Paleoworld- Troodon Dinosaur Genius (Part 3)

[Alkipwnd]

I think that the Troodon would not become upright and look like anything they depicted. I personaly think that if the design of the raptors was efficient and effective that their basic shape would remain the same but just slightly modifying proportions to suit the increase in brain size.

[bmpearson1]

VOLDEMORT

[DreamersVision]

Ok, why do we always assume our form is what all intelligent life would take? Sure nose shrinkage would probably happen if the troodon continued evolving, and of course the head would be bigger, but what reason would it have to stand completely upright and lose it's tail?

[RaffaLambeflores]

@DreamersVision better movement? there has to be a reason.

[QuickRefs]

@DreamersVision Well, think about it: advanced hands to explore the world and carry objects will cause it to stand upright. A tail in this situation would drag it back, so as it gradually stands up, the tail vanishes. I believe that out form factor: two legs, two hands, and big head is the ultimate shape of intelligent spicies.

[pytko3]

@DreamersVision What reason would it need to keep it's tail? It would probably become a vestigial stump.

[youngsauce15]

what if aliens were these things? there are galaxy's far away with the similar or same set up as our own n had these creatures not been wiped out they would be far more advanced than we are presently because of how much earlier they developed than us



[edwardschlosser1]

Guessing that it would have evolved into a human looking shape is unimaginative and highly unlikely. If NASA thinks that life forms will resemble us; bipedal, vertically semetrical, with opposable thumbs, one head, and two arms, I doubt they will recognize intelligent life when they run right into it. Is this guy really a scientist, or does he do costumes for Star Trek?

[DreamersVision]

@edwardschlosser1 Lol, posted my thing before I realized somebody else pointed this out.

[RaffaLambeflores]

@edwardschlosser1 And saying otherwise is just as unlikely, I mean, just as that guys said , look at us, we are a very successful evolutionary advance, is there absolutely no reason for other intelligent live to look like us, or even a more advanced form of our own? Evolution is unpredictable.

[SpiritusPhantom]

@edwardschlosser1 well, they did have 65 million years to change from that to a humanoid form, while we had around the same time to change from shrews to humans, so I guess it could happen, I mean why not?

[vk45de]

no boobs? reptiles suck

[sirunlalala]

troodon had sex with a monkey and humans were born lol

[DonMafianChild]

So this where all the crazy believers in Reptilians come from. Well, I think that this creature is extinct but it begs the question on whether this is what extraterrestrials may resemble and I do not know if anyone here has seen The Future is Wild, but there Squids become sentient beings, interesting right. I do not think Troodon wold look that human, but it could have become sentient. Does anyone think that the Amazon cold be haven for so called extinct life like this or is that foolish?

[Paleoworld101]

@DonMafianChild @DonMafianChild I have seen the "Future Is Wild" series. I don't think a lot of their evolution predictions are correct (Squid swinging in trees and fish flying permanently, theres a reason why they evolved in the water, their body shapes suit that lifestyle. You cant just stick a marine animal on land and have it keep the same body shape. All they did to the fish was stick on some wings...). But still, it was a good series, for entertainment value not scientific value.

[VicariousReality7]

@Paleoworld101

Squids swinging around in trees? Now that's an amusing mental image.

[skippydeenice]

reptoids

[labouractivist]

one of the most interesting episodes of the series. great post!

[Aikwood666]

why? why would it look like a human? Becose it would been as intelligent like a human? And therefore it have to look like a human? We look like we do, becose we evolved from apes....The shape of dinosaurs are diffrent than apes, so an evolutionary future-animal, evolved from this dinosaur, would moste likly looked diffrerant from a human, intelligent or not.

[quelorepario]

@Aikwood666 valid argument. The problem is that we are biologically hardwired to perceive anthropomorphic features as intelligent. If they did a bird like model we wouldn't think of it as a human-like intelligence, we would perceive it just like another animal/dinosaur.

See what is happening with the design of robots, the Aibo from Sony vs. Asimo from Honda, you will feel different.

