Evolution of dinosaurs

[ScienceGuy]

The evolution of raptors, even those did evolve as pack hunters, has a long and twisting tale. We won't need to discuss origins here, just where it has or could have gone.

According to some paleontologists some therapods (raptors) evolved into birds. The birds have not gone anywhere, in fact there are thousands of species of birds on this planet. Some of them have evolved in different ways but none of which have evolved intelligence(as we are implying in this case). If these are direct decendants of raptor dinosaurs, they haven't evolved much in the intelligence area.

As for the raptors that died out in the meteor/volcano/acid rain event, we really don't know. We can theorize that in 65 million years they could have. Troodont was a raptor with a large brain capacity for its body size. In proportional terms its brain equivalent was larger than the mammalian counterparts of its day. If evolutionary theory is right it may have had the largest (most intelligent ) brain today if humans were counted as well, which we would not be here in that case, and this would be pointless. Given enough time they may have evolved as much intelligence as Freethinker.

This above is all based on scientific findings, but not necessarily my view. If you would like my view I will give it. I will give you what I think about dinosaur intelligence and evolution based on where I think it all started, but only if someone asks. All of my theory may be based on Christian content or origins.

[ScienceGuy]

But every example we have shows the other way around. The longest lasting creatures tend to have the least intellegence.

 

In fact, one might wonder if intellegence is potentially a limiting factor in the evolutionary process.

 

Finally some science from the smart person.

There is one thing better, I agree with all of it!

[Tormod]

Dear folks,

 

you all discuss evolution as if every idea you can come up with is scientific fact. Yet most of you show little knowledge of the evolutionary process. Also, evolution is closely linked with the development of our planet, it's geology, climate and cosmic surroundings. The fossil record is more than 3 billion years old, which may well be refuted - if you can provide facts which discount the working theories. That would of course be extremely interesting and should warrant a paper in Nature, at least.

 

And to those of you who claim that this is not a religious discussion but somehow manage to discuss creationism in every other sentence, please take note: I am getting tired of it and I would like to see you folks tone down the religious aspects of your posts.

 

1) "But every example we have shows the other way around. The longest lasting creatures tend to have the least intellegence." (scienceguy)

 

Define "creatures". Define "intelligence". Show us the examples you are talking about. Or do you mean that species start out with intelligence and then they get more stupid as they evolve?

 

2) "In fact, one might wonder if intellegence is potentially a limiting factor in the evolutionary process." (freethinker)

 

Sure you can wonder. We have no empirical evidence for this, however. What is "intelligence"? I would argue that intelligence is one of the factors that makes adaption a strong force in evolution. Today we talk about artificial intelligence but even the simplest fly shows more intellingence (read: autonomy and ability to take care of itself) than any computer.

 

3) "what if raptors were highly intelligent. if theywere pack hunters than they would need a means of communication" (rileyj)

 

Yeah, what if. There is an incredible number of pack hunters in the wilderness today. But what is "communication"? Does it really require intelligence? If so, what kind of intelligence?

 

4) "are crocs an example of their evolution or just one case?" (rileyj)

 

Did dinosaurs evolve? Of course. They evolved in many ways. The first dinosaurs were much simpler creatures than the ones that were around at the time of whatever catastrophe help extinguish them.

 

Did dinosaurs evolve into crocodiles? No. they evolved from Thecodonts, a branch of reptiles, which were ancestors of birds, crocodiles, dinosaurs, and pterodonts.

 

5) Crocodiles have changed very little in the millions of years that they have been on earth, even some predating the dinosaurs. Is it possible that they stayed essentially the same over this long of time but we had only 65 million years to go from a shrew to highly intelligent man? This type of evolution is strange. (scienceguy)

 

Did you know that there are currently 23 species of crocodile around? (Source: http://www.flmnh.ufl.edu/cnhc/csl.html ). They all evolved from the same source. The SOURCE is no longer around. What is so strange about this "type" of evolution? (And what do you mean by "type"?)

