Thread: Could this happen if dinosaurs didn't extinct ?

Hello everybody,

I was reading on internet about dinosaurs,and i get to one site where paleontologist Dale Russell in 1982 proposed one theory and that theory is called Dinosauroid.
Dinosauroid is evolved Troodon that has human features.
If dinosaurs never extinct could they evolved into human like form?

I will post video and wikipedia link so you can know what am i talking about:


Troodon Dinosauroid - YouTube

Troodon - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (scroll down to see Dinosauroid).

I want to hear everybody's opinion.

i've always found this to be trying to make it too humanoid - most theropods had a well-developed counter-balancing tail and a back that was closer to horizontal than vertical

even the current tail-less dinosaurs called birds are not bipedal in the way that humans are - hence that's a big no from me

i'm quite willing to admit that the head and the hands could become like that of a human, but the overall stance would more likely be like the original shown below, unless its evolutionary route took it through an arboreal stage, and even then it's not certain whether you would arrive at something more ape-like

Originally Posted by marnixR

i've always found this to be trying to make it too humanoid - most theropods had a well-developed counter-balancing tail and a back that was closer to horizontal than vertical

even the current tail-less dinosaurs called birds are not bipedal in the way that humans are - hence that's a big no from me

i'm quite willing to admit that the head and the hands could become like that of a human, but the overall stance would more likely be like the original shown below, unless its evolutionary route took it through an arboreal stage, and even then it's not certain whether you would arrive at something more ape-like

Thanks for reply.
I was always thinking about it because last dinosaurs died about 700.000 years after big cataclysm.

Sure, it's possible, but what evidence leads you to think that dinosaurs would have taken on anything resembling a human form?

Sure, it's possible, but what evidence leads you to think that dinosaurs would have taken on anything resembling a human form?

To me, they always look as though they're ready to turn into ostriches or emus (with bonus arms) rather than anything primate.

If I had to imagine something, I'd guess that the tail might remain, but could be used like kangaroo tails to aid a bipedal stance, allowing a more stable upright posture with well developed and articulate arms and hands.

I'd think that might cause some problems when running, as the oversize arms might cause it to be too off balance for the standard T running shape. That might be compensated for by a fatter tail though I guess. This strikes me as less efficient than simply losing the tail and assuming a more vertical normal stance. They might be able to manipulate objects better that way as well.

Why do you guys think they'd keep a similar posture to their ancestors? I'm thinking that they'd need to evolve those arms to manipulate objects and then the normal T posture makes less sense to me.

Originally Posted by Flick Montana

Sure, it's possible, but what evidence leads you to think that dinosaurs would have taken on anything resembling a human form?

I read about Troodons and i stumble on Dale Russell's theory about "Dinosauroid".

The model is a very very bad concept piece from the early 80's when knowledge of Dinosaur/bird evolution was much sparser. I have to say the model is actually one of the most anthropocentric ideas out there. There is no need at all for a tailless humanoid dinosaur to evolve. Read the https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quinta...ension_Trilogy for a much more interesting take on alternate evolutionary paths. (yes its totally fiction but still a great trilogy)

If dinosaurs never extinct could they evolved into human like form?
Dinosaurs lack several adaptations that modern humans have. We don't think they had warm blood, although some might have, cold blood certainly slows things down. They don't have eyes that face forward. Something that is very important for things like hunting and reading. They needed much higher concentrations of oxygen. They don't give live birth, and may not have cared for their young. They lack the prefrontal cortex that modern humans have. They cant marathon run in the same way the humans can. The list goes on and on.

Hmmmm a number of inconsistencies here.

Most paleontologist agree at least theropod dinosaurs and their relatives had metabolisms very similar to modern day birds.

Most meat eating dinosaurs had binocular vision like modern predators and humans.

There are a number of instances of maternal care in dinosaurs, and what is the evidence for the higher oxygen concentrations?

Humans have all those traits in one. There may be a few dinosaurs that had a few here and there but we have them all. There was way more oxygen back then.

Originally Posted by uptonryan

There was way more oxygen back then.

No there wasn't.

Breathing Easier Since the Jurassic | Science/AAAS | News interesting

Originally Posted by uptonryan

Breathing Easier Since the Jurassic | Science/AAAS | News interesting

So a drop in oxygen 250MYA from 30% to about 10% [albeit rsisng to the current 21%] (your link) - shows that there was "way more oxygen" for the dinosaurs who first appeared during the Triassic period, 231.4 million years ago, and were the dominant terrestrial vertebrates for 135 million years, from the beginning of the Jurassic (about 201 million years ago) until the end of the Cretaceous (66 million years ago).
Got it.
Thanks.