Experiments with kids showed that toddlers treated humanoid robots as fellow humans, and not as a toy.

[Aikwood666]

@quelorepario Yeah yeah, we are hardWired to recognoze ower human form as intelligent.....We see this in early 1900-culture spechally. We shud have learned more aboat evolution by now. I know this is an fairly old dokumentary, but still. I have no problems recognizing intelligence in Ravens, Elephants and Dogs.

[quelorepario]

@Aikwood666 Actually all type of intelligence is found in all species, here we are talking about sentience.

Even to you unconsciously you would "feel" more comfortable to think that you can talk to a humanoid like c3p0 rather than to r2d2.

This is human nature and we can't do nothing about it.

Now about intelligence: it is currently thought in the scientific community that dolphins are the closest animals to humans in intelligence, even closer than chimps.

[Aikwood666]

@quelorepario Wel, then i am way beond human nature, is what im trying to say. I do not see ''intelligense in all sort of spicies'', that is a big missunderstanding. I pointed out those animals becose they are the ones who can be comprered to ower awearness and consciousness aleast. And yeah, i belive dolphins may be the smartest compered to us. But do ot agree with ''Actually all type of intelligence is found in all species''..Not shure i understand what u mean.but im shure u wil let me know ;)

[quelorepario]

@Aikwood666 but let me make a correction, we didn't evolve from apes. We are distant cousins, we both have common ancestors but we aren't related.

Apes took a different evolutionary pathway.

ACTUALLY our mammalian ancestors didn't have any anthropolomorphic feature at all.

[Aikwood666]

@quelorepario shure shure, we have a common ancestor with apes....Potato poteito. No, yeah, its a important aspekt to point out. I trye to express it like that whenever i remember to, but this time i dident. I`ll trye to remeber it next time.

But i want to point out one thing thou;;

''ACTUALLY our mammalian ancestors didn't have any anthropolomorphic feature at all.''

I do not know the scientiffic or english name for it, but in norwegan its called Trespissmus, wikipedia.no it. Look at the ear

[cryptidsaurian]

@Aikwood666 if you would have listened to dale russell, or read his paper on it, you'd see it has some credibility to that, would it resemble what he predicted? who knows, but it would help quite a bit if you had actually read it...

[Aikwood666]

@cryptidsaurian Yeah, shure, he mite have made arguments for his work, shure. But its basic evolution :::::: apes and dinosaurs , would need the same invirement and needs, as wel as an basic simular body-type, witch they have, ,to produce sutch simmular spicies like that. Did these dinosaurs live in the threes? Made they would evolve like that, if they in deed did live in the threes.

[cryptidsaurian]

@Aikwood666 and you didn't even acknowledge his arguements..., either way i never said it was the most likely, what i am saying is that russell does have some good points. to answer your last question, no troodon did not live in trees, but this isn't relevant to the arguement as we're not arguing for a lemur like troodon (although now that you mention it does sound like an amazing idea.) :)

[Aikwood666]

@cryptidsaurian Yeah, i have not read what he have sayd aboat how he imagine the evolution of this human-like dinosaurs, but....

[cryptidsaurian]

@Aikwood666 it's ok, it's a bit odd i know but technically you can't be proven wrong ;)

[Aikwood666]

@cryptidsaurian true true :P

[cryptidsaurian]

@Aikwood666 if you would have listened to dale russell, or read his paper on it, you'd see it has some credibility to it, would it resemble what he predicted? who knows, but it would help quite a bit if you had actually read it...

[Lagomort]

@cryptidsaurian I know Russel's argument. It is silly, and is not in line with the facts.

[cryptidsaurian]

@Lagomort and no arguement from your end, that's a dissapointment.

[Lagomort]

@cryptidsaurian

Jeepers, Troodontids had brains no bigger than a turkey's, so that puts it into the same basic size as modern birds did, yet birds had and have hands, and the same erect posture, and over 65 million years of evolution since the end of the dinosaurs, this same line where birds were derived from never came close to selecting for a "Humanoid" style creature of any sort.

