Conference back40::soapbox

    Hey! An experiment!
    
    Is this science?

    Question:
    
    Michael Crichton's book Jurassic Park contains some mention of an
    argument within the paleontological profession regarding the animal
    group to which dinos belonged - were they birds or lizards?  Was this
    an argument dreamed up purely for the book or is it an actual dispute?
    
    If it is an actual argument then one possible explanation for the base
    note's query as to why the smaller species remained when the larger
    ones died out would run as follows:  First, dinos would have been a
    type of bird (also mentioned in JP), not vice versa.  They would have
    been warm blooded and it is an established fact that birds have the
    highest body temperature of any creature.  They are, as a result, the
    most likely to die if hit by unexpected air temperature drops.
    
    Couple this with the gi-huge size of many of these creatures and sling
    in an asteroid for good measure and there are sufficient factors for
    the deaths of the largest animals while the smaller survived.
    
    1.	Asteroid smashes into Earth, throwing up massive amounts of dust,
    probably starting major earthquakes with associated volcanic activity,
    plus tsunamis and you have the equavilent of a nuclear winter.  Our hot
    blooded friends, the 90% not swallowed by fissures or drowned by 100ft
    plus waves, begin to lose enormous amounts of body heat in rates
    proportionate to their bulk.  This kills perhaps one third of the 90%,
    maybe more.
    2.	Most of the sun's light is blocked for decades by the dust in the
    atmosphere.  Large dinos are still dying of cold, those remaining are
    competing for a reducing amount of food brought about by the decrease
    in forest/grazing.  The smaller, nimbler creatures are getting the best
    of this bad deal as they are not losing as much body heat, plus their
    greater mobility enables them to reach the best supply first.
    3.	As the larger herbivores become fewer, the larger carnivores have a
    choice - go onto short rations (literally) or range wider in search of
    prey.  This would lead to increased competition in the latter case,
    which would inevitably result in deaths, and in the former case deeper
    inroads into the stocks of smaller herbivores.
    4.	In the meantime, the smallest carnivores would be subsisting on
    carrion and each other and would likely be too quick on their feet for
    their larger kin.
    5.	Eventually the available vegetation becomes too sparse to support
    the larger herbivores and they serve their last useful purpose by
    providing carrion for the small carnivores.  The T Rex & co starve
    slowly to death.
    6.	Meanwhile the dust etc has been settling, allowing more and more
    sunlight to reach the surface which stimulates the grasses and dormant
    scrub to begin growing.  The dino population is a fraction of what it
    was; the carrion has rotted away and the only way for the remaining
    carnies to survive is to travel, perhaps great distances.  It is still
    bittlerly cold and evolution has been stimulated into extending the
    scales into feathers.  Legs have strengthened and lengthened and the
    creatures exclusively use their hind legs for locomotion.  First Emus?
    Look at any creature which is going to rise to absolute superemacy in
    the survival stakes: Bipedal locomotion and HEIGHT are vital, the
    latter to see/reach further to locate your food source, the former to 
    handle that food when you reach it.  The exceptions from the period are
    alligators and sharks which have remained pretty much the same but look
    at the original designs of them - not much room for improvement.
    7. Feathers are extended scales - proven.  The smaller birds (dinos)
    being lighter and nimbler would perhaps have taken to the trees or
    clifftops to escape predation by others.  Getting up there's easy - ask
    any 7 year old; getting down again bites if you get it wrong.  Lose
    your balance and the instinct is to throw your arms wide - birds were
    probably no different.  Primitive feather arrays acted as a combination
    airfoil and parachute and lo! airborne eating machines.  Sitting
    in treetops was obviously safer than being down below and nuts and
    berries grow in trees. A change of diet gradually takes place and, when
    they're not eating they're watching these strange fish-like things
    taking their first look at dry land.
    
    The rest, as they say......
    
    What do you think? Plausible?
    
    Daz

    'cept that it would happen over a period of years, as opposed to
    millions of years.

