Undermining long-held paradigms

timescales don't need to be readjusted for this.
just our views on the evolutionary history of mammals.it honestly doesn't surprise me that there actually was a bigger mammal then the mice sized ones we so often see from that era.I mean, the explanation--they stayed small so that they weren't hunted isn't very good. the thing is, until these new mammalian fossils, what other explanation was there?my guess is that these cat and small dog sized mammals lived in the forests, arguably much safer from the larger predators--why is a raptor, much less a t-rex gonna hunt something the size of a dog? not worth it, energy wise.and in the forests, you don't have to worry about the massive, 85 ton herbivores crushing you--for the most part.I will say this--when the asteroid struck, it was the small mammals that survived, and for good reason. one of those being endothermy.
It was the small mammal that gave rise to the current mammals--even the article suggests this, as it states that the genus Repenomamus has no modern relatives. if they did survive the asteroid, then something else took them out of the picture (the new old big mammals)

---

All a man's knowledge comes from his experiences

I'm ashamed. I totally missed that. hmmm. bad kuresu,bad bad kuresu.i guess it's time out in the corner for me, as I'm no jack horner.Edited by kuresu, : No reason given.

---

All a man's knowledge comes from his experiences

ever take a look at the K-T boundary. that's the extinction event, the end the cretaceous and started the (tertiary?) periods.A good layer around most of the world, dating to 65 million years ago, and get this--way too much irridium (not globally, but there is still a well defined K-T boundary across the world). irridium ain't common in the earth's crust--certainly not in the concentration we've found close to the impact zone.we also have the crater mapped out--it's at the yucatan peninsula.we know that an asteroid or coment hit--more likely asteroid.what we don't know is if this was the culminating factor or the event that started the chain of events leading to the extinction of the dinos.as to your guess about t-rex--many predators have eaten plant material--often for no mroe purpose than staying regular.
in the case of the T-rex--if it is true, and it isn't contaminated--how about this. in the process of chasing down some prey, he snapped, missed, and got a mouthful of plant. really quite possible.try to do some research on this stuff before you make yourself sound like an idiot.

---

All a man's knowledge comes from his experiences

here's the difference between the K-T asteroid and the one that made metoer crater in arizonameteor crater, AZ
1.186km in diameter
chicxulub crater (k-t asteroid)
170km in diamter.that meteor that made that hole in arizona was tiny compared to the 10-20 kilometer in diameter asteriodalso, there was one other unlucky (for everyone but our ancestors) factor. the k-t asteroid hit an area with a ton of sulfur. you can read more here:
http://www.solarviews.com/eng/tercrate.htm
scroll down to find the pictures, and scroll down even further to find another impact that's 100 km in diameter.

---

All a man's knowledge comes from his experiences

i resent your use of the word "undermining".
"changing" is a better word to use here.why?
the foundations of our knowledge about these eras aren't changing, just superficial things--like the addition of new species not represented among today's species.undermining implies that we are destroying the foundation of our building, or that we are doing something subversively to erode something.There's nothing subversive or destructive going on.and, the empirical facts aren't being undermined. They are either changed or scrapped--like the flat earth was scrapped. Was that position undermined by Columbus? No.Okay, my point's been kind off lost. Basically, I just don't like your choice of words. They seem wrong for some reason--almost like a mischaracterization. I don't know. damn.

---

All a man's knowledge comes from his experiences

I'm not sure about the crocs, but I think the reason they wre able to survive was this.They are true reptiles, and they lived in the water.
as true, cold blooded reptiles, they can often go for a year without eating if they've eaten a good sized meal.Being in the water conveyed an advantage to surviving the k-t extinction event, but I'm not sure what exactly. possibly the water was warmer. I know the water has to help somewhere--reason being--less life was destroyed in water than on land.someone else can probably offer a better explanation.

