http://news.yahoo.com/gets-heated-twin-sisters-divided-over-occupy-wall-120036018.html
A poor attempt to be the Onion?
QuoteGrowing up, twin sisters Nicole and Jill Carty had a lot in common.
But around the age of 14, Nicole Carty told ABC News today, they started going in different directions — and they never stopped, with Nicole Carty attending Brown University for a degree in sociology and Jill Carty heading to the University of Pennsylvania to pursue degrees in international business and studies.
Now with the Occupy Wall Street movement more than a month old, the recent Ivy League graduates have found themselves on Wall Street but on opposing sides.
Nicole Carty, who works for a television station, spends her free time in Zuccotti Park, Occupy Wall Street's headquarters, organizing general assembly meetings for the demonstrators.
Jill Carty works for a company that assists financial service clients. She said although she agreed with some of the protesters' sentiments, she did not support more government regulations and intervention.
"I feel that's what's gotten us into this mess in the first place," she told ABC News Wednesday. "There are always unintended consequences with government intervention."
She said it was no secret among her family that she and Nicole Carty had different views on Occupy Wall Street and its message.
"I'd be very much more pleased if she [Nicole Carty] would be able to come up with solutions to these problems [voiced by protesters] that use the tools of the country and the world like economics and things that I feel have potential really to change the way that things work and the way people behave," Jill Carty said.
But Nicole Carty said that her sister's politics were completely wrong and off base.
"[Jill Carty] lacks a fundamental understanding of structural oppression that is inexcusable and immature," she said. "She just really trusts capitalism and doesn't recognize that capitalism is kind of responsible for a lot of the injustices we have in the world."
News organizations run this shit all the time. I think it's an attempt to "humanize" what's happening.
Yuck, they're non-white. :x
Structural oppression? Given the current state of the infrastructure in the USA it will collapse on its own in a few years unless the concrete is replaced.
Quote from: PDH on October 28, 2011, 09:47:57 AM
Structural oppression? Given the current state of the infrastructure in the USA it will collapse on its own in a few years unless the concrete is replaced.
As long as it's not my tax money paying for your socialist concrete :mad:
I've been hearing that "OMG Infrastructure" yarn for a decade now, so far everything's intact.
Quote from: chipwich on October 28, 2011, 08:16:36 PM
I've been hearing that "OMG Infrastructure" yarn for a decade now, so far everything's intact.
By the time things start falling down, you're far gone.
Ivy-educated people both using the stupid "I feel" statement. Bleh.
Do they think anything? :P
I feel that man has ruled this world as a stumbling demented child-king long enough!
Come on, T Rex got millions of years and we've barely gotten thousands.
Quote from: MadImmortalMan on October 29, 2011, 12:47:46 PM
Ivy-educated people both using the stupid "I feel" statement. Bleh.
Do they think anything? :P
The leftie neither feels nor thinks. She just knows. :)
Quote from: chipwich on October 28, 2011, 08:16:36 PM
I've been hearing that "OMG Infrastructure" yarn for a decade now, so far everything's intact.
Well except for that bridge in Minnesota.
Quote from: Peter Wiggin on October 29, 2011, 01:16:54 PM
Come on, T Rex got millions of years and we've barely gotten thousands.
We've had hundreds of thousands, which is a good run. And Tyrannosaurus never exerted the same power that a human does.
Quote from: Neil on October 29, 2011, 07:51:28 PM
We've had hundreds of thousands, which is a good run. And Tyrannosaurus never exerted the same power that a human does.
I'd imagine they had comparable power to a Stone Age band of hunters. So we're back to mere thousands.
Quote from: Peter Wiggin on October 29, 2011, 09:04:14 PM
Quote from: Neil on October 29, 2011, 07:51:28 PM
We've had hundreds of thousands, which is a good run. And Tyrannosaurus never exerted the same power that a human does.
I'd imagine they had comparable power to a Stone Age band of hunters. So we're back to mere thousands.
Not even close. Stone age hunters manipulated their environment to a degree that the T-rex could never have dreamed of. Hell, pre-Sapiens members of the Homo genus were far superior to the Tyrannosaurus. Tyrannosaurus didn't use fire.
I think you're giving intelligence too much weight. Sure, hominids have always been more clever and so able to manipulate their environment, but we weren't as securely ensconced at the top of the food chain.
