|
Post by tetonbabydoll on Dec 16, 2008 9:46:53 GMT
And one more thing. This may not be the biggest pteosaur ever....that could change. It may be the largest found so far...
Rex is biggest that ever lived. No wait, the Charco was. No WAIT, the giga was.
The sauropods are just as bad. They are the largest specimens of each yet discovered.
But, don't reptiles keep growing all their years? Who is to say there are not bigger specimens out there?
On the other hand, is it not more likely for larger carcasses to survive predation and fossilization intact? Perhaps these were the giants of each specimen, and not typical of the size reached by the majority of the animals?
The only reason to call these things the "biggest", or "nastiest" or whatever, is for the sensationalism. I thought we were all kinda against this type of stuff for the public and media.
Or is that only true for Horner and pals. Or for those with whom we disagree.
Hmmm. I really AM ranting tonight....
|
|
|
Post by crazycrowman on Dec 16, 2008 10:06:45 GMT
I don't know. NOBODY really knows. I think, that that is what upsets me about these.....discussions. "Facts" get stated as absolute, when the reality is, we DON'T know. We can only infer tyrannosaur behavior from modern animals. We can make guesses at how pterosaurs behaved. That is all fine, but to state that this or that was so, is just wrong. It would only take slight re-wording. I "think" pterosaurs MIGHT have behaved this way. Or, pardon the cross threading here, I believe large therapods MAY have looked this way. It is POSSIBLE that rex was a hunter, or scavenger, or fluffy, or scaly, or......State your opinions as such, and support them. Cool, fine. But we just cannot say anything as absolute fact about behavior, and precious little about soft tissue reconstruction. I do have a nagging feeling though. That dino mummy they found, the Hadrosaur, had a much larger back end than was thought. And as I sit here looking at the Carnegie original Stegosaurus, and the Wild Safari version, I can't help but think that that chunky lil Carnegie might have been more accurate after all......... Sorry, end of rant. I now return you to our regularly scheduled thread, already in progress. I agree Teton. Some facts can be "absolutes" - like this creature lived *insert time* and the specimen was *insert size*, and this individual possessed this integument here because it was noted and described. Anything beyond that sort of thing....well...like you said. Words like "certainly" are very frustrating when used this way, especially to desribe the behavior of an extict animal. Its hard to even use those words in general regarding todays animals 100% of the time about anything. I personally would think of these pterosaurs as having a similar role in the environment to modern Marabou storks - opportunist scavengers who would take advantage of various food sources including small prey when it was available. I don't really think that these "titan battles" that people seem to enjoy play out that much in the wild, and expect that a somewhat fragile creature like Hatzegopteryx would have been appropriately wary of any potential threat in its environment as much as it would have been aware of potential feed. I saw the dino mummy program. When Dr Manning was describing Dakotas "arse" all I could think of was how much it reminded me of the back end of a goose.
|
|
|
Post by ningishzida on Dec 16, 2008 14:26:48 GMT
Good stuff, CCM. Back to topic, I too would be interested in learning more about the 'braininess' of Pterosaurs. Considering that H. has the largest skull of any land vertebrate, it just might have the largest brain of any archosaur.
I can really envision flocks of Q's hanging around groups of rexes, easily avoiding and outwitting them, and letting the Rexes hunt for them, much as the stork/vulture analogy to lions. I could imagine them taking a large toll on baby rexes too, even if the Rexes had maternal instincts. Lions have only one or to cubs to watch, and I imagine a Rex producing 20-30 chicks of which, like crocs, only one or two from that group would survive to maturity.