 

It is rather a proof of the way evolution tends to work: new species evolve from a common source, with different traits adapted to the different living conditions they find themselves in.

 

Human beings evolved in the same way, but, as you point out, we took the primate route and not the reptilian route.

 

Tormod

[Tormod]

Originally posted by: ScienceGuy

Troodont was a raptor with a large brain capacity for its body size. In proportional terms its brain equivalent was larger than the mammalian counterparts of its day.

 

I am looking for evidence of your claim that troodonta had large brain capacities relative to body size. So far I have only found that they were smaller, birdlike species of dinosaurs. No clue as to their brain size.

 

Even so, it is not strange that mammals of the day had smaller brains (relatively) as they were much smaller creatures and was far less complex than the larger dinosaurs.

 

I find it more likely that large brains are required for more complex creatures - but that intelligence is not necessarily a byproduct of a large brain.

 

If evolutionary theory is right it may have had the largest (most intelligent ) brain today if humans were counted as well, which we would not be here in that case, and this would be pointless.

 

This is an extraordinarily pointless sentence. Which evolutionary theory states that the largest brain (even relative to body size) is the most intelligent? And how could you possibly know how the evolutionary route of troodontia would be in the 65 million years after it vanished?

 

And - this is particularly interesting - how is the fact that troodonta no longer exists a case *against* evolution?

 

Tormod

[Freethinker]

Originally posted by: ScienceGuy Fri Apr 16, 2004 1:43 PM

For the sake of saving this thread, I will not do the creation debate in here.

 

Originally posted by: ScienceGuy Tue Apr 20, 2004 7:30 PM

I do remember the first post where I did mention that I believe creation... I also believe that therapods came from bird ancestors which God created...I will not accept the answer of "creation is a myth."... Please stop dodging the important questions that should be asked of this topic.

 

1) You DID NOT mention Creation in your FIRST post. You did include a number of code words/ phrases/ concepts well identified with Creationist drivel and I responded to it.

 

2) you replied with the first quote above, saying you would not discuss Creation. So I stopped.

 

3) now, typical of a believer (as I point out many times here), you want to change your claims AGAIN! Now you want to be upset that we are NOT discussing Creation.

 

4) Creation lacks ANY Scientific credibility. Exactly how do expect us to discuss it SCIENTIFICALLY.

 

give scientific fact that says creation did not happen.

 

QM.

[Freethinker]

Originally posted by: ScienceGuy

If you would like my view I will give it. I will give you what I think about dinosaur intelligence and evolution based on where I think it all started, but only if someone asks. All of my theory may be based on Christian content or origins.

 

No thanks. I have to deal with enough mindless Christian ramblings. If all you have to offer is "some old guy in the sky snapped his fingers" as an explanation you are wasting all of our time. This site is supposed to be for SCIENTIFIC based discussion.

[ScienceGuy]

Originally posted by: Tormod

<blockquote>Quote

<hr><i>

 

I am looking for evidence of your claim that troodonta had large brain capacities relative to body size. So far I have only found that they were smaller, birdlike species of dinosaurs. No clue as to their brain size.

 

I added the t on accident, but http://www.biopark.org/troodon.html will give you a little info about what I was talking about. I found another that talks about different animals EQ and relative intelligence (only as far as we can see today, but that is what EQ is based on).

--------------------------------------

Even so, it is not strange that mammals of the day had smaller brains (relatively) as they were much smaller creatures and was far less complex than the larger dinosaurs.

 

I find it more likely that large brains are required for more complex creatures - but that intelligence is not necessarily a byproduct of a large brain.

