|
Post by tomhet on Jan 2, 2009 0:36:13 GMT
Meh, Rey's so called 'artistic abilities' are non-existant ;D He doesn't even know how to figure out perspective Not surprisingly, they've used cladistics to justify claims like 'birds are theropods', 'theropods were birds' and stuff like that. While we're at it, why don't we just claim that we are invertebrates too? We descend from one. That's why I don't trust that classification ;D
|
|
|
Post by tetonbabydoll on Jan 2, 2009 0:43:11 GMT
Ning believes in dragons, man. I'd recommend getting some good dino+evolution books, so you won't feel like you're floundering(though I've seen no evidence your level of knowledge is particularly low...). I just got Holtz and Rey's "Dinosaurs: The Most Complete Up-to-Date Encyclopedia for Dinosaur Lovers of All Ages", and it's really fantastic! Holtz explains cladistics and talks about the major groups of dinosaurs in a phylogenetic context. In addition, he has tons of little "asides" where he tells you about recent research that's improving our knowledge of dinosaurs, and he solicited contributions from 33 different paleontologists (not all of whom agree!) so you can get a sense of how these scientists approach paleontology. I feel I have a good basic understanding of the theories behind cladistics. Surprisingly enough, I learned myself how to read..... No, seriously I get what is being said, I'm just saying that at some time we may think differently. It is an ongoing process. That is all. And I still think that birds, if they are dinos, have evolved so much that their behavior MAY not truly be comparable to their **possible** ancestors. Now, the crocs on the other hand, may be much closer behavior wise, they don't seem to have changed all that much over time.
|
|
|
Post by kuni on Jan 2, 2009 0:55:10 GMT
Meh, Rey's so called 'artistic abilities' are non-existant ;D He doesn't even know how to figure out perspective Well, at the very least he forgot about perspective once he jumped to Photoshop! I still like a lot of his work, but it's telling that his best pictures in that book are the ones at the beginning of each chaper, with dinosaurs on a blank white background. His colors are a little out there sometimes, but his anatomy is usually quite good....bills on spinosaurids excepted... Not surprisingly, they've used cladistics to justify claims like 'birds are theropods', 'theropods were birds' and stuff like that. While we're at it, why don't we just claim that we are invertebrates too? We descend from one. That's why I don't trust that classification ;D Diagnosis: Moderate case of hyperbole, with a possible underlying cause of "not quite understanding phylogenetics". You should get that looked at.
|
|
|
Post by kuni on Jan 2, 2009 0:57:20 GMT
[And I still think that birds, if they are dinos, have evolved so much that their behavior MAY not truly be comparable to their **possible** ancestors. Now, the crocs on the other hand, may be much closer behavior wise, they don't seem to have changed all that much over time. That's totally legit, and as backed up by evidence as any of the other theories. I generally prefer comparing dinos to crocodilians, but I make an exception for maniraptorans, since they're sister to birds.
|
|
|
Post by crazycrowman on Jan 2, 2009 5:48:24 GMT
Wow. 0-o
I am actually only going to be here for today, (I just got home about an hour ago), and tomorrow before I am off for 2 weeks to south Florida to bird watch and also to go rooting around the Peace River for fossils, but I wanted to check in and see what was up on the list...
Alot more then I expected.
To address a few points in brief, as for birds that "pack hunt" Harris hawks, Striated Caracaras, and corvids all hunt cooperatively, and Harris and corvids work in groups very similar to wolves. (If anyone would like to know where I am making the statement from, please refer back to my list of books on corvids and corvid behavior I posted a time ago) Some researchers and scientists go as far as calling corvids, specifically ravens, "Wolf-birds".
While I think it is unlikely that dromeosaurs had the kind of "social smarts" that birds like corvids (and probably many other passerines) (Though not impossible) I would say its possible, even likely, that there were have been pack hunting dinosaurs. I think most of what can be said about behavior not being something we can really try to determine one way or another about in a prehistoric animal rings pretty true. We have far more evidence that these animals would have all had feathers then we do that they could/would/did/didn't/couldn't pack hunt.
