Jurassic Park Won't Happen: Dino DNA Dead

page: 2
1
<< 1   >>

log in

join

posted on Oct, 21 2012 @ 11:45 PM
link   
reply to post by Mianeye
 


Bringing back dinosaurs would be irresponsible, whether we could do it or not. They had their niche in the geological record, and should be left lie.

Why bring back another species to compete for resources, when we have famine and poverty in the world? IMO, such endeavors should only be considered once we achieve space colonization, and have a planet other than our own to implant them on. Humans and dinos would not make a good mix in today's society. There's simply not enough room for both of us on this planet.

While true that the dinosaurs died out because of a global extinction event, perhaps unfairly ending their existence, we have no guarantees that we won't also face extinction as well. Why, if that is the case, would we even worry about a species in the fossil record, let alone think about reviving it?

Besides, the movie denotes a tiny mosquito trapped in amber, the blood preserved in it's belly. How did that tiny proboscis ever penetrate a dinosaur's scaly thick hide anyway? The premise of the movie is flawed. Mosquitoes only feed on warm blooded mammals. Dinosaurs were ectothermic, not endothermic. Uhm, can you explain that?




posted on Oct, 28 2012 @ 08:49 PM
link   
reply to post by Druid42
 


While the movie is completely bogus in the sense of bringing back dinos from a mosquito trapped in amber mosquitoes certainly did feed on dinos. A lot of parasites fed on dinos.

Also your statement of dinos being ectotherms is not entirely true either. While some might have been ectotherms many were endotherms. Many dinos especially in the Cretaceous were related to modern birds. It is widely believed that dinos in fact evolved into modern birds. Recent soft tissue found in a T Rex bone shows proteins of T Rex being related to chickens and ostriches.

www.livescience.com...

news.nationalgeographic.com...

This article confirms that the proteins found were not contaminated as more proteins have been found. Soft tissue is showing up in dino bones.
www.sciencedaily.com...

New evidence is being found daily now with more modern science. The things known and written about in the past are starting to become extinct.

As I said in an earlier post though, I thought it was well known by now that DNA is too fragile to survive that long. Proteins on the other had will stay around for millions of years if the preservation is just right.

Raist



posted on Oct, 29 2012 @ 02:14 PM
link   
Who says you need to clone them? You could make them in other ways.



posted on Oct, 29 2012 @ 03:59 PM
link   
reply to post by Bartjebartje
 


A part of me thinks that would be super cool. But at heart I know it would be incredibly wrong. Dinos were taken outby nature for a reason. If they had not been taken out man would not be here.

Raist



posted on Oct, 31 2012 @ 04:13 PM
link   
reply to post by Raist
 


I just want to add to the parasite thing.

www.sciencedaily.com...

This link discusses lice and dinos. Blood sucking/drinking parasites do not have to penetrate the full skin only the thin dead layer. Skin itself is pretty thick; however you have a vascular system feeding the skin. Even if you scratch yourself you have a tiny amount of blood that comes from the wound.

As an example when one turns red it is because of blood rushing to fill the tiny vessels in our skin. It is now believed that Stegosaurus plates turned red with a flush of blood.

You can bet that dinos had tiny blood sucking parasites feeding on them.

Raist



posted on Dec, 3 2012 @ 06:10 PM
link   
reply to post by Mianeye
 


I'm relieved, actually. The thought of dinosaurs is terrifying to me. I'm glad it isn't possible as far as we know. I think their relative, the chicken, is bad enough as it is lol!!





top topics
 
1
<< 1   >>

log in

join