[cryptidsaurian]

@Lagomort this is what i was wanting to hear, a good arguement! so let me try to give my side, russell is saying had this never happened what could have happened as an alternative. troodon did have a brain the size of a turkey that's given but that is not definitive to it's intelligence, seeing as there are a few other factors that affect it and could sway from the intelligence of say a possum to something more intelligent like a dog or bear. this is a two part comment read the next please.

[Lagomort]

@cryptidsaurian

In the end, Troodontids and their kin were on this earth longer than the whole of the time that was given for mammalian evolution after the KT event. In the whole of that time there are NO signs of any trends pointing towards "Humanoid" development of any kind. Simply put, when it comes to ideas, (and I paraphrase slightly) "Man proposes, and nature disposes..."

[cryptidsaurian]

@Lagomort but to be honest one still has to disagree, humans spun up in what was it, 4 million years? saying a dinosaur, had it lived on could not evolve a similar form is a simply unthoughtful, tell me if you look our early very early species, like  Darwinius masillae from 47 mya, it looks nothing like us, so using the same logic you presented to me could not be an ancestor. but to be honest a troodon would have had even more time. either way it's hard to prove wrong.

[Lagomort]

@cryptidsaurian

One, bird posture, as I stated, is basically the same as basal dinosaur posture. Despite this, no humanoid dinosaur ever evolved, and no trends towards them have ever been shown. This means there is no supporting evidence to Dale's hypothesis.

I never claimed impossibility. I said there is no evidence that supports his hypothesis. He is making wild speculations. Prove to me they wouldn't have turned into snakeoids? Silly, right? Same thing with Dale's idea.

[cryptidsaurian]

@Lagomort you should have stuck with you're first arguement. i said that the posture shifted slightly to a more upright, not strictly, nor drastically a small change was all that was needed to show my point. a snakeoid, you could have at least tried to make a logical statment, had the dinosauroid have no evidence for it russell wouldn't have thought of the dinosauroid, computer models, measurements had all been made by him to back his arguement up, you and I on the other hand have nothing.

[Lagomort]

@cryptidsaurian

First, you're clearly not an anatomist. Debating you on anatomy seems totally futile.

Next: Dale has nothing to back him up. Speculation is not evidence. Evidence is evidence. As I said, he has the same amount of evidence as I would if I claimed they were going to become snakeiods. I could claim evolutionary pressures and make up trends not found in the fossil record. This would leave me on equal foot with Russell's conjecture, each without a stitch of evidence.

[cryptidsaurian]

@Lagomort agian, you can't even quote me right so what would be the point, you know that a snakeoid, at any rate would be unlikely seeing as the loss of limbs and all would be nearly impossible, just showing the thing about the dinosauroid is only modification of what it has is needed, not complete and utter loss of it, you could have at least tried something semi logical. of course the real matter is you've failed to attack russell's point which leads me to believe, that you simply can't.

[Lagomort]

@cryptidsaurian

Science isn't speculation. It is a methodology. Speculation can only be used to derive a hypothesis, and by doing so come up with something that is tested. Everything Russel has claimed that would lead to a "humanoid" has been shown to have been there for longer than the entire Tertiary. (and yes, Dinosauroid is wrong, as -oid means "like" and Russell was trying to claim these dinosaurs would end up "human-like,"... hence the proper term "Humanoid," not dinosauroid.") next:

[cryptidsaurian]

@Lagomort but all science does stem from speculation in some way, despite how much you try to undermine that. and while you refering to the dinosauroid, or as you put it straight the "humanoid" was interesting it is irrelevant all the same.

[Lagomort]

@cryptidsaurian

Holding a pair of car keys in you hand does not mean you are driving. Speculation is not science. We may speculate to derive testable ideas (Hypothesize). Once we have these ideas we need to test them. The testing and statistical analysis of these ideas and peer review afterwards?,,that is science.