As for dromeosaurs in trees...Small ones, maybe. Anything larger then a turkey, I think that even if they could get up there, it would be unlikely that they would want to, unless it was a very low tree and a bored/hungry animal who was after some tidbit. I wouldn't expect it really, as they do not seem to be suited to that sort of lifestyle.
|
|
|
Post by richard on Jan 2, 2009 6:56:55 GMT
Wheather you do or don't do feathered raptors, I think THIS is just absurd.... The class may now discuss . yes it is... and the feathers are not classy I mean look at it, it's pseudo scaly
|
|
|
Post by arioch on Jan 2, 2009 13:01:16 GMT
Okay, for the last time, it's *not* simple cooperative behavior. The article(and the original Science paper) specifically talks about how the hawks will do "false dives" with no chance of predation success to give others in the group a chance to go in for the kill. That's DIRECTLY analogous to what lions do, and is one of the key differences between social hunting and cooperative hunting. Now, there may be more and deeper levels of cooperation, but this one is a pretty big step, and at least leaves open the possibility that their sister taxon contained individuals capable of cooperation. It is by no means direct evidence that dromaesaurids did - when it comes to dinosaur "raptors", I'm slightly in favor of the crocodile and/or tiger hypothesis myself. (Now I'm wondering what the braincase of a Harris hawk looks like in comparison to other hawks and to dromaesaurs. Interesting...) One other small point: Genetics ABSOLUTELY matters to a discussion like this, and to any questions about altruism and group living. No behaviorist worth their salt would claim otherwise. You sound so desperate to convince yourself of something. Sorry, but i must try to show you the mistake. That "false dives" isnt part of the stablished parameters who diferences the complex behavior from the simple one. It is an advanced method and really show a great capability on the birds, but don´t changes the essence of the behaviour. I say, again, my friend, no sharing of food, no hierarchical order : it means no complex cooperatively. That, and the leaderism are real parameters. The hawks hunt methods are quite advanced for a simple cooperatively, but it is, still, simple. Genetic knowledgement don´t change that. Don´t insist more, please. Dromaeosaurids had a more complex coperatively behavior? who knows ..theres some possibilities. But evidences shows that, most probably (not sure) they didnt.
|
|
|
Post by kuni on Jan 2, 2009 15:42:37 GMT
Science 25 March 1988: Vol. 239. no. 4847, pp. 1525 - 1527
Cooperative Hunting Harris' Hawks (Parabuteo unicinctus) JAMES C. BEDNARZ
Coordinated hunting by several individuals directed toward the capture and sharing of one Large prey animal has been documented convincingly only for a few mammalian carnivores. In New Mexico, Harris' hawks formed hunting parties of two to six individuals in the nonbreeding season. This behavior improved capture success and the average energy available per individual enabled hawks to dispatch prey larger than themselves. These patterns suggest that cooperation is important to understanding the evolution of complex social behavior in higher vertebrates and, specifically, that benefits derived from team hunting a key factor in the social living of Harris' hawks.
|
|
|
Post by kuni on Jan 2, 2009 15:48:10 GMT
Arioch, I'm not convinced you have any serious understanding of behavior if you don't understand the importance of heritability. In addition, these hawks DO have a social hierarchy and feed together from kills (even if individuals will try to steal parts only for themselves, a behavior not unknown to lions and wolves). No amount of "no true scotsman" logical fallacies change the fact that these guys cooperatively hunt.
We pretty much agree when it comes to dromaesaurids, though I seem to think cooperation is potentially likely.
