/sci/ - Science & Math

>>>/r9k/

>>4727034 How well would humanity take care of the situation?

Fighter jets

>>4727034 Who would suffer the most casualties?

The dinosaurs

/thread

you mean birds, op?
they're already everywhere.
humans are fine.

>>4727034
>How well would humanity take care of the situation?
Very well.
>Who would suffer the most casualties?
Dinosaurs.

>>4727034
it'd hit the news straight away that dinosaurs are suddenly everywhere.
every countries military would start fucking them up in their own countries, and then eventually helping other countries as well.

>Who would suffer the most casualties?
countries without a standing army or with no government would be most at risk.

sucks to be in somalia, they'd be fucked up for several days until some other country eventually turns up to clear them all out.

>>4727048
this

we would just have a "dinosaur steak" fad for a while

>>4727034
Tyrannosaurus- 6.8 tons
M1 Abrams- 60 tons

You do the math.

>>4727054
"zoology student" that doesn't know that birds are dinosaurs?

>>4727037
what if the dinosaurs ARE fighter jets?

Unless they're velociraptors, we would have new dinasaur kebabs.

>>4727054
>implying dinosaurs would be hellbent on killing humans

they'd just be stupid animals for us to hunt and breed, like every other animal. No need of an army to kill food.

That would be awesome. Murica would wipe out all of the dinasours in our country within a week. Then we help out our Euro bros. Then our Asian bros. By the time we got to africa al the people would be gone and it would just be left alone as a Jurassic park wildlife preserve.

Dinosaurs were probly dumb herbivores.

>>4727062
*descended from,
actually
we dont class modern birds as dinosaurs
and im pretty sure OP speciically meant 2 story tall T-rexes and shit walking about and eating people.

>>4727080
we certainly do classify modern birds as dinosaurs, miss moron.

do you even clade?

>>4727080
OP never said "super powerful fantasy dinosaurs", he just said "dinosaurs". You know, the kind that would likely have no interest in eating humans and have absolutely no chance at surviving rednecks with rifles.

>>4727076
it wouldnt take a week
a couple of days, tops
people would really get on this shit pretty hard.
the army wouldnt even sleep until they were all cleared out. the more time you procrastinate and fuck about, the more people would die

plus at least in america, people have their own guns, so everybody would be joining in who could.

>>4727093
velociraptors and shit like that actually are dangerous. they'd kill all the dangerous ones at least

>>4727088
huh, i guess so

"Paleontologists regard birds as the only clade of dinosaurs to have survived the Cretaceous–Paleogene extinction event 65.5 Ma ago."

>Let's say there was a mass outbreak of dinosaurs all over the world for whatever reason (and yes, they've adapted to whatever climate they're in). How well would humanity take care of the situation? Who would suffer the most casualties?

this is what /sci/ has become

>>4727080
That's a good example of the observational bias caused by media. Since most people only find the huge or savage saurs interesting, documentaries and films are only made about the big and nasty ones.

And that leads to people thinking that all dinosaurs must have been either huge brutes or incredible killing machines.

Almost no one realizes how much more there were smaller dinosaurs, just like today there are logarithmically more small animals than big ones.

If you just mean T-rex's and other large dinosaurs, the military would wipe them out no problem, given that they're such big targets.

If you mean all the dinosaurs from a certain time period, then that would be a bigger problem. We're not just talking about t-rexes, but also pteradactyls, velociraptors, stegosaurus, just to name a few. Exterminating the smaller dinosaurs would be a problem, and animal rights activists would start protesting to protect the less hostile dinosaurs and let them coexist with us

>>4727099
I'm a paleontologist kiddo. I have my zoology degree in hand, as well as one for geology.

also Velociraptor was too small to matter.

>>4727122
they wouldnt kill everything just for the sake of being a dinosaur, just the dangerous ones.

>>4727129
too small to matter? according to jurrasic park they travel in packs, and according to your pic they're at least the size of a large dog, and dogs can still kill people.

also, why 2 degrees?

