Dinosaur Extinction?

[Livewire]

The only reason humans are still alive is because we have an understanding of diseases.
If you think along those lines, it's almost a 'duh' that diseases played a part in the extinction of dinosaurs.
The meteor may have ensured their extinction but imo disease has had a very large role in it.

However, I'm not going to discuss whether flies / moths killed dinosaurs because anything can be a vector.

Carbon dating is a retarted thing to use as evidence for millions of years ago.

If a virus or a disease were to blame, it would have shown up in the dinosaurs bones, as many lethal diseases leave chemical markers. For example, tuberculosis, radiation poisoning, and plenty of other lethal diseases are easily discernible in skeletons (of any animal, human, Dinosaur or otherwise) because of the irregular bone growth and the bone's overall shape and mass. A disease that rampant and deadly would show up in the fossil record, and it wouldn't kill selectively- the mammals, fish, and other reptile species that survived would have caught it too.

And Carbon/Isotope dating isn't "retarded", for starters. Isotope Analysis is a fool proof system of dating things at a molecular level when performed correctly.

 

[Kotowari]

And Carbon/Isotope dating isn't "retarded", for starters. Isotope Analysis is a fool proof system of dating things at a molecular level when performed correctly.

Agreed. I have a class of Isotope Geology next semester, so yes, it is very important. And not only in dating.

As I stated earlier however, Carbon is usually used for the more recent history.
Carbon id only reliable fro... what 140000 years? I can't remember that well...
Other elements like O, Sr/K and S are favoured.
Combine that research with the International Geological Time Scale chart combined with the Magnetic Time Scale, and you got yourself a pretty believable and trustworthy dating system.

Of course CaCO3 and other organic fossils do not contain iron-minerals like Magnetite, but the Time scales based on radiometric isotopes do the job pretty well.
And relative dating shouldn't be forgotten either.

 

[Waffle-San]

The only reason humans are still alive is because we have an understanding of diseases.

Humans have definately not had a very good understanding of diseases throughout the majority of our history. Our survival is a testament to our ability to adapt quickly to almost any living condition. Superior communication is arguably a factor as well.

The Dinosaurs had many natural defense mechanisms that kept them alive for an amount of time we can only dream of achieving. It caused something major to wipe them out, enormous temperature changes can easily wipe out an unprepared species. Not to mention what it would do to their food sources, a rodent needs to eat a lot less than a dinosaur and can reproduce many times faster. =/

 

[beauty. proletariat]

Carbon Isotope dating, like I said before, is USELESS when you get into the millions.

It is useless for any time peroid beyond ~60-70 thousand years ago, relatively accurate for upto ~40000 years range.

Never knew that disease can be detected in bones however.

 

[OmegaRuby and AlphaSapphire]

An asteroid hit the earth around 65 million years ago, near the Yucatan peninsula in central Mexico. Also, if one looks in the soil layers around that time, you'll see a thick layer of black ash, called the kt boundry. The asteroid theory is the accepted view in mainstream science today. As for the Jurassic Park scenario, it is actually feasible, but it's still within the realm of science fiction, for now.

I find it funny that the Maya were in Yucatan and predicted something in 2012 and that an astroid hit there a long time ago that ended life or the dinosaurs...
Well sometimes the Mainstream is wrong but you are right there is lots of proof for it...but I wonder why birds didn't die out...I mean small dinosaurs should have survived as mostly small animals survived this big extinction...unless the small dinosaurs all evolved into birds thus ending the dinosaur line...but still other big animals did survive...
Speaking of extictions there were tons of extictions before the dinosaurs...actually 90 something % or so of all life that ever lived on earth at any time is said to be extinct...

 

[Livewire]

I find it funny that the Maya were in Yucatan and predicted something in 2012 and that an astroid hit there a long time ago that ended life or the dinosaurs...
Well sometimes the Mainstream is wrong but you are right there is lots of proof for it...but I wonder why birds didn't die out...I mean small dinosaurs should have survived as mostly small animals survived this big extinction...unless the small dinosaurs all evolved into birds thus ending the dinosaur line...but still other big animals did survive...
Speaking of extictions there were tons of extictions before the dinosaurs...actually 90 something % or so of all life that ever lived on earth at any time is said to be extinct...

