 | | Evidence of Warm Blooded Dinosaurs
|
|
Anyone interested in Dinosaurs should check this out: (URL) Pretty cool, huh? :) Jeff (25 years ago, 24-Apr-00, to lugnet.off-topic.fun)
|
| |
| | Re: Evidence of Warm Blooded Dinosaurs
|
|
(...) I saw that! It sort of confirms what palaeontologists have thought since about 1980. The fact that it's a plant-eater is more interesting, though--the suggestion existed that "only predators needed that level of energy." Hm. best LFB (25 years ago, 24-Apr-00, to lugnet.off-topic.fun)
|
| |
| | Re: Evidence of Warm Blooded Dinosaurs
|
|
(...) A similiar article appeared in the L.A. Times. One would suspect that warm-bloodedness goes back at least till the dinosaur-mammal split given the plant-eater angle. Bruce (25 years ago, 24-Apr-00, to lugnet.off-topic.fun)
|
| |
| | Re: Evidence of Warm Blooded Dinosaurs
|
|
(...) Oh man, it's funny how the media is taking this as a bold new theory that is just now seeing the light of day. Horner, Bakker et al. published their thoughts on this stuff -- with much media fanfare -- ten years ago or so. Much of the (...) (25 years ago, 24-Apr-00, to lugnet.off-topic.fun)
|
| |
| | Re: Evidence of Warm Blooded Dinosaurs
|
|
(...) This prompted me to pull out one of my dinosaur books, and examine the dinosaur family tree. :) Anyway, if this chart is correct (it's ten years old, but I doubt its changed much), then I'd guess Dinosaurs and mammals both evolved (...) (25 years ago, 25-Apr-00, to lugnet.off-topic.fun)
|
| |
| | Re: Evidence of Warm Blooded Dinosaurs
|
|
(...) The article, to me, seemed to be saying that this was the most conclusive evidence found yet... Of course, I could've misinterpreted it. :) (...) Unidentified specimen? It is from a Thescelosaurus... The best example yet... Also, see my post (...) (25 years ago, 25-Apr-00, to lugnet.off-topic.fun)
|
| |
| | Re: Evidence of Warm Blooded Dinosaurs
|
|
(...) Darn sacci-frasso-rassin' kids, stealin' my thunder...;) But yeah, that's the story. Why do crocodiles not have a high, warm-blooded metabolism? They don't need it, and have never needed it. They're archosaurs like monotremes are (...) (25 years ago, 25-Apr-00, to lugnet.off-topic.fun)
|
| |
| | Re: Evidence of Warm Blooded Dinosaurs
|
|
(...) Ichthyosaurs absolutely did (there's a famous fossil of an Ophthalmosaurus that died while giving birth and was somehow fossilized), so there's no reason that archosaurs didn't. Oh, regarding that end-of-the-sauropods argument, there are (...) (25 years ago, 25-Apr-00, to lugnet.off-topic.fun)
|
| |
| | Re: Evidence of Warm Blooded Dinosaurs
|
|
(...) the (...) dinosaur (...) I (...) don't (...) "Predatory (...) conflates (...) based (...) bird (...) thus (...) juvenile, (...) made (...) into (...) (which (...) yes. (...) to (...) to (...) suggests (...) and (...) our (...) as the (...) (...) (25 years ago, 25-Apr-00, to lugnet.off-topic.fun)
|
| |
| | Re: Evidence of Warm Blooded Dinosaurs
|
|
(...) True, however, Ichthyosaurs are definitely not a good example, if you ask me. Sharks, after all, give birth to live young(I'm not sure about all of them, but I think they do), so perhaps laying eggs is a poor choice for large sea-going (...) (25 years ago, 25-Apr-00, to lugnet.off-topic.fun)
|
| |
| | Re: Evidence of Warm Blooded Dinosaurs
|
|
(...) There's even some debate as to whether ichthyosaurs were true dinosaurs anyway. (...) Yah, I was...Mondays. :-, (...) What ideas were those? Cheers, - jsproat (25 years ago, 25-Apr-00, to lugnet.off-topic.fun)
|
| |
| | Re: Evidence of Warm Blooded Dinosaurs
|
|