>>4727141
size of a small dog perhaps, but very lightly built. About 33 lbs max. They likely would run from people.

the pack thing is a loose interpretation of Deinonychus.

two degrees because when I was in school there was no paleontology program being offered.

I'm pretty old.

>>4727141
>according to jurrasic park they travel in packs
confirmed for troll/ scottish basement dweller with multiple personalities

>>4727141
>>4727141
>according to jurassic park
fuck off, EK

>>4727147
>paleontology

so what do you actually do all day?

>>4727141
Why are you here?

You are banned.

>>4727151
>>4727153
lol, i knew people would complain about that.
i only know dinosaurs from games and films, i havent actually studied the history of them.

>according to jurrasic park

m(

>>4727147
Even 33lb dogs have been known to kill people, especially if they work in packs and have six-inch claws.

>>4727153
>>4727151
Archaeologists believe the raptors were pack-hunters, either in pairs or in family groups.

Dismissing data just because of the stated source? Say you people aren't that shallow?

>>4727163
And so it's confirmed you do not know shit about the topic of this thread.

Get out.

>>4727141
>according to jurrasic park
SCIENCE

>>4727170
at least im being honest, im pretty sure most of the people ITT wont have studied dinosaurs either, except mr paleontologist up there

>>4727164
being a pack hunter is still inferior to having firearms

and using a movie which portrais velociraptors as intelligent and actively evil as source is retarded

>>4727156
I do whatever I want, I'm wealthy and quite retired.

sometimes I do this:
>>>/an/1204179

mostly I read paleontology and wait for the digging season to get rolling.

>>4727181
Yeah, well it's a science board for that reason. You are supposed to contribute what you know, or ask questions. Not shitpost "HURR DURR I WATCHED JURASSIC PARK GUIAZ LOOK AT ME XDDD"

Go fuck yourself. According to >>4724217 you are permabanned anyway.

>>4727164
>Dismissing data just because of the stated source?
you're kidding me right, it doesn't matter if it's right or wrong. A movie is not even close to a credible source.

I think humanity would first try to control the carnivores since they have that predatory instinct and will most like attack first if they see a human. We'd try to make habitats for the herbivores. All in all the ones that will be in danger would be people without guns and scientists trying to study up close.

That is what I would like to believe, but most dinos were giants and unless they have the same mentality of an elephant (you can trap an elephant with flimsy wooden gates) and think they cannot get out... it would be difficult keeping them contained.

>>4727195
No it's not. But it's as foolish to dismiss the information purely based on source, without researching the topic yourself.

EK may have used a questionable source for their behavior, but she still got it mostly right, while people who dismissed her post on the basis of
>JURASSIC PARK LOL SOOOO STUPEEED AMIRITE!!!!
got it mostly wrong.

Bias, bias. Tut tut. Not very scientific.

>>4727221
Stop samefagging and fuck off EK.

>>4727105
>>4727099
>>4727094
>>4727080
>>4727054

Big fucking surprise, the zoology drop out perpetuates the stupid thread about dinosaurs because they apparently have a relation to biology.

>>4727164
33lb dogs don't kill people.
archaeologists don't study dinosaurs
paleontologists don't believe raptors were all pack hunters.
there is no evidence at all that Velociraptor hunted in packs.
There is no unequivocal evidence that any dinosaur did.

>>4727221
Go fuck yourself EK

>>4727243
fuck off bitch
you're too limited for /sci/

>>4727237
i dont samefag

>>4727243
im not a dropout, and dinosaurs arnt part of my course; we only study animals that arnt currently extinct.

>>4727248
>>4727266
>neither post was directed at one i made

so the stupid has woken up and come to my /sci/ yet again.
typical.

>>4727285
I was telling the other anon to fuck off.
the zoology hate on /sci/ is funny, I'm thinking of poasting dinosaur threads here daily to watch the autists have seizures.

>>4727237
>>4727248
>Oh noes, my bullshit has been called, must use next weapon, "SAMEFAG, SAAAAMEEEEFAAAG!!!!"
The attack was ineffective.
Now that you have your assumed quota of EK-obsession filled, could we get back to the topic at hand? It's just that I find that kind of juvenile behavior a bit tiring.

