Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]






Shoot a firework rocket ~ Winners!
Make a forum zoo!

Welcome to The Round Table. We hope you enjoy your visit.


You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free.


Join our community!


If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features:

Username:   Password:
Add Reply
What annoys you about paleontology?; Rant on about moronic theories, complaints, or just animals that annoy you.
Topic Started: Sep 28 2013, 05:04 PM (256,466 Views)
TyrantTR
Member Avatar


Aardvark727
Nov 2 2013, 04:56 PM
Just a question. If we're all just animals that evolved and have no spirit, how do we reason? How do we have language and thought? A cat doesn't plan for winter and worry about whether or not it'll get enough food or be safe, so why do humans? You need thought for language, and language for thought. Seeing as other animals have neither, wouldn't that show that someONE gave us a spirit?
The opinion that all living things do not have nor need a soul does not indicate a hole in evolution. You can still believe in an internal spirit all you want, I have no idea why you would suggest this is a key component of evolutionary theory. It certainly isn't a belief I share, but that isn't as a product of my acceptance of the theory of evolution, more like a product of my rejection of superstitious claims.

Regardless, most of what you have listed as proof of a human soul is more a result of increased intelligence. And all these traits are things you will find in animals as well. They don't think about the same things humans do obviously, an elephant doesn't have to worry about paying rent, but it does have to take precautionary steps to ensure it, and its herds survival.

And even if I agreed with the contention that all of this pointed to a spirit, why does that mean someone had to have put it there? Is it not equally plausible that it arrived through the natural processes we regularly observe? What if it evolved just like everything else about the human anatomy?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Fluffs
No Avatar
Pull my finger!

As a Christian, even I believe (or know) that evolution exists. It's all around us. Elephants are losing their tusks due to poachers, and sparrows introduced to the United States have become bigger or smaller depending on the area they are at.

Don't forget about the invasive Asian carp in certain North American rivers, they've developed a jumping-out-of-the-water habit that their buddies back at home don't have ;)
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Stan The Man
Member Avatar
Honorary Party Member

The only example of evolution that actually is evolution in my eyes is the one with the sparrows.

So what's my pet peeve with paleontology, you might ask? My answer is almost all large dinosaurs being depicted as fluffballs, so Tyrannosaurus, Megalosaurus, Sinoceratops, and such dinosaurs of similar sizes and climates.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
CyborgIguana
Member Avatar


MrRabbid
Nov 2 2013, 07:37 PM
So what's my pet peeve with paleontology, you might ask? My answer is almost all large dinosaurs being depicted as fluffballs, so Tyrannosaurus, Megalosaurus, Sinoceratops, and such dinosaurs of similar sizes and climates.
Sick 'em, Gorsh! xD
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Fluffs
No Avatar
Pull my finger!

*blows the blow horn to summon the Almighty MrGorsh*
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Dr. Hax
Member Avatar


To be fair, I don't like my dinosaurs being turned into fluffballs eithe-Now MrGorsh is gonna kill me.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Megaraptorking
Member Avatar
I stand in the shadows waiting for you to return me to the light.

But you can you cuddle a ugly lizard Tyrannosaurus monster or a fluffy yet just as terrifying fluffy tyrannosaurus monster who does not look like if you kiss it on the side or just hug it would not give you salmonella and the fact is that Yutyrannus had feathers and if it did then why did Tyrannosaurus the false king of the terrible lizards(Birds) not have feathers?

But to better explain this topic Mr.Gorsh and other people who can explain better than me go ahead and finish it and fix the scaly and feathered before it becomes a long as hell debate.

But to be fair some like Ankylosaurus and Carnotaurus never had much feathers to begin with but might still had some fluffy-ness on their underbelly. Besides really there are not many downsides with having feathers many large birds who relate to dinosaurs have feathers in deserts and tropical rainforests and you do not see them becoming giant scaly freaks.
Edited by Megaraptorking, Nov 2 2013, 07:59 PM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Terrena Laxamentum
Member Avatar
There is always something going on...

I only accept feathered dinosaurs only if they have a light coat feathers, not like a walking ball of fluff.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Stan The Man
Member Avatar
Honorary Party Member

And... most people are taking this as a joke.