|
|
|
Post by crazycrowman on Jan 2, 2009 17:59:18 GMT
"The hawks hunt methods are quite advanced for a simple cooperatively, but it is, still, simple. Genetic knowledgement don´t change that. Don´t insist more, please." Bird behavior regarding cooperative foraging simple ? Seriously ? Where are the studies calling mammalian predators "true" pack hunters, and birds not capable of such ? When you talk about the capability of modern birds, "compared" to those of mammals, a look over at corvids will show you that those at least are capable of things that only a very select group of mammals (Us and the other Great Apes) seem to be, so if you are using the cooperative hunting of a cast of Harris hawks to negate the capability of birds to work together in teams and thus by default disregard dromeosaurids or any other theropod from being able to do the same, its a rather faulty argument. Kuni already beat me to the Harris article above. www.springerlink.com/content/g4843546492001w0/Corvid behavior is quite comparable, especially with regards to ravens with that of animals like chimpanzees. (There are several books and a bunch of links back a ways on the topic of corvid "smarts") We do not/will not see "group" or "pack" hunting behavior from parrots, the other group of "brilliant" birds because they are generally frugivores not omnivores/carnivores. There are some fascinating reports and studies of cooperative breeders throughout the bird world though, with birds of many different types, from corvids to Kookaburras. www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=ArticleURL&_udi=B6W9W-45JB6VF-C&_user=10&_rdoc=1&_fmt=&_orig=search&_sort=d&view=c&_acct=C000050221&_version=1&_urlVersion=0&_userid=10&md5=07ef9197c6fe3567775956e79d91f106Even little corvids, like scrub jays have been observed hunting cooperatively... www.bioone.org/perlserv/?request=get-document&doi=10.1676%2F02-129(The "Cooperative hunting has only rarely been described in passerines" line is starding to get a little watered down as more and more passerines are observed and documented Cooperative hunting!) www.bioone.org/perlserv/?request=get-document&doi=10.1676%2F0043-5643(2001)113%5B0462%3AACHILS%5D2.0.CO%3B2&ct=1Its just that in some cases, it has not been well studied, like above. I am not the least bit surprised that another passerine would do this and expect this behavior is much more common then currently addressed - corvids, while very intelligent birds, are also large and conspicuous compared to many of the other passerine species. Caracaras...(And not the species I was talking about before) findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_hb6646/is_199909/ai_n26561379Some film of the Striated Caracaras is here though... www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y7qcNiJTfVUPelicans.... www.ingentaconnect.com/content/brill/beh/1992/00000120/F0020001/art00005?crawler=truewww.youtube.com/watch?v=hEWUbe7ec4EBald Eagles... www.fosbirds.org/FFN/Articles/FFNv20n4p110-112Folk.pdfI am sure there are more, this is all I thought of off the top of my head.
|
|
|
Post by tomhet on Jan 2, 2009 18:59:30 GMT
I have the impression that this thread is getting out of hand and the topic is going in circles. Like the Tylosaurus discussion, this one needs boundaries. So, we can't say for sure what were the hunting methods of deinonychosaurs, everybody move on.
|
|
|
Post by arioch on Jan 3, 2009 16:36:42 GMT
I know the crows and some birds are very smart, and i do not want to offense their fans. But thats not the point. I fear some of you are not understanding me.
I invite you to make a serious list, point to point, of those things than the cooperatively of wolves and hawks have in common. No more vagueness, if you want to argue seriously about this.
Does some birds fulfill the parameters of the complex cooperatively that i mentioned before? its a very easy question and the answer is: no, they don´t. Then, their social behavior isnt in any way, in complexity or organisation, like the mammals one, despiting the too enthusiastic and sensationalist articles that could be written. Period.
|
|
|
Post by crazycrowman on Jan 3, 2009 16:58:51 GMT
I know the crows and some birds are very smart, and i do not want to offense their fans. But thats not the point. I fear some of you are not understanding me. I invite you to make a serious list, point to point, of those things than the cooperatively of wolves and hawks have in common. I have enough of vagueness. Does some birds fulfill the parameters of the complex cooperatively that i mentioned before? its a very easy question and the answer is: no, they don´t. Then, their social behavior isn't in any way, in complexity or organization, like the mammals one, despiting the too enthusiastic and sensationalist articles that could be written. Period. 0-o I provided this information, from sources that should be considered valid. YES, some birds fulfill the parameters of the complex cooperation that you had mentioned, and to the degree that it is seen in the mammal species you mentioned. I took that a step further and added that not only is that kind of behavior present, (see links for example) but that corvids are one of the only other animals to display in lab settings, not through anecdotal or "sensationalist articles" what was thought to be something only a select group of "higher" mammals possessed - self awareness. I was under the impression that you were asking us to compare mammalian social behavior to avian social behavior, and the complexity of social interactions between co specifics, particularly when regarding foraging/feeding behaviors where members of a group/flock/pack/family unit must work together to secure prey that would not be something they could secure as individuals, either because it was too large, or because they were less successful hunters when working singly. I have provided this in some detail, and you seem to have ignored that. (So have other members, with the Harris article) I am going to have to assume that I am not understanding what exactly you are seeking to find/prove here, as if you are trying to say that birds are not as socially complex organisms as mammals, not capable of working like hunting mammals, you are quite mistaken. dinotoyforum.proboards100.com/index.cgi?board=dinos&action=display&thread=687&page=4Please refer to this post for more info on corvid/avian social complexity.
