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

Re: Troodon again

> I have now the concrete data. The Troodon had 0.1% brain to body mass ratio,
> ( the ratio is the important thing not the absolute size )
> and if we do not count it's tail ( since we want to compare to mammals that 
> usually do not have a heavy tail ) than it is 0.13%

      How much of that brain mass is taken up by the cerebral
hemispheres, the area of the brain that is generally accredited with
"intellignece"?  Mammals also exhibit a degree of convolution (to increase
the size of the association areas) on the cerebral hemispheres that you
don't find in birds or reptiles.  Intelligence is hard to
quantify, but as I understand it cerebral size and coinvolution 
development is the best means of estimation.  Troodons were unusually
brany dinosaurs, but brain to body size ratios aren't the whole story.

> 65 million years after the human race someone examining the North-American
> fossils.(Let's say there are the best sites) He is finding some Upper 
> Cretaceous fossils belonging to some quite intelligent species. And than also 
> at the end of the Tertiary and in the 
> Qarternary there are some fossils with higher brain/body mass ratio.
> Probably some kind of elephant, but not so clever like the guy at the end of 
> the 
> Cretaceous( don't think that he would find any of you, Homo Sapiens, a few 
> million for a few thousand year is nothing, and anyway you don't like to be 
> fossilized aren't you? )
> So this paleontologist guy would conclude that the existence of an intelligent
> species in the Qarternary is nonsense.
> Is he right? I think not because I'm sending this mail somewhere.

     There has not been (as far as I know) a general trend throughout the
Cenozoic in developing ever increasing large brain size.  In other words,
mammals are (on the average) no brainier today then they were at any
other time in the Cenozoic (expect possibly the Paleocene?). Based on his
evidence as you presented, our hypothetical paleontologist would have been
just as likely to predict a sapient species during the Miocene, of
Oligocene; and he would have been WRONG.  

LN Jeff