The Tactical Strategist

Well thank you all. @Phil for all, I'll try and get better. I'm 14 and still kinda new to everything, and have lots to learn. I'll be happy to learn from everyone here. I'm sure I might be able to hold my own on attacked ideas. It's ok. Thank you.

Ok. This is what I wanted. I know there are many different things that go along with this, so thank you all. I'm finding this conversation interesting. @ten oz, with the track and races thing, I just mentioned that to show that not all humans are built for long distance Also it's very true about your statements with finding food and apex predators. Cats would be the most difficult. They are, perhaps, some of the most dangerous animals in the natural world. No wonder they have lived so long. In fact, they preyed on us for a long time, and occasionally still do. @phil for all, I know there are many factors going into survival. All these are just hypothetical questions. Thank you all. I did happen to ask this on another website and everyone attacked me and gave stupid answers. So I appreciate you all

But in modern day, is their any similarity on how we pick our partners with animals? Is it because of their beauty? Or another reasons. Now, I know people say looks aren't everythings and all that stuff. Which I agree. But subconsciously, maybe in some hidden animal part of us, is that how we pick

All good points I have thought about. Let's say something like a tiger for intelligence. I know about our endurance. But not all races of people are built for the stamina as well as others. I'm into track and field, and from Jamaican descent, so I found an article/study of why jamaicansproduce such fast runners. Their descendants from west Africa were naturally built for "speed". Eastern Afrjcans are built for the endurance, hence two totally different body types. Caucasian are built more for throwing, and lifting, swimming, etc. So anyway, I know endurance would really help, hunting wise. But could we kill without our tools? And would top predators kill us off with their quick bursts of speed in an ambush. We don't have armor like reptiles do defend ourselves, and no claws or teeth to fight. Most animals can do what Ten OZ said, but can we to do it well enough. We can't swim like reptiles, some mammals, and obviously fish. We are terribly slow in the water, at least wading. Digging? Could we really build burrows? I don't know. We don't have as many muscles as some animals. A tiger could kill us with the swipe of a paw easily. Elephants have more muscle in the tip of their trunks than we have in our entire body. Lions have smaller muscles than us, with allows more muscles, and faster twitch reflex, making them faster and stronger.

True. But I'll just rephrase this. Sorry, I'm terrible when it comes to questions. I can never get them out right. What do you think is better adapted? Dinosaurs or Mammals. But then I realize this is unfair, because dinosaurs couldn't survive in this world, too different. Maybe, "Would predatory dinosaurs have a shot at surviving, or would modern animals kill them off, either by direct fighting (highly unlikely) or just better adapted

Basically, how do we pick our mates. Is it by physical attraction like birds and flowers, or some other way

Well I don't mean random. But that's just the word I can think of.

I wouldn't think so

Could modern humans like you and me survive without our intelligence. We don't have many natural defenses. No teeth to fight, just to eat. Not made to rip and tear. We don't have speed. Normal people are slow compared to most animals. No claws. Can't swim like a fish. What are your thoughts. Mind you, I'm not saying we are ill suited for survival, but just a thought.

Hmmm. We shall turn this into an animal fight night. Haha. What about a Utahraptor vs a Tiger. A triceratops vs a rhino. What is most dangerous to man? Modern animals, or Prehistoric? Who would retake or keep the world Maybe, what is more dangerous to man? Or what will dominate the earth? Maybe the best question is, "Who is better adapted to survival?"

Oh, I'm sorry. Random. I mean this by saying do we just pick a female for "no" reason as our "mate"

Is that how we get out "mates"?. Lots of animals get theirs by attractions, and that's why flowers evolved. Attraction. Is that why women are considered beautiful, or do we just pick randomly

Very true, because of mind. May I clarify. Other than humans, what is the most dangerous creature. I do agree though, man is probably the most dangerous

Prehistoric please. Modern man doesn't work. But if you want to say something like Neanderthal, cro manga, Australopithecus, etc, that's ok

Who do you think was the most dangerous prehistoric predator? Maybe an ice age mammal: Smilodon, cave lions, Andrewsarchus, or even Neanderthal. Or would you go with a Mesozoic dinosaur. Utahraptor, tyrannosaur, allosaurus, dilophosaurus perhaps. Or was it even a predator at all? Maybe a ceratopsian, or a stegosaur. What do you all think, and why? I'm hoping we can use this thread to determine who might have been the baddest prehistoric animal. 😄

