|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
Thread ▼ Details |
Member (Idle past 380 days) Posts: 876 From: Richmond, Virginia USA Joined: |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: We Evolved Pretty Quickly | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
DC85 Member (Idle past 380 days) Posts: 876 From: Richmond, Virginia USA Joined: |
its Amazing in the Earth's History we Seem to be the Only "intellegent" (its in qoutes because I consider us Animals all the way) life to Ever Evolve. Its Pretty amazing if you think about it. It is Very Rare. I mean the Dionsaurs Had the Planet for around 160 Million Years and its amazing Something Didn't Evolve. but in our Little 65 we happened...........
[This message has been edited by DC85, 07-03-2003]
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Peter Member (Idle past 1479 days) Posts: 2161 From: Cambridgeshire, UK. Joined: |
Well ... technically we are one of the results of
approx. 3.5billion years of evolution. That is we have had 65million years MORE than thedinosaurs.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
DC85 Member (Idle past 380 days) Posts: 876 From: Richmond, Virginia USA Joined: |
Yes however we most likey might not have gotton our Chance if Dinosaurs Never went extinct.... mammels would still be creatures Under the feet of Dinosaurs (most likely). I mean mammels changed Very little from the time they Evolved to the end of the Mesozic. but this 65 Million years did amazing this for this group
[This message has been edited by DC85, 07-03-2003]
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Autocatalysis Inactive Member |
Interesting. I have heard that there was a small species of dinosaur that had a physical stature and brain capacity comparable to chimpanzees. Hmmmwhere was that, a new scientist article I think,,have to look it up. There are differences in mammals that give a little advantage in the development of intelligence. Namely the quality of continuous eye tracking, absent in all other animals. It requires enormous brainpower in the visual cortex, yes mice have huge brain in this respect compared to comparably sized lizard
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
crashfrog Member (Idle past 1467 days) Posts: 19762 From: Silver Spring, MD Joined: |
What bugs me is movies where the inhuman villian condemns the entire human race, saying something like "the dinosaurs had their time, you've had yours" or the like.
I mean, the dinosaurs had 100 million years or whatever. Human civilization has only been around for what, 10,000? Way less than 100 million - way less than 1 million, even. Seems hardly fair to me. Seems like we've got a little more time left on the meter, if you ask me.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
mark24 Member (Idle past 5195 days) Posts: 3857 From: UK Joined: |
Peter,
That is we have had 65million years MORE than the dinosaurs. Well, not really, the sparrows in my garden have had the same as me, & they are descended from dinosaurs. It's just that more time doesn't = more intelligence. The brain is a very costly organ, any increase in size must = greater fitness, or such moves will be selected against. Would a sparrow be fitter with twice the intelligence when it burns twice the fuel? I doubt it. We got lucky in that we had preexisting traits that could capitalise on increades intellignce, opposable thumbs etc. Mark
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Peter Member (Idle past 1479 days) Posts: 2161 From: Cambridgeshire, UK. Joined: |
I was really just pointing out the mis-conception about
how long it took us to evolve. The preexisting traits that led to us were evolving formillions of years prior to the 65million referred to as the time to produce humans. If WE burn more fuel due to our intelligence, then the samefitness benefit would apply to any creature. If we don't, then, well, the reasoning kindof fails there All extant creatures are the result of the last 3.5Billion yearsof evolution on the planet. Truncating that at some arbitray point in the past is, well, arbitrary ... and in my opinion mis-leading.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Peter Member (Idle past 1479 days) Posts: 2161 From: Cambridgeshire, UK. Joined: |
Maybe ... thems the chances you take with allowing
an evolutionary system to get going. The problem I have always had with the 'global extinction ofdinosaurs' is that that is not what you can see from the fossil record. What you see is that a large number of species of dinosaurdisappeared ... those that accept that birds stem directly from dinos. cannot calim global dino. extinction, since every christmas robin is a descendent of the dino. family branch that led there.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
mike the wiz Member Posts: 4752 From: u.k Joined: |
