It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Were dinosaurs more evolutionarily advanced than humans???

page: 4
9
<< 1  2  3    5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 22 2018 @ 08:24 AM
link   
a reply to: dug88

We are omnivores..


That requires more different forms of bacteria to break down our food.


The human gut has more bacteria than any other animal for that same reason..


Plus not all bacteria is bad, so “clean” is definitely relative..


If your counting bacteria, then probably so..




posted on Jun, 22 2018 @ 12:07 PM
link   

originally posted by: JoshuaCox
I know this is a hard thing to apply a metric to, but I was thinking to myself “were they really primitive?? Or are we more primative evolutionarily???

If we are assuming that major extinction events wipe the slate clean, which I know isn’t 100% the case..

So the dinosaurs had like 135 million years of evolution as they “ruled the earth” and humanity has only had 65 million years of evolution that led to our dominance.


So does that mean the dinosaurs were actually more advanced physically because they have had longer to adapt to their environment???


I’m asking a weird question That I don’t even know if there is an answer to....



But when you compare the pre extinction event animals they seem better adapted to fit their environments..

If you brought them to modern times they jump straight to the top of the food chain..
Regardless of what other members and their "Intelligent" brow beating may try to say, there is nothing stopping your train of thought, except covert mind control.

"Officially" we know of many life forms that inhabited the outer surface of our planet. Through scientific observations of the remains of those life forms found in the ground we have a pretty good idea of them. And to support your train of thought, there is no way to scientifically prove life forms that were not found. In other words absence of evidence, is not evidence of absence. Its a very large scientific hole that anything, or one, could operate in, or from.
Of course "They" will demand evidence that just doesn't exist, and they know it. I would say, it doesn't exist, where we are allowed to look........

You point out specifically "dinosaurs". But in the time line you are dealing with, again, wasn't mammals. It was, reptilian. And if you are trying to say that one, maybe two species of reptiles were able to evolve even past what mankind has achieved in the last 40,000 years, then the hole of ignorance would be large enough to hold them. So I see no reason to stop, but to support, your train of thought. Even if direct evidence of their existence can not be scientifically proven.

Science must be based in observation, first. Since we have observed no bones in the ground to initiate a scientific examination, at least publicly, then the observation must come from somewhere. And that is where witness observations come into play. Have "Reptilian" observations been made? Seems so, just go through all the "UFO" materials and you will find the "Missing Link", the real, missing link....



posted on Jun, 22 2018 @ 01:20 PM
link   
a reply to: All Seeing Eye

A) no one said anything about establishing any scientific facts lol.. wrong forum. I was just spit balling..


B) I wasn’t really talking about only mental/technology advancement... but that is another issue I’ll come back to in C.


The best way I can think of to describe what I meant is...


Say we assigned a number value to every trait like it was a DND game or an rpg..


Armor:
Dexterity:
Strength:
Ect.
Ect.
Ect..


Which if you had all the information you could almost certainly do..we don’t so we can’t.. just saying it isn’t impossible to compare 2 species and say one is subjectively superior... atleast as far as your scale is concerned.

Well if you did that would we really have such a high intelligence score that it trumped (pick a cool Dino)’s score..

I figure as a species adapts to its environment it gains more traits than it loses.

That in an extinction event all the alpha predators die first. So that leaves the last tier animals remaining.. basically starting the whole ball rolling again. Just never starting from zero.


C) oh I THINK with all those millions of years there is no telling how many Stone Age cultures have been forgotten.


Maybe even some from reptilians..


That doesn’t change the fact that “still living modern reptilians” and a society as advanced as ours that history has forgotten is ridiculous..



posted on Jun, 22 2018 @ 09:08 PM
link   
a reply to: JoshuaCox


Appearently all that particulate heated the atmosphere to 1200 degrees EVERYWHERE..
Not necessarily.

You seem to have missed the link when I posted it earlier.

