What Really Killed the Dinosaurs?

[mooeypoo]

They're not similar. T-Rex is a land creature, Crocs are "both water and land" (dont remember the english word, sorry), they have HUGE physiological and physical and biological and GENETICAL differences, not to mention the sheer fact that PHYSICALLY the act of MATING would not only be virtually impossible, but plainly PAINFUL physically. And it's not something you can do with "oops, a t-rex sperm accidently entered the croc's egg" --- it doesn't WORK like that.

 

Unless there was some devine (or extra terrestrial???) intervention here, which I must say both options sound rediculous - that is just not possible.

 

~moo

[Pinch Paxton]

I think I have presented as much evidence as the crator, and the dust cloud, and the Ice Age.

 

Crator = Swamp full of crocs, and T-rex.

Dust cloud = Gene cloud in water.

Ice Age = Dormant Gene pool.

[mooeypoo]

Egh. I give up.

[Pinch Paxton]

Also female hormones are combining with male hormones in our drinking water. Males are becoming more female. This is the same as T-rex drinking from the croc water, and the crocs also drinking the same water.

[Pinch Paxton]

Those things are not working through "breeding" of two species. Even when we tried to crossbreed QUITE similar animals (like mammals from the cats family - lions and tigers, for instance) it didn't really work.

 

And you tell me to get my facts right, but Lions, and Tigers can breed naturally without any help from mankind. It's just that they live in different countries.

 

Pincho.

[mooeypoo]

They CAN"T breed naturally without help from mankind.

 

Besides, do you even see what you're saying here? Lions and Tigers (Fairly similar [physically at least]) against T=REX and CROCS.

 

Sheesh, man.

 

Other than that -- your logical system is FLAWED.

 

THIS:

Crator = Swamp full of crocs, and T-rex.

Dust cloud = Gene cloud in water.

Ice Age = Dormant Gene pool.

IS NOT LOGIC.

 

 

Why? take a look at this Logic system:

 

Asteroid travelling in high speed in Space near Earth

........................... :nabla:

 

Asteroid being "pulled" (or twisted or however you call it) towards earth by its gravitational force (or wave, or glitch in time-space)

 

........................... :nabla:

 

Asteroid is big enough not to be fried and disapear in the Earth's atmosphere while shooting down towards the surface

 

........................... :nabla:

 

Asteroid - much smaller than before impact, and yet still substantially big - hits earth's surface

 

........................... :nabla:

 

Emmediate Cause: Crater

 

........................... :nabla:

 

Effective Cause: Huge dust cloud from the impact now covering the atmosphere for months (or years, depending on the impact and the asteroid's size)

 

........................... :nabla:

 

Earth's surface is not recieving enough heat, and an Ice Age is created

 

........................... :nabla:

 

Creatures that so far lived in a thrivingly HOT earth, are now freazing, and cannot fit themselves quickly enough to the new environment. Granted, some *can* but those who cannot, simply DIE from the massive change.

 

........................... :nabla:

 

Hence, the extinction of the dinosaurs.

 

 

NOW.

 

THIS is logic. Every effect comes with a direct result, a result thatis LOGICAL result, not made up "what if" result.

 

You can't tell me "No! Asteroids falling from the skies don't create craters!" because they USUALLY do.

Actually, unless its completely burnt, I don't believe there has been cases of impact WITHOUT a crater.

Those are SAFE ASSUMPTIONS. LOGICAL assumptions.

 

And while this theory may have flaws - as long as it is built on logic (as I've shown), it is accepted. YOUR theory, however, has no connection WHATSOEVER between cause and effect.

 

You just decided what your reality is. That's not logic, that's storytelling.

 

 

~moo

[Cap'n Refsmmat]

mooeypoo said in post # :

And yu're right, Cap'n. This is one of my favourite movies, I am ashamed for the mistake. Mogs, and (what was it? DAAAAAMN I need to see that movie again!!!!!!I'm senile!!! aaaa!!) Pizzaman? Mr. Pizza? err.. well you know what I mean. I just embarassed myself even more. I go dwell in my self pity and rent that movie again.

~moo

Pizza the Hut.

And the theory of genes in the water, no. How can they get into the animal AND get into the chromosomes of the child?

[mooeypoo]

the problem is less the suggestions - it's more the logic.

Try using more logic in your theoretical assumptions, pinch. We might even understand wat you want.

[Pinch Paxton]

You call that asteroid list logic because it contains no science at all. I can't strip the science away from a gene theory, it is more complex. I am writing a computer program at the moment to see what would happen if 2 people in 100000 had faulty genes. Then pass the genes on to their children as dormant. I am interested to find out what happens when the population reaches 20000000. Will the gene pool start to become higher risk, or lower?

 

Pincho.

[mooeypoo]

It doesn't contain science?...