'All extant creatures are the result of the last 3.5Billion years
of evolution on the planet' thats a nice old figure to work with isn't it . lol
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Peter Member (Idle past 1479 days) Posts: 2161 From: Cambridgeshire, UK. Joined: |
I like it
And it is consistent with scientific research from a varietyof fields. In this thread, however, the OP suggested an acceptance ofthe contempory modern time-scale for the earth and life upon it ... so this issue is off topic for this thread.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Parasomnium Member Posts: 2224 Joined: |
DC85,
What gives you the impression that "intellegent" [sic] is opposed to animaldom? Chimpanzees are intelligent. Dolphins are. Why, even those colourfully feathered, talking dinosaur descendants we call parrots are. It's just a matter of degrees. Or do you perhaps mean "conscious"? You say, "the Dionsaurs [sic] Had the Planet for around 160 Million Years and its [sic] amazing Something Didn't Evolve."I'll take that as a sloppy way of saying that something intelligent didn't evolve in the age of the dinosaurs. Now, if we are to believe Mr. Spielberg, at least one of the dinosaur species themselves was pretty high up on the list of smart things. On second thought, I think we'd do well to believe just the experts our friend from Hollywood must have consulted, because he also produced "E.T." But again, you might also have meant to say that something conscious did not evolve. If so, you have a point, because consciousness (of the type we humans possess) is indeed unique in the animal kingdom, as far as I know. Cheers. P.S. Is there a reason for you to use capitals in mid-sentence? It seems like you're heavily into Pooh or something. Which is fine by the way, as long as you don't confuse "issues" with sneezes and Long Words don't Bother you. Anyway, you're forgiven. From the fact that you are a future paleontologist, I take it you are quite young, compared to an old fart like myself. {Edited to correct a typo, I don't know what possessed me.} [This message has been edited by Parasomnium, 07-18-2003]
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
DC85 Member (Idle past 380 days) Posts: 876 From: Richmond, Virginia USA Joined: |
sorry so long to reply. I have never said Humans are better then other animals as a matter of fact I believe other wise. it just its hard to Explain something without putting ourselves ahead sometimes.
the point I was trying to make is that their is nothing that Compares with Humans we Evolved so differently then anything else. I mean look at dinosaurs(and pre mammals and other creatures) and then Modern animals compare. many seem to resemble and most likely had similar behavior. where we seem to be different then anything else that has evolved. get what I am trying to say? |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
truthlover Member (Idle past 4060 days) Posts: 1548 From: Selmer, TN Joined: |
Human civilization has only been around for what, 10,000? Way less than 100 million - way less than 1 million, even. Seems hardly fair to me. Seems like we've got a little more time left on the meter, if you ask me. Crash? You're throwing me here. You don't listen to Rush Limbaugh, do you? Who's this "we" that has a little more time left on the meter? Is it man? If so, then man's been around probably 200,000 years. You're not making civilized man his own species or anything, are you? That's still a short time, but it's seems pretty objectionable to me to suggest that our meter wasn't running until some humans in the Middle East built a city and started destroying the world. It's possible we had villages in South America 60,000 years ago, and it's certain we had them there 20,000 years ago. Why don't those people count?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
crashfrog Member (Idle past 1467 days) Posts: 19762 From: Silver Spring, MD Joined: |
Crash? You're throwing me here. You don't listen to Rush Limbaugh, do you? Uh, lord no. (I sure did, though, once. Legacy of a mis-spent childhood. )
It's possible we had villages in South America 60,000 years ago, and it's certain we had them there 20,000 years ago. Why don't those people count? They don't count because I'm a crappy historian. By which I mean to say that I picked a number off the top of my head that sounded reasonable. Obviously I was way off. So, 20,000 years, or even 200,000. Still way less than the dinosaurs.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
mike the wiz Member Posts: 4752 From: u.k Joined: |
'So, 20,000 years, or even 200,000. Still way less than the dinosaurs.'
Yes well, there goes those nice time figures again.Hell why not add another billion years evo's!
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024