RE: 124.2 by PEKING::DP_SECURITY "Is It Morning Yet?"

> Michael Crichton's book Jurassic Park contains some mention of an
> argument within the paleontological profession regarding the animal
> group to which dinos belonged - were they birds or lizards?  Was this
> an argument dreamed up purely for the book or is it an actual dispute?

It's pretty well settled:  birds are dinosaurs.  It was a hot discussion 15
or so years ago.


> What do you think? Plausible?

No. Early birds predate the end of the dinosaurs by 10's of millions of
years.


Phil

    >> It's pretty well settled:  birds are dinosaurs.
    
    
    RAPTOR - Velociraptor
           - Bird of prey

    .4
    
    > It's pretty well settled:  birds are dinosaurs.
    
    in most experts' minds, it's pretty well settled.  however, there are
    still some anomalies to be explained; chief among them is the fact that
    avian ear structure is far closer to crocodilian ear structure than to
    dinosaurian - the difference is so striking, in fact, that recently one
    prominent paleontologist has gone on record saying that birds could not
    have evolved from primitive dinosaur stock because of this difference.
    
    what IS settled, though, is that birds and dinosaurs are both now
    classified as members of a taxonomic class called Archosauria, which is
    divided into subclasses that include Reptilia, Dinosauria, and Aves;
    previously, dinosaurs were classified in class Reptilia and birds were
    in their own class Aves.

    .5
    
    > RAPTOR - Velociraptor
    >        - Bird of prey
    
    no.  a raptor is a thief, not a bird.  eagles and hawks are called
    raptors because they seize and carry off their prey.  vide the dinosaur
    called oviraptor, egg thief, because the first specimens were found in
    nests of eggs and were presumed to have been feeding on the eggs.  it is
    now known that those eggs were in fact oviraptor eggs, and the adults
    found there were mothers, not predators.  but the name sticks.

    One of the shows about dinos on TLC (over turkey-day weekend)
    theorized tha<t some of the larger, faster upright-standing dino's
    may have been feathered. It is postulated that the faster running
    predators like the V-raptors may have been warm-blooded, or at least 
    had some built in blood-warming mechanism. Seeing as how our
    contemporary birds are warm-blooded, and reptiles are not, it is a good
    possibility that dinos had this advantage. 
    
    One other point they made is that a true "dinosaur" had legs which were
    not splayed from the body, as in today's smaller lizards and
    alligators, they were more or less vertical from the hip. 
     

	oh boy, richard, a whole dinosaur topic to play in.
	cool.

    
    
    	Another extinction theory is if Dinosaur sex in determined the
    	same way reptile sex..ei..by the temperature in the nest; too warm
    	or too cold could produce broods of a single sex.
    
    	

    
    
    i hate barney.
    
    but dino is cool...
    
    

Re: <<< Note 124.8 by CSSREG::BROWN "KB1MZ FN42" >>>

>>                             It is postulated that the faster running
>>    predators like the V-raptors may have been warm-blooded, or at least 
>>    had some built in blood-warming mechanism.

If it's the same show I saw a couple of months ago (did they caputre a sea
turtle?) I think the alternate warming system is called "Gigantathermy"
(spelling?) -- the waste heat of the animal keeps it warm, rather than any
dedicated warming "system".

                                  Roak

Well, that's better than swallowing one of those chafing dish warmers,
I suppose.

    raptor = raven, as in  "...rapt, rapt, rapting on my door?"
    		 	   "quoth the raven, nevermore."
    
    velociraptor = raven riding a fast bike.
    
    Man, don't you guys know anything?