These new model- based results, taken together with the abundant literature on paleontological indicators of fire occurrence, suggest that extensive wildfires were not the cause. This model-data agreement does not eliminate the role of relatively high temperatures (on the order of a couple of hundred degrees centigrade) in some of the extinctions seen at this time; but does suggest that the thermal pulse component of the K-Pg impact was not as significant as has been previously thought.

www.researchgate.net...

edit on 6/22/2018 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 23 2018 @ 03:17 AM
link   
a reply to: JoshuaCox




No the present theory is that the particulates vaporized and went up into the atmosphere . Then turned into sphrereicals and fell back to earth like shooting stars.


No, that is at MOST one current HYPOTHESIS. And it is NOT the most favored hypothesis. (See Phage's reply above mine).



Appearently all that particulate heated the atmosphere to 1200 degrees EVERYWHERE..

That would INSTANTLY kill anything at surface level.


(source)

An average surface fire on the forest floor might have flames reaching 1 metre in height and can reach temperatures of 800°C (1,472°F) or more. Under extreme conditions a fire can give off 10,000 kilowatts or more per metre of fire front. This would mean flame heights of 50 metres or more and flame temperatures exceeding 1200°C (2,192°F).


And yet, not even a fire at that temperature DOES actually "INSTANTLY kill anything at surface level". Of course lots of animals die; but many survive. Those temperatures are common in Australian fires EVERY year, and yet there is constant debate over whether to cull the kangaroo mobs due to overpopulation in those areas. Kangaroos are hardly able to hide 18 inches below ground, nor can possums or koalas. If your assertion was correct, Australia would be populated by nothing but termites, wombats, and echidnas (and the echnidas would be questionable).



Are mice as evolutionarily advanced as people?


YES. Absolutely.



If the same thing happens today, mice survive and people die out.


Not all mice, and not all people.



posted on Jun, 23 2018 @ 12:42 PM
link   
a reply to: rnaa

If the definition of evolutionary advancement is to survive and breed, I think we could argue that every species living today is equally advanced. From mice to humans to cockroaches. But not dinosaurs.



posted on Jun, 23 2018 @ 06:39 PM
link   
a reply to: toms54

Dinosaurs just were not Ewing to handle one single day..

We are not talking about something being beaten by its competitor..

If I decide to go kill all the rinos..

It wasn’t an evolution thing that killed them off.

A meteor is way closer to that than survival of the fittest.


Mammals were lucky. Not good.



posted on Jun, 23 2018 @ 06:45 PM
link   
a reply to: rnaa

Instantly wasn’t even remotely relevant.. assuming that is what happened every creature on the earths surface died with in minutes or seconds or hours..


Reguardless only burrowing Dino’s survive to reproduce.

No large animals survive 1400 degrees :..

I don’t know what kangaroos have to do with it.. none could survive an afternoon at 1400 degrees..



posted on Jun, 23 2018 @ 07:29 PM
link   
I know what your asking, you just framed your question incorrectly. I had the same question, was/is it possible for an advanced reptilian species to evolve if not along the dinosaurs but from a branch, since mammals gave rise to... people.

The thing is dinosaurs weren't as evolutionary advanced as much as they were successful. Dinosaurs kept evolving, they just turned into birds, so they "in essence" are still around.

Also, mammals were there too, it's just that dinosaurs were more successful at that time, which changed around the Kt boundary.

The big question is would there be any evidence of such and so far no, but absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. They could have left the planet and traveled elsewhere, they could have died out, who knows.

A bigger question is would there be any graves, recoverable graves? Seeing as how we are finding partially fossilized predecessors, the chances of recovering a fossilized body of a "reptilian humanoid" are between zero.

Come to think about it, before "us" we have no idea who or what called Earth home. We can only find the fossils.



posted on Jun, 23 2018 @ 07:31 PM
link   
a reply to: JoshuaCox

No , Pure Instinct , Kill or be Killed .



posted on Jun, 23 2018 @ 09:11 PM
link   
a reply to: JoshuaCox

They are dead. We have 65 million years of evolution or de-evolution over them -- for what that's worth. I have read that if some of them were alive today they couldn't live. Their necks are too long or they are too big for their hearts to pump blood to their brain. Apparently giraffes are about the upper limit for a long neck under today's conditions. Some of them would have trouble walking. An elephant is supposed to be the upper limit for body mass. Its like there was less gravity back then or something. At any rate, we are better adapted than they would be if they were here today. I mean dinosaurs not birds which may have come from dinosaurs but are not dinosaurs.