---

All a man's knowledge comes from his experiences

that makes sense. I figured it was something close to this, but I just didn't know how to put it--lack of more precise knowledge I'd say.One other thing I would include that would help the crocs is that of thier low metabolism. they only have to eat once a year in extreme times. So a good chunk of them could survive the freezing period, and also have access to all that rotting flesh. that's the other reason that the reptiles survived.Even if the non-avian dinosaurs were cold-blooded, living on land screwed them. And if warm--blooded, they're screwed yet again because the large ones especially would need plenty of food every couple of days, I'd say. My personal guess is that the last of the non avian dinos to die out were the smaller ones--like the comps (or whatever was about their size at that time)

---

All a man's knowledge comes from his experiences

randman, if I may, doesn't have piss-poor arguments.
If you want a good example, check of the woese's progenote hypothesis thread.He uses evidence for common ancestry as evidence against common ancestry.
He claims that, when Woese is stating that he doesn't see how a genote ancestor can be the ancestor of the bacteria, eukarya, and archae, but that a progenote can be, that woese is actually saying that there is no common ancestor. or something to that effect.It's actually a little bit like Heropton (Ray). Ray loves to make the claim that if you disagree with him on something then he is clearly right. Of course, this means that if you agree with him, is he wrong? To him, no. He's still right. How Rand and him are alike is in using opposites--evidence for something is actually against something, or disagreement proves rightness, and agreement proves rightness.Anywho, using evidence to support your claims (which doesn't actually support your claims) is using Rand's tactic. that's all.oh, and in that sense his arguments are piss-poor. If only he could use the correct evidence to support his claims at times.

---

All a man's knowledge comes from his experiences

apparently you're going to be able to keep that "wel-liked, but mostly wrong" statureI'm sure you know this, but the mesozoic has three periods, in order from oldest to youngest:triassic, jurassic, cretaceous. So, Laurasia and Gondwanaland were separate by the late cretaceous.

---

All a man's knowledge comes from his experiences

true--the names given to the periods are based off of the life found at that time.however, one quick point--life doesn't automatically evolve towards greater complexity.I point you in the direction of the largest biotic kingdom on earth, the one with the most profound impact on the ecology of this planet--bacteria.They are the simplest life forms in existence (unless you think that virus's are alive, at which point, those are the most simple). And if everything supposedly moved from simple to complex, why haven't these guys? And if they have, how come they have gotten as complex, as say, you or I? after all, they've had the same amount of time to get here, no?abe: dang it man, you're turning into randman. this article is about an impact that occured 250 million years ago. this does nothing to refute the fact that chixulub impact was involved in the extinction event at the end of the cretaceous. referring to the k-t. referring to a much earlier extinction event.In fact, this supports chixulub. Why? Becuase no we have two meteor(asteroid?) impacts and massive volcanism at the same time. One volc/impact 250 mya, one volc/impact 65mya.
It was thought to be a coincidence that the volcanism came at the same time as the impact. we now have this "coincidence" twice. More probable that the volcanism and impact are linked, which just aids the case of "yes, an asteroid impact took out the dinos".Edited by kuresu, : No reason given.

---

All a man's knowledge comes from his experiences

false. birds are still around--the avian dinosaurs.Archer already explained how crocs could survive. frogs use similar methods.I don't know how old the Komodo is, but don't you think it could have evolved after?also, reptiles are not part of the dinosaur set. the name is a misnomer, because the first fossils were thought to be reptiles, based off of faulty reconstructions.dinosaurs evolved from reptiles, not the other way around.And I think DrA was asking you for the creationist answer, not evolution's answer. maybe later I'll get some time to do some extensive research and provide to you.

---

All a man's knowledge comes from his experiences

patently false. the coldest place on the earth is at antarctica.
also, all the dinosaurs did not die simlultaneously. thirdly, the temperature dropped, yes, but to the level of at most, a severe winter.now then, tell me this. Reptiles and amphibians are found just about everywhere on earth, except ireland (snakes) and antarctica. and anyplace above roughly 10,000 feet. we find salamnders in new england. even snakes in new england. On my IB biology exam this previous spring, we had to examine a problem involving (snakes?) migrating from islands to the mainland--dealing with the great lakes.
also, the garter snake in new england (or it's canada) have a tendency to hibernate in caves--in the thousands.as to the evolutionary history, Archer can possibly help you with that--but you have to accept that there are transitional fossils do exist, and that we have many transitionals.

---

All a man's knowledge comes from his experiences

sorry to intrude, Percy, but is the email listed in your profile (non-admin profile) active?If it is, I sent you an e-mail. if not, I need to resend the e-mail to an active account.just figured that this would be a good way to get a hold of you.

---

All a man's knowledge comes from his experiences