    .16
    
    > "Gigantathermy"
    
    not in a velociraptor.  they were about the size of a german shepherd
    dog, roughly 150 pounds in weight.
    
    warming by gigantothermy is postulated for the sauropods (apatosaurs,
    brachiosaurs, et al.) but not for theropods (the predators).  bone
    studies show that theropod bones had structures much like those of
    birds, with charcteristics associated with internal homeothermy.  it is
    possible, in fact some research shows it as quite likely, that the
    bigger theropods, like T. rex, Albertosaurus, et al., may have begun
    life with a system of warm-bloodedness like that of birds but, as they
    grew to adulthood, changed from that system to a system of combined
    gigantothermy and muscular homeothermy (in which activity provides the
    energy and size maintains it).

        Dick, I  seem to remember that "The Making of JP" had a segment
        which explained that  they  (the  JP  folks)  had  invented the
        velociraptor for the movie  - the clear implication was that it
        didn't exist or at least that no remains had ever been found to
        suggest it's existance.
        
        Andy
        

    sorry, &y, they didn't invent the velociraptor.  there is a recognized
    genus Velociraptor.  it's a member of the family Dromaeosauridae, which
    also includes Deinonychus, a rather larger beast, and Utahraptor, one
    that turns out to be about the size of the raptors in jurassic park. 
    the two known velociraptors are V. antirrhopus and v. mongoliensis,
    both from asia.
    
    the reason that the raptors in jp were so big was in order to fit a
    human inside them.  spielberg also excused his failure to adhere to
    known fact by saying they'd be much scarier that size.  as it happened,
    the very first known specimen of Utahraptor was discovered during the
    actual production of the film, thereby justifying the decision after
    the fact.
    
    but spielberg missed the boat on the scariness quotient, i'd be a hell
    of a lot more scared of a critter that vicious and also small enough to
    go everywhere i could go.

Since we're having some serious discussion here -

Any portrayals I've ever seen of triceratops always leave me with the distinct
impression that it was a "very different" sort of beast than most of the
other dinosaurs. In looking at the skelatal structure (as normally
postured) it has more of the appearance of our present day pachyderms
(rhinos, hippos, elephants, ?) than of any of its contemporaries.

Has there been any serious professional thought given to a relationship
or decendency to mammals for them?

        Oh, ok Dick - my interpretation could (easily) have been faulty
        since I know little about them;  I just had a recollection that
        something had been invented  and  took  it  to  be  the vraptor
        itself, rather than it's size for the movie.
        
        Thanks!
        
                a
        

    .22
    
    no.
    
    ceratopsians were ornithischians, meaning that they had a hip structure
    more like that of modern birds than like that of modern lizards.  there
    were many dinosaurs with a quite similar skeletal structure, such as
    stegosaurs and ankylosaurs.  in each case there are modifications, but
    the main structure is pretty basic.
    
    all of these animals were digitigrade, which happens to be true of the
    pachyderms as well, but so were all the sauropods and, for that matter,
    all other dinosaurs - a digitigrade stance is a characteristic of all
    the dinosaurs.
    
    the essential structure of the ceratopsian skull does not resemble the
    skull of any mammal, pachyderm or other; all the dinosaurs were
    diapsids, having two arches in the skull, whereas all mammals are
    synapsids, having only one.  also, pachyderms have no extended carapace
    like that which identifies a ceratopsian.

	&y,

	Possibly you were thinking of the acid-spitting dilophosaurs in
	Jurassic Park.  I was reading a book with my son (over and over
	and over and over...) about the movie, and it mentioned that
	the neck frill, "hooting", and acid were for entertainment
	value, not based in scientific discovery.

	joanne

	

    and they made the dilophousurus only about 1/3 of the size of the real
    ones, thinking to play it for cute value and then shock the audience
    with the discovery that cute isn't always nice.

        That's very  possible, Joanne - my memory ain't what it used to
        be! :^)
        
        &y
        
        PS. Watched MPatHG again last night; "I got better!" :*)
        
	

>> PS. Watched MPatHG again last night; "I got better!" :*)
               ^^^^^^ 
               ^^^^^^
&,

I've already got one, y'see?  .....   Yes, it's very niiiiiice.

        I'm sure  it  is!  Y'know, I can almost imagine you as a Castle
        Anthrax denizen rather than a French Taunter!
        
