"If the Asteroid had not eliminated the Dinosaurs?" Topic

Do you think this is what could have developed?

link

CC

Another representation:

link

CC

And then they build spaceships and become extremely unkind to the other races in the galaxy…or is that just the Scarrans from Farscape? I get confused sometimes. ;)

Interesting conceptualization, though.

-Brian

Dogal Dixon explores a modern world which didn't lose the dinosaurs in his book 'The New Dinosaurs'.

Make that 'Dougal', not 'Dogal'.

Life is fundamentally nothing more than an anti-entropic process. The question is whether higher intelligence is an inevitable development (given the opportunity) – or in our case is just an aberration due to a unique set of circumstances.

Evolution is marked by a number of periods where life evolved to a highly efficient state. It's arguable that meaningful evolution would have stopped many times were it not for some opportune natural disasters of a global scale.

"Life is fundamentally nothing more than an anti-entropic process. The question is whether higher intelligence is an inevitable development (given the opportunity) – or in our case is just an aberration due to a unique set of circumstances."

I've just bought a book by Simon Conway Morris ("Life's Solution") that explores just this. It's theme is whether certain evolutionary developments are inevitable, regardless of how things turn out ie if you rewind the Earth back to the start, would certain features of life *always* develop. I haven't read it yet, though, and it's number three in my evolutionary biology book backlog :-)

Actually it was either prions or a primitive flu that wiped out those filthy nasty saurians so neatly.

IF you have ever read the Harry Harrison Books one trilogy looks into this with evolved dinos living & fighting with primitive man interesting ideas.

This is more likely:

picture

CC…. seeing as you earlier expressed an interest in Who… these guys are one of my favourite Who beasties…

link

"If the Asteroid had not eliminated the Dinosaurs?"

…we'd all be speeking Raptor now. Heck, we woul BE raptors.

McDonalds would serve Bronto-burgers with fries.

Hydrissian rule the world!!

They wouldn't of changed. Brawn not brains ruled their world. think of all the millions of years they lasted by working with the bigger is better track of evolution. It was only when the environment collapsed to such an extent as to be unable to support mega huge funa that the thinkers got their chance. Previous to that they were nothing but a handy snack.

I think Scurvy is right. Intelligence is such an unlikely survival tool. How many tool using chimps and gorillas are there in the wild. 10,000? There are a heck of a lot more hyenas, who are just as intelligent as they have to be. IMHO, hyenas are the pinnacle of evolution.

weequay a thinking biped man sized dino picks up a stick and attaches a chunk of sharp flint to the end of it. "Ooooo I have the power!" it cries out!

The cry attracts a wandering T-Rex

Weequay proceeds to use said stick to stab himself to death as its quicker and cleaner than what the T-Rex is just about to do to him.

The thinker strain of dinos is declared an evolutionary dead end.

For once, I disagree with BOTH scurvy and the OFM! I can not believe it gent since we are often on the same page.

I mention octupi? Smart as hell, with a life span of 8 years? Tragic, but good at what they do.

I actually do think that the raptors were developing into astonishingly complex and smart hunters. Now, would they look like humans? No, I doubt it. I think that humans are a species that developed big brains instead of brawn; and even our form does not lend itself to long lives. In the raptors case, they could actually be fast, lethal, and smart. Already, raptor evolution took the road down the smart road instead of the big road. Through adversity, like proto-hominids did, they could have gotten even smarter, and I suspect that they might have with the ice-ages and increased competition for the same food.

I saw a documentary about ravens recently in which a raven bent a stright pin into a hook to get a package of food out of a beaker. THAT IS TOOL USE AND TOOL MAKING! Many animals use tools, but that animal did what almost none do; they changed a found implement to make a tool. That is incredible and is what we used to use to define human…

I think that if that raven had hands, we would have a good competitor.

So, here is my scenario. What about a meteor that was smaller wiping out dinos on one super continent, but left them on another super-continent? Say, it killed them in africa-eurasia, but left them in the Americas? Then, the geography and ice ages kept them apart. Perhaps Homo Sapien versus Raptor Sapien?

Theres a lot of current scholarship out there suggesting dinosaurs are still around, except we call them birds now.

Actually it was either prions or a primitive flu that wiped out those filthy nasty saurians so neatly.

I thought it was chain smoking and drunken partying too close to the tar pits.

Without asteroids, a flu, or bad habits I imagine the dinosaurs would evolve mostly into Raptors or other pack hunters. Intelligent and tool using? Nah..If so I'd have expected birds or reptiles would have developed more than they have but they haven't.

Good points Norscaman but over what span of time for the Octopus and Raven? I really like your what-if scenario for a Sci-fi/Fantasy game.

Individual Intelligence is important but so are thumbs and a social structure.

I was jokingly thinking of that earlier this week. Let's presume that one species evolved into sapient-tool using beings. Instead of the meteriorite crashing, what if they just snuffed everything out with over-industrialisation and explotation of the planet?