Off topic, I may be getting Emus soon, and would love to have a Raven. I know that in the States its a big hassle to keep Raptorial birds, but how much legal trouble to keep a Raven? Can you buy 'captive born' ones?
|
|
|
Post by ningishzida on Dec 16, 2008 14:32:24 GMT
And one more thing. This may not be the biggest pteosaur ever....that could change. It may be the largest found so far... Rex is biggest that ever lived. No wait, the Charco was. No WAIT, the giga was. The sauropods are just as bad. They are the largest specimens of each yet discovered. But, don't reptiles keep growing all their years? Who is to say there are not bigger specimens out there? On the other hand, is it not more likely for larger carcasses to survive predation and fossilization intact? Perhaps these were the giants of each specimen, and not typical of the size reached by the majority of the animals? The only reason to call these things the "biggest", or "nastiest" or whatever, is for the sensationalism. I thought we were all kinda against this type of stuff for the public and media. Or is that only true for Horner and pals. Or for those with whom we disagree. Hmmm. I really AM ranting tonight.... I agree, an even bigger ptero may be found, even though scientists had pretty much said, 'nothing bigger than quetzalcoatlus could fly'....... and they were wrong. But right now it is a fact. H. is the biggest Pterosaur though even now there is scant evidence of other contenders. And hey, you forgot to mention Spinosaurus, hands down, the largest Theropod we have evidence of today.
|
|
|
Post by crazycrowman on Dec 16, 2008 20:11:33 GMT
Off topic, I may be getting Emus soon, and would love to have a Raven. I know that in the States its a big hassle to keep Raptorial birds, but how much legal trouble to keep a Raven? Can you buy 'captive born' ones? Emus are very cool birds! I know I am wandering off topic here....but... Some captive bred ravens are available for purchase from time to time, but are expensive and in most states in the USA they would be illegal to keep and you need the same permits you would to purchase captive bred hawks/falcons/eagles. (and yes, this goes for "exotic" species of corvid as well) And that a good thing, really. Native crows and ravens are actually illegal to keep EVEN WITH permits unless you are a wildlife rehabilitation with permits for education. If you are not a falconer, or an educator/rehabber trained in handling these birds, they are almost certainly not for you. Those permits help keep the birds out of the hands of people who would not be serious about their care, or know all the particulars for caring for these creatures. Ravens have very high upkeep budgets, and are messy birds to house as captives. (they have high metabolisms, as they are passerines, and make an extraordinary amount of waste) They need lots of room -big flights - and a keeper who understands how to man such an easily stressed bird without harming it. They are VERY high strung, and easy to "traumatize" with poor handling. They are also prone to things like plucking their feathers and other forms of self mutilation if not constantly kept "entertained" - and sometimes that means constant attention. They can also hurt you with not to much effort on their part, and ending up with a hormonal aggressive adult that allows no one to handle it is a pretty common experience when working with corvids (ravens or crows) They bite, and use their talons and will also go directly for the eyes when they feel they need to defend themselves. Some people have done vile things like clip their wings, (we have seen "pet ravens" come through rescue in miserable shape) which is tantamount to torture. Raven NEED to fly, and can not properly get around otherwise. They are prone to a variety of medical conditions if kept improperly and are surprisingly easy birds to kill with bad care. Metabolic problems, Aspergullus problems, and more. In the USA they also have to be protected against west nile virus, which if they get is lethal to them, and all it takes is a mosquito bite. (That means an expensive mosquito proof outdoor flight, much like some owls require) Though fascinating animals to work with if you have the training and dedication, ravens make very poor "pets" and I am glad that they can not just be acquired as such on a whim. I usually suggest to people that volunteering at a wildlife rehab is a good way to learn if you would even like to be around a bird like this, as you can have one on one contact over a long period of time with corvids at most rescues, and even learn to feed and manage juveniles/fledglings. I also always add if you don't have the time for a long term energy investment like that, then a raven is certainly not a bird you would enjoy or keep properly. I know I go on and on about these things, but as a person involved with rescue, wildlife and exotics, I see people do some horrible things to animals that they don't even realize they are doing, and always try to make sure people would know exactly what is entailed with the animals they see me with and think that they would make a "cool pet".
