|
Post by Tyrannax on Dec 29, 2008 6:47:42 GMT
Would it have even been remotely possible for Homo Sapiens, using spears and other primitive tools/weapons, to actually survive easily through the late Cretaceous? We have evidence of Neanderthals hunting mammoths and other large prehistoric mammals, but dinosaurs are reptiles, meaning they can take a larger beating and heal from it much easier. Could they actually take down Tyrannosaurus using spears? They were able to fight off mammoths, but remember, mammoths weren't quite as large and weren't predatory either, meaning they didn't have as much experience in hunting and/or fighting. I'm sure it would have been almost certainly possible to kill a dinosaur, but could they really out compete Dromeosaurus, Triceratops, Tyrannosaurus, etc?
What are your opinions?
|
|
|
Post by sid on Dec 29, 2008 11:25:46 GMT
Obviously NO.
Humans would have been mince meat in a matter of seconds if they lived in the Cretaceous ;D
|
|
|
Post by arioch on Dec 29, 2008 12:56:12 GMT
One thing are bears and smilodon , and another T. rexes and his hungry and fast babies (i donĀ“t speak about dromaeosaurids, cause they are overrated). Maybe the humans could survive for some time hiding in caves, but the hunt would be too dangerous, even with good quality weapons...
|
|
|
Post by sbell on Dec 29, 2008 13:22:56 GMT
Depends on numbers. A group of 5 or 6 could probably eke out a decent living--stay in dense forest, eat small mammals and reptiles, scavenge when the opportunity arises. With larger groups, hunting even a mighty T.rex would not be such a difficult task, if they were so inclined (I would think it makes more sense to hunt hadrosaurs, since they don't actually bite). A well coordinated hunt and some planning--pits, spears, fire, and well-chosen terrain--would easily put the humans at an advantage, just as we have always done against other animals that would appear invincible. T.rex, like every other animal, is just an animal, and can be dealt with as such (not saying there would be no risk, but then, there always is).
|
|
|
Post by arioch on Dec 29, 2008 13:46:17 GMT
Well, using tricks and traps, it could be.... but look, theres too many lesser factors.
Does the humans had enough time to prepare traps, considering the huge sense of smell of rex and his territorial instinct? and how many humans could die to beat just one tyrannosaur, with his fast reflexes and excellent eyesight? the percentage of casualties would be too high...
Tyrannosaurus inst just another animal more. IS the animal who evolved to kill fast anything of his size, with an incredibly robust and dynamic build, so effective that he had no real competitors in his environment, unlike almost all the big theropods of another periods, who coexisted with another species of carnosaurs. But tyrannosauridea erased the competition in all levels.
So, for me, the most sensible for this cretaceous humans should be follow the herds of hadrosaurids and beat them usually ...and be prepare to run in every moment. ;D
|
|
|
Post by [][][]cordylus[][][] on Dec 29, 2008 14:41:19 GMT
Could homo sapiens live in the cretaceous?
HAHAHA! Yeah right! Wait- where in the creataceous? I suppose sbell is right in some of his points...
But still, even if you managed to not get eaten by a trex- You would get sick from dozens of deseases, bacteria, etc that haven't been discovered today. It was REALLY hot back then too, so it would be very uncomfortable, and people would smell really bad. I hear it was really moist too, maybe humans could suffer respiratory infections from that.
|
|
|
Post by sbell on Dec 29, 2008 15:42:54 GMT
I did forget that the 'where' is important too. And even the 'when' in the Cretaceous. On the coasts of Texas when Deinosuchus and Albertosaurus, plus several small dromaeosaurs, were wandering around? Or in South America, when the predators were so large that a little human would seem pointless?
And while it's true that tyrannosaurids were master predators in their time, I think we can blame a history of movies, culminating in the JP movies, for thinking that there is something attractive about eating humans. Would a 44 ft dinosaur really be bothered with a skinny little mammal--who would pretty much smell and taste like the other familiar mammals of its time? Probably not; JP aside, the large predators are not going to bother with small, unfamiliar prey--unless it gets in the way. Hadrosaurs would still be the most likely route (actually, small mammals and reptiles would be the most likely route, but let's pretend these humans are motivated) but that would bring them into direct competition with their other predators--and we humans know how that usually turns out...
As for diseases--most pathogens are host specific unless prolonged contact allows for a jump. Not saying that there wouldn't be one that could right away, but you generally would not need to worry about a dino flu. Unless you domesticate them, remove their inclination to escape, and start breeding them for increased egg and breast meat production (as an example).
|
|
|
Post by [][][]cordylus[][][] on Dec 29, 2008 15:49:27 GMT
^ I am not just talking about dinosaur diseases, but maybe different parasites carried by flies, some type of intestinal worm, etc. We don't know how diseases really "worked" back then.
|
|
|
Post by Tyrannax on Dec 29, 2008 17:35:52 GMT
I'm talking about if they lived near Texas. That would definitely put them at competition with Dromeosaurus, Tyrannosaurus, and Deinosuchus for food. I doubt any homo sapien would voluntarily try to kill a Tyrannosaurus when much easier prey (Hadrosaurs, and Dromeosaurs) were around. Obviously they were smart, but having to fight off possible disease, dealing with harsher weather conditions and protecting your group from animals that could kill you instantly in my opinion would have drove the species to extinction.
