|
Post by Dinotoyforum on Jul 30, 2008 23:49:56 GMT
|
|
|
Post by tomhet on Aug 2, 2008 18:26:12 GMT
OK, I will post this, it's from another forum, the author claims to be a zoologist:
"I don't understand how most popular literature can state that Velociraptor and Deinoychus are the closest know relatives of birds. Correct me if I am wrong (I am a zoologist interested in dinosauria; not a paleontologist) but, didn't birds evolve in the mid-to-late Jurassic? To my understanding, in the late Cretaceous, birds were already flying around and being birds. How can an animal derive its ancestry from a creature it itself is older than? To me, it makes no sense that the last of the Dromaeosaurids evolved into birds. The Dromaeosaurids may have descended from a creature that gave rise to both birds and themselves, but they were not birds. They were dinosaurs. Wouldn't a late Cretaceous bird like Hesperonis be the closest relative to existing birds?
It's like saying humans gave rise to the lemurs. We evolved from the same stock, but humans took a different path."
|
|
|
Post by sid on Aug 2, 2008 20:07:06 GMT
^ I think i agree with that
|
|
|
Post by Dinotoyforum on Aug 2, 2008 23:30:12 GMT
I don't understand how most popular literature can state that Velociraptor and Deinoychus are the closest know relatives of birds. Its because they are. Correct me if I am wrong (I am a zoologist interested in dinosauria; not a paleontologist) but, didn't birds evolve in the mid-to-late Jurassic? Probably even earlier. To my understanding, in the late Cretaceous, birds were already flying around and being birds. How can an animal derive its ancestry from a creature it itself is older than? Birds did not derive ancestry from Velociraptor and Deinonychus, they share COMMON ancestry. To me, it makes no sense that the last of the Dromaeosaurids evolved into birds. correct. Thats why nobody is saying that 'the last' Dromaeosaurids evolved into birds. The Dromaeosaurids may have descended from a creature that gave rise to both birds and themselves, but they were not birds. Exactly. They were dinosaurs. subjective classification. See the rest of this thread - this common ancestor was almost certainly feathered. why? Becasue primitive dromaeosaurid dinosaurs like Microraptor are preserved with fossil feathers. Plus, thee is evidence for integument in dinosaurs even more basal than dromaeosaurs. Wouldn't a late Cretaceous bird like Hesperonis be the closest relative to existing birds?
Yes, but you originally said 'birds', not 'existing birds'. That's a big difference. (moving goalposts) It's like saying humans gave rise to the lemurs. We evolved from the same stock, but humans took a different path." It would be, and you would have a brilliant point - IF your argument was not a Staw Man logical fallacy (I love spotting fallacies in arguments ). From wikipedia: "A straw man argument is an informal fallacy based on misrepresentation of an opponent's position.[1] To "set up a straw man" or "set up a straw man argument" is to describe a position that superficially resembles an opponent's actual view but is easier to refute, then attribute that position to the opponent"
|
|
|
Post by stoneage on Aug 3, 2008 1:07:53 GMT
;D OK how about Psittacosaurus as the first real bird. It has feathers and unlike Archaeopteryx and Microraptor had a beak with no teeth although there were cheek teeth towards the rear of the mouth. Its head resembled a parrot. It did not have a tridactyl hand but 4 digits, which could have evolved into the 3 digits of a bird. Also like a bird it walked on two legs just like the theropods. ;D I give you the missing link.
|
|
|
Post by thagomizer on Aug 3, 2008 23:54:08 GMT
;D OK how about Psittacosaurus as the first real bird. It has feathers Nope, studies of the structure of those quills show they're fundamentally different from feathers. So do turtles. Even if Pstittacosaurus had feather-like structures, you have to look at the sum of the animal, not "key" features that you think define a bird. Overall, dromaeosaurs are far more bird-like than psittacosaurus in just about every way, save for superficial similarities. Why, because it had a sharp beak? That's the only, vague resemblance I can think of. The skull is squat, wide, and has long bony projections coming off the side. Not very parrot like at all.
|
|
|
Post by thagomizer on Aug 4, 2008 0:19:44 GMT
It's like saying humans gave rise to the lemurs. We evolved from the same stock, but humans took a different path." It would be, and you would have a brilliant point Not quite. As you said, nobody is saying birds evolved from Deinonychus. They evolved from the common ancestor of Deinonychus and modern birds. It's not like saying humans gave rise to lemurs, it's like saying humans and lemurs both evolved from primates. Which is so obvious nobody would bother saying it in such a simple way, which is where all this commen ancestor stuff comes from. A simplification would be that monkeys evolved from lemurs. The ancestral monkey would not technically be a true lemur, but if you saw one, you'd think--it sure looks like a lemur. Same with saying birds evolved from dromaeosaurs. It's not completely accurate, but if you're just being descriptive, you're not far off.