T. rex didn't hunt in packs using spears and communication, either.
Also, there are major advantages to not weighing as much as a t. rex. Wasn't there a major risk of death from what we would consider minor falls? Iirc, elephants are pretty vulnerable to that sort of thing.
Quote from: Peter Wiggin on October 29, 2011, 09:37:43 PM
I think you're giving intelligence too much weight. Sure, hominids have always been more clever and so able to manipulate their environment, but we weren't as securely ensconced at the top of the food chain.
It's impossible to give tool-using, environment-changing intelligence too much weight. It's the magic bullet.
Besides, Homo has been an apex predator for the last million years and change.
Quote from: Ideologue on October 29, 2011, 09:59:41 PM
T. rex didn't hunt in packs using spears and communication, either.
Also, there are major advantages to not weighing as much as a t. rex. Wasn't there a major risk of death from what we would consider minor falls? Iirc, elephants are pretty vulnerable to that sort of thing.
They might have. They needed something to do with those little arms. Humanity has already set off minor extinction event. I doubt the T. Rex could pull that off, or survive it.
Quote from: Neil on October 29, 2011, 10:00:00 PM
Besides, Homo has been an apex predator for the last million years and change.
In packs. Alone humans are vulnerable. But not so much now that our reach is everywhere and we ruthlessly hunt down other predators that presume to attack one of ours.
Quote from: Peter Wiggin on October 30, 2011, 05:33:33 AM
Quote from: Neil on October 29, 2011, 10:00:00 PM
Besides, Homo has been an apex predator for the last million years and change.
In packs. Alone humans are vulnerable. But not so much now that our reach is everywhere and we ruthlessly hunt down other predators that presume to attack one of ours.
So what? Wolves also hunt in packs. That doesn't make them any less a top predator.
How about bears?
Quote from: Neil on October 30, 2011, 09:27:08 AM
Quote from: Ed Anger on October 30, 2011, 08:47:33 AM
How about bears?
Bears have been tainted by Tim.
Well, all your talk about Homos is probably turning Marty on.
Quote from: Razgovory on October 29, 2011, 02:23:16 PM
Quote from: chipwich on October 28, 2011, 08:16:36 PM
I've been hearing that "OMG Infrastructure" yarn for a decade now, so far everything's intact.
Well except for that bridge in Minnesota.
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.angryduck.com%2Fpictures%2F1004%2Fom-nom-nom-nom-bridge.jpg&hash=e219e4ac4ed4715c8d00eefeca7bf37bd785e930)
Quote from: Peter Wiggin on October 29, 2011, 09:04:14 PM
Quote from: Neil on October 29, 2011, 07:51:28 PM
We've had hundreds of thousands, which is a good run. And Tyrannosaurus never exerted the same power that a human does.
I'd imagine they had comparable power to a Stone Age band of hunters. So we're back to mere thousands.
A stone age band of hunters could surely kill a Tyrannosaurus.
If you transported a few thousands paleolithic H. sapiens to 85 million years ago ala Terra Nova I don't think they'd have to difficult a time spreading all over the world.
I wonder if the increased oxygen would make the humans larger. Also wonder if there were any plants they could domesticate. Domesticating dinosaurs would be tricky, due to the long maturation, large size, and low intelligence.
Quote from: jimmy olsen on October 31, 2011, 01:13:12 AM
A stone age band of hunters could surely kill a Tyrannosaurus.
If you transported a few thousands paleolithic H. sapiens to 85 million years ago ala Terra Nova I don't think they'd have to difficult a time spreading all over the world.
The way the Terra Nova writers have it, 22d century man still has a bit of trouble. :lol:
I doubt dinos were as bullet-resistant as depicted in that show, but versus stone age weapons and nets? I think the hominids would end up dwelling in caves and densely packed forests while the big dinosaurs still dominated the plains.
Dinos wouldn't stand a chance against Homo Sapiens.
Quote from: Peter Wiggin on October 31, 2011, 08:58:49 AM
Quote from: jimmy olsen on October 31, 2011, 01:13:12 AM
A stone age band of hunters could surely kill a Tyrannosaurus.
If you transported a few thousands paleolithic H. sapiens to 85 million years ago ala Terra Nova I don't think they'd have to difficult a time spreading all over the world.