|
|
|
Post by Ajax on Dec 16, 2008 21:21:45 GMT
"I also know what a crow is, I grew up on a sheep farm and crows were everywhere, they used to eat our baby lambs and sheep's eyes (while the sheep was alive)" Ah, so no mistakes on Id's then. I would think your cat was a good predator, though I would not be surprised if the crows, or the majoraty of crows taken by him were young and unexperienced birds. You see this every year on the roadways around here. Adult crows rarely get hit by cars, but after fledging, every spring, there are some juveniles who do not learn the ways of the cars quick enough, and get thinned out. (literally) Though unfortunate for your lambs, that sort of predation is yet another example of their adaptability and willingness to take advantage of live food resources much larger then them. Even crows will take down sheep and lambs by attacking lambing ewes and calves. Ravens have been known to take adult sheep. They have also been known to go after deer fawns, though much of the time unsuccessfully. "I don't like cats killing native animals but could not have cared less about him killing dirty rotten crows, i also don't believe in cats being kept indoors unless they want to be." www.cat-world.com.au/IndoorCats.htmI do believe cats should be kept indoors because not doing so it really harmful to native wildlife, an issue especially of concern in places like Oz with so many species threatened by introduced predators. Crows aside, (a common and adaptable species that surely were under no pressure from the occasional cat predation) think of all the other native animals your cat was capable of exterminating if it was capable of taking crows. Invasive species, and "outdoor cats" in particular are really taking their toll on wildlife world wide. (And Teton, you don't have to worry about me getting irate over this - I don't really take it the wrong way - Ajax apparently really hates crows. Alot of people REALLY hate crows. Its sort of a testament to their adaptability and toughness - they are too good at what they do. People in all parts of the world have been trying to eliminate crows from the time we have had a hand in agriculture - before that as hunter/gatherers crows and ravens were often treated as guides/sacred type entities by primitive cultures - We dealt a heavy hand for the wolf, and bear, and many other species (in Oz the Tazzy Tiger and the Tazzy Devil to name a couple of well known ones, and even the Dingo, which is, granted a naturalized species) with our bounty and eradication programs because they competed with mans agricultural resources, and even the raven suffered, in part because with no wolves & bears, the ravens had less to eat - But crows in nearly all the parts of the world where they were common, remain so, and in many areas are considered significant pests because of this. I have an affinity for many animals that are hated in such ways - corvids, snakes, spiders, and in some areas crocodilians. OK....so, Pterosaur brains anyone ? Going once, going twice ? Im Glad you didn't take what i said the wrong way , and you do understand that to sheep farmers in Australia crows are a enemy and can kill as many lambs and sheep as a fox can, I won't say anything about how terrible Emu's can be in some area's and how they can ruin crop's which also can ruin a farmers life.
|
|
|
Post by [][][]cordylus[][][] on Dec 16, 2008 21:31:10 GMT
The best quote from this thread! ;D
|
|
|
Post by crazycrowman on Dec 16, 2008 22:33:15 GMT
I'm Glad you didn't take what i said the wrong way , and you do understand that to sheep farmers in Australia crows are a enemy and can kill as many lambs and sheep as a fox can, I won't say anything about how terrible Emu's can be in some area's and how they can ruin crop's which also can ruin a farmers life. Emus and Crows evolved to deal with the harsh life in Oz. People and sheep, along with most of the crops people plant there did not. I know native species are looked at as "enemies" by hunters and farmers alike, but really we and our animals are the foreign matter in those places. I would say that while I completely understand that it is frustrating to deal with animals who seem to have an edge on you and your crops/livestock, I don't have a whole lot of pity for the issue. We are the ones who have invaded their habitats and are trying our darndest to push them out of it (and in some species, to push them right into extinction) Some of those animals, like crows, are just capable of pushing humans back by utilizing our resources to their own ends.
|
|
|
Post by sbell on Dec 16, 2008 23:10:18 GMT
The best quote from this thread! ;D All I'm going to say to that--wait until the next issue of PT.
