The impossible solution to Big Dynosaur Size

page: 1
4
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join

posted on Aug, 7 2012 @ 02:28 PM
link   
As most people should realize, is that Dynosaurs would never have been able to live in the current earth. Simple laws of physics puts up a delimiter for that.

The solution that has come up, is that the earths atmosphere was so thick, that it reached 2/3 of the density of water. That sound logical, a simple solution to the problem? Boyancy to counter the gravity? Where did the gravity come from, that attracted such dense atmosphere in the first place? Volcanic eruptions, similar to venus?

No, it doesn't. The most obvious problem with this solution, is that an animal wouldn't need wings to fly in such dense atmosphere. It would be much more logical for it to swim through it. Thus, if this was true, you should be able to find remnants of animals that were "swimming" rather than "flying" through the air. That is, their body/wing ratio, was such that it was swimming rather than flying. A dragon fly, even with 70cm in size, would never be able to swap it's insect wings. The insect wing, is designed for speed through less dense air, and not the devil fish wings, to flap itself through dense water. This, is the most obvious problem with it.

Not to mention, it's skeletal body would not sustain itself in such an environment. Remember that the insect has an exo-skeleton.

So, whereas the boyancy would certainly solve the wieght problem. The form of the animals living during this era, certainly does not. Imagine a brochosaurus moving it's huge neck upwards, in such dense atomosphere. This would be an act in slow motion, and the mammals motions would be incapable of speed. Why would nature, design creatures with legs designed for speed ... in an environment, where speed is not possible.

Animals living in such an environment, would be more hybrids living between waterworld and airworld. Drawing in air, in such thick atmosphere would require an enormous strength that it wouldn't be possible.

The amount of strength needed, to move a mammal in such an environment ... would make such a creature impossible.

For the land mammal equivalent animal, reptile, bird or insect to live in such an environment is just as much impossible, as it living in the current environment.

Sorry, this is not the solution to the equation.
edit on 7/8/2012 by bjarneorn because: (no reason given)




posted on Aug, 7 2012 @ 02:35 PM
link   
reply to post by bjarneorn
 


So what are you saying? That dinosaurs didn't exist?

And that the bones are planted as some test from some deity?




The solution that has come up, is that the earths atmosphere was so thick, that it reached 2/3 of the density of water. That sound logical, a simple solution to the problem?


Who came up with that?
edit on 7-8-2012 by DjangoPhat because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 7 2012 @ 02:36 PM
link   
reply to post by bjarneorn
 

Do you belive dinosaurs did exist, but not at such large sizes?
If they are really not so large then are the fossils of these animals exaggerated to fit the evolutionary theory.



posted on Aug, 7 2012 @ 02:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by bjarneorn
As most people should realize, is that Dynosaurs would never have been able to live in the current earth. Simple laws of physics puts up a delimiter for that.


This thread seems to follow from some assumptions which I am not too familiar with. Would you mind explaining why physics wouldn't allow dinosaurs to live on the earth?

There is about 250kg of air above our heads, but we don't get squashed because our bodies grew to withstand it. Why could it not be the same for the dinosaurs?



posted on Aug, 7 2012 @ 02:44 PM
link   
Another solution was simply that earth was moved, which is what I believe, earth fell.



posted on Aug, 7 2012 @ 03:02 PM
link   
reply to post by bjarneorn
 
I thought the usual atmospheric density solution proposed was that earth's atmosphere was previously less dense or gravity lower than it currently is, instead of the atmosphere being more dense...?

I know it's still very much on the edges of fringe science, but the growing/expanding earth hypothesis would also account for this - and, I haven't looked into in quite awhile, but the coastlines, geological ages (if reported accurately in the related videos), and fact that many tons of material from space are added to earth every year would seem to lend some small bit of support to it - however much evidence otherwise there may be to shut it down.

I don't think I've personally ever heard the explanation that a MORE dense environment is what made the dinosaurs' size possible...
edit on 8/7/2012 by Praetorius because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 7 2012 @ 03:03 PM
link   
While it is true that creatures cannot be the size they were in the past, that does not mean that they could not live today, growing up in the modern environment. They just grow up to be smaller. This is also why you can monkey around with atmospheres and raise creatures in these environments, and get changes in their size.



posted on Aug, 7 2012 @ 03:05 PM
link   
reply to post by adrift
 


it is true with a little research you will find that an elephant is about as big as any land animal can get. And yes one of the current hypothesis is an atmosphere as dense as 2/3 water or close to liquid methane. It is a mystery. I've even heard that the planet was smaller and so less gravity. But the truth is we have no clue how,and no one seems inclined to research it. Probably because you sound like a nut when you do.



posted on Aug, 7 2012 @ 03:08 PM
link   
I have never heard the theory that their size was impossible because of gravity. We have dump trucks and machinery the size of dinosaurs and bigger that function just fine so don't see why dinosaurs would have a problem?



posted on Aug, 7 2012 @ 03:11 PM
link   
I read somewhere a theory of higher oxygen levels in the atmosphere at the time of the dinos. This caused all animals to grow bigger.

Made sense at the time but I have no links to offer.



posted on Aug, 7 2012 @ 03:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by hawkiye
I have never heard the theory that their size was impossible because of gravity. We have dump trucks and machinery the size of dinosaurs and bigger that function just fine so don't see why dinosaurs would have a problem?

