If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(NBC News)   Everything you know about dinosaurs is wrong   (cosmiclog.nbcnews.com) divider line 73
    More: Interesting, dinosaurs, Brian Switek, Allosaurus, biology, Triassic, history of science, triceratops, paleontology  
•       •       •

4906 clicks; posted to Geek » on 02 May 2013 at 7:54 AM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



73 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-05-02 06:47:28 AM  
Joke's on you, subby. I know nothing about dinosaurs.
 
2013-05-02 06:54:35 AM  
HAH! More lies from the heart of Satan himself!

Everyone, and RAY COMFORT, knows that Jesus rode dinosaurs when he used AK-16s to Conqueror the Romans!

hot-dogma.com

zombierobots.net

25.media.tumblr.com
 
2013-05-02 06:56:12 AM  
We were joined by University of Maryland paleontologist Thomas Holtz Jr., one of the country's foremost experts on prehistoric dinosaurs and their connection to present-day birds.

Oo
 
2013-05-02 07:17:32 AM  

TsarTom: prehistoric


As in before recorded history. Certain species, like birds, are basically dinosaurs in the modern era. Some birds are extinct. Thus it can said there are prehistoric, historic, and modern dinosaurs.
 
2013-05-02 07:18:40 AM  

TsarTom: We were joined by University of Maryland paleontologist Thomas Holtz Jr., one of the country's foremost experts on prehistoric dinosaurs and their connection to present-day birds.

Oo


That makes sense:  Birds are *MODERN* dinosaurs, so qualifying it by saying that the animals that lived in the Triassic through the Cretaceous period are prehistoric dinosaurs is kosher.

/Even though rex meat may not be.
 
2013-05-02 07:38:37 AM  
All I know about dinosaurs I learned from The Flintstones.
 
2013-05-02 07:40:44 AM  
It might be a quibble over terminology, but I disagree with the statement that dinosaurs are still alive because there are birds around.
Everything that we classify as dinosaurs is gone. Birds evolved from one line of dinosaurs and become avians, thus they are no longer dinosaurs.

If you want to use the 'modern' dinosaur argument, then you could also say that humans that 'modern' bacteria, because one branch of the bacteria line evolved into other forms and eventually became homo sapiens.
 
2013-05-02 07:52:11 AM  
They don't love me?
 
2013-05-02 07:54:52 AM  

Slives: If you want to use the 'modern' dinosaur argument, then you could also say that humans that 'modern' bacteria


No cell walls.
 
2013-05-02 07:57:28 AM  

doglover: Slives: If you want to use the 'modern' dinosaur argument, then you could also say that humans that 'modern' bacteria

No cell walls.


What about prison?
 
2013-05-02 07:57:49 AM  
The dinosaur "expert" completely misses the point by saying that birds are living dinosaurs. We weren't excited by dinosaurs when we were kids because they had 3 toes. That's like saying that tricycles are the same as roller coasters. What? they're both forms of conveyance?
 
2013-05-02 07:58:35 AM  
As most 9-year-olds could probably tell you, there's officially no such thing as a Brontosaurus.

First you tell me Pluto is no longer a planet, and now you tell me there's no such thing as a Brontosaurus?
F*ck you! They're both still real to me dammit!
img.photobucket.com
 
2013-05-02 08:01:52 AM  

I_C_Weener: What about prison?


Try not to face the walls.
 
2013-05-02 08:05:48 AM  

Slives: It might be a quibble over terminology, but I disagree with the statement that dinosaurs are still alive because there are birds around.
Everything that we classify as dinosaurs is gone. Birds evolved from one line of dinosaurs and become avians, thus they are no longer dinosaurs.

If you want to use the 'modern' dinosaur argument, then you could also say that humans that 'modern' bacteria, because one branch of the bacteria line evolved into other forms and eventually became homo sapiens.


What specific unique traits do birds have that make them non-dinosaurs?

