Jurassic Park 4 [Jurassic World] (no spoilers)

[amargasaurus cazaui]

I am not so much surprised at the suggestion of using birds to bridge the gap with Pterosaurs via DNA as more to the point the idea of using DNA from any animal perhaps 80-100 million years more derived in evolution to bridge gaps for an animal that is so much more basal. The implications for how that would play out are most interesting.....or if it would work at all.

[Gwangi]

Not true. While pterosaurs are not dinosaurs they do belong to a group that includes them but excludes crocodilians. This group is called Ornithodira and literally is defined as "all animals, living or extinct, which are more closely related to birds than to crocodiles." Therefore, the closest living relatives of the pterosaurs are birds.

Argh, how dare you correct someone b-4 I do (Just kidding)!

Ok ok! One correction was enough!

Why do birds get to be used in the definition? Why not: all animals more closely related to dinosaurs, than to crocodiles?

In part because birds are still living and evolving. They serve as a bookend for the group. If it is related to birds than it is a given that it is related to dinosaurs.

[E.D.G.E. (PainterRex)]

I am not so much surprised at the suggestion of using birds to bridge the gap with Pterosaurs via DNA as more to the point the idea of using DNA from any animal perhaps 80-100 million years more derived in evolution to bridge gaps for an animal that is so much more basal. The implications for how that would play out are most interesting.....or if it would work at all.

So... are you saying that when ingen used more advanced frog DNA from the present in the much more primitive and completely unrelated Dinosaurs and Pterosaurs, the abnormalities are normal for such genetic anomalies. And that maybe there should have been more mutations within the saurian species recreated? Because if so than that would be totally awesome! 

[amargasaurus cazaui]

Well that plot twist did allow the dinosaurs to lay eggs and reproduce, but imagine some of the other possibilities even with frog DNA. Amphibious dinosaurs perhaps....?

[CityRaptor]

For the Chaos Effect toyline, Frog DNA gave the Compstegnathus a long tongue...

I also would not consider Dinosaurs more primitive than frogs.

[stargatedalek]

IIRC the bright colours in CE were also due to frog DNA

[CityRaptor]

Actually, both Raptor Alpha and the Omega T-Rex [sic] are stated to be pure breed.

[Roselaar]

Principal photography is done!:



That was fast.

[Ultimatedinoking]

Not true. While pterosaurs are not dinosaurs they do belong to a group that includes them but excludes crocodilians. This group is called Ornithodira and literally is defined as "all animals, living or extinct, which are more closely related to birds than to crocodiles." Therefore, the closest living relatives of the pterosaurs are birds.

Argh, how dare you correct someone b-4 I do (Just kidding)!

Ok ok! One correction was enough!

Why do birds get to be used in the definition? Why not: all animals more closely related to dinosaurs, than to crocodiles?

In part because birds are still living and evolving. They serve as a bookend for the group. If it is related to birds than it is a given that it is related to dinosaurs.

Be honest, birds are nothing more than glorified dinosaurs.

[Gwangi]

Not true. While pterosaurs are not dinosaurs they do belong to a group that includes them but excludes crocodilians. This group is called Ornithodira and literally is defined as "all animals, living or extinct, which are more closely related to birds than to crocodiles." Therefore, the closest living relatives of the pterosaurs are birds.

Argh, how dare you correct someone b-4 I do (Just kidding)!

Ok ok! One correction was enough!

Why do birds get to be used in the definition? Why not: all animals more closely related to dinosaurs, than to crocodiles?

In part because birds are still living and evolving. They serve as a bookend for the group. If it is related to birds than it is a given that it is related to dinosaurs.

Be honest, birds are nothing more than glorified dinosaurs.

It's true, but they are the most recently evolved and unlike the other dinosaurs they're still evolving so that is why they're used in the definition.

