Tool making dinosaurs?

Whos to say there didnt exist any dinosaurs capable of a making tools, having rudimentary speech, even art of some kind? sounds daft but given the huuuuge variety among the dinosaurs, the fierce competition and the bizzare geography of earth at the time? im imagine there still a myriad of speices of dinosuars we dont have fossils for.....hmm, anyone care to induldge in a bit of wild speculation?

Haha.... well we form our opinions on dinosaurs based on their small cranium size.

Now dinosaurs did exist for like 150 million years... far longer than anything even remotely related to our species. So I suppose there is plenty of time for a subset to have evolved larger brains and higher functions.

While there are plenty of dinosaurs that walked on 2 legs, their arms left alot to be desired in terms of manipulating tools.

Perhaps a subset of them evolved to the point where they were able to hide their remains and take their place in the stars?? Galactic reptilians!?

Actually most dinosaurs werent as dumb as the media potrays them. While the herbivors were not the smartest but the same case is today. The meateaters were all fairly intelligent and certainly not repillian like.

Read Evolution by Stephen Baxter. Although a sci fi novel (actually a series of stories from various stages of human evolution) it it based on solid research and latest theories.

It includes tool making dinosaurs

If a species of dino reached the equavalent of our stone age, then there would be absolutely no trace of them today. And if they buried their dead, as we do, few, if any, fossils to be found either.

It's not an impossiblity

Here's an article I found where someone thinks they might have found proof of tool makeing dinosaurs.

Tool Time for Dinosaurs: A BMC Discovery
By Emily Johnson
STAFF WRITER

Dr. Roger Harris, a geology professor at Bryn Mawr made a new discovery recently, in Belle Fourche, South Dakota. Harris, who is currently on leave from his teaching duties, has found what he believes to be proof that dinosaurs were actually the first to use tools, that is, in the words of Harris, “organic and inorganic objects which assisted in daily life.”

The specimen found is believed to be the fossil of an Ornithomimus, a small, omnivorous theropod. Harris discovered the fossil while on a dig in South Dakota this February. The specimen was found with what appears to be a stone tool, as well as a fossilized egg. This, according to Harris, is proof that at least one dinosaur may have reasonably used tools to assist in its daily needs.



For the whole article here's the link:

www.biconews.com...

Well, letr us not forget that there are animals that use tools, esp birds. They are known to use rocks to crack open eggs, twigs to get bugs, ect. The bower bird uses tools to attract a mate..
I would not be surprised if dinos used tools along those same lines.

I don't find this terribly difficult to believe either considering the high intelligence of the raptors and other such creatures. It would have become apparent to these types of dinosaurs that their environment around them could be used to their advantage over such a long time that they existed.

it may have been possible but if they only reached to a stone age type civilisation and all their tools and remains were wiped out by the asteroid then what proof do we have unlesss someone builds a time machine and gos back to see and i dont see that happening any time soon until someone finds evidence for tool making dinosaurs its all just speculation

Originally posted by mr cryptoman
it may have been possible but if they only reached to a stone age type civilisation and all their tools and remains were wiped out by the asteroid then what proof do we have unlesss someone builds a time machine and gos back to see and i dont see that happening any time soon until someone finds evidence for tool making dinosaurs its all just speculation

I think that is a very sensible thing to say. Speculation is sensible.

I have long held the belief that Dinosaurs did evolve into Highly Intelligent beings.

It could also be that the creatures we are digging up are 'Beasts of Burden', much like the cows and horses of today, and the 'Wild Animals' of some other civilization.

Maybe life takes turns at letting beings evolve. It was our turn this time. Last time it was somebody else's.

Next time, well, it may well be the Prawns.

All Hail the Prawn Over-Lords of tomorrow!


[edit on 21-10-2006 by Unrealised]

[edit on 21-10-2006 by Unrealised]

there were no tool making dinos because we have no evidence of tool making dinos

that is how science works

you come up with a hypothesis
gather new and old evidence
and come to a conclusion

we have zero evidence showing tool making dinosaurs existed

Originally posted by TheSilentProtagonist
Whos to say there didnt exist any dinosaurs capable of a making tools, having rudimentary speech, even art of some kind?

Who's to say that there definitly wasn't something like that? I suppose no one. Who's to say that there actually was such a thing, or anything even close? Apparently no one either.

given the huuuuge variety among the dinosaurs, the fierce competition and the bizzare geography of earth at the time? im imagine there still a myriad of speices of dinosuars we dont have fossils for

The problem is, what advantage would tool making offer, say, a small dinosaur, say tool making on the level of the apes? Whats a small dinosaur going to do with a stick, or even the ability to smack two rocks together to make one sharp, when its being attacked by a sharp clawed and sharp toothed dinosaurian predator?