[cryptidsaurian]

@Lagomort I never did imply that, but speculation does hold place in scientific method, a man gazes up at the starts wander what places them there, he speculates what may have created them, then comes the hypothesis, he tests this hypothesis, it fails to hold up to scrutiny, thus he forms another, it then holds up to scrutiny. speculation is merely a step before a hypothesis, in this case though, it's unprovable, and thus stuck as speculation. this i feel we can agree on.

[Lagomort]

@cryptidsaurian

Nothing is science is "provable." We do not prove but give statistical support, (something far more likely than not given the evidence.) We request the ability to falsify* when possible. The evidence here shows Russel's ideas as not being consistent with what the geological record shows trend-wise over time. This means his idea has little in the way of support, and much that contradicts it. In science, this is damn near as good as it gets in dispelling a speculation.

[Lagomort]

@cryptidsaurian

The lose of limbs isn't near impossible. Artiodactyls gave rise to cetaceans and that brought about a huge grouping of morphological changes in less than 10 million years (including a loss of the hindlimbs). This means a small deer-like animal resulted in a near anguilliod form in short order once the selective pressures were there. How is this any easier than Troodontids becoming snakeoids?

[cryptidsaurian]

@Lagomort not neccessarily my point, i merely mean highly unlikely but, haven't modern whales retained they're limbs, if i do recall the hind limbs are vestigal, and the front are obviously used as a means of propulsion, anyways i said near impossible, but it seems you aknowleged that. how is it easier you asked, it's not, but that was not what i had insinuated, i merely said it was "near impossible" not impossible.

[Lagomort]

@cryptidsaurian

No, modern whales do not retain their hindlimbs. They are only present during ontogeny, and in some atavisms. The front limbs are kept because it was selective for them, which is key here. If it was selective for them to get rid of them, that would happen as well. "Near impossible" is only based on your hindsight knowing it did not occur, but as you can see by what DID occur, these things can happen, and very fast in evolutionary terms if the selective pressure is present.

[cryptidsaurian]

@Lagomort ok, here i have to admit i was simply wrong. although you keep making it seem as if I say these things never happen, i'm aware they do and i acknowlege this but just because i say near impossible rather than less likely as you suggested, does not really change anything and i find it a rather pressing and mildly irritating.

[Lagomort]

@cryptidsaurian

"and the front are obviously used as a means of propulsion"

rethink this.,...

[cryptidsaurian]

@Lagomort well the tail used for propulsion fins for steering, but i'm sure you get the point of what i said. dear me you seem just like the people who judge ones statement on a spelling error or typo, sure here it was brought upon by my own lack of knowlege but honestly don't act like it undermines my whole statment as it was a simple fluke.

[Lagomort]

@cryptidsaurian

Are you going to say that to your professors when they mark your statements wrong on a test? If you want to walk the walk, then walk the walk. I do not think you are really under the impression that the pectoral fins are used in propelling these animals (at least I hope not). I knew it was probably a mistake. That does not mean I ignore information when it is incorrect. Stop saying things like, "Near impossible" if you really mean, "less likely" and these thing will not happen.

[cryptidsaurian]

@Lagomort ok, you got me with you first point as for you telling me to stop saying things as i mean them, it is not going to happen, even though "near impossible" and "less likely" are one in the same but. i feel near impossible is a better choice as I see it as having more effect. when used talking to you i see it doesn't but that isn't enough to get me to stop saying it in that form. it's as if saying passed away or died, which has the bigger effect? it's obvious and that's why i do it.

[Lagomort]

@cryptidsaurian "even though "near impossible" and "less likely" are one in the same"

You're really trying to sell that? Should we set up a poll and ask the general public in a blind test what is meant by those terms relative to one another?

By the way, it is: "one and the same," ...Not: "In the same."

[cryptidsaurian]

@Lagomort in the way they were being used eaerlier I was to assume yes, should have thought that one through. as for my saying one in the same instead of one and the same, it was a simple typo.

[cryptidsaurian]

@cryptidsaurian darn my typo's I meant earlier, if you happen to read this.