[stargatedalek]

Be honest, birds are nothing more than glorified dinosaurs.

which only further opposes your initial point

[Ultimatedinoking]

Not true. While pterosaurs are not dinosaurs they do belong to a group that includes them but excludes crocodilians. This group is called Ornithodira and literally is defined as "all animals, living or extinct, which are more closely related to birds than to crocodiles." Therefore, the closest living relatives of the pterosaurs are birds.

Argh, how dare you correct someone b-4 I do (Just kidding)!

Ok ok! One correction was enough!

Why do birds get to be used in the definition? Why not: all animals more closely related to dinosaurs, than to crocodiles?

In part because birds are still living and evolving. They serve as a bookend for the group. If it is related to birds than it is a given that it is related to dinosaurs.

Be honest, birds are nothing more than glorified dinosaurs.

It's true, but they are the most recently evolved and unlike the other dinosaurs they're still evolving so that is why they're used in the definition.

Are you sure? How do you know glorified dinosaur evolution is still ongoing? 

[CityRaptor]

Because as long things are alive, they will evolve. Some slow, some fast. Even the Nautilus is evolving.

[Ultimatedinoking]

Because as long things are alive, they will evolve. Some slow, some fast. Even the Nautilus is evolving.

I was not wanting to start an evolutionary debate, all I ment was that birds get more love than they deserve. While, say, bats, get almost none.

[CityRaptor]

Well, Bats are Mammals while Birds are Dinosaurs. There are also more Birds than Bats and they are more diverse. And they have barely evolved in the last 47 million years.

[Ultimatedinoking]

Well, Bats are Mammals while Birds are Dinosaurs. There are also more Birds than Bats and they are more diverse. And they have barely evolved in the last 47 million years.

Ah, but remember, there are more beetles than glorified dinosaurs (and just about everything else).

I know that, I ment that you see tons of glorified dinosaur related stuff everywhere, but almost no bat stuff. There's been TONS of glorified dinosaur movies, but what? 1-2 bat movies? 

What about spiders? Or sharks? (Or as most people know them, SHAAAARRRRKKK!!!!) or snakes?

[amargasaurus cazaui]

So science question for today...is it true if you weighed all the ants and all the people on earth, the ants would weigh more? If so then I think ants belong in the debate too  !!!!

[Gwangi]

Are you sure? How do you know glorified dinosaur evolution is still ongoing?

Evolution doesn't stop, if it's alive it is evolving. Natural selection is always at work, new gene mutations are constantly being discarded or selected for.

I was not wanting to start an evolutionary debate, all I ment was that birds get more love than they deserve. While, say, bats, get almost none.

It would seem like you have something against birds in general. Bats are fine animals who have their admirers but we all belong to a forum with members who have a strong affinity for dinosaurs. Since birds are dinosaurs those two interests overlap. You could also argue that dinosaurs receive more love than mammals in general around here but this is a place where that would be expected so I'm not sure why it would even be brought up.

Birds are completely worth our admiration. There are over 10,000 species of them (double the number of mammal species). They live on every continent, in every conceivable habitat, diverse in form and complex in behavior. They're colorful, outgoing, abundant and all around us. You step outside on any given day you'll see a bird guaranteed. An entire day spent outside will be filled with them where you may not see even a single mammal species, let alone a bat. They'll eat food at a feeder outside your window or right out of your hand in a city park. They'll nest in houses you put up, in trees outside your yard or even in a building. They sing beautiful complex songs and are often quite colorful and just pleasing to watch. Also, they're dinosaurs. I love birds, not just because they're dinosaurs but because of all the reasons I just listed and more.

[Ultimatedinoking]

So science question for today...is it true if you weighed all the ants and all the people on earth, the ants would weigh more? If so then I think ants belong in the debate too  !!!!

Gasp! Your right!

[CityRaptor]

Oh my...

Besides that what Gwangi just posted: There are tons of movies about other mammals. And most animal toys are mammals as well, with horses and humans being the lead. Atleast looks like that in toystores....