Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures

[maledoro]

Everyone and their mums knows Archaeopteryx.

1. Not everyone knows about that one. There are some people out there who aren't familiar with the concept of transitional fossils.

2. Wouldn't "everyone" include mothers as well?

[DoomRulz]

The Majority of Mammals survived, with only a few going extinct, which would mean, there is still a large food source available, and even if there was a lack of food, that wouldnt explain why the Herbivores and Omnivores went extinct.

Without any dinosaur DNA, we have no idea why they went extinct, whether it was something that was effected within their genes, we have no way of knowing, and to be honest, i prefer it that way, it still preserves the mystery around them.

Mammals were able to adapt which allowed them to survive; dinosaurs couldn't.

Except the Dinosaurs could adapt, considering they were around for 160 million years, and went through an extinction period between the Triassic and Jurassic periods, they came out unscathed, Meteor impacts would of only had an effect for around 10 years, and the fossil record shows that at the dates of major impacts, dinosaurs were around after the 10 years.

I'm not disputing that the Meteors didnt have an effect, its clear that they did, however with the species that did survive, such as the mammals and fish, crocodiles and sharks, i just have to question whether it was a fact of them being 'unable to adapt'. If you look at a the dinosaurs that could fly, the small ones, they would have essentially the same diet as birds, eating small lizards, bugs, etc. Yet they went extinct and a number of modern day birds that were alive in that period didnt. Even with the big dinosaurs, plenty of fish survived, yet the fish eaters similar to Baronyx, and Spinosaurus (Although these were extinct at the beginning of the cretaceous) they died out, so its clearly not the food source, for some, and the effects of Impact would be minimal, for a large area outside the crater.

TBH, im just blabbering now, although there is no clear reason why the Dinosaurs did go extinct

Well it wasn't just a meteor. The meteor was just the straw that broke the camel's back. Towards the end of the Cretaceous period 65 million years ago, the Earth was undergoing massive geological upheaval and as such, caused a huge surge in volcanic activity. This poisoned the atmosphere, which in turned prevented dinosaur eggshells from forming properly. As such, young were not being born, but the tiny mammals that were around at that time were able to get by by eating those remains. As such they survived and took over the planet.

The reason the marine reptiles died out is b/c as the continents moved to form their modern shapes, the bodies of water around at that time dried out and shrank (I'm guessing anyway). So naturally there was nothing left for marine reptiles.

[WisePredator]

Ever heard of "Dead Clades Walking"?

[Dark Passenger]

The Majority of Mammals survived, with only a few going extinct, which would mean, there is still a large food source available, and even if there was a lack of food, that wouldnt explain why the Herbivores and Omnivores went extinct.

Without any dinosaur DNA, we have no idea why they went extinct, whether it was something that was effected within their genes, we have no way of knowing, and to be honest, i prefer it that way, it still preserves the mystery around them.

Mammals were able to adapt which allowed them to survive; dinosaurs couldn't.

Except the Dinosaurs could adapt, considering they were around for 160 million years, and went through an extinction period between the Triassic and Jurassic periods, they came out unscathed, Meteor impacts would of only had an effect for around 10 years, and the fossil record shows that at the dates of major impacts, dinosaurs were around after the 10 years.

I'm not disputing that the Meteors didnt have an effect, its clear that they did, however with the species that did survive, such as the mammals and fish, crocodiles and sharks, i just have to question whether it was a fact of them being 'unable to adapt'. If you look at a the dinosaurs that could fly, the small ones, they would have essentially the same diet as birds, eating small lizards, bugs, etc. Yet they went extinct and a number of modern day birds that were alive in that period didnt. Even with the big dinosaurs, plenty of fish survived, yet the fish eaters similar to Baronyx, and Spinosaurus (Although these were extinct at the beginning of the cretaceous) they died out, so its clearly not the food source, for some, and the effects of Impact would be minimal, for a large area outside the crater.

TBH, im just blabbering now, although there is no clear reason why the Dinosaurs did go extinct

Well it wasn't just a meteor. The meteor was just the straw that broke the camel's back. Towards the end of the Cretaceous period 65 million years ago, the Earth was undergoing massive geological upheaval and as such, caused a huge surge in volcanic activity. This poisoned the atmosphere, which in turned prevented dinosaur eggshells from forming properly. As such, young were not being born, but the tiny mammals that were around at that time were able to get by by eating those remains. As such they survived and took over the planet.

The reason the marine reptiles died out is b/c as the continents moved to form their modern shapes, the bodies of water around at that time dried out and shrank (I'm guessing anyway). So naturally there was nothing left for marine reptiles.

did you come up with that from walking with dinosaurs...ps Great show

[WisePredator]

Walking with Dinosaurs and it's sequal/prequal/spinoffs are half truths.

[Dark Passenger]

Walking with Dinosaurs and it's sequal/prequal/spinoffs are half truths.

that may be...but they are certainly entertaining..,

[WisePredator]

Walking with Dinosaurs and it's sequal/prequal/spinoffs are half truths.

that may be...but they are certainly entertaining..,

Indeed they are.

[maledoro]

Walking with Dinosaurs and it's sequal/prequal/spinoffs are half truths.

I haven't seen any of them yet. Where do they get the science wrong?

[WisePredator]

An example is in Walking with Monsters with the Euparkeria, it is said to be the direct descendant of the dinosaurs, even though they are either a part of the sister group of Archosaurs or a part of the lineage leading to the dinosaurs. It is not definet that they (the Euparkeria) are directly linked to the dinosaurs.

http://www.ucmp.berkeley.edu/diapsids/euparkeria.html

[DoomRulz]

Walking with Dinosaurs and it's sequal/prequal/spinoffs are half truths.

They're aren't totally inaccurate. They do entertain, but I'd say at least 60% of what is discussed is true.

[WisePredator]

Yes, but if the time comes it is best not to be used in paleontological debates.

[Ghost Rider]

T-rex all the way.

[DoomRulz]

Yes, but if the time comes it is best not to be used in paleontological debates.

Agreed.

I give the show credit though b/c to the best of my knowledge, many of their guesses about animal behaviour in the Walking With series are based on modern-day creatures. We'll never know if they're correct or not, but it's still really well-done.

[Ghost Rider]

Yes, but if the time comes it is best not to be used in paleontological debates.

Agreed.

I give the show credit though b/c to the best of my knowledge, many of their guesses about animal behaviour in the Walking With series are based on modern-day creatures. We'll never know if they're correct or not, but it's still really well-done.

I had the whole series at one time.

[maledoro]

Thanks for your input, WisePredator and DoomRulz!