[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Subject Index][Author Index]
Re: The flaws of
David Hill wrote:
> It's obvious that deinonychus had some type of social structure and
> that they ate together who's to say that they didn't kill their prey
> together. People are so worried about assuming things, where would we be
> today if we didn't assume. Dinosaurs would still be in swamps, Iguanodon
> would still be up like a kangaroo, The Carnegie diplododus would be
> confined to trenches and so on. I'm sure that all of the preceding
> examples sounded like "Fantasy" at the time. Deinonychus is different
> though. We have evidence that it was equipped to hunt prey larger than
> itself! There is a good chance that deinonychus was smart enough to do so.
> I'm sick of people confining dinosaurs to being blindingly stupid. There
> are so many examples of animals that were dumber than deinonychus and still
> worked together to kill prey. Here's a list: Crows will attack a larger
> bird in mid air(I can verify this with a video-tape),
Whoa, hold it; crows are not dumb. In fact, crows (and all corvids, for
that matter) are amazingly bright, with problem solving skills often
compared to those of your brighter mammals (dogs, cats, whatever).
I've no other comments (sick of the thread), but I couldn't let crow
maligning go unanswered.