No, all raptors probably weren't pack hunters, but some probably were.

Yes, some were probably warm-blooded and would show up in far infrared.

Yes, armies would make short work of most of them.

No, even armies would find it extremely difficult to kill off all dinosaurs, or even all dinosaurs that are dangerous to humans.

>>4727292
Do it. Zoology threads are still better than homework spam.

>>4727292
Oh yes, please do!!
In best case they will leave /sci/ entirely.

Even if they don't do that, maybe they finally learn to use 4chanX and wordfilter all the interesting threads, thus stopping their own participation in them.

>>4727285
ah, sorry i didnt realise it was intentional. i figured 'bitch' meant it was probably supposed to be directed at me.

>>4727292
ah, sorry i didnt realise it was intentional. i figured 'bitch' meant it was probably supposed to be directed at me.

>>4727308
So you like being called a bitch?

>>4727306
>wordfilter all the interesting threads

Do you mean all the highly academic religion discussions? Or maybe the neutrally and objectively debated comparison of different majors?

>>4727306
Nobody hates Zoology.

We hate EK for shit posting.

I have an MSc in Biology, "Jurassic Park" is not a scientific/accredited source. You may as well reference some work by Plato and call that empirical.

>>4727307
I call men bitches when they act like bitches.

/sci/ is infested with bitches.

>>4727314
because this thread is full of well-reasoned posts citing accredited journals?

I think the large insects and smaller reptiles will be a force hard to deal with, if at all. Specially the insects.

>>4727314
>the royal WE
WE don't hate EK, some people on /sci/ hate her, some love her, some like me don't give two shits about whether a poster is tripnamed EK or not.

But what I hate is people getting sidetracked because of their obsession with EK, especially when these same people seem ignorant enough that they are incapable of filtering her posts out, which would:
a). spare them from EK's posts
b). spare me from having to see their whiny, teenage emo facebook-posts about how much they hate EK

>"Jurassic Park" is not a scientific/accredited source
No, it's not. Like I said three times already. I also said that dismissing data that might be correct is akin to /pol/iticians dismissing Einstein's contributions to science just because he was jewish. And yes, that was hyperbole, but since you've already ignored one of my points three times, I think it's time to be more obvious and shoot the subtletyhorse.

I mainly lurk 4chan, but I had to comment on how entertaining you autistic faggots are please continue.

>>4727313
nope, ive just learned that /sci/ has quite a lot of misogynists, so i'm used to that kinda thing.

>>4727352
i get far more drama than i actually should.
if they care that much, they can use anonymise, or they can filter me
either way, the 'problem' is solved with basically no effort.
whining about me doesnt solve anything, it just makes them look like a twat.

>>4727355
lel

>No, it's not. Like I said three times already. I also said that dismissing data that might be correct is akin to /pol/iticians dismissing Einstein's contributions to science just because he was jewish. And yes, that was hyperbole, but since you've already ignored one of my points three times, I think it's time to be more obvious and shoot the subtletyhorse.

"Proof by analogy is fraud" - Bjarne Stroustrup.

Your analogy is fail. It is not alike. Bringing up Jurassic Park was entirely a troll action. Stop samefagging EK and get the hell off our board.

>>4727141
>too small to matter?

Do you want to see something really small, EK? (if you know what I mean)

>>4727369
>our board

some of us remember when you weren't here tripfag.

it was nicer.
more sciencey.

how 'bout you fuck off?

>>4727369
Cry harder. How about you leave 4chan, if you can't deal with the presence of other posters?

>>4727364
are you a fat land whale or are you attractive?

>>4727369
>Bringing up Jurassic Park was entirely a troll action.
wasnt meant to be, i presume the film makers want an aspect of realism, and they actually research their shit, and try to make the dinosaurs look and act how they probably would have done, based of fossil evidence etc.

>>4727364
>moar drama
I know, I've been on /sci/ since the beginning. I fondly remember the few times when the people that had grown obsessed with you either left or got permabanned.