Both had feathers, laid shelled eggs, and were warm blooded.

"Flying" doesn't count. Bats fly, and are still mammals.
 
2013-05-02 08:05:54 AM  
Dinosaur floor was lava. The birds won. QED
 
2013-05-02 08:07:34 AM  
But were there giant fanged fire breathing turtles?
 
2013-05-02 08:09:28 AM  

Walker: As most 9-year-olds could probably tell you, there's officially no such thing as a Brontosaurus.

First you tell me Pluto is no longer a planet, and now you tell me there's no such thing as a Brontosaurus?
F*ck you! They're both still real to me dammit!
[img.photobucket.com image 320x240]


Nah, they later reversed that horrible decision about Pluto.  The next scientist that even suggests that Pluto isn't a planet is going to get a first-class rocket trip TO Pluto, where they will live out the rest of their incredibly short life explaining to the massive layer of gaseous ice that its not actually a planet.

/it circles the sun, it has its own moon, therefore, it's a goddamn planet!
 
2013-05-02 08:12:10 AM  

blue_2501: /it circles the sun, it has its own moon


It has FIVE moons.
 
2013-05-02 08:16:33 AM  

doglover: TsarTom: prehistoric

As in before recorded history. Certain species, like birds, are basically dinosaurs in the modern era. Some birds are extinct. Thus it can said there are prehistoric, historic, and modern dinosaurs.


Let's leave John McCain out of this.
 
2013-05-02 08:16:44 AM  
4.bp.blogspot.com

Are you saying that they weren't thin at one end, much thicker in the middle, and then thin again?
 
2013-05-02 08:20:33 AM  

Cubicle Jockey: Slives: It might be a quibble over terminology, but I disagree with the statement that dinosaurs are still alive because there are birds around.
Everything that we classify as dinosaurs is gone. Birds evolved from one line of dinosaurs and become avians, thus they are no longer dinosaurs.

If you want to use the 'modern' dinosaur argument, then you could also say that humans that 'modern' bacteria, because one branch of the bacteria line evolved into other forms and eventually became homo sapiens.

What specific unique traits do birds have that make them non-dinosaurs?

Both had feathers, laid shelled eggs, and were warm blooded.

"Flying" doesn't count. Bats fly, and are still mammals.


Not to mention insects that fly.

Also, some modern birds are flightless:  Penguins, ostriches, rheas, emus, kiwis, cassowaries, etc.
 
2013-05-02 08:21:57 AM  
So, they didn't have feathers or give rise to birds?
 
2013-05-02 08:25:09 AM  
Black is white, up is down and short is long?
 
2013-05-02 08:27:10 AM  
But the headline becomes erroneous after you read the article.....
 
2013-05-02 08:36:55 AM  
I still think that Jim Henson was right.

img186.imageshack.us
 
2013-05-02 08:39:19 AM  
Y'all are slipping this morning.

imgs.xkcd.com
 
2013-05-02 08:42:22 AM  
I've always wondered about the efficiency of dino lungs. There must have been more oxygen 65 mya. Either that, or their bodies must of have been mostly lungs.
 
2013-05-02 08:44:30 AM  
So they're not totally awesome? I find that very hard to believe
 
2013-05-02 08:59:42 AM  
farm6.staticflickr.com
Wrong.
 
2013-05-02 09:00:31 AM  

indarwinsshadow: I've always wondered about the efficiency of dino lungs. There must have been more oxygen 65 mya. Either that, or their bodies must of have been mostly lungs.


Same strategy birds use:  Unidirectional flow.

Bird lungs aren't dead-end sacks like ours.

Check out the animations on that page.  The upshot of it is that even when they are exhaling, they are extracting oxygen from the air because air only flows one way through their actual lungs.
 
2013-05-02 09:03:06 AM  
Saying birds are "modern dinosaurs" completely misses the point of evolution and differentiation. All living things are at least distantly related to each other, but humans are not considered "modern bacteria" by most scientists.
 