 

If you call science a bunch of storytelling-non-logic babble, then yah. It's not science.

 

What you're saying is NOT logical because you CANNOT expect what happens to genes. You can have a "dormant" gene for decades, or for 2 generations. You don't KNOW what would happen to it because it's too complex, it contains generations fo generations of knowledge.

 

How 'bout you stop talking about science and start talking about LOGIC.

 

I can't keep answering you because you're not LISTENING.

you're not even TRYING to understand, man. And I have tried desperately to understand your logic, your theories, ANYTHING. You're not giving me a chance because you're not listening to me.

Ifind myself repeating the same thing over and voer and over again because you plainly don't listen, or don't care.

 

You throw EMPTY non SCIENTIFIC acusations. Don't believe me? You don't have to. Ask any scientific-thinking person. You know what? Ask anyone what LOGIC is.

Read books about the meaning of axiom, logic, and listening while debating.

 

This is really frustrating, and quite frankly, I'd spend all my time debating new ideas and new theories - but debating with someone who just don't listen, and whenever he gets a "tough question" he makes up his own reality without even counting on facts - is a waste of my time.

 

Talk logic, I'll listen and debate.

 

Otherwise - good luck. You haven't convinced me.

 

~moo

[Pinch Paxton]

Male carries rare, dormant disease

...........................

 

Female carries matching gene causing mutated childbirth

...........................

 

Dormant Male breeds with none gene carrying female, male child carries dormant gene.

 

Dormant female breeds with none gene carrying male, female child carries dormant gene.

...........................

 

Population growth increases risk of carrying child mutation, when a couple both carrying genes mate.

 

...........................

 

16 million years later, whole population carry mutant genes.

...........................

 

Breeding now causes mutation each time.

...........................

 

Mutated T-Rex has smaller arms. Cannot fall, else starves.

...........................

 

T-Rex moves into water, where he cannot fall over.

...........................

 

A large breed of Crocs already live in water, their gene pool is also starting to weaken.

 

T-rex mates with female T-rex in water. mutated Genes are passed into water.

 

Croc mates with female croc in water, some mutated genes are passed into water.

 

T-rex drinks water containing croc mutated genes.

 

Croc digests water containing mutated T-rex genes.

 

Croc eggs contain a mutation, with some elements of T-rex.

 

T-rex eggs contain a mutation with some elements of croc.

 

Adventually the two mutations are able to breed, and produce a smaller croc with a new gene pool which is safe.

 

New small Crocs continue to survive, but T-rex, and larger croc become extinct.

 

Is that simple enough?

[mooeypoo]

No, if that rare gene is not fit to society it would vanish through the evolutionary system.

 

And if the breeding DOES end up with mutations and those mutations DO NOT change, it means that those mutations are "meant to be" by evolution - therefore they're not really mutations but a result of evolution (because otherwise they would not survive natural selection to GET to the point the entire population has those genes).

 

That's the point of evolution.

 

And don't patronize me. I didn't ask for simple I asked for logic. That STARTS looking like one, although your logic system is still flawed, because you're missing some very important variables:

1. Such as what I have mentioned with evolution

 

2. the fact that if within a period of million years both Crocs and T-Rexes (which both lived less than millions of years but we'll leave that asside) will have the ability to reproduce cross-species, then they will no longer seriously *be* cross-species.

 

3. Oh. Yeah... you don't get genes by drinking water, dude. It just doesn't work like that.

 

4. Saying "Mutated T-Rex has smaller arms" is fallable. Listen, mutation that will not fit environments will PERISH. DIE. Will NOT move on.

 

You're treating mutations as if they're entire-species, while they're - by definition - a small precentage of the population.

 

Dude, that's the entire POINT of evolution. That's why we *dont* have shut mouths. Those who are born with serious mutations *do not survive* natural selection and don't PASS their mutations onwards.

 

When we talk about evolution we're not talking about mutations we're talking about SLOW PROCESS OF CHANGE.

It's thousands of changes that only some last, else just disappear out of lack of need.

 

It's a start, but it's not logic.

I would suggest you read a few books about evolution and genes before you throw such powerful thesis into the air that fits NO SORT OF LOGIC in physics, or biology, or genom, or ... well anything.

 

 

~moo

[MishMish]

Mooey:

 

"Crocodiles (though a bit different in size) were existing in the jurassic era, along with the dinosaurs. So did whales, btw."

 

Do you have a source for that bit about the whales, seems just a bit off to me

[Skye]

Pincho, population growth, with a variable number of offspring per individual, would result in a stochastic distribution of gene frequencies (the mean being equal to the original gene frequency) with a standard deviation that's proportional to the variability of the number of offspring, right?