Seriously guys, if you put some logic in fuzzball dinosaurs, you might see that above dinosaurs (except Yutyrannus of course) covered in protofuzz would be pretty illogical. I mean, protofeathers on dinosaurs would most definantly work more or less the same as fur on mammals. For example, the musk ox and the water buffalo are the same size (I think), yet the former has a really shaggy coat while the latter has the exact opposite sort of coat due to their habitats' climates. Also, giraffes and elephants live in the exact same habitats, yet giraffes have a coat of fur that goes on most every single exterior body part, while elephants have hardly any strands of hair of their body.

Wouldn't the things I listed above also apply to dinosaurs?
Edited by Stan The Man, Nov 2 2013, 07:59 PM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Sheather
Member Avatar
Thank you for the set, Azrael!

The buffalo still has a coat, though.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Dr. Hax
Member Avatar


Terrena Laxamentum
Nov 2 2013, 07:57 PM
I only accept feathered dinosaurs only if they have a light coat feathers, not like a walking ball of fluff.
HOW ARE YOU READING MAH MIND?! But in all seriousness, I tend to give all my nopes to overly-fluffy dinosaurs whenever I see them.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Stan The Man
Member Avatar
Honorary Party Member

Sheather
Nov 2 2013, 07:59 PM
The buffalo still has a coat, though.
I'm pretty sure I said that (if not, please correct my grammar), but as you can see, those two animals have very constrasting coats because one lives in sub-zero temperatures while the other lives in a somewhat scorching landscape.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Jules
Member Avatar
Mihi est imperare orbi universo

Actually, this is not comparable ;) Feathers, unlike fur, protect from the heat too, which means a coat is pretty useful in hot climates too ;)
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Megaraptorking
Member Avatar
I stand in the shadows waiting for you to return me to the light.

Nope.... Dinosaurs are birds, lizards are reptiles, and mammals are mammals... You are comparing a mammal to a giant as hell bird. Where is your logic? Mammals are not dinosaurs neither are lizards (Even though dinosaurs came from reptiles).

So why do you not look at a EMU or a OSTRICH possibly a RHEA all living in tropical climates however have big, bushy, shaggy, coats of feathers making them look like balls of poof. So if dinosaurs are giant birds why did the ones related to ones who had feathers or quills not have those options.

Birds give no crap to the climate unless it is serious climate like Antarctica and they cannot fly. Dinosaurs lived in a sub-tropical to tropical/arid climate constantly even in Antarctica it would be like north america now in the winter just getting a bit colder in the true antarctic winter. So why would the care if they had ten inches of poof, twenty inches of poof, or even thirty inches of poof?

Your doing something idiotic my friend comparing a mammal to a bird I mean yes both are warm blooded and both live on land, breath Oxygen, require food, and have a extra cover upon them. But birds have something mammals don't feathers, mammals lose their coats because instead of fur keeping them on display mammals use it for temperature(Mainly keeping warm) or because they once lived mainly in water, birds however use their coats for display, for keeping simply normal body temperature and some to fly in which dinosaurs never really flew.
Edited by Megaraptorking, Nov 2 2013, 08:10 PM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
DinoBear
Member Avatar


Posted Image

Poor guy gets no love, everybody be hating on feathered dinosaurs.

For me, I like all sorts of feathered dinosaurs, just as long as it's realistic. For example, a T. rex probably wasn't a super poofy ball of fluff, but saying that it had a full coat of feathers that stuck relatively close to it's body isn't unreasonable at all. It's also perfectly reasonable to think that some ceratopsians, like Pachyrhinosaurus, may have had a pretty substantial covering of quills. I'd say any dinosaur might have had some level of feathering. I'm believe that feather like structures were a basal trait of avemetatarsia (spelling?).

I'd also like to note that feathers are just as good at keeping animals cool as they are at keeping them warm. For example, roadrunners live in hot environment, yet they still keep a full coat of feathers.
Edited by DinoBear, Nov 2 2013, 08:13 PM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
4 users reading this topic (4 Guests and 0 Anonymous)
Go to Next Page
« Previous Topic · Extinct Animals & Evolution · Next Topic »
Add Reply