2013-05-02 09:04:11 AM  

blue_2501: Walker: As most 9-year-olds could probably tell you, there's officially no such thing as a Brontosaurus.

First you tell me Pluto is no longer a planet, and now you tell me there's no such thing as a Brontosaurus?
F*ck you! They're both still real to me dammit!
[img.photobucket.com image 320x240]

Nah, they later reversed that horrible decision about Pluto.  The next scientist that even suggests that Pluto isn't a planet is going to get a first-class rocket trip TO Pluto, where they will live out the rest of their incredibly short life explaining to the massive layer of gaseous ice that its not actually a planet.

/it circles the sun, it has its own moon, therefore, it's a goddamn planet!


Uh, what?  I am pretty sure that is not the case.  The whole issue was they found another rocky/icy body circling the sun that was slightly larger than Pluto, and based on how thye found it they also realized there are proabbly quite a few more similar bodies circling the sun.  The choice was either to cap the Planet range/size at Neptune and anything beyond that is a "Dwarf Planet", or add a whole bunch more Planets to the "original" 9.

/It is just semantics, it isn't like Pluto is no longer out there
 
2013-05-02 09:05:09 AM  

UNC_Samurai: Y'all are slipping this morning.

[imgs.xkcd.com image 740x234]


After reading the headline, my first thought was "Someone call Randall Monroe and let him know the Raptors are coming for him STAT!"
 
2013-05-02 09:08:47 AM  

pkellmey: All living things are at least distantly related to each other, but humans are not considered "modern bacteria" by most scientists.


No, but there are many dinosaurs that, were they alive today, would be considered birds.
 
2013-05-02 09:15:00 AM  

Slives: It might be a quibble over terminology, but I disagree with the statement that dinosaurs are still alive because there are birds around.
Everything that we classify as dinosaurs is gone. Birds evolved from one line of dinosaurs and become avians, thus they are no longer dinosaurs.

If you want to use the 'modern' dinosaur argument, then you could also say that humans that 'modern' bacteria, because one branch of the bacteria line evolved into other forms and eventually became homo sapiens.


Biological classification is done through recognizing natural clades, meaning a group that contains an ancestor and all of its descendants. Scientifically, it is helpful when the names of organisms mean something specific.  This definition can create problems as you mentioned- sponges are likely multiple groups meaning that we are all technically sponges, unless we split sponges into multiple phyla. The same thing goes with fish, we are all fish unless we differentiate fish into lobe-fined, cartilaginous,  and ray finned.

A useful way to think of it is to imagine if all mammals went extinct except for primates, would we no longer be mammals then?

/paleontologist that just finished teaching a class on dinosaurs
 
2013-05-02 09:20:37 AM  

Cubicle Jockey: Both had feathers, laid shelled eggs, and were warm blooded.


There's always the problem of teeth, though. And dinosaur eggs are different from bird eggs.
 
2013-05-02 09:24:23 AM  
Only hipsters divide animals into 'clades". There's only two kinds of animals - tasty and not tasty
 
2013-05-02 09:27:13 AM  

theorellior: Cubicle Jockey: Both had feathers, laid shelled eggs, and were warm blooded.

There's always the problem of teeth, though. And dinosaur eggs are different from bird eggs.


Early birds mostly had teeth and several groups of theropod dinosaurs had beaks. Dinosaur eggs differ amongst themselves. Theropod dinosaur eggs are rather similar to bird eggs.
 
2013-05-02 09:33:05 AM  
I think they're appealing because they demand answers of us.

No. Dinosaurs are appealing because they're gigantic walking mountains of flesh-rending awesomeness.
 
2013-05-02 09:39:07 AM  
What I do know is that a velociraptor is no match for a 13 year old girl that excels at gymnastics.
 
2013-05-02 09:43:41 AM  

t3knomanser: pkellmey: All living things are at least distantly related to each other, but humans are not considered "modern bacteria" by most scientists.