|
|
|
Post by stoneage on Dec 17, 2008 3:55:04 GMT
CCM With regard to animal intelligence. While I'm not saying that cats are smarter then crows I can't find any reliable study to show which is smarter. They are both smart animals. Tyrannax admitted he is bias because he loves Cats like he loves T-Rex. We know you love birds. Not all dogs have same intelligence. Working dogs like Border Collies and German Shepherds seem to be the most intelligent. Wolves are even smarter. In the domestication of dogs and breeding many dogs are dumbed down to make them more submissive to humans. Just like people you can have a very smart crow and a not so smart crow. If an animal is given the proper stimulation when young it will be smarter then an animal without stimulation. Do you know of any conclusive study on animal intelligence?
|
|
|
Post by crazycrowman on Dec 17, 2008 5:32:17 GMT
CCM With regard to animal intelligence. While I'm not saying that cats are smarter then crows I can't find any reliable study to show which is smarter. www.zoo.cam.ac.uk/zoostaff/madingley/member_pages/nemery_pubs.htm (Look under "Are Corvids Feathered Apes - almost near the bottom of the page for the PDF file) cat.inist.fr/?aModele=afficheN&cpsidt=17865916Well, being that crows make tools, that they "invent" with no coaching, have shown to be able to actively reason and "put themselves in the mental space of another", even using our tools (like dropping nuts and letting our cars run them over and using our crosswalks and traffic signals!) and show signs of being able to be self aware - something that only elephants and great apes have done besides man, they are certainly more like us, and what people tend to call "smarter" then most other animals. The other animals ranked with corvids are parrots, the great apes, cetaceans and elephants. www.thirteen.org/scienceandnature/crows-pass-chimps-in-causal-reasoning-testwww.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/abstract/sci;306/5703/1903?maxtoshow=&HITS=10&hits=10&RESULTFORMAT=&fulltext=%28corvidDogs are smart too, as are cats, (like I have said before, all animals are as smart as they need to be) but they do not display the same capability for "cognition" that those animals above do. They simply must not need that ability. It does not make them somehow less then corvids or great apes, but it does make them less like us. (Take that however you wish to) Crows and many other corvids are the way they are because they have to work around the extraordinary complex social network that is crow society, a society with defined "language" that must be learned, and defined "culture" that needs taught, much like how the other great apes, dolphins and elephants are, and something we used to think was exclusive to those select mammal species. Cats are simply not like this, and while they and canids (and rodents) can learn amazing amounts of things, and are fantastic creatures, they lack some key social/mental elements to be like "us" as well. On a side note, it is interesting that both humans AND corvids though, find canids very useful resource animals, (to aid us in securing food and watching out for danger) and both have formed relationships WITH canids independently of one another. news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2002/08/0808_020808_crow.html(a summary kind of page) "INTELLIGENCE In the scientific world, corvid intelligence is highly noted. Ornithologist John Terres suggests that corvids have the “highest degree of intelligence”. Naturalist Tony Angell claims that the crow family has “superior intelligence to all other avian species tested”. Zoologist Bernd Heinrich notes that the raven is “assumed to be the brains of the bird world”, while animal behaviorist Konrad Lorenz credits the raven with “the highest mental development”. A 1991 paper by Irene Pepperberg, of the University of Arizona, affirms that corvids may share “the cognitive capacities of many primates”. In several tests, the corvids performance was put on par with gorillas and chimps, our own species’ closest relatives." www.ardastra.com/corvidinfo.htmlneurophilosophy.wordpress.com/2007/02/05/call-me-bird-brain/There is a heck of a decent list under these wiki pages - en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bird_intelligenceen.wikipedia.org/wiki/Animal_intelligenceIf you really need route articles and texts, I am sure I can dig them out, but if I am going to do that, we should really have a topic thread for this, as I can provide enormous amounts of information on the topic. I have bookshelves full of books about these animals, and animal cognition, and I am sure I can get sources and exact information. Conclusive studies on animal intelligence are there, but they are usually not (and really should not be, as nature is not a scale with man being "best", and everything else descending!) comparative towards other species directly. I have listed above some info on what corvids (and parrots) have proven themselves mentally capable of with comparative testing that animals like