(...) As far as I know, there is no debate. Icthyosaurs are not Dinosaurs, just as Pterosaurs aren't Dinosaurs either. :) However, all three types are Archosaurs. :) (...) First, the sauropod (in this case, Diplodocus) dug a hole with its rear feet. (...) (25 years ago, 25-Apr-00, to lugnet.off-topic.fun)
|
| |
| | Re: Evidence of Warm Blooded Dinosaurs
|
|
(...) Er, yeah. That's what I said. ;-) "Archosaur" == "ancient lizard"? I guess I need to look that one up in the standard literature. (...) A prehensile ovipositor, eh? LOL -- I just watched _Aliens_. I wonder how much scarier that movie would've (...) (25 years ago, 25-Apr-00, to lugnet.off-topic.fun)
|
| |
| | Re: Evidence of Warm Blooded Dinosaurs
|
|
(...) I've never heard of it, so I'll have to check this book out. :) (...) I find this hard to swallow. What happened to their skulls and the wishbone? It is true that some birds later evolved into Dinosaur-like creatures(1), but I wouldn't use (...) (25 years ago, 25-Apr-00, to lugnet.off-topic.fun)
|
| |
| | Re: Evidence of Warm Blooded Dinosaurs
|
|
(...) :D IIRC, Archosaur means "Ruling Lizard". Actually, I'm quite sure. (Monarch = single ruler... :D ) (...) I guess so! :) (...) (I'm gonna get it for this one...) I suppose I'd find that funny if I'd actually seen that movie. :) Jeff (25 years ago, 25-Apr-00, to lugnet.off-topic.fun)
|
| |
| | Re: Evidence of Warm Blooded Dinosaurs
|
|
(...) The jury's still out on plesiosaurs, mosasaurs, pliosaurs, and so forth--but some people believe that sauroptergyians (IIRC, that's the blanket name for plesio/pliosaurs) actually flippered onto shore to lay eggs like turtles. But that might (...) (25 years ago, 26-Apr-00, to lugnet.off-topic.fun)
|
| |
| | Re: Evidence of Warm Blooded Dinosaurs
|
|
(...) That's just it--the distinction is unclear. The thought is that some late dromaeosaurs have archaeoptergyian skeletal features that really shouldn't have evolved independently unless the former were secondarily flightless. For example, what (...) (25 years ago, 26-Apr-00, to lugnet.off-topic.fun)
|
| |
| | Re: Evidence of Warm Blooded Dinosaurs
|
|
(...) Was that a jest? I can't tell. To correct or to let lie, that is the question. "Arch" is the prefix for "old". Like "archaic". "Monarch" originally meant "old man". Eventually, its meaning was narrowed to the person who was typically the most (...) (25 years ago, 26-Apr-00, to lugnet.off-topic.fun)
|
| |
| | Re: Evidence of Warm Blooded Dinosaurs
|
|
(...) I'm not very current on dino-topics, but isn't "Dinosaur" something of a bum categorization? I thought there are/were a number of critters lumped in as dinosaurs, who aren't any more related to each other than they are to other, (...) (25 years ago, 26-Apr-00, to lugnet.off-topic.fun)
|
| |
| | Re: Evidence of Warm Blooded Dinosaurs
|
|
(...) question. (...) the person (...) of the word (...) Cut and paste from on-line dictionary: 15th century. Directly or via French monarque from late Latin monarcha from Greek monarkhos , literally "to rule alone," from mono- "alone" + arkhein "to (...) (25 years ago, 26-Apr-00, to lugnet.off-topic.fun)
|
| |
| | Re: Evidence of Warm Blooded Dinosaurs
|
|
(...) Nope, I wasn't jesting. I am not a jester, after all. (...) I believe you are thinking of "archaeo", as in Archaeopteryx. :) "The Dinosaur Data Book" says, and I quote, "gave rise to the archosaurs or 'ruling reptiles'" (...) Maybe we do need (...) (25 years ago, 26-Apr-00, to lugnet.off-topic.fun)
|
| |
| | Re: Evidence of Warm Blooded Dinosaurs
|
|
(...) That's correct. But "ancient" is palaeo-. ;) In "archaic" it's that last "a" that makes the difference--it's a merger of "archae" + "-ic". (...) There is an off-topic.bs...off-topic.geek. ;) Part of the reason why the words are so close, (...) (25 years ago, 28-Apr-00, to lugnet.off-topic.fun)
|