.....hmm, anyone care to induldge in a bit of wild speculation?

Speculation is allways fun. Some researchers have noticed that the lineage associated with the evolution into birds was showing trends torwards increased brain size, and speculated on what would happen if this was extrapolated over time.
But the problem is, reptile brains are incredibly small to begin with, reaching the intelligence of a primitive bird is an accomplishment, but far from making tools and having languages. And that brain size increase was largely related to the requirements for flight and/or living amoung the trees, not necessarily the same kind of brain material needed for making tools.

OF COURSE, primates ultimately developed tool making abilities, and they started scurrying about tree branches, like the pre-avian dinosaurs, so perhaps something might've happened in the end.

There was actually a thread on this a long time ago, you might find it interesting:
www.abovetopsecret.com...

Here is a page with more information, Dr. Dale Russel is the person that came up with this idea"
home13.inet.tele.dk...
Scroll down to the section headed "Intelligent dinosaurs"


Russell's hypothetical construction.

elaine
www.biconews.com...

It notes that this was actually an april fool's joke. The name 'roger harris' is apparently of a british comedian.


[edit on 22-10-2006 by Nygdan]

Originally posted by madnessinmysoul
there were no tool making dinos because we have no evidence of tool making dinos

Lack of evidence is not evidence of lack. That's not to say I believe that tool-making dinosaurs did exist, I just think outrightly dismissing something without being in possession of all the facts is a bit short-sighted.

Originally posted by Perturabo

Originally posted by madnessinmysoul
there were no tool making dinos because we have no evidence of tool making dinos

Lack of evidence is not evidence of lack. That's not to say I believe that tool-making dinosaurs did exist, I just think outrightly dismissing something without being in possession of all the facts is a bit short-sighted.

well, i never said that the possibility didn't exist

but as far as we know, the idea is far-fetched

There is one huge factor against this theory- simply the lack of an opposable thumb in non-primates. 3 clawed digits on a Theropod limb do not qualify. How is it postulated that a dinosaur grasped a "tool"? I suppose that one could have held a tree limb in its mouth and used it to turn over loose rocks. Really? We've never seen canines, dolphins, horses or crocodiles do that. Of course no wood-based impliment could have survived the ages and simple teeth marks would not be conclusive if it did.

What is a tool anyhow? An animal has to weild the tool with the idea of an end result not aimless coincidental motion. A chimpanzee uses a blade of grass as a "tool" in that he sticks it into a termite mound and withdraws it and eats the insects clinging to it. Primates in the great ape category do not make tools either.

Ancient hominids probably used some tools they found handy. But certainly they didn't purposfully put together tool kits as ancient Homo did. Even so Homo Erectus didn't gather a tool kit of assorted sized stones and flints for use in varying ways as Homo Habilis did. We know because the tools were found where they lived and died.

Any rock found adjacent to a dino fossil would have to have specialized wear patterns indicative of repeated use in the same manner. One such stone could be aberent and we'd have to see it recurring in many dino fossil sites to give it creedance. Certainly they didn't gather a tool kit as Homo Habilis did.

The article mentions "what appears to be a stone tool" which completely ambiguous in that absolutely no description is included. It is simply the matter of one person's interpretation again. While we should respect opinions we do not have to agree with them especially with no accompanying evidence.

This is postulation rather than hypothesis.

Essan, it was actually that book that got me thinking about this subject!

In regard to opposable digits, primates only evolved this becuase of the need to braciate through the forest and grasp tree boughs and branches securley enough for it to be a safe mode of transport. Plus the coordination needed for such movement also requires large brains and forward facing eyes needed to triangulate and coordinate the body and judge distances. The ability to make tools is a useful by-product of combining a well coordinated brain and opposable digits, plus of course a need to make them.
As the old adage goes, "the hand is the teacher and agent of the brain".

Im no palentologist but it seemed that most large-ish dinosuars were optimized to either swim or walk on a flatish terrain. In the brutal competiton of panangea any species that had developed to take refuge in the trees may have had at least some niche in which to thrive, plus having the environmental conditions to develop the requirements to tool making; binocular vision, thumbs etc.

as essan said, even if they got to past the rudimentary mr-termite-meet-mr-stick stage, say being able to build fires and create spears, and were intelligent enough to work as a team, we still would have virtually no evidence today, after 65 million years and a comet.
We have enough trouble today unearthing the meagre remains of say, the nedanderthals, which existed only about 30,000 years ago, and were not vapourized in an apocalyptic asteroid impact as was the case with dinos.

