[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Subject Index][Author Index]
Re: Troodon again
> Dear everybody,
> If you don't mind I would like to continue arguing about the intelligence of
> 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%
> The primates have about 1% to 0.15% brain to body mass ratios. The adult male
> gorillas have something like 0.2-0.15%
> And the Homo Sapiens have something like 2%
> So the Troodon ( and probably other coelosaurs if I know it's group name well
> are not so bad.
It's not simply a matter of brain size, or relative brain
size. The complexity and structure of the brain also matters. A
large brain may simply be made up of enlarged sensory lobes, with
very little in the way of a cerebral cortex.
> And one more thing about the tool use of some dinosaurs. In the first stages
> every animal (or being) uses tools as it finds in the nature, like sticks or
> stones. The chimpanzes (is it right?) are using sticks for fishing ants.
> If some kind of dinosaurs also used some tools ( the Troodon had a perfect
> for that ) how can we find this out?
Tool use is not necessarily signs of high intelligence. There
are many birds that use tools. I recently saw footage of a
wedge-tailed eagle using a stone to crack open an emu egg, and as
far as birds go I doubt they are in the intelligence league of
crows or parrots (suposedly the most intelligent). And as far as
abstract thought goes, recent experiments with pigs suggests they
are more intelligent (however you define "intelligence") than
chimpanzees! And yet I don't know of any instances of wild pigs