/sci/ - Science & Math

What's there to talk about? God created everything in 7 days. Seems pretty straightforward

>>7226590
6. He was resting the last day.
knowyourmemevirus.scr

>>7226590

>>7226570
>tfw not the mama

>>7226570
do we know how dinos had sex? are there any fossils where two dinos were in the middle of having sex?

>>7226643
well we found their eggs so we know that they DID have sex. you mean the way in which they mated, right? iirc there are no fossils of dinos "caught in the act", or really any animal. but we can assume that their sex organs were similar to those of birds and/or reptiles. since birds have varied sex organs (some have penises, others have simply a cloaca), its possible that different dinosaur taxa exhibited different genitalia.

Are dinosaurs reptiles?

>>7226570
Is there any viable dinosaur DNA preserved in amber?

>>7226680
Are dinosaurs more related to reptiles or birds?

I would just like to take this small moment to remind you all that the One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church has had no problem with evolution from the day Darwin published his book, and continues to pump cleric scientists out of her seminaries who actively argue against creationism and for chemical evolution, micro evolution and macro evolution.

That is all

Continue on

Anomia genre is the mark for the limit between the Cenamanian and the turonian in Colombia :) Villamil 1996

>>7226680
>>7226709
dinosaurs are reptiles in the sense that they are members of the group Sauropsida, and since birds are descended from dinosaurs technically dinosaurs are still around. However their closest extant reptilian relatives are crocodiles, which are similar to dinosaurs in many regards and thus can tell us a lot about what dinos might have been like.

>>7226720
*Cenomanian

>>7226705
No. A Tyrannosaurus bone was discovered which contained intact soft tissue (collagen, protein) and blood vessels which showed similarities with those of ostriches. However any DNA found from dinosaur bones would be so fragmentary as to be useless. It wouldn't be found in amber though, since it would be fragmentary as is and also mixed with bug dna (the Jurassic Park idea is that mosquitos sucking dino blood would get trapped in amber and therefore preserve the DNA)

>>7227010
fyi: http://www.ucmp.berkeley.edu/diapsids/buzz/popular.html
>>7226705

Were the infant T Rexes four legged and feathered?

>>7227144
dont know where youre getting the four legged part from but ill look into it. they almost certainly were feathered. whether the adults were is a better question.

>>7227151
I watched some document once about them, in which they said the "hands" are so retarded because they didn't grow the same rate as the dinosaur they were attached to. Then they showed fossils of them as infants and they were the same size as the back legs. Basing their proposition on these facts, they claimed the babies walked on all four until the back legs had grown strong enough and too big for the front legs to reach the ground.

>>7227161
tell me the title of the film so i can look it up. i haven't been actively keeping up to date with this kind of stuff for a while so i'm out of the loop

>>7227163
Now that's tricky. It was over five years ago and just one of those weekly science documentaries whose actual names made no difference. "Did you watch the documentary this week?" "Yeah. What was its name?" "No idea."

I'll see if I can find something though.

>>7227176
Yea. Let me know who some of the talking heads were in it too.

>>7227186
I found the name of Jack Horner mentioned in the description of a documentary about how the infant dinosaurs looked different to their parents. Not sure if this is the one but atleast it's related to the thread: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7GrqB09hL5k

>>7227219
Nah, wasn't this one. But certainly there seems to be metamorphosis when they grow up.

How do paleonthologists find the digsites? Do they just guess and end up getting to the bones by trial and error, or do they have the same sixth sense regarding rocks as geologists when they choose the place to dig?

>>7227255
You go where fossils have been found before. Remember that fossils only occur in sedimentary rocks so no dinosaurs in Hawaii.

>>7226570
How long til we use the soft tissues found in T-rexes to recreate them ala Jurassic park?

Since I saw this thread and I barely new to /sci/. Is this a good place to discuss History? Since History doesn't have it's own board.

>>7228281
Never

>>7228296
No. Go talk about history on /pol or /lit. Unless you want to talk about the history of science.

Is there ANY way that dino DNA could be preserved?

>>7228912
Nope. Even if it was it would be so fragmentary as to be useless. See the link in this post
>>7227012

Anyone remember these magazines?

>>7226714
And yet they claim condoms spread hiv.

>>7229306
Shit nigger... I have a feeling I still have a folder with all of those at my parents house from when I was a kid. I loved those 3D tyrannosaurus glasses.

Dinosaurs.
Wow, they are big.
Why arent there giant human skeletons?

>>7226570
not my thought but

mythological dragons could have and probably did originate as people finding dinosaur bones and not knowing what they are

>>7229306
>cries.jpg

Thank you anon, that is my childhood.

Glad to see it wasn't just an Italian magazine.

Definitively love that.

>>7229635
not originally my thought*

>>7226570
does the picture depict well their breeding ?

>>7229635
yup, there is historical evidence which suggests this
>>7229627
because giant humans never existed

>>7226570
So, feathers?

>>7229838
What about them

Ok guys, I only know the pop dinosaurs from jurassic park.
are there others more unknown dinosaurs?
how bout non dinosaurs like trilobytes.


>>7228296
/lit/ has a history general and /pol/ also.
even /int/ talk about history sometimes.

>>7230094
>are there others more unknown dinosaurs?

Wikipedia says there are about 1000 separate identified species of dinosaur so far discovered. Presumably there were many, many more than that, since all we have to go on is fossils, and fossilization is very rare.

>how bout non dinosaurs like trilobytes.