|
|
|
Post by Dinotoyforum on Aug 4, 2008 0:44:26 GMT
It's like saying humans gave rise to the lemurs. We evolved from the same stock, but humans took a different path." It would be, and you would have a brilliant point Not quite. As you said, nobody is saying birds evolved from Deinonychus. They evolved from the common ancestor of Deinonychus and modern birds. It's not like saying humans gave rise to lemurs, it's like saying humans and lemurs both evolved from primates. Which is so obvious nobody would bother saying it in such a simple way, which is where all this commen ancestor stuff comes from. A simplification would be that monkeys evolved from lemurs. The ancestral monkey would not technically be a true lemur, but if you saw one, you'd think--it sure looks like a lemur. Same with saying birds evolved from dromaeosaurs. It's not completely accurate, but if you're just being descriptive, you're not far off. Oi! you took my quote out of context! That's mean! My sentence had a major qualifier, a hugh capitalized IF at the end, basically saying exactly what you said (but more concisely). I said: "It would be, and you would have a brilliant point - IF your argument was not a Staw Man logical fallacy"
|
|
|
Post by stoneage on Aug 4, 2008 2:43:32 GMT
So Thag do you still think Dinotoyforum is a moron.
|
|
|
Post by thagomizer on Aug 4, 2008 8:29:35 GMT
So Thag do you still think Dinotoyforum is a moron. I said sid and Piltdown were morons, not him... I think...
|
|
|
Post by Dinotoyforum on Aug 4, 2008 8:58:07 GMT
You think!?
;D
I don't recall ever being called a moron.
|
|
|
Post by stoneage on Aug 4, 2008 21:53:14 GMT
What he said is"I'm just about done with this forum. Its not what I thought. Its a den of Morons". To me that means the whole forum is made up of nothing but Morons.
|
|
|
Post by sid on Aug 4, 2008 22:42:16 GMT
What he said is"I'm just about done with this forum. Its not what I thought. Its a den of Morons". To me that means the whole forum is made up of nothing but Morons. Agree...That was a very unhappy move by Thagomizer.
|
|
|
Post by thagomizer on Aug 4, 2008 23:35:20 GMT
What he said is"I'm just about done with this forum. Its not what I thought. Its a den of Morons". To me that means the whole forum is made up of nothing but Morons. No that's not what I meant. I den of morons is someplace morons dwell. It doesn't mean it's made up ONLY of morons! You're taking MY post out of context--I thought I made it clear I was talking specifically about sid and Piltdown.
|
|
|
Post by stoneage on Aug 4, 2008 23:56:05 GMT
First off I didn't take what you said out of context its an exact quote. Go back and look. Where does it say a den of morans is someplace morans dwell? Tell me where I can find this definition. When I think of a den I think of a wolf den which would consist of more then two wolves. A den of wolfs would consist of all wolves in the den. I don't see where in this quote Sid and Piltdown are mentioned. If you meant something else you should have been more specific.
|
|
|
Post by thagomizer on Aug 5, 2008 4:27:27 GMT
First off I didn't take what you said out of context its an exact quote. Go back and look. Where does it say a den of morans is someplace morans dwell? Tell me where I can find this definition. When I think of a den I think of a wolf den which would consist of more then two wolves. A den of wolfs would consist of all wolves in the den. I'm in the den too--was I calling myself a moron? What I saw in that thread was one or two people blatantly misrepresenting what was going on, and everyone else jumping on board with them, not even noticing how wrong their basic logic was. Looking back at it, even dinotoyforum was among them with the comment about carbon dating feather impressions. but a later discussion cleared that up. Even if he was one of the morons in the den at the time, it wasn't his fault and he's not now The post was a response to sid's posts, which were quoted, and Piltdown's. Just to be clear, this post I'm writing write now is a response to stoneage, not dinotoyforum. Just in case there's confusion later.
|
|
|
Post by crazycrowman on Aug 5, 2008 14:30:24 GMT
"everyone else jumping on board with them, not even noticing how wrong their basic logic was." Everyone else ? Really ? Well thag, its good to know you are there to lead the rest of us out of our mornon-dom
|
|
|
Post by Dinotoyforum on Aug 5, 2008 16:12:33 GMT
"everyone else jumping on board with them, not even noticing how wrong their basic logic was." Everyone else ? Really ? Well thag, its good to know you are there to lead the rest of us out of our mornon-dom mormon-dom? ;D
|
|
|
Post by crazycrowman on Aug 5, 2008 18:34:25 GMT
Thats actually a hilarious type-o.
Moron-dom was what I meant!
|
|
|
Post by thagomizer on Aug 5, 2008 22:03:22 GMT
"everyone else jumping on board with them, not even noticing how wrong their basic logic was." Everyone else ? Really ? Well thag, its good to know you are there to lead the rest of us out of our mornon-dom Jeez, what is with people taking things literally over here? Yes, I mean everyone, including the people who hadn't even replied to the thread. (sarcasm) I swear I will never use a figure of speech or hyperbole for emphasis ever again (not really, that last statement was hyperbole, used for emphasis). crazycrowman, I have no idea how you could make that mistake, you're one of the people here I would *never* include among the morons.
|
|