The way the Terra Nova writers have it, 22d century man still has a bit of trouble. :lol:
I doubt dinos were as bullet-resistant as depicted in that show, but versus stone age weapons and nets? I think the hominids would end up dwelling in caves and densely packed forests while the big dinosaurs still dominated the plains.
If men could kill Imperial Mammoths, then they could certainly kill Dinosaurs.
Also, modern urban people are obviously going to do to more poorly in an untouched wilderness than hunter gatherers.
Quote from: Razgovory on October 31, 2011, 08:26:13 AM
I wonder if the increased oxygen would make the humans larger. Also wonder if there were any plants they could domesticate. Domesticating dinosaurs would be tricky, due to the long maturation, large size, and low intelligence.
Chickens are extremely dumb and basically dinosaurs and we domesticated them.
If you think humans need some more advantages send some of the tribes back that first domesticated the dog.
Quote from: Razgovory on October 31, 2011, 08:26:13 AM
I wonder if the increased oxygen would make the humans larger. Also wonder if there were any plants they could domesticate. Domesticating dinosaurs would be tricky, due to the long maturation, large size, and low intelligence.
i thought they had less oxygen back then?
Quote from: HVC on October 31, 2011, 10:57:03 AM
Quote from: Razgovory on October 31, 2011, 08:26:13 AM
I wonder if the increased oxygen would make the humans larger. Also wonder if there were any plants they could domesticate. Domesticating dinosaurs would be tricky, due to the long maturation, large size, and low intelligence.
i thought they had less oxygen back then?
Nope. In the Cretaceous, the atmosphere had 50% more oxygen, and also ~500% more CO2, but not enough to pose a health hazard so far as I know--at least in the short term; long-term exposure to five- or sixfold CO2 levels may manifest some bad effects. Actually, though, I suspect some devices might have to be redesigned to work properly--internal combustion engines specifically. And heightened O2 may mean greater incidence of cancer? I dunno, I'm not a doctor.
Quote from: jimmy olsen on October 31, 2011, 10:40:42 AM
If men could kill Imperial Mammoths, then they could certainly kill Dinosaurs.
ya, but mammoths weren't trying to track us down and eat us either. Humans have been prey for many a large mammal until fairly recently in our species' time frame. Make that predator a few tonnes and spears wouldn't be as effective as you imagine. Could humans kill a T-Rex? sure. Could we as a stone age species over throw them and the other large predators? I don't see it.
Also, T-Rex's did hunt in packs, they think anyway. Juveniles and their parents.
Why would a T. rex try to hunt down and attack humans? It'd be like stalking a rat. Anyway, insofar as they do present a threat and competitor, spears aren't the only option: covered pitfalls may work better. And this is well, because predators have no rights.
Also, and this has nothing to do with anything, they replaced their teeth. Isn't it kind of bullshit that humans don't grow new teeth? It's total bullshit. Intelligent design my ass.
Quote from: Ideologue on October 31, 2011, 11:00:24 AM
Quote from: HVC on October 31, 2011, 10:57:03 AM
Quote from: Razgovory on October 31, 2011, 08:26:13 AM
I wonder if the increased oxygen would make the humans larger. Also wonder if there were any plants they could domesticate. Domesticating dinosaurs would be tricky, due to the long maturation, large size, and low intelligence.
i thought they had less oxygen back then?
Nope. In the Cretaceous, the atmosphere had 50% more oxygen, and also ~500% more CO2, but not enough to pose a health hazard so far as I know--at least in the short term; long-term exposure to five- or sixfold CO2 levels may manifest some bad effects. Actually, though, I suspect some devices might have to be redesigned to work properly--internal combustion engines specifically. And heightened O2 may mean greater incidence of cancer? I dunno, I'm not a doctor.
that's what i meant, as a mixture there was less oxygen. So for each breath you got less oxygen then you do now. As a general rule mammallian lungs sucks. That's why i was confused becasue i thought a theory for tiny mammals was that there just wasn't enough oxygen in the air.
Quote from: Ideologue on October 31, 2011, 11:05:47 AM
Why would a T. rex try to hunt down and attack humans? Do humans stalk rats?
Of course, tyrannosaurs may not have been hunting predators anyhow. Also, and this has nothing to do with anything, they replaced their teeth. Isn't it kind of bullshit that humans don't grow new teeth? It's total bullshit. Intelligent design my ass.