Norscaman, how could rators be improved upon? They were an astonishingly efficient killing machine, especially operating in packs. More intelligence would not improve their survival probability any. They were just as smart as they had to be, no need to evolve any more.
Humans evolved because they were so slow, weak, etc. They NEEDED intelligence to survive. Now, we don't need it any more, so we hardly ever use it! 8^)

Well, this is not a hill I am willing to die on. It's just my opinion, and my feelings will not be hurt by dissent. 8^)

Hyaenas get a bad rap, just 'cause they're so danged ugly (to us). They're actually quite admirable (from a human perspective) in their social organization, care for their young, etc. I just wouldn't wwant them as neighbours.

Allen (NPA)

Lions are overrated, in my opinion. Fat, lazy, the new stud male kills all the old male's cubs, etc. (Dr. Laura got all upset on hearing this one day. Weird broad, entertaining radio.)
And they steal the game that the hyenas kill.

"hyenas are the pinnacle of evolution"

Nah, roaches.

I guess the space aliens would have eventually killed them off, but not before they used them to haul stone blocks to build the pyramids.

On a tangent; 1 of the oft reported close-encounter ET types before the Gray became a stereotype was a reptilian-appearing space alien, & some earlier descriptions of Grays mentioned lizard-like features. Also, in 1 conspiracy theory, the "Secret Masters" are highly evolved reptiles who may or may not be native to Earth.

"I thought it was chain smoking and drunken partying too close to the tar pits."

Only in that one Far Side cartoon (which is one of my favorites).

"Hyaenas get a bad rap, just 'cause they're so danged ugly (to us)."

No just ugly – they freakin' SCARY. I was at Busch Gardens once, and they had an African plains exhibit with high plexiglass walls right next to the walking path. There was a hyena, I presume adult sized, sleeping right up against the wall (on his side, thankfully). The thing was huge, with great big chompy teeth and massive musculature. Even sound asleep it looked deadly. Hyenas, visually, make wolves look like cocker spaniel puppies.

Doug

Actually, the thing that we can do, that no other animal can do, is throw a fastball. Seriously.

Doing it well requires a zillion calculations to be performed in an instant.

So ol' Weequay, there, picks up a rock and throws it at the 'saur. If it doesn't kill (or stun) the 'saur, Weequay hides behind a tree, and the 'saur looks around in confusion for the thing that smacked it.

"They're actually quite admirable (from a human perspective) in their social organization, care for their young, etc. I just wouldn't wwant them as neighbours."

But you wouldn't want a femal hyena's (ahem) 'plumbing'. This is a family board, so I won't go into details, but it's so badly set up that 10% of them die the first time they give birth.

How about "Dinosaur Wars" The book about dinos coming back "home" and finding us taking up space.

OFM, you have a great point indeed. My scenario would be more like this:

Raptor is perfectly evolved at killing its prey in its environment. They are, as you rightly point out, are just as smart as they need to be. BUT, then the ice-age sets in. Now, lots of their prey dies off because of changes in temperature/ecology/climate. Now, the raptors could go one of two ways: 1) south, 2)change.

If they follow their prey (which most would) there still could be pressure to fill the vaccuum in the area that changed. Perhaps, first, they raptors might find that there are new animals burrowing into holes to escape the raptors. So, those raptors either develop a shovel-shaped foot, an anteater snout, or use the formidable brain that they already have to figure out that they can coordinate and block the entrance, or if they miss, lure the critters out, or dig them out with tools.

It is far-fetched indeed. But evolutionary pressures are miraculous. AND, my theory is that their already good brains might be well adapted to changing. After all, neanderthals went into europe because of pressure in the south from other hominids, AND because they were smart enough to adapt culturally by wearing skins. I could see raptors doing the same if presented with a 200 year period to change as their food vanished. The 18 minutes it took to engulf much of the world in flame (with the asteroid) was obviously not enough time.

"They wouldn't of changed. Brawn not brains ruled their world. think of all the millions of years they lasted by working with the bigger is better track of evolution. It was only when the environment collapsed to such an extent as to be unable to support mega huge funa that the thinkers got their chance. Previous to that they were nothing but a handy snack"

If you plot dinosaur brain case volume versus body mass("Encephalization Quotient") over time, there is a general progressive trend with the Triassic/early Jurassic Prosauropods being the lowest, the mid-late Jurassic Sauropods and Stegosaurs next and the Cretaceous dinosaurs (particularly the Troodontids) topping the list. The only exception is are the Cretaceous Ankylosaurs and Nodosaurs, plotting at about the same level as the Stegosaurs due to their heavy armor and small heads. Pachycephalosaurs are fairly dumb though I don't remember where exactly they fall on this scale.

As for mammals having to evolve etc., during the Mesozoic, the largest mammals only got to the size of large dogs. Most were small, nocturnal, rat-like creatures. The only way mammals could evolve to become more intelligent/fiercer was to kill off the dinosaurs and therefore open up niches for the mammals to evolve into. Dinosaurs would have kept evolving to be smarter as well. If a pair of Domaeosaurs are each hunting for food, the smarter of the pair will be more likely to succeed and thus the species will tend towards increasing intelligence.

In your honest opinion . . .

What would have developed to a sentient level?

CC

Someone should make 28mm reptilians in futuristic gear, with something like any of these faces:

link
link
picture
picture
link
stvoy.epguides.info/?ID=500
link
link
link
link
link
link
link
picture
picture
picture
link
picture

CC

I guess that these "Graks" might be around then:

TMP link

CC

About the Mojh:

TMP link

CC