[Pinch Paxton]

Yeah I've been reading up on it. Each human at the moment carries 5 faulty genes. There are 4000 possible illnesses from faulty genes. If both parents are carriers then 25% children will be diseased, 50% will be carriers, 25% will be normal. If 1 parent is carrier the 25% children will be carrier. I shall put this into my computer, and watch what happens over generations.

 

I also found out that Alligators have gone through changes with resulted sterilisation due to chemicals found in water from pesticides. Now I know that pesticides aren't the same as T-rex genes, but I am thinking now of T-rex hormones from urine etc, and also that perhaps T-rex received hormonal changes from crocs. Amphibians are very perceptible to changes in their water, frogs also require quite a pure type of water.

 

Pincho.

[Pinch Paxton]

Actually a quick think about it....

 

5 faulty genes per human

25% passed on as carriers

 

That's actually a gain in carriers!

 

There are some 50% diseases as well, because of dominant disorders. 2 Children = 1 diseased on average. That's from just one parent.

 

On top of that, you can aquire a mutation from none of the parents, but from your environment. You can also then pass this mutation on to your children!!!

 

What do you think?

 

http://www.dnapolicy.org/genetics/geneticsAndDisease.jhtml

[Skye]

No, the number of carriers decreases and the number of diseased and normal increases.

 

The parents are both carriers. Therefore 100% of the first population are carriers. If 50% of their offspring are carriers then obviously the number of carriers decreases. And as there are now 25% of both diseased and normal individuals, where before there were none, these have increased.

 

Look up Punnet squares, these are a better way to understand it, especially as it becomes more complicated.

[Sayonara]

How can you not realise that if it worked like this everything we know about evolution and all of our actual observations of the world right now would be wrong?

 

Before you try and model genetic progression, maybe you should learn how it actually works.

[Pinch Paxton]

It does get complicated. That's why I want to run it in my computer. I suppose that any gene can become mutated due to an aquired mutation. How many genes do we actually have? I need all the accurate figures.

 

5 mutant genes per person.

4000 possible illnesses.

sometimes 25% passed on as carriers.

sometimes 50% passed on as carriers from the father alone. (huntington Disease) and it's always the male that gets it.

All this I have to get accurate.

[Pinch Paxton]

What I'm thinking is that if the number decreases then why do we all carry 5 mutant genes after such a long span of the human race? I am just hypothesising anyway. Skye are you taking 2.4 children into consideration? Also, how many eggs do crocodiles lay that reach breeding stage, and same with T-rex, and other dinosaurs.

[atinymonkey]

Pinch, your theory is ok upto the magic gene water. That's the bit that make no sense. A crock and a dinosaur cannot cross breed, it's the equivilent of a crock and a toad or a fish and a dolphin. We can see, observe, test, map the genome and prove that it is impossible.

 

But, the regressive gene theory might hold some water if you look at it from a different angle. There was a change in climate, and a regressive gene may have prevented any useful biological evolution from occuring in the period it was required.

[Pinch Paxton]

Yeah I noticed that no gene mutation occurs through water, or has not been discovered, but I should really have said hormone transferance, because I was basing my theory on hormones passed through water from the female birth contreceptive. So maybe I lost my way a little bit during my explenation.

[Sayonara]

Right - I need to get this straight. Is this a fairly accurate summary of your theory...?

 

The asteroid craters and evidence of the following geological and meterological events, and the evidence of changes in the plant ecology of the planet, are coincidental and did not lead directly to the end of the age of dinosaurs.

 

It is more likely that the dinosaurs were wiped out by the cumulative effects of recessive-gene diseases, which eventually propogated to every individual of every species, reducing offspring numbers over a period of time.

 

A suggested mechanism is the aqueous transfer of hormones between (EG) crocodilia and (EG) Tyranosaurus rex, resulting in majority offspring of both being hybrids (let's call them Tyranodiles) with the genetic defects of both species.

[Pinch Paxton]

It is more likely that the dinosaurs were wiped out by the cumulative effects of recessive-gene diseases, which eventually propogated to every individual of every species, reducing offspring numbers over a period of time.

 

I say that mathematically, all species including ourselves, have an increasing probability of getting two matching gene mutations due to a slow increase in gene mutation over time. In other words, all genes in one species are slowly starting to match up.

 

A suggested mechanism is the aqueous transfer of hormones between (EG) crocodilia and (EG) Tyranosaurus rex, resulting in majority offspring of both being hybrids (let's call them Tyranodiles) with the genetic defects of both species.

 

This sounds accurate, apart from including that there would be hybrid Tyranodiles, and hybrid Crocasaurus. Each with half gene pool of each making a totally fresh gene pool. When Crocosaurus, and tyranodiles mate you get todays crocodiles, smaller than the original versions of that day.

 

Pincho.

[Sayonara]

What's the difference between a Tyranodile and a Crocosaurus?