Now, no (unless you're ina third world) in the past? yup. delicasy if you were roman. Predators hunt easy things. We get easy steaks so we leave relatively (compared to steaks :P ) hard to catch mice alone. As a t-rex would you rather hunt one large spiky and hard prey item or several squishy humans throwing sharp sticks (also, throwing spears are relatively new to humans. most were trusting spears until we invented the throwing dart).
Quote from: Ideologue on October 31, 2011, 11:05:47 AM
Why would a T. rex try to hunt down and attack humans? Do humans stalk rats?
Of course, tyrannosaurs may not have been hunting predators anyhow. Also, and this has nothing to do with anything, they replaced their teeth. Isn't it kind of bullshit that humans don't grow new teeth? It's total bullshit. Intelligent design my ass.
Ours last as long as we were meant to live.
Quote from: HVC on October 31, 2011, 11:09:28 AM
Quote from: Ideologue on October 31, 2011, 11:05:47 AM
Why would a T. rex try to hunt down and attack humans? Do humans stalk rats?
Of course, tyrannosaurs may not have been hunting predators anyhow. Also, and this has nothing to do with anything, they replaced their teeth. Isn't it kind of bullshit that humans don't grow new teeth? It's total bullshit. Intelligent design my ass.
Now, no (unless you're ina third world) in the past? yup. delicasy if you were roman. Predators hunt easy things. We get easy steaks so we leave relatively (compared to steaks :P ) hard to catch mice alone. As a t-rex would you rather hunt one large spiky and hard prey item or several squishy humans throwing sharp sticks (also, throwing spears are relatively new to humans. most were trusting spears until we invented the throwing dart).
I bet dinos loved getting fire thust in their faces.
Anyway, H, like I said (but it was in an edit), spears aren't the only option. I'd try pitfalls, tripwires, and other traps before trying to directly assault something so large.
Quote from: Peter Wiggin on October 31, 2011, 11:11:35 AM
Quote from: Ideologue on October 31, 2011, 11:05:47 AM
Why would a T. rex try to hunt down and attack humans? Do humans stalk rats?
Of course, tyrannosaurs may not have been hunting predators anyhow. Also, and this has nothing to do with anything, they replaced their teeth. Isn't it kind of bullshit that humans don't grow new teeth? It's total bullshit. Intelligent design my ass.
Ours last as long as we were meant to live.
Fuck you, Kirk Cameron. I want new teeth.
Quote from: HVC on October 31, 2011, 11:01:30 AM
Quote from: jimmy olsen on October 31, 2011, 10:40:42 AM
If men could kill Imperial Mammoths, then they could certainly kill Dinosaurs.
ya, but mammoths weren't trying to track us down and eat us either. Humans have been prey for many a large mammal until fairly recently in our species' time frame. Make that predator a few tonnes and spears wouldn't be as effective as you imagine. Could humans kill a T-Rex? sure. Could we as a stone age species over throw them and the other large predators? I don't see it.
Also, T-Rex's did hunt in packs, they think anyway. Juveniles and their parents.
I dunno, primitive humans apparently hunted some serious predators to extinction - like the giant short-faced bear. In fact, human predation has been blamed on the disappearance of a number of giant predators throughout the world - all in prehistory.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Short-faced_bear
Check out thge comparative size chart here ...
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2011/02/110203-biggest-bear-largest-giant-short-faced-animals-science/
Turns out those tool-making, fire-using apes are serious bad news for apex predators everywhere ...
On a similar note, I just read a book by a guy named Jim Corbett called
Man-Eaters of Kumaon - apparently this was the guy the Indian gov't called on in the 1910s through 1930s to dispose of tigers that for various reasons (usually an injury) became dedicated person-eaters. Some of them racked up impressive numbers of kills - one tiger ate something like 400 Indians before biting a bullet. But those were the exceptions - allegedly, generally tigers avoid eating people, probably as a result of natural selection (those that found people tasty tended to die).
Anyway, old Jim clearly had the most macho job in the universe - "what do you do?" - "I hunt tigers - but only the man-eating ones" :lol:
Did any of the terror bird-types survive to coexist with humans? Iirc, some of them were functionally utahraptors.
