[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Subject Index][Author Index]

Mammalian success

I'd like to ask a few questions on "this released supiorioity by mammalian
predisposition toward succes" thread;

1. In the event the term "success" means surviving the K/T, are there more
mammal species than any other kind? I'd be willing to bet the a number of
dollars(US) that more species emerge from eggs than do not. IMHO success is
the proliferation of the type leading to more adapted and varied forms of a
species, not the most dertructive (as per humans).

2. Does a singular find, of any paleontological sort, require us to rethink
everything? Until the data on mammalian history can be more carefully
studied, and in a variety of worldwide formations, all of the assuptions we
now make may be premature. Examples exist to bolster conservative thinking.
Without such fractured tales emerge and we have scientific anarchy like
rhino-virus or rat's egg predation ending the dinosaurs riegn.

3. Do frogs, sharks, alligators, snakes, tiurtles, or a thousand other K/T
survivors have hair or a high metabolic rate? Not only do they not have
either of the aforementioned, these creatures would survive just as well if
placed in the wayback machine and injected into the dino days.

4. If mammilians survived because they were smarter, ie learning all the
time, why is there only one species using the list? It would seem that the
pressures that gave rise to human intellect, a "successful" species, would
also give rise to articulate cows.

I feel that until we, as people, accept the fact that this reality, as we
know it,  is entirely a fluke of chance we are doomed to think of success
in the improper way. The pressures of life have been the dictator of
survival, not the individuals power to overcome. To overcome in the face of
these pessures, or adapt, happens by chance. As the old saw states, " I'd
rather be lucky than good".  Mammals were lucky, as were others, and it
seems simple to me. Dinosaurs, and nearly everything else, ended their days
at the K/T. Like it or not chance played a much bigger role than we can
account for, which goes against the grain of  classical science. Chaos

Roger A. Stephenson
Professional Amateur Paleontologist :-)