Well Birds first surfaced during the Jurassic, in the form of Archeopteryx, so it really wasn't a traditional "bird" as we know it. They evolved later. But remember, the extinction was gradual- Dinosaurs still lived, died, and evolved for a little bit after the KT event 65 MYA. So in a way, they survived, just as birds instead.

There really weren't many large land vertebrates left after it. Small mammals and birds that lived very frugally survived, because quite frankly, the planet was a wasteland after the KT event.

 

[OmegaRuby and AlphaSapphire]

Well Birds first surfaced during the Jurassic, in the form of Archeopteryx, so it really wasn't a traditional "bird" as we know it. They evolved later. But remember, the extinction was gradual- Dinosaurs still lived, died, and evolved for a little bit after the KT event 65 MYA. So in a way, they survived, just as birds instead.

There really weren't many large land vertebrates left after it. Small mammals and birds that lived very frugally survived, because quite frankly, the planet was a wasteland after the KT event.

True, the only big animals I can think up that survived KT were water animals such as the Crocodile...
The sad thing is that if another KT like event were to happen only small animals would survive and we humans would die out (we are fairly big compared to the mammals that survived the Kt)

 

[Waffle-San]

True, the only big animals I can think up that survived KT were water animals such as the Crocodile...
The sad thing is that if another KT like event were to happen only small animals would survive and we humans would die out (we are fairly big compared to the mammals that survived the Kt)

Not so fast there MRAS. Our numbers would certainly be decimated (in a way more people dying could help our species) and civilization would cease to exist how we know it but to our core Humans are determined, stubborn and adaptible species. I think we'd survive, what we know today as life probably wouldn't but some humans would find a way. People in Russia, for example, would probably be fairly unaffected by the impact itself but would suffer through the aftermath, something that we have to intelligence to do.

But the key is that a large amount of our species dies out and only a small percentage survive. Life on earth would be decimated, including our food supply, so numbers wouldn't exactly equal a good thing. Humans are inheritently greedy, but who wouldn't be to survive?

 

[Rich Boy Rob]

But the key is that a large amount of our species dies out and only a small percentage survive. Life on earth would be decimated, including our food supply, so numbers wouldn't exactly equal a good thing. Humans are inheritently greedy, but who wouldn't be to survive?

The most important thing is that those that survive would be those resistant to the factors that killed the rest of our species and in the terms of an asteroid, that would (disregarding our smooshiness when hit by several mile wide rocks) be the cold. Something that reptiles aren't very good with, being cold blooded 'n all. This would mean that we would start to evolve to be better suited to the cold, likely retracing our evolutionary steps in the form of fur. Either or as well as that we would also presumably be made up of those from developed countries, as we would be more able to shelter from the dust/cold.

In any case, we wouldn't last long as a species (in terms of Homo Sapiens) as we would probably be superseded by our evolutionary cousins nieces and nephews. Although there is always a chance that those who could simply survive out in the cold could just split off as a separate, but parallel species to the scientifically minded Humans.

 

[OmegaRuby and AlphaSapphire]

Not so fast there MRAS. Our numbers would certainly be decimated (in a way more people dying could help our species) and civilization would cease to exist how we know it but to our core Humans are determined, stubborn and adaptible species. I think we'd survive, what we know today as life probably wouldn't but some humans would find a way. People in Russia, for example, would probably be fairly unaffected by the impact itself but would suffer through the aftermath, something that we have to intelligence to do.

But the key is that a large amount of our species dies out and only a small percentage survive. Life on earth would be decimated, including our food supply, so numbers wouldn't exactly equal a good thing. Humans are inheritently greedy, but who wouldn't be to survive?

Well the dinosaurs in different continents died as well so I think the same will happen to man kind...but that's just my own little theory...

 

[Waffle-San]

Well the dinosaurs in different continents died as well so I think the same will happen to man kind...but that's just my own little theory...

The dinosaurs lived in a fairly warmer earth and as Rich Boy Bob hinted on, weren't able to deal with the resulting cold. Not too mention the hit plant life would take from the changing weather thus giving plant eaters nothing to eat which in turn gave large predators nothing to survive on. This is all relative to the size though. An asteroid the size of North America would certainly spell our doom. :P

 

[Kung Fu Ferret]

The meteor is most likely.

