40 Sikh lads defend themselves against Muslim sex predators?

[purpleronnie]

Most died not all.

[The Doctor]

If that is your reasoning , why didn't the little dinosaurs survive and re evolve into big dinosaurs again ?

They weren't all big .

I'd suspect that either they were too big or they were out-competed in the aftermath by the mammals in scavenging the small resources available.

As for re-evolving into big dinosaurs - that would require growth into big dinosaurs to be favourable - none of pre-extinction dinosaurs would be recreated at any rate.

[Zingari]

I'd suspect that either they were too big or they were out-competed in the aftermath by the mammals in scavenging the small resources available.

So basically you're just fookin guessing

Why would it be impossible for pre extinction dinosaurs to re evolve , but not impossible for whole new mammalian species to appear for the first time ?

What are you basing this on ?

[purpleronnie]

so basically you're just fookin guessin

Major links in the food chains were severed and whole ecosystems broke down. All large bodied species disappeared. Those that made it through were:

-few

-lucky

-small bodied

-mainly generalists (feeding on various food sources)

Species living in streams and rivers were also less affected and very few species of bony fish went extinct.

[The Doctor]

so basically you're just fookin guessin

Sort of, it's applying reasons we know to affect survival to the conditions theorised to have been around at the time. Obviously since humans weren't around at the time of the dinosaurs, we can't be certain why they didn't survive.

[Raw Dykes]

If anyone does seriously believe that evolution is false, then they should try to present some evidence to back it up. Anyone who could disprove the theory would become a very wealthy, world famous, nobel prize winning historical figure.

[purpleronnie]

I don't think you can prove it without some doubt, what you have to do is way up all the evidence and come to your own conclusions, sadly some are uneducated about evolution and dismiss actual known facts, however thats not to say there are some things that we just don't know.

[yorkie1999]

Humans were definitely around when the dinosaurs were alive, you only have to watch ice age to realise that.

[Zingari]

Major links in the food chains were severed and whole ecosystems broke down. All large bodied species disappeared. Those that made it through were:

-few

-lucky

-small bodied

-mainly generalists (feeding on various food sources)

Species living in streams and rivers were also less affected and very few species of bony fish went extinct.

Yes but there were , (or should have been) small surviving dinosaurs at the same time as the small surviving mammals .

What reasoning dictates that small mammals cowered away for a few million years and then flourished but the small dinosaurs couldn't. .

I think its all fookin guesswork and scientists just successfully make facts fit in with commonly held theories in the same way religions used to make facts fit in with commonly held religious theories

I really think we'll never actually know everything about how the world's stuff came about .

Maybe some day an inter galactic space traveller will come and tell us that they seeded the world millions of years ago with new life forms and everyone will have to throw away all their Darwin books

[21st Century Fox]

I haven't been keeping up to date with this thread but the smaller dinosaurs that survived were the evolutionary ancestors to modern day reptiles and birds.

[The Doctor]

I haven't been keeping up to date with this thread but the smaller dinosaurs that survived were the evolutionary ancestors to modern day reptiles and birds.

Birds had already started to diverge from therapod dinosaurs prior to the extinction. Archaeopteryx boyo - the biggest name transitional fossil.

[Zingari]

I haven't been keeping up to date with this thread but the smaller dinosaurs that survived were the evolutionary ancestors to modern day reptiles and birds.

is it possible for them to regress back to dinosaurs ?

if not , why not . Is evolution one way traffic only ?

[danny.]

It's more a case of shortening the Humans and other apes down to just human and apes, I'd suspect it's born out of the old belief that humans weren't animals.

But humans are animals, and we are apes. Why say "humans and apes"? You wouldn't say Gorillas and primates or Parrots and birds. Makes no sense.

Apparently all the ancient fossils have turned into oil (according to some), so I'm not sure why you'd believe that human bones from hundreds of thousands of years ago would still be visible, or evenly remotely detectable to us.

I think you need to read up on what oil is. According to you, then we don't have fossils any older than 100,000s of years? So how do we have dinosaur fossils?