cats/dogs/rats have not. That is what I have been talking about from the beginning. "Smart" in this sense, in the "common" usage that people regard animals - closest to our mental capacity. (I am aware that is the old, outdates scala nature sense in many ways) I am trying to point out is that it is not my "opinion" that crows & parrots have excelled at these tests and do far better then any cat, it is a fact. I am also not saying there can not be dumb crows, or exceptional cats, I am simply stating that its rather well noted among the people who study animal cognition that corvids and psittacines are considered among the worlds most cognitant of animals and they rest inside the circle which includes the other great apes and man. That in itself is extraordinary. They have time and time again proven themselves capable of things other animals have not in laboratories (and in the wild) around the world. JFYI - I like many species of animals, including felines. I was not trying to present a personal bias towards corvids over felines. I was presenting the fact that cats can not be called "smarter" then a crow realistically. If one were to call one of the 2 animals in this case "smarter" in the sense that humans understand cognition and intelligence, especially in a social format as we understand, crows would be miles ahead of cats. I am particularly fond of corvids and parrots BECAUSE they are so smart. I read the books by Konrad Lorenz as a youth, and they are some GREAT reading on the subject of what is really going on inside animals heads. Granted, I like many kinds of animals that are not considered as cognitant as corvids or cats, like snakes. They certainly aren't going to be winning any awards for being particularly "bright" organisms in a comparable sense to those others listed.
|
|
|
Post by ningishzida on Dec 17, 2008 12:41:33 GMT
Some reptiles are also not as dumb as some people think. Some reptile attractions have crocodilians taught to do similar tricks to birds and dogs, though it is harder to 'train' them because of their lower food needs to warm blooded animals.
My Nile Croc, "Sobek", associated the sound of my opening refrigerator with "food", and when the fridge was open, and if he was hungry, he would deliberately scratch the bottom of his pool with one rear foot to get my attention, that he wanted something out of the fridge.
Ad of course, there is the story of Gustave, a massive Nile Croc that has succesfully preyed upon hundreds of humans for decades in a place where every male over the age of 10 has a high powered, automatic assault rifle. A pretty smart croc.
|
|
|
Post by crazycrowman on Dec 17, 2008 17:59:51 GMT
"Some reptiles are also not as dumb as some people think. Some reptile attractions have crocodilians taught to do similar tricks to birds and dogs, though it is harder to 'train' them because of their lower food needs to warm blooded animals."
You will clearly notice I said snakes, not crocodilians. I also did not say snakes were not trainable. Personally I think reptiles are easier to train then ravens. They are very stimulus/response kind of animals, and that makes it easy for a trainer to condition them with the behavior = food, and such things work well. I have explained how Osceola, my Alligator has been trained and I have clicker trained tortoises as well. I have not even needed to use food rewards to train osceola for the most part. I never said reptiles are out and out "dumb", but they are not going to be using tools or competing with the mental acuity of corvids or the great apes any time soon.
|
|
|
Post by sid on Dec 17, 2008 18:06:28 GMT
Speakin' again about that bigass Pterosaurus and the possibility that he could have scared away (no less than) a T.rex,all i can say is:
AH! AH! AH!
C'mon,Rex could have easily ANNIHILATED that critter,no matter how he was tall or "scary-looking" ;D ;D
|
|
|
Post by ningishzida on Dec 17, 2008 20:43:49 GMT
Speakin' again about that bigass Pterosaurus and the possibility that he could have scared away (no less than) a T.rex,all i can say is: AH! AH! AH! C'mon,Rex could have easily ANNIHILATED that critter,no matter how he was tall or "scary-looking" ;D ;D Yes, I agree that a 5 ton T-Rex would win a fight against a 800 lb. Pterosaur, but it is still possible they may be intimidated by such a creature, especially if it lived in fear of being eaten by one while a juvenile - something a triceratops or duckbill never threatened to do. Some scientists have said that the reason humans survived was due to the upright gait that made us seem bigger and more formidable than we really are. Also, consider how inprudent it would be for you to try to pluck feathers off of a five foot tall great blue heron. Yes, you outweight the bird and you are stronger and could bite off its head (we had to do that with chickens in recondo training), but is it worth getting stabbed in the face by that spear of a beak? Rexes may have had a healthy respect for giant pteros, something with so little meat yet so potentially dangerous probably isn't worth eating.