[Lagomort]

@cryptidsaurian

Hey, I think I know who you are as a person from this. This stuff interests you and you just feel like talking to other people who also like this stuff. I am actually friends with some well known paleontologists, and I know how cool it is to find someone else that has a similar interest. I'm thinking of starting a Facebook page where people like you and I can post and chat about paleo stuff. What do you think?

[cryptidsaurian]

@Lagomort a harsh debate followed by this, please forgive me for how rash my arguement may have been. a facebook page for prehistory, it sounds interesting i'm not neccessarily sure if this is the best way to appreciate it but if you think it would be a good way to show public interest by all means go ahead, i'd love to see it if you decide to follow through. ;)

[Lagomort]

@cryptidsaurian

Yeah, I know one guy that is actually friends with Dale Russel and reviewed one of his last books for him. This guy is also a well know paleontologist and has been in several documentaries. I am wondering if I could get my friends to join the discussion as well. Another one is a well known authority of horse evolution, and another is an authority on boney fish (mostly sarcopterygians).

[cryptidsaurian]

@Lagomort who was the man who had appeared in the documentaries, i'd love to see. as for primitive horses and sarcopterygians I must say I have very little knowlege on them, I try to stay familiar with dinosaurs, and pterosaurs.

[Lagomort]

@cryptidsaurian

Oh, by the way, "Darwinius masillae" is anatomically very close to us, and looks a lot like us. Far more than any troodontid is to Dale's hypothetical humanoid dinosaur speculation. Despite this there is no good evidence that D. masillae is our ancestor. Is it possible? Yes. Is this issue even close to being resolved? Um, no.

[cryptidsaurian]

@Lagomort well i never meant to insinuate that d. masillae was our definite common ancestor, but since it was originally brought up that way by the media, i felt it would provide a good example, and aside from te five fingers, it seems almost, if not completely unlike humans in any way shape or form, a troodon, had it a short neck anf blunt face would honestly look very similar. but now it seems that both of our arguements aren't even at a scientific bases anymore.

[Lagomort]

@cryptidsaurian

If you think D. masillae is complete unlike a modern human in form, I will take a wild guess and say you know little to nothing about comparative vertebrate anatomy? Next, did you just say a Troodon has a short neck and a blunt face? You're killin' me here guy. Are you like 15?

[cryptidsaurian]

@Lagomort dammit, did you even read the comment? i said, had it a short neck and blunt face, or to put it simply "if it" had a short blunt face, i worded the statement oddly but come it wasn't that had to figure out,your first statement, again you horribly mis interpreted what i said, I never meant anatomically, had i meant that i'd be disclaiming nearly all initial scientific statements brought forth. I could go on how you did something similar but you would just brush it aside as you have.

[Lagomort]

@cryptidsaurian

I did read what you said. Your wording just sucks.

[Lagomort]

@Lagomort

Despite all this time during the Mesozoic as well as afterwards, NO trend towards "Humanoids" has been shown in these theropod groups that brought us aves. All Theropods had swivel thumbs when present, and hands much like the Troodontids. The only trend was a reduction in the range of motion of the digits, not an increase. There is no trend for larger brains that is general for all birds statistically overall, as well as all mammals over. next:

[Lagomort]

@Lagomort

This means either all of these vertebrates are trying to become humanoid, or none are, as it isn't diagnostic of trend towards humanoid traits. Parsimony points to the obvious. Since many animals learn to fly, and many animals learn to break down vegetable matter and so on, and so on, but only one small tiny branch became humans? This indicates little in the overall selection of life for human like creatures.

[Lagomort]

@Lagomort

So, you have obviously confused some type of authority as being a sign of science. Dale can speculate 'til the cows freakin' come home and it means nothing. He needs evidence in support of his views. There is none. How do you not grasp this? Idle speculations without evidence that corresponds to your ideas mean NOTHING. He did not perform science. He speculated based on certain premises he held as true, and then extrapolated from there. Science never happened here.

[cryptidsaurian]

@Lagomort secondly birds did make one huge jump, not neccessarily to a human-like form but in posture, the stand upright like a man. had dinosaurs not gone extinct there would be a lot more competition, a large brain would prove all the more neccesary, with a large brain it requires more blood to supply it, a large neck held out would somewhat inhibit this as it does sauropods, so the large neck may be out the question. the apposable thumbs seems useful, as it may help in catching food.