Saying the earth is 5000 years old is ridiculous yes, but I haven't said that homo's have been around for 66 million years. I do say that we've been around for much longer than we think though. With bouts of near extinction and re-emergence every so often.

You did, you said we humans were around at the same time as the dinosaurs, who haven't been around for over 66 million years. Therefore you said that humans have been around for over 66 million years.

If that is your reasoning , why didn't the little dinosaurs survive and re evolve into big dinosaurs again ?

They weren't all big .

Birds?

[Zingari]

But humans are animals, and we are apes. Why say "humans and apes"? You wouldn't say Gorillas and primates or Parrots and birds. Makes no sense.

I think you need to read up on what oil is. According to you, then we don't have fossils any older than 100,000s of years? So how do we have dinosaur fossils?

You did, you said we humans were around at the same time as the dinosaurs, who haven't been around for over 66 million years. Therefore you said that humans have been around for over 66 million years.

Birds?

Can birds regress back into dinosaurs ?

if not , why not , why is evolution a one way ticket?

[21st Century Fox]

is it possible for them to regress back to dinosaurs ?

if not , why not . Is evolution one way traffic only ?

There would be no need to. Any evolved creature is as evolved as it needs to be. Unless there were some environmental reason for them to do so.

[Zingari]

There would be no need to. Any evolved creature is as evolved as it needs to be. Unless there were some environmental reason for them to do so.

That was the point i made earlier , but was told it was impossible .

My belief is that blueprints for all forms of life are kept somewhere in the gene pools of various animals and they don't just blindly evolve due to external forces , but are permanently in place ready and waiting for the changes to the environment .

[21st Century Fox]

That was the point i made earlier , but was told it was impossible .

My belief is that blueprints for all forms of life are kept somewhere in the gene pools of various animals and they don't just blindly evolve due to external forces , but are permanently in place ready for the changes .

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2027558/Scientists-undo-evolution-create-chicken-maniraptora-snout.html

[The Doctor]

http://www.dailymail...tora-snout.html

Chicken-gators? We're doomed!

That was the point i made earlier , but was told it was impossible .

My belief is that blueprints for all forms of life are kept somewhere in the gene pools of various animals and they don't just blindly evolve due to external forces , but are permanently in place ready and waiting for the changes to the environment .

No - complete regression to dinosaurs from this point of a bird would require a massively different genome to what the birds have.

[Carl the Llama]

What I've never understood is why crocodiles/alligators don't count as dinosaurs... They're reptilian creatures from the same geological eras. They're dinosaurs in everything but name.

[21st Century Fox]

Chicken-gators? We're doomed!

Worth it if just to see what KFC's marketing department could come up with.

[purpleronnie]

Worth it if just to see what KFC's marketing department could come up with.

Tesco's are probably selling them.

[Zingari]

Chicken-gators? We're doomed!

No - complete regression to dinosaurs from this point of a bird would require a massively different genome to what the birds have.

But surely if that were the case , then evolution from dinosaur into bird would require the same amount of genome difference.

why is one leap into evolutionary transition impossible and not the other ?

[danny.]

What I've never understood is why crocodiles/alligators don't count as dinosaurs... They're reptilian creatures from the same geological eras. They're dinosaurs in everything but name.

Because crocodiles are crocodylia, not dinosaurs - both were reptiles but different orders. Similar to how rabbits are lagomorphs, not rodents - but both are mammals.

[21st Century Fox]

What I've never understood is why crocodiles/alligators don't count as dinosaurs... They're reptilian creatures from the same geological eras. They're dinosaurs in everything but name.

I'd assume it's because modern day crocodiles and alligators of every genus are far removed evolutionary speaking from their prehistoric ancestors. Crocodylomorpha would have branched off so far they are too "modern" to be considered "dinosaurs".

What danny. said...

[The Doctor]

But surely if that were the case , then evolution from dinosaur into bird would require the same amount of genome difference.

why is one leap into evolutionary transition impossible and not the other ?

Because the forward progression of dinosaur to bird happened via mutation and natural selection, the genome changed over time to what it is currently. The probability of the reverse mutations happening to progress back towards dinosaurs is so incredibly low it can be considered impossible.