---------------------------------------

 

I was giving the info based on a look at the EQ. I don't know any other ways to determine the intelligence of dinos. Does a given species with a higher EQ have a better chance of surviving over a long period of time? Maybe. It depends on size, strength, speed and other factors also. This is all speculative because we don't have the information on the evolution of intelligence, for which I apologize for the statement below. This was to show the hypothetical progression of evolution if they had not died out and had been able to stay ahead of the mammals in the intelligence area. If they were ahead they may have stayed ahead, but could have hit a dead end somewhere (my bad). On the other hand, troodons more than likely hunted these small mammals. I doubt evolution would progress in the same way given a stronger, faster, smarter troodon and small, dumb mammals if the dinos had not died out. This is why I say we would not be here. I was not making a case against evolution (not this time).

 

<blockquote>Quote

<hr>If evolutionary theory is right it may have had the largest (most intelligent ) brain today if humans were counted as well, which we would not be here in that case, and this would be pointless. <hr></blockquote>

[ScienceGuy]

That is not the post I was referring to. I was referring to the one we discussed (sort of) in Evolution vs religion. That is where I was going to leave that debate. You would not give me your view, I will stop giving you mine so you will stop ripping on the Christians. All of your replies had no science which is what you now want to discuss. I give you a scientific hypothesis (based on a Christian view) and your counter to that is something anti-religious. Give me another hypothesis that sounds better based on science. I do believe "some big guy in the sky snapped his fingers and it happened", prove me wrong! I want to learn from these debates, but I want to learn facts and figures that will support a theory. Please and thank you.

[Tormod]

Scienceguy - you ask for facts and figures, but when I ask you for them you don't provide them.

 

"I was giving the info based on a look at the EQ."

 

You never mentioned that. What do you mean by "EQ"?

 

"I was not making a case against evolution (not this time)."

 

Right. In fact you are providing us with evidence which supports evolution, right? You did read the last sentence on that page to which you linked?

 

Tormod

[Freethinker]

Originally posted by: ScienceGuyI do believe "some big guy in the sky snapped his fingers and it happened", prove me wrong!

 

Sorry, but the Great Invisible Pink Unicorn created everything.

 

Prove me wrong.

[Freethinker]

Don't ya love scientific discourse?

[ScienceGuy]

"You never mentioned that. What do you mean by "EQ"?"

 

EQ is the Encephalization Quotient which plots brain size and body size for different kinds of animals. www. csubak.edu/~ghurlburt/ghresrch.html or users.tamuk.edu/kfjab02/dinos/VPtheropodspaleobiology.htm

The second of these sites I was unable to open. I believe it is the one I got some info from. I hope you have better luck.

 

 

"Right. In fact you are providing us with evidence which supports evolution, right? You did read the last sentence on that page to which you linked?"

 

Again correct, this all goes back to the original post about the evolution of intelligence in raptors. At the end of which I made clear that it was not my view on the subject. This was a HYPOTHETICAL train of thought based on evolution of dinos over an extensive time period that COULD have evolved intelligence based on the rate of the small mammals intelligence to humans today. I do not believe evolution works on this extensive of rate. My view involves a different starting point for species, but with smaller evolutionary consequences.

 

Please tell me if you need more web sites.

[ScienceGuy]

Originally posted by: Freethinker

<blockquote>Quote

<hr><i><hr></blockquote>

 

Sorry, but the Great Invisible Pink Unicorn created everything.

 

Prove me wrong.

---------------------------------

Show me the beliefs based on your Great Invisible Pink Unicorn and I will consider the science behind them. If you can give your theory on how everything came to be on Earth based on this GIPU which surpasses a reasonable understanding in my mind, I will believe in him too. I certainly cannot prove something based on nothing. My views of God are based on the Bible, from which I have given you a theory of creation and origin of species. If the theory I gave you has major flaws (which to you will have something to do with God) please present them so I can alter, revise, or abolish my hypothesis.

 

I am glad that you finally told me your stance though.

How can the unicorn be invisible and pink at the same time? I thought pink to be a shade in the VISIBLE light spectrum.

[Freethinker]

Originally posted by: ScienceGuy

<blockquote>

<hr><i>Originally posted by: <b>Freethinker</b></i>

 

Sorry, but the Great Invisible Pink Unicorn created everything.