Its not a surprise early humanoids were able to take down mammoths with a small group of 5 people. Mammoths were relatively not agile when it came to attack. They could charge quickly, but when an elephant charges, its easy to move out of the way as they cannot turn so well. Plus, their skin would have been easier to pierce. Not as easy as today's elephants as Mammoths had a layer of fat, but it would have been much easier then say, the skin of Tyrannosaurus. Plus, Tyrannosaurus would have been more agile and ravenous if it were being attacked. One whack with its head could send a homo sapien flying. So, in my opinion, they would have been wiped out.
|
|
|
Post by sbell on Dec 29, 2008 18:06:42 GMT
Some good points, but I am amused at the idea of the 'ease' with which an elephant's skin is pierced--have you seen the size of spear heads required? Or the size of rifle required? To be honest, elephant (or rhino) skin is probably a good functional equivalent for the skin of a large dinosaur. A long, fire-hardened pointy stick would work in a pinch; I am guessing that traps would be more probable (to ensure survival of the hunted).
And to be fair--there were lots of animals in Africa that would have been more than happy to drive humans to extinction, but they failed. Diseases like Malaria were always there. Yet somehow people, with far less advanced knowledge, were able to survive and take over.
One other key--intelligence. It is highly unlikely that those humans would ever attack a rex, or a Deinosuchus (note-the two never lived together--tyrannosaurid maybe). They would likely never even stay near a rex (the crocs would pose less threat on land). If someone was foolish enough to get within head butt range, it would be because they were either stupid or not paying attention.
So is the question, would just a random sample of modern people, sent back in time, survive? Or would people that have survived up until that time survive? If modern people, it depends on the people (short answer--probably not long). If it was people that had evolved up until that time, then most likely yes, they would be (more or less) fine; if a little nervous.
|
|
|
Post by kuni on Dec 29, 2008 18:17:18 GMT
I suspect they could, and when it comes to tyrannosaurs, the population could be decimated just via egg-stealing and perhaps via intentional fires. I suspect dromeosaurs(and perhaps, quick-moving juvenile rexes) would pose a more significant problem for early humans, particularly if dromeosaurs were as good at getting into trees as paleontologists think.
In general, humans have always been quite good at eliminating megafauna, either through direct hunting or by impacting the ecosystem so there isn't enough food for the higher trophic levels.
|
|
|
Post by stoneage on Dec 30, 2008 0:54:23 GMT
;D I think that since the smartest of Dinosaurs was no smarter then an Opossum that if man had evolved along with Dinosaurs he would have learned to hunt and kill them. By observation man would quickly learn how to trick them. They would have become extinct much sooner if man had been there. T-Rex was dumb compared with todays animals. ;D
|
|
|
Post by Tyrannax on Dec 30, 2008 6:13:22 GMT
^ Some believe Tyrannosaurus was as smart as out thinking a modern house cat stoneage. ;D Even so, it posed no chance at homo sapiens. It did have size on its size, and a few spears wouldn't cut it. I suspect traps would be a much better idea. But like sbell said, homo sapiens would most likely stay out of their way. Herbivorous and smaller predatory dinosaurs would have been an easier hunt.
|
|
|
Post by kuni on Dec 30, 2008 6:25:24 GMT
And if you kill enough herbivores, you mess up the ecosystem and kill the apex predator indirectly.
|
|
|
Post by Tyrannax on Dec 30, 2008 9:04:30 GMT
Thats more likely.
In any case, I doubt homo sapiens could survive long.
|
|
|
Post by [][][]cordylus[][][] on Dec 30, 2008 19:53:33 GMT
And if you kill enough herbivores, you mess up the ecosystem and kill the apex predator indirectly. .......... Or drive the apex predator into killing you. ;D
|
|
|
Post by [][][]cordylus[][][] on Dec 30, 2008 19:54:42 GMT
^ Some believe Tyrannosaurus was as smart as out thinking a modern house cat stoneage. ;D Even so, it posed no chance at homo sapiens. It did have size on its size, and a few spears wouldn't cut it. I suspect traps would be a much better idea. But like sbell said, homo sapiens would most likely stay out of their way. Herbivorous and smaller predatory dinosaurs would have been an easier hunt. House cats aren't all that smart, T... And troodon was smarter than rex by a few IQ points I believe.
|
|
|
Post by sbell on Dec 30, 2008 20:14:42 GMT
And if you kill enough herbivores, you mess up the ecosystem and kill the apex predator indirectly. .......... Or drive the apex predator into killing you. ;D Yeah, just like tigers have...Bears are good at...sabre tooth cats were able to...wolves are holding their own in most of their...well we certainly can't compete against raccoons, now, can we? ^ Some believe Tyrannosaurus was as smart as out thinking a modern house cat stoneage. ;D Even so, it posed no chance at homo sapiens. It did have size on its size, and a few spears wouldn't cut it. I suspect traps would be a much better idea. But like sbell said, homo sapiens would most likely stay out of their way. Herbivorous and smaller predatory dinosaurs would have been an easier hunt. House cats aren't all that smart, T... And troodon was smarter than rex by a few IQ points I believe. I have a cat that I guarantee would not be a cause for bragging rights for rexes.
|
|
|
Post by [][][]cordylus[][][] on Dec 30, 2008 20:24:04 GMT
As you once put it, your "good for nothing, pain-in-the-arse cat", sbell? ;D
|
|
|
Post by stoneage on Dec 31, 2008 0:11:29 GMT
^ Some believe Tyrannosaurus was as smart as out thinking a modern house cat stoneage. ;D Even so, it posed no chance at homo sapiens. It did have size on its size, and a few spears wouldn't cut it. I suspect traps would be a much better idea. But like sbell said, homo sapiens would most likely stay out of their way. Herbivorous and smaller predatory dinosaurs would have been an easier hunt. ;D Who believes that T-Rex was as smart as a modern house cat? What's your source? ;D
|
|