Originally posted by Cruizer
There is one huge factor against this theory- simply the lack of an opposable thumb in non-primates. 3 clawed digits on a Theropod limb do not qualify. How is it postulated that a dinosaur grasped a "tool"? I suppose that one could have held a tree limb in its mouth and used it to turn over loose rocks. Really? We've never seen canines, dolphins, horses or crocodiles do that. Of course no wood-based impliment could have survived the ages and simple teeth marks would not be conclusive if it did.

I do distinguish the use of tools, with the making of tools, though related they are two separate things.
The use of a rock by some birds to break open eggs is the use of a tool, the building of bowers to lure a mate is making a tool, though rudimentary, and more instinctual, than something learned.. Though males do get better at building bowers as they mature, the basic instinct is already hard wired in.
However, there are birds that make and use tools to gather foods. They will take and modiy thorns to grab grubs out of wood, for example.
That is a learn behaviour, as my memory tells me, though I grant, I could very well remember incorrectly.

Originally posted by Cruizer
What is a tool anyhow? An animal has to weild the tool with the idea of an end result not aimless coincidental motion. A chimpanzee uses a blade of grass as a "tool" in that he sticks it into a termite mound and withdraws it and eats the insects clinging to it. Primates in the great ape category do not make tools either.

You should really read some of Jane Goodalls work. Chimp don't just take a piece of grass, they pick certain types of twigs and grass, and modify it. In fact, they make and modify different types of twigs and grass depending on the bug they are going for.
Not only that, but they are known to make use of external objects when making threat displays. One chimp was infamous for dragging around water jugs, incase he needed to make a point while not in the camp.
They also make use of a crude sponge for drinking, chewing leaves to sop water up, rather than lean over into water.
This is rundematary tool building and use, and it is a learned behavior, not instinct.

Originally posted by Cruizer
Ancient hominids probably used some tools they found handy. But certainly they didn't purposfully put together tool kits as ancient Homo did. Even so Homo Erectus didn't gather a tool kit of assorted sized stones and flints for use in varying ways as Homo Habilis did. We know because the tools were found where they lived and died.

Actually they have found that indeed they did have a tool kit of sorts, as archeologists have found tools that were made of non idigenous rocks to the area they were found in.
In other words, they had to be carried in.
Also, they used different tools for different things, skin scrapping, knacking flints, cutting sticks for arrows, and spears.
To assume that the ancients did not have a "tool kit" would most likely to be incoorect.
If they knew enough to use tools, certainly they recognized the difficulty of creating them, and would in all likelyhood have several tools handy incase of loss or breakage, even if they had to tuck their favorite clam cracker under an armpit.

When I was a kid I remember to see talking dinasaurs on the tv, when they talked, small letters apeared at the botom of the tv screen

Originally posted by derfred33
When I was a kid I remember to see talking dinasaurs on the tv, when they talked, small letters apeared at the botom of the tv screen

Thats it then!

I tend to think that until we find a T.rex fossil with an uzzi or
a mortgage statement, then I think that with the experiment in
size and variety of shape, they probably spent most of their time,
feeding, pro-creating and basically surviving.

FalseParadigm- I learned that Habilis was so named because it basically means "handy" in regard to compiling tools. Regardless of exactly who or when we want to attribute this feat, at some time in the hominid past they picked up what was available there and then. The earlier bipedals had enough problem with surviving long enough to not become a predator's meal and certainly didn't carry anything around but their offsprings

When we see members of the Great Apes using a "tool" we realize we began the same way. The problem is that the by comparison apes haven't progressed and we have. Dinosaurs had a far greater span of time on Earth than the apes to utilize tools and evolve beyond them yet they didn't either. Otters use a rock to break open shellfish too but have never modified the rock as a tool maker does.

Our friends the Great Apes, though much more recent a species than the youngest dinosaur, have an opposable thumb and yet have never progressed to flaking stones into more specialized shapes or transporting them in their travels which would indicate a glimmer of recognition as to their importance.

But then again you heard about the explorer who flicked a lighter on and the natives all gasped in awe at the flame. "Never seen fire, eh, fellows?" said the explorer. "No. Just never saw a lighter light on the 1st try. Now that's amazing!" replied the native.