I think cloning Ice Age beasties is more likely than cloning dinosaurs.

 

[Kaean]

Cloning ice age beasts is more likely then the dinosaurs, but not
by to many magnitudes. To clone anything we would need a intact
chain of a DNA molecule. However DNA is very weak, as far as
molecules are concerned, and start to break down very quickly after
death. One would need a sample that had been frozen almost
immediately right after death occurred and to have stayed that way
for hundreds of thousands of years, as well as finding an animal to
serve as a surrogate. So while ice age creatures are more likely I
still don't think we'll be seeing them anytime soon, if at all.

 

[xMeowthz]

No... but spreading a disease which killed off most dinosaurs, perhaps.
Also, what scientists? All you've said is as effective as saying "some argue".
Last, how are we supposed to know what they contain is 'dinosaur blood' anyway? I can imagine using DNA from fossils (assuming that can be done), but go on...

One dinosaur was unlucky to be drained, but disease came. Also, it's not just about "dinosaur blood", but also DNA samples from fossils, like you said.

Also, many people think that most reptiles are related to dinosaurs. I don't find that true, as though it's easy to imagine, their body parts are similar, but DNA is vastly different. Studied by several archeologists, dinosaurs are different, very different from reptiles. It's basically what separates cats from monkeys, kids.


~Massacre.

 

[Jeni7783]

I accept with the meteor theory. I don't accept with the theory of insects.

 

[Livewire]

One dinosaur was unlucky to be drained, but disease came. Also, it's not just about "dinosaur blood", but also DNA samples from fossils, like you said.

Also, many people think that most reptiles are related to dinosaurs. I don't find that true, as though it's easy to imagine, their body parts are similar, but DNA is vastly different. Studied by several archeologists, dinosaurs are different, very different from reptiles. It's basically what separates cats from monkeys, kids.


~Massacre.

Cats and Monkeys are both mammals, so a large chunk of their DNA is identical. You forget that humans and Chimpanzees share 98% of their DNA. A human shares half their genetic material with your average back yard Tree.

And no, Dinosaurs were Reptiles. "Deinos" being Greek for terrible, "Saurus" being Greek for, lizard. They were an older class of Reptiles, some of which later evolved into birds during the Jurassic.

 

[Poster]

Cats and Monkeys are both mammals, so a large chunk of their DNA is identical. You forget that humans and Chimpanzees share 98% of their DNA. A human shares half their genetic material with your average back yard Tree.

And no, Dinosaurs were Reptiles. "Deinos" being Greek for terrible, "Saurus" being Greek for, lizard. They were an older class of Reptiles, some of which later evolved into birds during the Jurassic.

Correction: Δεινός means fierce. I'm Greek, I know better, right? The part about reptiles is correct, though.

No matter what, though, you can't help but notice the similarities that Dinosaurs have with lizards. Although the birds are indeed the closest species to be identified as the 'descendants'.

 

[Livewire]

Correction: Δεινός means fierce. I'm Greek, I know better, right? The part about reptiles is correct, though.

No matter what, though, you can't help but notice the similarities that Dinosaurs have with lizards. Although the birds are indeed the closest species to be identified as the 'descendants'.

derives from Greek δεινός (deinos) "terrible, powerful, wondrous" + σαῦρος (sauros) "lizard"

Synonyms.


Birds are the living descendants, and the proto-bird/dinosaur ancestors somehow manged to survive the KT event at the end of the Cretaceous.

 

[Otherworld9)]

True Identity

I believe an asteroid might have as well destroyed at least 10 to 20% of dinosaurs, but most must have lived. As mentioned, a virus could have killed the rest, along with the ice age, which the temperatures could have killed the remaining survivors in my opinion. However, I consider crocodiles and such insects to be still living dinosaurs, and some were discovered via ocean and water.

 

[WriteThemWrong]

Correction: Δεινός means fierce. I'm Greek, I know better, right? The part about reptiles is correct, though.

No matter what, though, you can't help but notice the similarities that Dinosaurs have with lizards. Although the birds are indeed the closest species to be identified as the 'descendants'.

they were reptiles but dinosaurs are also classified by their anatomy; there are lizard-hipped dinosaurs than there are bird-hipped dinosaurs. both were reptiles but bird-hipped dinos must've been able to survive after KT extinction to evolve into modern day birds