No, but there are many dinosaurs that, were they alive today, would be considered birds.


Cold-blooded organisms are usually not considered to be warm-blooded avians. Birds are usually defined as have the features of being feathered, winged, bipedal, warm-blooded, egg-laying vertebrates. There were dinosaurs that may been warm-blooded, some were avian and some that were feathered, and it appears all were egg-laying, but there are not believed to be any warm-blooded avian dinosaurs in the books. This was probably due to internal body differences in heart, lung and rib cage construction, but the science is still not entirely sure why. Similar characteristics can be found in many organisms that are not closely related, like egg-laying in both warm and cold blooded creatures, however that does not mean they are considered to be the same.
 
2013-05-02 09:48:20 AM  

dittybopper: indarwinsshadow: I've always wondered about the efficiency of dino lungs. There must have been more oxygen 65 mya. Either that, or their bodies must of have been mostly lungs.

Same strategy birds use:  Unidirectional flow.

Bird lungs aren't dead-end sacks like ours.

Check out the animations on that page.  The upshot of it is that even when they are exhaling, they are extracting oxygen from the air because air only flows one way through their actual lungs.


Actually, that answered all the questions I've wondered about birds and dinosaurs. I've always wondered how dinosaurs managed to breathe enough air to keep their systems purged of co2. I guessed they must have had higher than normal heart rates and a more efficient cardiopulmonary system than modern reptiles, or, they were sluggish and mediated their body temperature and respitory rate based on movement and couldn't continue long stretches of intense excerise without reaching unacceptable levels of ketosis.
 
2013-05-02 09:49:46 AM  

pkellmey: but there are not believed to be any warm-blooded avian dinosaurs in the books


I did not think this was true.
 
2013-05-02 09:59:36 AM  

cystis: theorellior: Cubicle Jockey: Both had feathers, laid shelled eggs, and were warm blooded.

There's always the problem of teeth, though. And dinosaur eggs are different from bird eggs.

Early birds mostly had teeth and several groups of theropod dinosaurs had beaks. Dinosaur eggs differ amongst themselves. Theropod dinosaur eggs are rather similar to bird eggs.


Geese have teeth.

www.digital-nature-photography.com
 
2013-05-02 10:00:59 AM  
http://smg.photobucket.com/user/valhalla130/media/Males-Goose-Tongue_z psfbfba6bb.jpg.html">http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v319/valhalla13 0/Males-Goose-Tongue_ zpsfbfba6bb.jpg">
 
2013-05-02 10:01:49 AM  
NM.
 
2013-05-02 10:23:42 AM  

pkellmey: Saying birds are "modern dinosaurs" completely misses the point of evolution and differentiation. All living things are at least distantly related to each other, but humans are not considered "modern bacteria" by most scientists.


Evolution worked different back then. The T-rex turned into a chicken to seem non-threatening to a party of fireball wielding pointy organism. Unfortunatly it was a very short lived, yet delicious, survival technique.
 
2013-05-02 11:35:00 AM  
controversy.wearscience.com
 
2013-05-02 11:50:47 AM  

DerAppie: pkellmey: Saying birds are "modern dinosaurs" completely misses the point of evolution and differentiation. All living things are at least distantly related to each other, but humans are not considered "modern bacteria" by most scientists.

Evolution worked different back then. The T-rex turned into a chicken to seem non-threatening to a party of fireball wielding pointy organism. Unfortunatly it was a very short lived, yet delicious, survival technique.


This also explains the Boot Bush and the Pencil Shrub.
 
2013-05-02 11:55:51 AM  

pkellmey: Saying birds are "modern dinosaurs" completely misses the point of evolution and differentiation. All living things are at least distantly related to each other, but humans are not considered "modern bacteria" by most scientists.


No, but we are considered apes like chimpanzees, gorillas, and orangatans.
 
Displayed 50 of 73 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report