first_primates.htm
Smile
Post 22 Mar 2008, 10:33
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
vid
Verbosity in development


Joined: 05 Sep 2003
Posts: 7105
Location: Slovakia
vid
From what i studied, question that birds evolved DIRECTLY from dinos is settled. Here is some material:

http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-transitional/part1b.html#bird (also follow link to other FAQ)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Origin_of_birds (lot of links to materials)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolution_of_birds
Post 22 Mar 2008, 11:03
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website AIM Address MSN Messenger ICQ Number Reply with quote
tom tobias



Joined: 09 Sep 2003
Posts: 1320
Location: usa
tom tobias
vid wrote:
...question that birds evolved DIRECTLY from dinos is settled.

Was Archaeopteryx a theropod or did it evolve from a basal thecodont? - more simply, did birds evolve from dinosaurs or their ancestors?

Here is the more "traditional" view, i.e. in support of vid:

Today the controversial issue is specifically which dinosaurs are the closest relatives of birds.

I find this reference to be very well written:

There are two major competing hypotheses regarding avian evolution, which differ primarily with respect to when the first true birds appeared. One hypothesis proposes that the first birds descended directly from ancestral reptiles about 230 million years ago in the early to middle Triassic. Here, we refer to this idea as the basal archosaur hypothesis; "archosaur" is the name for the ancestral reptiles from which birds, crocodiles, and dinosaurs evolved. The other hypothesis advocates a much later entry of birds, with derivation from the dinosaurs some 100 million years after the time proposed by the basal archosaur hypothesis. This idea we refer to as the theropod dinosaur hypothesis.

This is not exactly like FASM vs. YASM or MASM etc, but folks engaged in research on evolution, do acquire some unshakeable convictions, absent, in my opinion, sufficient supporting evidence to sustain such unyielding positions. I think the best evidence, DNA study of a particular part of the genome relating to flight, may, one day, help explain this problem in evolution.
Smile
Post 22 Mar 2008, 11:34
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
revolution
When all else fails, read the source


Joined: 24 Aug 2004
Posts: 17284
Location: In your JS exploiting you and your system
revolution
tom tobias wrote:
... flight, may, one day, help explain this problem in revolution.
Oh good, I always wondered what was my problem. Laughing
Post 22 Mar 2008, 11:43
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website Reply with quote
Borsuc



Joined: 29 Dec 2005
Posts: 2466
Location: Bucharest, Romania
Borsuc
victor wrote:
After humans have exterminated all dinosaurs, they would still not live in peace.
Why should not let dinos live in "peace" too?

victor wrote:
Humans would start to challenge each other, like what we do on this board. Then, violence begins to take place everywhere. Finally, weapons of mass destruction are deployed.
Same as exterminating dinos, same destructive and selfish nature Sad

revolution wrote:
No no, I'm not talking about the future, I'm talking about now. Currently humans have the means to kill any animal on the planet but we don't.
Because there are a few humans that are still 'normal', unlike the evil ones that put themselves and their specie on the top.

revolution wrote:
So if the dinosaurs were around, what sort of treatment would they get/deserve.
They would get a kick in their butt because we as humans like to put ourselves 'above' the others and enslave them -- if you watch or play typical video games, I'd say we are the "evil empire" and blah blah, because we do exactly the same things -- We enslave others and promote ourselves (of course evil cares for evil too).

Why do people think Zoos are more "good" and rightful than Prison? (which is a human zoo).


What dinos deserve though is another matter (and quite subjective). I'd say they deserve the same treatment we do to ourselves. Note this does not mean that we should necessarily use the same methods (like watching a TV with a dino), but usually living in peace (i.e leaving him alone or admiring him) is enough. You'll all say they will crush us in this way, but notice we shouldn't just spread like a plague all over the globe and consume all the resources -- so simply we should not get into their homes/territories (like we do not like thieves to get into our territories).

That said we might kill a few dinos if they have too much territory and don't let others live (not only humans, but other animals too) -- but that shouldn't be a mean to over-conquer and over-extend ourselves.

Currently we are all classified as a disease or a virus, because that's exactly what we are: big virii. Sad

apparently some humans are 'normal', but too few to make a difference
Post 22 Mar 2008, 18:05
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Patrick_



Joined: 11 Mar 2006
Posts: 53
Location: 127.0.0.1
Patrick_
Who says these things happened millions of years ago? It could be only thousands...
Post 22 Mar 2008, 18:08
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
edfed



Joined: 20 Feb 2006
Posts: 4237
Location: 2018
edfed
who says? the earth memory, fossiles, poles, etc...
and as you can see there are no ruins of old dino's civilizations, cause it was so far that all returns to the nature...
Post 22 Mar 2008, 18:33
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website Reply with quote
vid
Verbosity in development


Joined: 05 Sep 2003
Posts: 7105
Location: Slovakia
vid
patrick: like edfed said, also earth strata say this, corals which needed millions of years to grow into current sizes, places with 20 millions of annual sediments (each year another distinguishable layer) UNDER which dino strata lays, etc... are you suggesting some young earth creationist hypothesis?
Post 22 Mar 2008, 22:04
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website AIM Address MSN Messenger ICQ Number Reply with quote
AlexP



Joined: 14 Nov 2007
Posts: 561
Location: Out the window. Yes, that one.
AlexP
Quote:
How high would a fence on a Brontosaurus farm need to be?
The Brontosaurus actually has an odd spinal structure, it's head does NOT go very far above the ground, actually -- angle I think...

As I heard, this was found out by museum people first assembling the casts of the spine bones, and when they tried to put them on the upwards-wiring, they went "WTF???!!!!"
Post 23 Mar 2008, 03:12
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website Reply with quote
Display posts from previous:
Post new topic Reply to topic

Jump to:  


< Last Thread | Next Thread >
Forum Rules:
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You can attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum


Copyright © 1999-2020, Tomasz Grysztar. Also on YouTube, Twitter.

Website powered by rwasa.