Thinking back to it, the people who obsessed over you were actually a rather benign phenomenon compared to the current bout of facebook-vitriol.

>>4727369
>samefagging
I would like to direct you to the first paragraph of my post here >>4727296

>Your analogy is fail.
I would also like to point you to the last sentence in py post here >>4727352

>>4727378
He's sure better than EK. He's one of the rational tripfags here.

Fuck off.

EK also claims this is "her board"

>>4727367
Fuck off Sagan

>>4727364
It's irrelevant.

You are banned, get the fuck out.

Too bad the only rational mod that doesn't white knight you like invisibro comes on at UK time.

>>4727394
>implying Sagan is the only one using lel

>>4727380
EK is a Scottish neckbard

>>4727380
im not fat, im fairly skinny. whether im attractive or not doesnt really bother me, apparently im above average, but TBH i dont reli care.
no1 chooses how they look, what i do and what i think ARE choices, and are more important

>>4727390
you're correct.
most of these nerds would point out that several respected paleontologists consulted on the making of those films- or at least they would have if you hadn't said it first.

JP gave a decent depiction of Deinonychus and called it Velociraptor.

>>4727406
>choices

>implying free will

lel

>>4727391
>I know, I've been on /sci/ since the beginning.
I doubt that. I've been here since the dawn of the textboard, EK shits up almost every thread with 200+ reply drivel. She doesn't know shit about science or math (confirmed for not knowing what series convergence is), and regularly participates in math/science troll threads.

She is the cancer that is killing /sci/. The people who obsess over her contribute even more to such.

>>4727390
I think someone in the group got mixed up with Deinonychus and Velociraptor at some point, then told others that V.Raptors are three meters long and before anyone realized the mistake, the species and the size were already locked in.

Considering the superficial similarity, it's an easy mistake to make.

>>4727409
i thought velociraptor was the actual name,
its not?

Stop being mean to EK :3c

>>4727417
IIRC Spielberg said he swapped them on purpose. He just didn't change the name to keep the screenplay closer to the books in that regard.

>>4727406
if you're Scottish i doubt you are above average, no offense to the scotts. What significant life event led you to be interested science? Were you ostracized in school? Or did you just have a natural curiousity?

>>4727433
Fuck off EK sympathizer.

>>4727436
Do you want to fuck me?

>>4727420
the animal in the movie is too large to be Velociraptor.

it's also too short and broad in the snout and skull.

they called it Velociraptor, but it isn't modeled after Velociraptor.

>>4727423
>teacup shows up

lel

>>4727446
FUCK OFF SAGAN

>>4727433
im not actually scottish, thats just a lie made up by, i think 7/7/11-fags, altho that doesn't really fit with the rest of their shit, so im not actually sure. (rose isnt scottish either)
i tend to just ignore them either way.

>What significant life event led you to be interested science?
dunno, ive just always been fascinated by how things work, and i'm always asking questions, and i like to know the truth.

>Were you ostracized in school?
nope

>Or did you just have a natural curiousity?
yeh, i think so.

>>4727449
Hahaha, no.

>>4727446
actually thats just me samefagging with my teacup account, so it looks like i have more support =p

>>4727454
>the real sagan shows up

lel

>>4727454
Nobody uses that stupid reddit shit but you.

LOL GUYS XDDD LOL SO RANDUM XDXDXDXDXDXD MEGUSTA.JPG HOW ABOUT THOSE TROLL PHYSICS COMICS GUYS?

>>4727458
It is. Now fuck off you multiple personality bitch.

>>4727465
>>4727467
U mad?

I have no idea what's going on

>>4727458
It's funny because I try to filter your shitposts but it's impossible with those fucking image macros you have.

Whelp, the lot of you turned a semi-decent and different thread into a shit war. I'm out. Have fun bitching over mundane things.

>>4727479

>>4727483
Can't wait until the inane trolling garbage mod comes on and bans your shit.

>>4727479
WTF? Are you too stupid to use a filter?

>>4727490
I anonymize her posts.

>>4727483
Get out from this.