[Lagomort]

@cryptidsaurian

Troodontid thumbs are no more opposable than that found as a diagnostic trait to dinosaurs in general, (common through-out all theropod groups). I am not certain, but you seemed to imply a different posture for birds that their non-avian theropod roots? If so, this simply isn't true, They are still counterbalanced in the same basic manner. The only difference is a reduction of the caudaulfemoralis and the primary hindlimb joint becoming the tibiotarso-tarsometatarsal joint.

[cryptidsaurian]

@Lagomort for your first statement i have to agree, not because i want but i have never had the pleasure of even seeing a troodontid skeleton in person. as for you attacking my second point you missed what i meant entirely, i suppose i worded my statment poorly. i never did say how the counter balance system works, but just by looking at modern birds you can see they stand more upright not a human like trait per se, but a step in the right direction in a lucid manner.

[Lagomort]

@cryptidsaurian

Next, large brains and an extreme learned association style intelligence that evolved in the genus Homo is extremely rare, and as far as we know is found only within Homo. If one divides the number of known animals with this type of intelligence, by the total number of estimated species that have evolved, we see the frequency of such intelligence evolving is amazingly, almost ridiculously, small. This does not point to a high selective pressure for such.

[cryptidsaurian]

@Lagomort as for this it's a bit trickier to argue, but I i do not know what you mean by learned association stlye intelligence, i'm assuming you are refering to learning contributing towards our intelligence? i'm not neccessarily sure where you get those figures, but i'd be happy to look, anyways for the most part animals throughout history have grown more and more intelligent, with very few exceptions, i can't really argue until you tell me where you got those "facts" but i'd love to see.

[nebulaegazer]

If it weren't for science, would you still be using cellphones, taking medicine, driving vehicles, wearing fashionable clothes, eating fast food, watching tv, or complaining on the internet?

If it weren't for backward-minded religions, we would be hover-boarding on Martian cities by now.

[Rubystars1000]

Dinosaurs are still more successful than mammals, there are more species of birds than mammals. 

[JackyLum]

i assume you only guess and dream, dinosaur become humanoids?i doubt it, reptiles from millions of years like crocodile and alligators remains the same till today..... no tremendous changes, smart scientist think too far, you are wasting citizens taxation money........ make more medicines and reduce high tech weaponry, thats make a better world!!!

[eagc7]

@JackyLum But troodon had a bgi brain and their eyes looekd at the front liek ours

[yagihito]

so....Sleestacks 'eh?

[Paleoworld101]

@yagihito Yeah lol

[angus506]

@Paleoworld101 you shut your FACE paleo world

[Paleoworld101]

@angus506 Ok wtf dumbass

[JackyLum]

@yagihito

lol, we paid millions and millions for the scientist, and they make a ingenious story of a genius dinosaur, well it is ok till he turn the dinohuman, thats Steven Spielberg movie add Alien movie... scientist make truth and facts, now they make fantasy...... i doubt the million of years the dinosaur had died, i doubt all and everything before the but until calendar start till 2010 today, thats what i believe

[jugoschopia]

@JackyLum

Fantasy? That's a bunch of bullshit you loser. Clearly you haven't watched the video, because you would realize that Troodon, a dinosaur, and our earliest mammalian ancestors, the small rodents, HAD SIMILAR BRAIN SIZE. That means that both species had equal chance of evolving. Troodon had already developed arms, and our earliest mammals, the small rodents, were four-legged.

Now tell me, how the hell could Troodon not evolve into humanoid-shaped?

[JackyLum]

@jugoschopia i have to read 2-3 times of your comment, i wonder you telling me a loser for not supporting the statement made by scientist, or are you agree with it, scientist can't even judge a human skull came from which origin of skin but only by guessing , they drew dinosaurs with stripes and colors, now Raptors comes with feathers haha, troodon not evolved? cause it is not exist