Prove me wrong.<hr></blockquote>

Show me the beliefs based on your Great Invisible Pink Unicorn and I will consider the science behind them.

 

"The Invisible Pink Unicorns is a being of great spiritual power. We know this because she is capable of being invisible and pink at the same time. Like all religions, the Faith of the Invisible Pink Unicorn is based upon both logic and faith. We have faith that she is pink; we logically know that she is invisible because we can't see her."

 

Look around you, Everything you see is proof of the creation of the Great IPU! Holy be thine horn! How could it get here if not the Great Invisible Pink Unicorn!

 

See you can not prove that i am wrong!

 

If you can give your theory on how everything came to be on Earth based on this GIPU

 

Do not mock the Great IPU. We NEVER use "*IPU" (* is G, but would show great disrespect if typed together)

 

I am glad that you finally told me your stance though.

How can the unicorn be invisible and pink at the same time? I thought pink to be a shade in the VISIBLE light spectrum.

 

I quote from Hoofprints 4:14 (by the prophet Ixian) Yea, and I was given by inspiration that She was next to me, and I could touch Her, being the loyal servant, and I laid my hand upon Her mane, and She *was* Pink. She was not pink, She was not colourless, but She *felt* Pink, and I was thus overcome. I awoke later with a hangover, but I knew She was *yet* Pink, but invisible.

 

and K 6:73 "For her Pinkness is such that it transcends pinkness. Yea, it is beyond the ken of man or mind to comprehend, but we shant question it for it is the doubter than shall be skewered upon Her Sacred Horn, like unto a shish kebob."

 

What more proof would you possibly need? The ultiamte proof, it is said, that her holiness the Great IPU is so obviously the greatest of all that ever existed that even an Athiest would believe in her!

[ScienceGuy]

I commend your imaginative thought with this subject. Where is the rest of this great book that I might be able to examine it? I might also ask why we do this in a thread about dinosaurs?

[Freethinker]

Why are you stalling Scienceguy? You said:

 

Show me the beliefs based on your Great Invisible Pink Unicorn and I will consider the science behind them.

 

I did.

 

Now prove I am wrong.

 

We are on this thread because you kept wanting to talk about Creation. If you would rather prove I am wrong, that the Great IPU did NOT create the universe, on another thread, that's fine.

 

But don't try to squirm out.

[Tormod]

Originally posted by: ScienceGuy

 

EQ is the Encephalization Quotient which plots brain size and body size for different kinds of animals. www. csubak.edu/~ghurlburt/ghresrch.html or users.tamuk.edu/kfjab02/dinos/VPtheropodspaleobiology.htm

The second of these sites I was unable to open. I believe it is the one I got some info from. I hope you have better luck.

 

No, the second site does not open. But I fail to understand why EQ is of any interest in this discussion. Please explain why it has any relevance to the evolution of dinosaurs.

 

I wrote:

"Right. In fact you are providing us with evidence which supports evolution, right? You did read the last sentence on that page to which you linked?"

 

You answered:

"Again correct, this all goes back to the original post about the evolution of intelligence in raptors. At the end of which I made clear that it was not my view on the subject."

 

What? Where did you make that clear? I am trying to read the posts you have made in this thread but I still fail to see why you would use that link as proof of what I asked of you.

 

More from you:

"This was a HYPOTHETICAL train of thought based on evolution of dinos over an extensive time period that COULD have evolved intelligence based on the rate of the small mammals intelligence to humans today. I do not believe evolution works on this extensive of rate. My view involves a different starting point for species, but with smaller evolutionary consequences."

 

This is unclear to me. What exactly DO you mean? I think it would be easier if you just explained how evolution works rather than providing cases which turn out not to be your own view.

 

I have argued against a lot of the points in this thread - please reread that post and comment upon that.

 

"Please tell me if you need more web sites."

 

Well, if the web sites you provide keep supporting evolution but provide no further insight into your opinion on this matter, better leave them alone.

 

Tormod