        

You won't know for sure unless you wander past our
house and we catapult a cow at you, now will you?

And no trojan rabbits, we're onto that one!

        Well, there was only one Scot in there, so you can call me ...
        
                                     Tim!
        
        Signed,
        
        Manky Scots Git (Mrs., retired)
        

    re: earlier...
    
    did somebody mention a 150 pound German Shepherd?
    
    Jesus Mary and Joseph.  That's, what, half again the size of a St.
    Bernard?
    
    Niiiiice doggie...
    
    Or was this the general size of German Shepherds when dinoaurs walked
    the earth?

             <<< Note 124.32 by ODIXIE::CIAROCHI "One Less Dog" >>>

    
>That's, what, half again the size of a St.
>    Bernard?
    
	Not really. St. Bernard's pretty typically run over 200 lbs.

Jim

    
    "Dinosaurs are thin at one end, much much thicker in the middle,
     then thin again at the other end."
    
    						- Ann Elk
    

 I didn't know an elk could talk!

 Chris:   Uhhhh...that's it is it?
    
 Ann:     Right Chris..
    
 Chris:   Well you've certainly seem to have hit the nail on the head...
    
 Ann:     ...and it's mine
    
 Chris:   ..uhh thanks for coming to the studio
    
 Ann:     ...right Chris
    
 Chris:   ...Britian's new open...
    
 Ann:     It's benn alot of fun...
    
 Chris:   ...will be playing at the paramount
    
 Ann:     Telling my theory that is...
    
 Chris:   Ah..yes thankyou
    
 Ann:     And visiting...
    
 Chris:   Yes...Britia...
    
 Ann:     I have another theory...
    
 Chris:   Not now thank you...
    
     Ann:     The theory the second which is mine...eehhheem...spews out
    nonsensical theory
    
    Chris:  Shut Up...WILL YOU PLEASE SHUT UP....Look if you don't shut up
    I shall shoot you....
    
    Ann:   Eeeeehem....The theory I have which is mine which belongs to me
    (POW)......Eh...eh....the theory the second...by Ann (Enter machine
    gun)

 NEW YORK (AP) - Move over, Tyrannosaurus rex.
   Newfound fossils reveal a beast that may be the biggest meat-eating
  dinosaur known, scientists reported today.
   The dinosaur, which resembled T. rex, was 41 to 43 feet long and
  weighed 6 to 8 tons when it roamed the plains of what is now Argentina
  looking for food to chomp with its huge serrated teeth, scientists said.
   It lived about 100 million years ago, which is about 30 million years
  before T. rex appeared, said paleontologist Rodolfo Coria of the Carmen
  Funes Museum in Neuquen, Argentina.
   A bone-by-bone comparison with remains of T. rex suggests the newfound
  creature was slightly longer and matbe 3 tons heavier, Coria said.  He
  and an Argentine colleague reported the find today (9/21/95) in the
  journal Nature.
   The newfound fossils were discovered by an automobile mechanic who hunts
  dinosaur bones as a hobby, Coria said.

   (inset : Gagaotosaurus carolini, roughly translated as "Ruben D.
  Carolini's enormous southern reptile", after the auto mechanic,
  artist's reconstruction of huge monster next to man)

    -1 cool! i like dinosaurs

Seen in the Want Advertiser, complete with picture.

T-REX.  Museum qual dinosaur w/pneumatic jaw movement & life-lk skin.
Nearly 7' tall.  Appearance stops people in their tracks.  Plywood
skeleton, fiberglass substructure & latex skin.  Rigged for smoke mach
for eerie effect.  Creates an incredible attraction for store frt,
restaurant, amusement ctr or lg game rm.  Vy hvy, will provide prof
moving.  Best model of its kind in NE.  $5995.

 .39  you watch - it'll be hanging over richard's cube pretty soon.

But it's vy hvy.

    No prb w vy hvy rp