This I find is the most likely. Dimreeper is right as with pack hunting T. rex like animals. Gigantosaurus, which hunted in packs to bring down sauropods like argentinosaurus (sorry if spelling is wrong). Gigantosaurus was actually bigger than a Tyrannosaurus. But I'm sorry to say, as I might be crushing childhood dreams here, most dinosaurs weren't giants. Only a select few. Most were horse sized and smaller, a moderate amount were like rhinos, cap Buffaloes, and cars. But not a whole lot of dinosaurs were humongous, even though there was still quite a list as time goes on. Small dinosaur species vastly outnumber colossal dino species

Very true. We can't really live without each other. I love that analogy. That's why I mentioned it as a symbiotic relationship

Ok. Thanks for the clarification. The thing with Paleontology, we will never understand the animals as they are gone. But my question is hypothetical, so I'm willing to hear what people think. Who is the more dominant type of animal, dinosaur, or mammal. Of course, we don't know, but what are the bets.

So are you saying that paleontology, paleobotany, archeology, etc are not sciences? Science is not all facts. It's also inferences. So what are you trying to understand? From your posts, I'm starting to think you are on here just to attempt to rip apart my ideas. Quite sad, might I say, as I'm just here to talk and converse, and maybe learn what I can about the natural world.

Science, especially paleontology, and other ancient histories, are all about inferences. There is nothing else you can do, since it's all gone and extinct. If we didn't infer, thing of all the things we wouldn't "know". And imagine how much we do "know" through inferences

How? It's basic science. People infer everyday, whether you realize or not. Velociraptor was small with light bones, built for speed, as most dromeosaurs, so we Infer it's fast. It has sharp claws and teeth, including the famous sickle claw on all raptors. We have a skeleton of a velociraptor on a protoceratops, showing that it probably ran and leap onto its prey, like a cat after large prey. And also, like a cat hunting large prey, it would probably live in packs so they can help each other bring down prey. They also have a large brain cavity (raptors were some of the smartest dinosaurs), which suggested they could solve problems and developed thing tactics. We can safely assume that maybe they did live solo, but other raptors have been found in packs. It would also help them bring down larger prey, which we know they did. And maybe if one dies, the rest would leave. The main reason we know some dinosaurs lived in packs is because of freak accidents. A flash flood killed a whole heard of centoceratops, proving they lived in herds, but what were the chances of that happening? Close to none. Are they? Wild dogs are doing extremely well in the wild, and live in packs up to 80 animals! They are great predators. Hyenas don't hunt as often, as they love to scavenge. They were built for it. They are also bigger, so they can chase away the dogs and steal their kill. A lazy way of survival. Not that I'm dissing the hyena. I love the animals and respect it fully. It's just like a lion and a cheetah. Cheetahs have a quite higher success rate ( 50%) than a lion (20% - 30%). They get more kills. But it's extremely common for lions to steal from the smaller cheetah, as it's much easier Well, a few of my last facts were incorrect. The wild dog is endangered due to poaching and poisoning. Sorry about that.

Well we can infer on a dinosaurs hunting tactics, based on the skeleton, and other fossils. I say the wild dog as they are probably the most succesful predator in, not just Africa, but the world, with a 80% - 90% success rate. And I imagne the velociraptor to me much like them, intelligent, fast, stealthy, stratigec, and dangerous. To help answer the question, I will talk about the supposed hunting tactics of the velociraptor, and then the tactics of a African wild dog. The velociraptor: an ambush predator, thought to live in packs, even though no skeletons have been found in groups. It would spread out, and using quick, coordinated attacks, surround and attack their prey, such as a protoceratops, with teeth, and their sickle claw. Wild dog: spread out and pick a target, and use their endurance and strategy to run down and kill their prey, like an impala. They will chase their target to others in their group and run it to ground, then move in for the kill

I would say it's a great symbiotic relationship, but it all comes down to plants. I suggest reading the book, and I'm sorry if I get the name wrong, as I haven't read it in a while, and don't own a copy, "The Bontany of desire" or something like that. But in this book. It talks about this topic, really. Plants were here before animals, and provided food for animals in the Precambrian and Paleozoic eras. Then in the Mesozoic, flowering plants evolved, which in turn gave rise to fruits, seeds, etc. This gave more food/energy to the natural world to help warm blooded animals. It all comes back to plants.

Well yes, but I was thinking hypothetically. Like let's say the Serengeti in Africa. Who would be more dominant, velociraptor or African Wild dog. Please note that even though people may say the lion does rule, I wanted to match two species that were similar.

Oh, I'm sorry. I got that fact from a video my science teacher showed me. I'm pretty sure it's from scientists at the La Brea Tar Pits, and also scientists specializing in big cats