I believe it's a matter of heart size/blood pressure or otherwise related to cardiopulmonary issues with living organisms (much easier to put higher pressures needed for machinery through something that isn't relying on biologically-safe pressures). If they were just robots, sure. Being land animals, though, I think the cap is elephant size with our current environment & gravity - hence them being the largest currently-living creatures.



posted on Aug, 7 2012 @ 03:16 PM
link   



posted on Aug, 7 2012 @ 03:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by Signals
I read somewhere a theory of higher oxygen levels in the atmosphere at the time of the dinos. This caused all animals to grow bigger.

Made sense at the time but I have no links to offer.



Indeed, atmospheric oxygen was greater in those times, hence the larger dinosaurs, insects and pretty much everything else...



The oxygen levels of Jurassic earth were 130% greater than modern levels. The amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere was also 7 times greater than preindustrial level. This led to a warmer Earth which was 3 degrees Celsius warmer than today.

Read more: www.universetoday.com...



posted on Aug, 7 2012 @ 03:21 PM
link   
reply to post by hawkiye
 


its mostly a muscle mass thing . I'll dig up links when I get home if you would like



posted on Aug, 7 2012 @ 03:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by Another_Nut
reply to post by adrift
 

it is true with a little research you will find that an elephant is about as big as any land animal can get.


Wow, I never knew that.... very interesting, I suppose a muscle-mass thing?

Speaking about muscle-mass: We know those stories of people who are able to lift cars when in an emergency situation, say in order to save child. I understand that the general consensus is that at times of crisis, the brain is able to fire extra neurons (may be wrong word).
Is it possible that dinosaurs could have had a higher 'default setting' than mammals of today?



posted on Aug, 7 2012 @ 03:48 PM
link   
From what I gather from your post, is that your evidence is based on flying dino's wouldn't need wings to fly in such a thick atomosphere.

You forget to point out that most flying dino's were much bigger, most likely didn't have feathers(although some could have), and they may have not had hollow bones like the birds we have today.

Most of them were gliders not really flyers from what I understand.

Also the size of the dino's had to do with the amount of oxygen in the atomosphere not really the thickness.

This has been proven that an oxygen richer atomosphere would in fact make animals grow bigger. Someone tested the theroy with pacos fish and I believe It was tested on incests as well.

I also don't think the gravity of earth has changed much since the first land animals started comming out of the water.



posted on Aug, 7 2012 @ 03:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by bjarneorn
As most people should realize, is that Dynosaurs would never have been able to live in the current earth. Simple laws of physics puts up a delimiter for that.


There is no reason at all why dinosaurs - the majority of which were no bigger than a turkey - could not have been the size we know they reached.

Anymore than there is a reason why humans cannot reach a height of 6 foot.



posted on Aug, 7 2012 @ 03:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by Another_Nut
reply to post by adrift
 


it is true with a little research you will find that an elephant is about as big as any land animal can get.


It is true that with a little proper research you will find that that is true in the same way as it's true 10ft tall unicorns live in the Moon



posted on Aug, 7 2012 @ 05:09 PM
link   
Sorry guys, but it is a FACT that nothing anywhere near the size of the larger dinosaurs would even be able to lift its head in today's gravity. "Scientists" just conveniently ignore this FACT.

An elephant is about the upper limit of size possible in this gravity. It's a matter of physics, it is not a THEORY. When you increase muscle mass, double the mass, double the strength, but FOUR times the weight. This is why gymnasts, such as those you are all watching in the Olympics lately, tend to be little shrimpy people. A 120 lb man can do far more pullups, etc. than a 230 lb hulk like myself, no matter how strong I can be. The pound for pound strength is unmatched. This is why an ant can lift 200 times its own body weight, and a flea can jump hundreds of times its own height. If you could match this strength, you would be able to toss cars like beach balls, and "leap tall buildings in a single bound".

Elephants are so big and heavy, they cannot even run. Their fastest gait is more like a lumbering fast walk. Their legs and feet are like treetrunks to support all that weight. They are very reluctant to go down steep hills, since if they fall they could break their own bones. Large bull elephants cannot even get up again without help if they lie down, thus they never lie down.

Whales are the biggest things on the planet now. They are fully supported in the water. When they beach themselves, they break their own bones, and suffocate since they cannot even take a breath against their own weight crushing them down. Skeletons of dinosaurs such as Brontosaurus are far bigger than any whale.

Tyrannosaurus Rex skeletons appear to have been around forty feet tall, far bigger than an elephant. Its stance appears to have been like a ballerina on tippytoes, obviously made for running and jumping, not lumbering around like an elephant. The skull is so huge that it would break its own neck in today's gravity.

The only possible explanations are: gravity was somehow less back then, or the Earth was smaller, as in the Expanding Earth theories. This would mean the fossil skeletons are so old that they have expanded along with the Earth itself, thus the dinosaurs weren't nearly as big as they appear to have been. This also implies less gravity as well. However, all this is ignored and swept under the rug, like many other aspects of ancient archaeology, geology, and anthropology. Look up ooparts (out of place artifacts) and you will see what I mean.

To accept any of this, would mean just about everything stated as fact about dinosaurs is WRONG. People are loath to admit they are wrong about anything, especially PhD Sheldon Cooper type dorks, therefore it is swept under the rug.



posted on Aug, 7 2012 @ 05:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by AndyMayhew

Originally posted by Another_Nut
reply to post by adrift
 


it is true with a little research you will find that an elephant is about as big as any land animal can get.


It is true that with a little proper research you will find that that is true in the same way as it's true 10ft tall unicorns live in the Moon


It's true that with even the LEAST BIT of research, such as a quick Google search, you will find out this is TRUE. Not the ten foot unicorns, the FACT that an elephant is about as big as it can get.





new topics
top topics
 
4
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join