|
|
|
Post by arioch on Jan 3, 2009 17:14:13 GMT
Dammit...i readed the articles, but didnt see any example of hyerarchical organisation, pack leaderism, signs of submission from the members... Please, point it for me, with the specific words, not your personal interpretation.
And still, we need a case of bird cooperative hunting (in a big group, more than 1 male and 1 female) were all the members attacks to the SAME objective, to aply that to the behaviour that some people thinks dromaeosaurids had. This is one of the origin points of the discussion, not the bird behaviour itself.
|
|
|
Post by dinonikes on Jan 3, 2009 17:45:46 GMT
Dammit...i readed the articles, but didnt see any example of hyerarchical organisation, pack leaderism, signs of submission from the members... Please, point it for me, with the specific words, not your personal interpretation. And still, we need a case of bird cooperative hunting (in a big group, more than 1 male and 1 female) were all the members attacks to the SAME objective, to aply that to the behaviour that some people thinks dromaeosaurids had. This is one of the origin points of the discussion, not the bird behaviour itself. You should take a breath and calm down a bit- starting a post with dammit is a good sign that you aren't going to be calm and rational in your post- just my opinion as someone who isn't a part of this discussion but still is exposed to it when i read the 30 most recent posts link---
|
|
|
Post by kuni on Jan 3, 2009 17:50:51 GMT
"Pack leaderism"? You think Harris hawks don't have a hierarchy? Also, the articles REPEATEDLY state how the groups are larger than 2 individuals - harris hawks usually have groups of a mated pair and 3-5 offspring....exactly the same as your average wolf pack! Your....interesting use of vocabulary and poor spelling, coupled with your weird dismissal of peer-reviewed scientific publications, lead me to believe that a) you don't know what you're talking about and b) are just trying to save face through denial. There's absolutely nothing wrong with the data going against you in a scientific argument, it happens to everybody. Just read the articles, accept that ornithologists have recorded cooperative hunting in birds and have written about it in some of the most respected peer-reviewed scientific journals, and we get can back to arguing about hypothetical T-Rex/human interactions.
|
|
|
Post by [][][]cordylus[][][] on Jan 3, 2009 18:00:10 GMT
OK arioch--- Why are you saying it is impossible for dienonychus to have hunted in packs? Just because modern birds don't?
