Post Comment Preview Comment
To reply to a Comment: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to.
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page:  « First  ‹ Previous  1 2 3  Next ›  Last »  (3 total)
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
omegas3
Is it an android you are or are you a quasar?
01:25 PM on 11/26/2012
it amuses me when these scientists add colors to these creatures yet they could've been one primary color
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
He-Grilled-It
If all you can do is insult me, then I win.
03:53 PM on 11/26/2012
To be fair, it's the artists drawing the representations of dinosaurs who add colours... Besides, all we have to work from now are modern birds and reptiles, which tend not to be entirely monotone.
photo
hopeisalive
Old enough to know better, but young enough to try
11:13 AM on 11/26/2012
In reading some of the posts on this thread, it is interesting to see the differences and then to wonder why these differences are there. In some, I see the intent to be humerous, but in others, a lack of understanding or knowledge. Dinosaurs have been creatures that we have fantasized about and so still attract the attention of many, especially children. I like that old ideas are being reexamined and found to be either slightly wrong or just plain wrong. To incorporate the physics of structure to living, or in this case extinct, animals is a very good idea. Physics is based on math and math has an answer to each problem and not like biology which many times has a problem to follow the first problem.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
12:32 PM on 11/26/2012
Oops...gotta disagree. It is known that some problems in physics cannot be solved mathematically. Maybe, like the invention of the calculus, we need a new type of math. Where's a 21st century Leibniz (bet you thought I'd ask "Newton") when we need one?
photo
hopeisalive
Old enough to know better, but young enough to try
03:33 PM on 11/26/2012
Yet when you use the principles of physics in structural support along with the the math of forces, a more clear picture about the mass supported by these bones can be calculated more accurately.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
RedDogBear
11:43 AM on 11/27/2012
I agree and I would add that there is actually a lot of math in biology. Simple formulas like the Price equation for example: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Price_equation
cherylw1958
Always searching for knowledge.
05:11 AM on 11/26/2012
Open the door, get on the floor, everybody walk the dinosaur. I guess they were light on their feet.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
RosesForObama
Obama WON Re-election. I CALLED It
01:27 AM on 11/26/2012
Yeah. I think they were a lot smaller and skinnier than is suggested.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
jwmeritt
12:43 PM on 11/26/2012
Mine is......
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Ashlieeeee
Free thinkers are dangerous!
11:56 PM on 11/25/2012
I seen that tarantulasoarus rex on that triassic park movie and in done shook the water in that cup from a mile off it woulda had to be real heavy to do that!
photo
Fentwin
Sedagive?
11:27 AM on 11/26/2012
O.o
photo
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
missouriwatcher
military veteran, veteran teacher, father, grandpa
11:04 PM on 11/25/2012
Since it is fairly commonly believed now that birds descended from dinosaurs, perhaps the birds got their lightweight bones from their ancestors, that also were lighter than earlier thought.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
12:41 PM on 11/26/2012
Descended from dinosaurs...true....but not from **ALL**dinosaurs. From Theropoda, and not from, say, Herrerasauridae.

Okay, so I cheated....looked up the names on google. But I was reading Roy Chapman Andrews when I was ten. And that was when his discoveries in China were still earth-shaking (esp.: dinosaur eggs).
photo
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
missouriwatcher
military veteran, veteran teacher, father, grandpa
02:44 PM on 11/26/2012
You scared me at first . . . then I saw that you looked up the names and didn't have them memorized.  And you are correct, of course.
04:28 PM on 11/26/2012
You are on the right track. Both Sauropods and Theropods had "pneumatic" bones - full of air sacs like birds have. The long neck of a sauropod would have been much heavier if it had bones like a mammal. Still much to learn about dinosaurs. Amazing and interesting creatures.
photo
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
missouriwatcher
military veteran, veteran teacher, father, grandpa
05:32 PM on 11/26/2012
They are indeed amazing, and new information about them is constantly coming to light.  Thank you for your comment . . . fanned and faved.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Alan Holyoak
I can't do everything, but I can do something
04:26 PM on 11/27/2012
Makes sense, since a hollow tube is actually stronger than a solid rod of the same diameter...of course, when enough stress is placed on the tube the failure can be epic.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
Marcusarilius
Marooned Star Traveler
10:48 PM on 11/25/2012
What colour were they? We gots to know!
photo
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
missouriwatcher
military veteran, veteran teacher, father, grandpa
11:05 PM on 11/25/2012
We needs a time machine so we could go back and see for ourselves.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
12:43 PM on 11/26/2012
No, actually there are hints in the fossils. Chemicals which appear in existing animals that produce color have been discovered in the fossils.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
SidTheScienceKid
Science!
