Why did non-avian dinosaurs grow to such gigantic sizes? If it had something to do with their avian lung system as following article suggests (news.nationalgeographic.com
Why did non-avian dinosaurs grow to such gigantic sizes...
Elijah Torres
Other urls found in this thread:
en.wikipedia.org
sauroposeidon.files.wordpress.com
youtube.com
twitter.com
Bentley Rogers
Never, ever listen to a paleontologists when it comes to size. They're always wrong. The overwhelming single most important reason that animals achieve enormous sizes is because they can and because it's generally better to be bigger. It's literally that simple. The reason we don't have massive Ratites is because 1: Humans kill all large animals and 2: They're not playing their A game anymore. This isn't the Mesozoic anymore. Mammals do that now. And the largest Crocodilians are pretty fucking big. Remember, Dinosaurs had hundreds of millions of years to achieve the things they did - Crocodilians had even longer. Mammals have only had the freedom to do that for about 65 million. Also, keep in mind, the Cenozoic has achieved multiple record-breakers itself, such as Titanoboa, Argentavis and Blue Whales.
Jace Taylor
Aren't there downsides to being bigger? Like killing just like two dozen elephants could fuck over the whole species. Also aren't there physiological issues?
Christopher Hall
>Feathered tyrannosaurus
We have fucking skin impressions good damn it
Wyatt Gray
...
Camden Jenkins
Aren't those just from the underbelly and legs?
Michael Peterson
>Aren't there downsides to being bigger?
There are downsides to everything. What of it?
>Like killing just like two dozen elephants could fuck over the whole species
Nah, Earth can support massive numbers of even truly enormous animals as long as humans aren't killing everything. There used to be millions of African Bush Elephants before humans started their shit.
en.wikipedia.org
>The World Wide Fund for Nature believes there were between 3 and 5 million African elephants as recently as the 1930s and 1940s.
Humans are a genuine plague upon this Earth.
>Also aren't there physiological issues?
Of course. They overcome them. Evolution doesn't stop where humans say it does.
So much this. I wish we could publicly execute featherfaggots. They're ruining science with their fanfiction bullshit.
Oxygen content is another myth. Animals can get large just fine without muh oxygen meme. The largest Mammoths were as large as Indricotheres, which were as large as medium sized Sauropods just fine. Also, Blue Whales.
No.
Caleb Robinson
>40% oxygen
Son of a bitch. SSTO's might be doable with ramjets and some rocket then though I'm not sure about the fire hazards.
Kevin Edwards
>Oxygen content is another myth. Animals can get large just fine without muh oxygen meme. The largest Mammoths were as large as Indricotheres, which were as large as medium sized Sauropods just fine. Also, Blue Whales.
No. Mammoths had much lower activity levels than a T-Rex, grass isn't nearly as difficult to hunt as other dinosaurs are. There is no way a predator the size of a mammoth could thrive with our current oxygen saturation.
James Perry
>Mammoths had much lower activity levels than a T-Rex
There is absolutely no way to prove that. Also it's a pretty meaningless statement.
>grass isn't nearly as difficult to hunt as other dinosaurs are
You're describing herbivory, not oxygen content.
>There is no way a predator the size of a mammoth could thrive with our current oxygen saturation.
Says you. Who cares what you say? Morons like you were claiming that Dinosaurs walked with their bellies below ground and had to live submersed to support their weight and couldn't run or climb because "muh ankles". Your kind also claimed that the largest Sauropods, Pterosaurs and Carnosaurs couldn't exist...until we found them.
Noah Morris
>Also it's a pretty meaningless statement.
Yes because a herbivore and a predator are exactly the same, its meaningless to compare them!
Fucking halfwit.
Alexander Morales
What's that got to do with oxygen?
Thomas Wood
And let me stop you before you act retarded again. Your entire argument is that absence of evidence is evidence of absence.
Carter Cook
>HURR
Whatever you say, moron.
Jonathan Harris
It takes more energy to hunt than to graze. You aren't very bright, are you?
Cooper Hill
Alright, I'm going to say this again. Slowly. Absence of evidence IS NOT evidence of absence. The entire muh oxygen argument is based on blatant assumptions and absolutely nothing more.
Owen Cox
Also, all Whales are predators. Now move some goalposts around as you see fit.
Jason Allen
>HURR krill are animals so whales are the same as T-Rexes!
You really aren't very bright at all, are you?
Jace Myers
im not shure but the preys of the avians now a days are useuly mamals righ? And most of them are not that big, so the genetic encryption of avians might have been modified to save energy by having a body that can still perform correctly but also catch there preys
Aiden Williams
Knew you would. I bet you're the sort who's absolutely religiously convinced T-Rex had feathers.
Jordan Watson
>HURR
Whatever you say, moron.
Liam Ward
>Remember, Dinosaurs had hundreds of millions of years to achieve the things they did -
Dunno, some of them seemed to get big pretty fast. sauroposeidon.files.wordpress.com
Luis Wilson
>That picture.
Not even mad about the feathers -- splitters need to die.
Anthony Morales
>Morons like you were claiming that Dinosaurs walked with their bellies below ground
MFW being old enough to recall trench-diplodocids.
Nathaniel Rogers
...
Tyler Nelson
“What a bully time you must have had in London! The delight which the political caricaturists made of your Diplodocus was most amusing. What a pity the thing died out! What glorious shooting we would have had on the Little Missouri if it survived to our time!”
Luis Barnes
Wow, I don't see him recovering from a well thought verbal execution like that.
Gavin Rogers
Excuse my ignorance, but what's a splitter?
Nathan Moore
rofl
Adam Smith
Classification of organisms involves people who prefer to create fewer species/genera/etc., and people who prefere more.
"Lumpers" are seen by their opponents as cramming unrelated critters into the same box out of misguided sense of simplicity.
"Spllitters" are seen by their opposite numbers as being more interested in describing a NEW GENUS!!! than a mere new species, and creating necessary clutter by dividing creatures that should be classified together into superfluous classifications and sub-classifications.
Me, I tend to think more like the former.
Splitting Tyrannosaurus into a bunch of unnecessary groups when one genus is all that is justified irks me.
Connor Morris
What the fuck is this and why do I find it hilarious?
Evan Bell
Because "dinosaurs are reptiles," many early reconstructions gave them splayed, sprawling legs like lizards. Some bright boy pointed out that if this were the case, Diplodocus (notably deep-chested) would have to have walked around in trenches.
I am old enough to have seen the spectacular "compromise" mount in the Smithsonian, where a Triceratops was given correctly columnar hind legs, and sprawling forelimbs.
Imagining the poor beast walking with that set-up was amusing.
Joseph Wilson
Lol I forgot all about this, but I had this guy as a young teenager, of all things.
Jonathan Bell
I just kept seeing the poor dude get spooked by something trying to run, and doing helpless somersaults all over the place.
Nolan Thomas
That's rather fast, but consider also that Indricotherium lived during the Oligocene.
Lincoln Bennett
A stupid cunt who ruins taxonomy.
Gavin Roberts
That woman looks like she's down for the BDC