13:06


9:50



posted on Jun, 23 2018 @ 09:29 PM
link   
a reply to: toms54

A) Absolutely..

But they , hypothetically had 200 million years of evolution before old Mr. comet decided to shake up the ol extch a sketch.

We have only had 65 million years..

That’s kinda the basis for my thought.


B ) with out that meteor strike they likely evolve to deal with the changing atmosphere.
edit on 23-6-2018 by JoshuaCox because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 23 2018 @ 09:34 PM
link   
What do you mean "were".... they evolved into birds...



posted on Jun, 23 2018 @ 09:35 PM
link   
a reply to: Zanti Misfit

I think an extinction event is way closer to getting lucky than survival of the fittest.



posted on Jun, 23 2018 @ 09:39 PM
link   
a reply to: Blarneystoner

The small burrowing Dino’s became birds. All the things we really consider dinosaurs, died..

All the apex predators died in one “wrong place at the wrong time” event.. which only left the gamma predators who were everyone’s (beep) 5 min before that.



posted on Jun, 24 2018 @ 04:07 AM
link   

originally posted by: JoshuaCox
a reply to: toms54

A) Absolutely..

But they , hypothetically had 200 million years of evolution before old Mr. comet decided to shake up the ol extch a sketch.

We have only had 65 million years..

That’s kinda the basis for my thought.


B ) with out that meteor strike they likely evolve to deal with the changing atmosphere.


If they survived. Not the birds but the big ones. If they survived they would have to evolve and adapt to today's environment. What this would look like is de evolution. Look at the mammoths; in areas that were no longer suitable they shrunk into dwarf species before thy died out altogether. Places like California and Columbia and Bolivia. Eventually they might reach equilibrium with their environment:


1:40



posted on Jun, 27 2018 @ 01:07 PM
link   
a reply to: JoshuaCox


That doesn’t change the fact that “still living modern reptilians” and a society as advanced as ours that history has forgotten is ridiculous..
Why do you set intellectual boundaries for yourself? The "Ignorance Hole" I speak of, and you, is over 500,000,000 million years large, or larger. The evidence is mounting that more advanced cultures existed prior to our measly 40,000 years.



posted on Jun, 27 2018 @ 03:40 PM
link   

originally posted by: skunkape23
I vote humans, in a relatively short time, have beat the dinosaurs in the game of evolution.

We also have a sense of humor. It seems like a small thing, but having a sense of humor, our ability to imagine ourselves outside a situation and realize the laughable absurdity of it, wins us all the top votes.



posted on Jun, 27 2018 @ 03:53 PM
link   

originally posted by: JoshuaCox
a reply to: Blarneystoner

The small burrowing Dino’s became birds. All the things we really consider dinosaurs, died..

All the apex predators died in one “wrong place at the wrong time” event.. which only left the gamma predators who were everyone’s (beep) 5 min before that.


Really? I don't think so... birds evolved from maniraptoran theropods... meat eaters.. a group that includes velocoraptors... the dinosaur that is synonymous with the name dinosaur....



posted on Jun, 28 2018 @ 10:32 AM
link   
a reply to: Blarneystoner

Velociraptors were small enough to be burrowing Dino’s.. possibly, their close kin for damn sure we’re.


There has never been one large animal fossil recovered for millions of years after the KT boundary.


No species larger than a breadbasket (besides ocean life) survived the meteor attack..


When I think of evolution I don’t think of meteors killing everything in XY or Z area on whatever day.


I think survival of the fittest over eons.


An extinction event seems more an issue of luck than skill.







 
9
<< 1  2  3    5 >>

log in

join