Trilobites have nothing to do with dinosaurs. They were extinct 20 million years before dinosaurs showed up.

>>7229338
Completely unrelated, Mr. Neckbeard. Stay on point or get you fedora outta here.

>>7226570
I am autistic for liking dinosaurs?

>>7231468
Go pester the curator of your local science museum. I'm sure he or she will help you hone your 'tism.

>>7228296
>>7230094
Also /k/ for your war-related history, which is a lot of it.

>>7226647
>some have penises, others have simply a cloaca
Don't all male birds have a penis? If not, how to they get the semen into the female's cloaca?

>>7226680
Well the term "reptile" is a bit fuzzy, because traditionally species such as Dimetredon were considered reptiles, but now we know they are closer relatives to modern mammals than to modern "reptiles" like lizards.

But apart from those ancient "mammal-like reptiles" the animals we usually consider reptiles are in the clade Diapsida. Dinosaurs are within the Diapsida clade, so you can call them reptiles if you want.

>>7229635
>>7229801
It's been hypothesized that "dragon bones" mentioned in historical Chinese medicine texts may have been dinosaur bones. Since China has been opened up to foreign archeologists it's been found to be rich with dinosaur remains.

>>7232395
Don't forget anapsida. Turtles may or may not be the last surviving anapsids. Molecular evidence points to them being diapsids but the fossil evidence is lacking, and morphology obviously suggests and anapsid origin for testudines.

>>7232387
Nope, only some birds do (such as waterfowl). Others just transfer sperm via a "cloacal kiss" which is exactly what it sounds like. Watch some house sparrows mate if you can.

>>7232786
Huh, I had no idea. Pretty interesting.

>>7232781
Oh yeah, I forgot they're often classified as a separate group. I often see them as a sister clade to diapsids or nestled inside diapsids so I put them together in my head.

How on earth was a sauropod able to lay their eggs? I remember in Walking With Dinosaurs (Fuckin' A grade documentary) that the scene where they showed the diplodocus laying her eggs through an intestinal tube turned out to be the programmers making it up because they couldn't figure out the logistics behind such a huge animal being able to get down close enough for it's eggs to be laid without cracking.

Has it been figured out yet? Did the sauropods cover their eggs in poop before laying them so they were cushioned or something?

>>7229306
what do you mean 'remember', anon?

>>7233673
Yes, they are closer to diapsida than synaspida iirc

>>7234250
squatting, or the eggs could just survive the drop. back in the day the belief that the sauropods gave birth to live young was thrown around but it's not likely thats the case (its been said archosaurs cannot be viviparous for various reasons, but that hasnt stopped people from proposing viviparity for various archosaur taxa)

>>7232401
in fact, the Chinese "dragon bone" trade has been a huge problem for paleontology. you'll find a nice Tarbosaurus specimen weathering out in the desert, and the whole thing might be in good condition except for the head, which has been smashed with sledgehammers by looters harvesting "dragon teeth".

>>7234616
yup, another example of superstition ruining science. i recall a story of some young-earth creationists finding a very well preserved dinosaur skeleton and just botching the whole thing because they had no idea what they were doing. what a shame

>>7234250
I suppose we'll never know the structure of the eggs anyway - is it not quite possible that the structure of the egg was strong enough to survive a drop?
Say, a different stronger compound than the calcium carbonate that make up chicken eggs. Or perhaps a different, stronger protein in the shell. Or simply a thicker shell?

>>7229338
Friendly reminder that places with more condoms have more aids in Africa

$\frac{1}{2}$

>>7234650
Actually we know plenty about the structure of dinosaur eggs. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dinosaur_egg
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Egg_fossil

>>7234654
>>7234658
quit making off topic posts please

>>7234662
I was just seeing 4 chan supported latex, people are always posting math notations on here and I was wondering how.

>>7234675
go to your little mathfag threads, we have enough numerological nonsense on this board

>>7234681
yh ur right numbers r stupid lol sko0l sucks

>>7234686
damn right

>>7234695
Just me and you here now though buddy, you should just appreciate the bump

>>7226590
>science board
>God

this surely isn't bait

>>7234659
I just scan read those and while it reveals a lot, a great deal remains unanswered.
I'm ignorant of the numbers but I doubt there are such a significant number of dinosaur eggs found that we can afford to use these invasive methods on sauropod eggs.
In terms of protein, it claims only the amino acid profile can be deduced and there is a great risk of contamination in fossilization, and then after it has been uncovered and exposed. I also suspect just boiling down all the egg structures to the label 'dino eggs' is grossly simplifying what could be a multi-faceted set of structures.

In fact the lens section brings up another point - what shape of egg would be best for surviving an impact?

>>7234706
>knowingly and willfully taking b8
You're the cancer killing 4chan

>>7234719
http://dml.cmnh.org/ thats the dinosaur mailing list. The people there are very helpful, you can ask them your question. send it in and let me know what happens

>>7234706
Shh.... don't take or even acknowledge the bait...

It feeds the baiter

bunp

Any rule 42?

Wanna get sum of de lewd dinos hehe

>>7226590
Don't worry, anon. I'm smart enough to see you were just joking.

>>7235657
Has to be SFW (no genitals) and reasonably scientifically accurate.

Evolution is false

>>7234770
Wow, that's a great resource, thanks

>>7236434
Yep, just shoot one of the peoples an email and you can expect a good answer. Let us know what they say.

bunp

Bump