Originally Posted by uptonryan

Humans have all those traits in one. There may be a few dinosaurs that had a few here and there but we have them all. There was way more oxygen back then.

Show me that there weren't dinosaurian species with this combination.

And NO during most of the dinosaurs existence there was not more oxygen.

This is a very good question. The issue is whether dinosaurs where more advanced in their prime than we are. Clearly dinosaurs were well adapted for their time in many respects. There are many recent discoveries to suggest dinosaurs are not the slow dim witted animals we are led to believe. However there are some things that suggest we can do certain things that dinosaurs cannot. For one dinosaurs like the T-rex had tiny arms that don't seem to have much of a use. That suggests that many dinosaurs were in transition. However the real question is can a lizard perform better than a mammal. I would say a lion could eat a crocodile any day. The reason why humans are so tough an advanced today is because we have survived all the great extinction events. With each one we may have accumulated features to make us even stronger. Dinosaurs didn't survive. Even if they did survive the meteorite that killed them who is to say that something else would have done them in like the black plague and so forth. Humans on the other hand have survived and thrived. Except dinosaurs did survive they survived as birds. Birds are stagnated in their evolution compared to humans so I would say no. Dinosaurs could never become human like, not at least while humans are around. We are just too good.

Originally Posted by uptonryan

This is a very good question. The issue is whether dinosaurs where more advanced in their prime than we are.

The question was actually if any dinosaurians would have become sentient if they were still living

Originally Posted by uptonryan

There are many recent discoveries to suggest dinosaurs are not the slow dim witted animals we are led to believe. However there are some things that suggest we can do certain things that dinosaurs cannot.

If by Recent you mean the last 25 years or so. Vert. paleontologists generally agree that most dinosaurs had metabolisms like modern birds.

Originally Posted by uptonryan

For one dinosaurs like the T-rex had tiny arms that don't seem to have much of a use.

Tyrannosauridae is only one theropod family though, the juncture between birds and dinosaurs is full of nimble well proportioned active predators.

Originally Posted by uptonryan

That suggests that many dinosaurs were in transition.

huh? It does't do anything of the sort.

Originally Posted by uptonryan

However the real question is can a lizard perform better than a mammal. I would say a lion could eat a crocodile any day.

Wrong comparison, again, you need to be looking at birds not reptiles.

Originally Posted by uptonryan

The reason why humans are so tough an advanced today is because we have survived all the great extinction events.

The only major extinction event that primates in total survived was the Ice age, and much of the extinctions were human caused. Dinosaurs survived the K-T extinction also I will note.

Originally Posted by uptonryan

With each one we may have accumulated features to make us even stronger. Dinosaurs didn't survive. Even if they did survive the meteorite that killed them who is to say that something else would have done them in like the black plague and so forth. Humans on the other hand have survived and thrived. Except dinosaurs did survive they survived as birds. Birds are stagnated in their evolution compared to humans so I would say no. Dinosaurs could never become human like, not at least while humans are around. We are just too good.

Birds Stagnated? Not by a long shot, and humans are NOT stronger, we were almost killed off by the eruption of Mt Tambora. We just breed really well.

Ahhhh, but mammal to reptile is the wrong comparison.

Well humans have a number of attributes that set us apart. 1 we can throw objects. Hardly any other animal can do that. 2) We can use tools. Dinosaurs/Birds cant do those things

Originally Posted by uptonryan

Well humans have a number of attributes that set us apart. 1 we can throw objects. Hardly any other animal can do that. 2) We can use tools. Dinosaurs/Birds cant do those things

Yeah, but we can't yell "GRAWWWRR" as fiercely as dinosaurs could.

How do you know they went GRAWWWRR? They might have gone kakaarrr kakaarrrr like emus.

Originally Posted by uptonryan

Well humans have a number of attributes that set us apart. 1 we can throw objects. Hardly any other animal can do that. 2) We can use tools. Dinosaurs/Birds cant do those things

Birds at least are very well known for having multiple species that use tools. Watch crows, gulls, parrots etc.

Throwing is not a requirement for sentience

Originally Posted by PhDemon

Originally Posted by Paleoichneum

Throwing is not a requirement for sentience

True, have you seen girls play cricket...

What makes you think girls are sentient?

I do not pretend to understand females.

I do not pretend to understand females.

Protip:

You'd do far better to abandon the term "females" (unless you're writing a biology paper).

Women is the better choice. Girls if you're talking school-age or younger.

It is just all so confusing. Can we go back to dinosaurs ?

I'll just leave this here.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reptoid

http://skeptoid.com/episodes/4046