|
|
|
Post by crazycrowman on Jan 3, 2009 18:09:56 GMT
Dammit...i readed the articles, but didnt see any example of hyerarchical organisation, pack leaderism, signs of submission from the members... Please, point it for me, with the specific words, not your personal interpretation. And still, we need a case of bird cooperative hunting (in a big group, more than 1 male and 1 female) were all the members attacks to the SAME objective, to aply that to the behavior that some people thinks dromaeosaurids had. This is one of the origin points of the discussion, not the bird behavior itself. My personal interpretation ? Really ? Please, refer to the books and articles, (the whole articles, if you are going to be seeking such specifics) listed if you want to see where I am getting specific "interpretations" from. How have the articles on the groups of hunting Harris Hawks, or a group of ravens/crows taking an animal as a group not provided this ? (Even working as a group to take lambs/attempt to take deer fawns - Attacks on fawns by groups are well documented in "The American Crow and the Common Raven" By Lawrence Kilham) Regarding submissive/dominant individuals and their role in social groups, most of the links I provided on crows/raven books would have such information. Heck, even books on general aviculture/bird behavior would address these things, as many bird species live in very structured flocks with dominant higher ranking individuals doing all of the breeding, something someone breeding/keeping birds would need to know. In some species, "helpers" of descending ranks do other jobs and move "up" as the "alpha" pair dies. Many species of corvids and Kookaburras are such animals. If you are seeking information regarding the hierarchical structures in bird society, that should be very easy to find. The term "pecking order" did not come to be because it was observed in creatures that lacked beaks. Interestingly, mouth color indicates a birds individual dominance in crows and ravens. Older submissive birds still have the pink mouth color of a juvenile, while dominant birds often have black mouths as juveniles. Crows and ravens often wing flick to show submission to higher ranking individuals, along with juvenile submissive posturing, and begging calls. If you are asking for where I can show how birds act exactly as wolves do during a hunt, I most certainly can not do that. Parallels can be drawn between them, but thats all. Wolves act quite different then lions when they hunt as well, because they are not lions. I would not say that because lions have a different social structure and different hunt structure then wolves, that they are not as socially complex an organism. Chimpanzees hunt as well, and these are considered more socially complex then wolves or lions. their behavior is distinct from lion or wolf hunting behavior. Chimp social hunting behavior is quite comparable to corvid social hunting behavior though... As a side note, presenting specific instances of social or pack/flock hunting behavior in modern birds can not possibly prove or disprove anything about dromeosaur behavior. Addressing the general behavior of birds and how birds can and do interact with cospecifics is probably more insightful about the behavior of bird ancestors/prehistoric relatives.
|
|
|
Post by tetonbabydoll on Jan 3, 2009 18:13:42 GMT
I'm gonna risk putting my two cents in here. Like the tylosaur thread, this is going nowhere at all. A theory was stated, and counter theories proposed, and evidence presented. I will same thing I have ended with in two other threads now. Arioch, if you have any articles links or photos, post them to support your theory. If you can disprove CCM with any sort of supportive evidence, then let's see it. Like others, you keep repeating your belief, getting more determined and heated as we go. You are not going to change CCM's mind. And, despite posting supportive evidence, he does not seem likely to change yours. What sort of outcome can come from that? Lets move this topic forward a bit.
And not for nothing, but using bad spelling, or odd grammar, is not really valid here, it is .....not needed. We all type too fast sometimes, or skip a key. It is no big. And as for the grammer, Arioch you are not from the US right? He writes and talks like most people who use English as a second language. I think it is a matter of sentence structuring being different, and is not a thing polite people bring up. Its just his way of speaking, and he is perfectly understandable.
|
|
|
Post by arioch on Jan 4, 2009 14:33:44 GMT
Yeah...i´m very sorry for the bad spelling. Really. I guess i sound like an evil robot for you, lol. And maybe sometimes i sound more rude than i want. Its frustrating because i can´t express all the things i want. The discusion is really going nowhere. You can´t prove birds hunt like mammals, and i can´t be more specific explaining why they don´t. The arguments are wasted. But the discusion started when someone suggested that dromeosaurids hunted in pack like some mammals ( coordinated attacks on 1 large prey, only 1, and very big ), and i answered there was no real proof on that, including the fact that their closest relatives doesnt do it (what is true). And i say closest, because dromaeosaurids were just ground birds with teeth and claws (and their brains were proportionally a lot smaller than the corvids and parrot ones, by the way.) I never doubted that the birds social structures are quite complex, but whe were speaking about the hunt methods, not the everyday interactions! and while they hunt in pack, birds don´t keep that complex social structure, at least, at same level of canids or felines (the hawks help their partners to get his own prey, but does they have any priority inside the family? or they just help randomly those who are genetically related to them?) . But lions, hyenas, wolves or wild dogs...yes, they do. State that Harris hawks hunt like wolves is superficial and imprecise, and no more than an adorned half-truth. But in scientific publications, this vague but attractive sentences are acceptable because it helps to the diffusion of it...though it don´t make the article less valid. I hope you get my point now. So, maybe its time to stop this. But you must recognize dromaeosaurids are overrated!
|
|