04:56 AM on 11/26/2012
Early racist?
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
Marcusarilius
Marooned Star Traveler
08:31 AM on 11/26/2012
LOL!!  I like that one!!  ; )
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
VinZenTexaN
God welcomes his victims
10:36 PM on 11/25/2012
The bible also never mentions cats, not once, not in any book of the

Old or New Testament. That's why I don't believe in cats.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
JPETERB
10:49 PM on 11/25/2012
The Torah and Talmud mention lions quite a bit, and lions are cats.
But domesticated tent-cats, maybe not.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
VinZenTexaN
God welcomes his victims
10:51 PM on 11/25/2012
Yes the Torah and Talmud are NOT gods book, Hello! 
photo
1regularguy
Started outgrowing conservatism after age 40
10:32 PM on 11/25/2012
Some fundamentalists believe that humans and dinosaurs coexisted a mere 6000 years ago or so. All one needs to do is take a look at the US House of Representatives to realize that dinosaurs are still walking around today, so 6000 years ago is no big deal.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
SidTheScienceKid
Science!
04:57 AM on 11/26/2012
But they do not believe in themselves!
07:30 PM on 11/25/2012
Wait! Does this mean less fossil fuels?
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Anders Juul
A frickin dane messing with american news.
02:08 AM on 11/26/2012
If anything, it would mean more animals contributed to the amount of fossil fuels.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Robert Drdul
07:46 AM on 11/26/2012
No it just means that cloning pterodactyls is not a great idea to replace chicken wings.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
shivabeach
06:57 PM on 11/25/2012
It would certainly make sense that these critters were not ponderous old farts just waiting for predators to snatch them. Speed and agility would have to be a defense
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
Dolphinfan65
The Revolution is happening NOW!!
05:18 PM on 11/25/2012
The weights will never be exact. so whats the big deal any way. I mean I understand wanting to be as close to right as possible, but until we actually re-create a dinosaur , we will never know.plus as most of you know if something is curved and connects to something else (in nature) it's usually to support weight, not for looks, even bones!!. That is my two cents worth to this debate!!!
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
gutenmorgen
a.k.a. crowsnest
04:39 PM on 11/25/2012
No surprise here. Evolution would have favored the less massive beasts.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
05:55 PM on 11/25/2012
Is that true? Presumably there must be SOME survival advantage to large size? If for no other reason, the fact that a large animal is less likely to be preyed upon must confer some advantage surely?
06:08 PM on 11/25/2012
In the short term size is a definite advantage but when the lean times come the small are much more likely to survive. That is why mass extinctions are always worse for the dominant species.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
onionboy
Blessed are the Cheese Makers
01:57 AM on 11/26/2012
There's some, particularly in certain environments, but the higher up you are on the food chain, the more vulnerable you are to any problem that affects any populations along your food chain, and the bigger you are the more you have to eat, and thus are even more vulnerable. It's a double-edged sword...then again, so are most niches.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
humphry
The Voynich Manuscripts.
06:26 PM on 11/25/2012
They may already have been evolving into birds...
photo
Kasado
en jolt of terminus
04:12 PM on 11/25/2012
But due to an increased rotational spin and a more fluid , viscous earth: Was the earth's gravity the same as it is today ?
And how could it be proven or disproved ?
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
gutenmorgen
a.k.a. crowsnest
04:41 PM on 11/25/2012
Because of conservation of momentum in the Earth-Moon system the rate of rotation of Earth has indeed slowed down. The effect would have been the largest at the equator. I am unaware that this slowdown had a substantial effect on gravity.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
05:56 PM on 11/25/2012
I understood that gravity was solely a function of the mass of the earth and had nothing to do with it's rotation or orbit.
photo
SonOfUgh
Your micro-bio is empty
01:03 AM on 11/26/2012
You understand correctly, at least at a Newtonian level. I would not care to comment about rotation and spin and their effect on gravity once you move into the quantum mechanics area (I never did understand that stuff).
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
NadineColbert
What Scandal? This is a normal day at Faux News!
12:39 PM on 11/25/2012
I am most interested in how long it took these huge animals to reach adulthood and what was their life span?
They must have spent most of their waking time eating to grow and maintain their large mass!
The fact that these creatures existed is fascinating.
I love the Earth and all it's treasures, past and present.
But we humans are taking it all for granted.
By the way, there is no god involved in any of it.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
02:59 PM on 11/25/2012
I would suggest that depends on one's concept of "God"...