• wewbull@feddit.uk
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    8
    ·
    5 hours ago

    Which makes me ask, why were mammals able to evolve to produce an apex predator that relies on it’s inventiveness (Humans) in quite a short time, but no similar “dinosaur” got to that point in a much longer period?

    We’re searching planets for signs of life as a pre-cursor to intelligent life, but there’s no guarantee that life will evolve in the same direction as ours.

    • AngryCommieKender@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      2 hours ago

      Corvids and psittacines display human child level intelligence. They use tools. They recognize other people. Hell the psittacines can mimic speech.

      I personally suspect it’s a matter of energy density. Birds have to use almost all of their available calories on flying. Doesn’t leave a lot of energy left over for a massively hungry brain. No clue what’s holding back penguins, emus, and cassowaries.

      • exasperation@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        2 hours ago

        Birds have to use almost all of their available calories on flying.

        But flying is quite energy efficient as a method of getting from point A to point B. That’s why flying insects and birds have had such evolutionary success with that strategy.

        • AngryCommieKender@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          1 hour ago

          Is it though? They have to eat an absolute ton relative to their own mass. At least all the birds I’ve ever interacted with were constantly eating, even when they mostly didn’t bother flying. Chicken soccer is what I called feeding the chickens. No patience whatsoever.

          My mother used to say that her sons eat like birds, a peck at a time, and twice our own body weight daily.

          While we humans eat a lot, something like 50% of our calories are going to our brains. I’m not sure most birds could actually increase their caloric intake enough to be able to evolve bigger brains than they already have. Maybe if we designed them some super foods, but that seems to be cheating, to me.

          • MonkeMischief@lemmy.today
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            1 hour ago

            …something like 50% of our calories are going to our brains.

            Dang, I’ll have to remember this next time my ADHD pushes me to hyperfocus and I risk skipping meals again. O.O

  • borokov@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    16
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    7 hours ago

    Also, water you are drinking has probably been peed by dinosaure. Several time. But probably not peed by a human.

  • WoodScientist@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    120
    ·
    15 hours ago

    There are fossilized humans. Fossilization really doesn’t take that much time, geologically speaking; it just requires very specific conditions.

  • Mr Fish@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    113
    ·
    17 hours ago

    It is more chronologically accurate to show a t-rex being hit by a car than it is to show a t-rex eating a stegosaurus

      • Frozengyro@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        25
        ·
        16 hours ago

        Hi, I was just calling because I live down the street from you, and your daughter come to my house today and she kick my t-rex.

        Your daughter come to my house today, And she come on my property and then she kick my t-rex. And now my t-rex needs operation.

      • toynbee@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        12 hours ago

        The only interaction I’ve seen between a T-Rex and a collar is that one scene from The Lost World. Based on what I saw there, I have to assume that collars wouldn’t really work for them.

    • irish_link@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      24
      ·
      17 hours ago

      This is the comparison I was looking for. It’s great to explain that media shows them together but untrue, it is a totally different idea to explain the staggering time difference between the two.

  • Q The Misanthrope @startrek.website
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    66
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    17 hours ago

    This meme made me gasp loud enough that my girlfriend was worried something was wrong.

    Then I had to explain that I’m 41 years old and was just shocked by a dinosaur fact.

  • 🇰 🌀 🇱 🇦 🇳 🇦 🇰 🇮 @pawb.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    114
    ·
    edit-2
    18 hours ago

    This is only mind blowing because popular media likes to show every dinosaur at once. Like there’s a lot of things depicting stegosaurus fighting T-Rex; but these animals never would have met. They’re from entirely different periods.

    • tigeruppercut@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      16 hours ago

      Does getting buried in pumice count as becoming a fossil? Because Pompeii was only a couple thousand years ago.

      • Miles O'Brien@startrek.website
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        16 hours ago

        From wikipedia: A fossil (from Classical Latin fossilis, lit. ‘obtained by digging’)[1] is any preserved remains, impression, or trace of any once-living thing from a past geological age.

        Answer: yes. It does count. Specifically carbonization.

        Personal take: when I think of a “fossil”, I think of the stereotypical mineralized bones. Like the T-Rex in the museum of natural history that most people have seen from various movies and TV shows. Thinking of human and human predecessor bones as fossils is just weird to me.

        • Dave@lemmy.nz
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          10 hours ago

          Is Pompeii from a past geological age?

          2000 years ago doesn’t seem important on geological time scales.

          • Miles O'Brien@startrek.website
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            6 hours ago

            Okay so even though I read all this last night, I somehow missed the “2000 - (-2000) years” thus making the current geological age around 4000 years, and technically Pompeii would not count in the strictest definition. That said, had it happened 4,000 years ago, absolutely nothing would have changed. All the stuff would still be carbonized.

            Also from Wikipedia in the (geological age) article: An age is the smallest hierarchical geochronologic unit. It is equivalent to a chronostratigraphic stage.[14][13] There are 96 formal and five informal ages.[2] The current age is the Meghalayan.

            So again the answer is “yes it counts” but my personal take is “it feels weird to consider 4,000-10,000 ago multiple different geologic ages”