|
|
|
Post by ningishzida on Dec 17, 2008 20:45:42 GMT
"Some reptiles are also not as dumb as some people think. Some reptile attractions have crocodilians taught to do similar tricks to birds and dogs, though it is harder to 'train' them because of their lower food needs to warm blooded animals." You will clearly notice I said snakes, not crocodilians. I also did not say snakes were not trainable. Personally I think reptiles are easier to train then ravens. They are very stimulus/response kind of animals, and that makes it easy for a trainer to condition them with the behavior = food, and such things work well. I have explained how Osceola, my Alligator has been trained and I have clicker trained tortoises as well. I have not even needed to use food rewards to train osceola for the most part. I never said reptiles are out and out "dumb", but they are not going to be using tools or competing with the mental acuity of corvids or the great apes any time soon. I wasn't attacking your post, I am sure you of all people here are aware of reptilian intelligence. I was merely adding this as an aside since this is a dinosaur forum.
|
|
|
Post by crazycrowman on Dec 17, 2008 21:01:16 GMT
I wasn't attacking your post, I am sure you of all people here are aware of reptilian intelligence. I was merely adding this as an aside since this is a dinosaur forum. I am sorry if I came off as though I thought you were attacking my post. Sometimes it is hard to put "feeling" into these sort of things, and I know I can come off as...well...harsh sometimes. It was not meant that way. I am glad you added this because many people are still of the mind that reptiles and even birds (and even more animals depending on who you are talking to) are nothing more then organic robots that function without feeling. I think that sort of thinking can clearly be logically stomped out based on the fascinating studies done in the world of animal cognition, from rats and crocs to crows and cats.
|
|
|
Post by stoneage on Dec 17, 2008 23:19:57 GMT
CCM Your articles are interesting. The New Caldonian Crow uses tools. Chicks that were hand raised and never taught to make tools made them anyway instinctively. It is interesting that birds are more like us brain function wise then dogs and cats to whom we are more closely related!
|
|
|
Post by crazycrowman on Dec 17, 2008 23:51:23 GMT
CCM Your articles are interesting. The New Caldonian Crow uses tools. Chicks that were hand raised and never taught to make tools made them anyway instinctively. It is interesting that birds are more like us brain function wise then dogs and cats to whom we are more closely related! Thanks. Its a very neat case of convergent evolution that mentally corvids share similar brain functions. I am completely in agreement with the hypothesis that it is due to the need for things like culture and language in an extremely complex and challenging social environment that "causes" brains to need to develop like that. The tool use is fascinating in many ways. Even more then just instinctive is the fact that the birds will modify tools of new materials with no coaching. Not even chimpanzees do that with any regularity that we know of. Only man and crows.
|
|
|
Post by stoneage on Dec 18, 2008 1:18:22 GMT
Well the question is what is instinct and what is intelligence. Birds build nest to lay their eggs. They never saw their parents do this, and yet I'll bet most robin nest look pretty much the same. Why do they come up with the same general construction? Turtles return to where they were born to lay their eggs. Spiders weave complex webs. Is that intelligence. I'd bet given the same test the cat would get the food by using it's paw, Licking, Turning the glass over, or Breaking the glass. If it couldn't do that because it has no way to use a tool other then it's mouth which isn't designed for that is he less smart. A dolphin is smart but it's ability to make a tool is limited by it's body design.
|
|