Ya, as a job description that beats most out there :lol:
Also, i'm not saying those transported humans would be wiped out in a week of arriving. They'd probably do very well (ignoring stuff like oxygen levels and disease). Humans are really good at killing stuff. This is made doubly impressive that as a predator we're awkwardly built. We can't see very well, can't smell very well, we're weak and have no claws or effective teeth. We're smart and have amazing endurance. i'm just not on timmy boat that they'd arrive and become new kings of the world. Short faced bears, sabertooth tigers, cave lions and my personal favourite those giant ass wolves are all impressive and all deadly, but tiny in comparrison to dinos.
Quote from: Malthus on October 31, 2011, 11:24:09 AM
Quote from: HVC on October 31, 2011, 11:01:30 AM
Quote from: jimmy olsen on October 31, 2011, 10:40:42 AM
If men could kill Imperial Mammoths, then they could certainly kill Dinosaurs.
ya, but mammoths weren't trying to track us down and eat us either. Humans have been prey for many a large mammal until fairly recently in our species' time frame. Make that predator a few tonnes and spears wouldn't be as effective as you imagine. Could humans kill a T-Rex? sure. Could we as a stone age species over throw them and the other large predators? I don't see it.
Also, T-Rex's did hunt in packs, they think anyway. Juveniles and their parents.
I dunno, primitive humans apparently hunted some serious predators to extinction - like the giant short-faced bear. In fact, human predation has been blamed on the disappearance of a number of giant predators throughout the world - all in prehistory.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Short-faced_bear
Check out thge comparative size chart here ...
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2011/02/110203-biggest-bear-largest-giant-short-faced-animals-science/
Turns out those tool-making, fire-using apes are serious bad news for apex predators everywhere ...
On a similar note, I just read a book by a guy named Jim Corbett called Man-Eaters of Kumaon - apparently this was the guy the Indian gov't called on in the 1910s through 1930s to dispose of tigers that for various reasons (usually an injury) became dedicated person-eaters. Some of them racked up impressive numbers of kills - one tiger ate something like 400 Indians before biting a bullet. But those were the exceptions - allegedly, generally tigers avoid eating people, probably as a result of natural selection (those that found people tasty tended to die).
Anyway, old Jim clearly had the most macho job in the universe - "what do you do?" - "I hunt tigers - but only the man-eating ones" :lol:
I think the decline in most apex predators in the face of humanity is generally thought to be more based on humans out-compteing them for prey, rather than humans hunting them as prey.
I seem to recall reading somewhere that predators make crappy prey - they usually don't have much edible meat on them relative to the amount of energy needed to kill one, at least compared to prey animals.
Quote from: HVC on October 31, 2011, 11:39:35 AM
Ya, as a job description that beats most out there :lol:
Also, i'm not saying those transported humans would be wiped out in a week of arriving. They'd probably do very well (ignoring stuff like oxygen levels and disease). Humans are really good at killing stuff. This is made doubly impressive that as a predator we're awkwardly built. We can't see very well, can't smell very well, we're weak and have no claws or effective teeth. We're smart and have amazing endurance. i'm just not on timmy boat that they'd arrive and become new kings of the world. Short faced bears, sabertooth tigers, cave lions and my personal favourite those giant ass wolves are all impressive and all deadly, but tiny in comparrison to dinos.
I dunno If I'd describe a bear the size of an elephant as "tiny". :lol: It may be smaller than the largest predatory dinos, but it would give the majority a run for their money ...
Quote from: HVC on October 31, 2011, 11:39:35 AM
Ya, as a job description that beats most out there :lol:
Also, i'm not saying those transported humans would be wiped out in a week of arriving. They'd probably do very well (ignoring stuff like oxygen levels and disease). Humans are really good at killing stuff. This is made doubly impressive that as a predator we're awkwardly built. We can't see very well, can't smell very well, we're weak and have no claws or effective teeth. We're smart and have amazing endurance. i'm just not on timmy boat that they'd arrive and become new kings of the world. Short faced bears, sabertooth tigers, cave lions and my personal favourite those giant ass wolves are all impressive and all deadly, but tiny in comparrison to dinos.
One theory about the rise of humans as predators is actually based on our ability to see extremely well compared to other predators, in that we have eyes on top of a tall body, which is ideally suited for hunting in the plains, since it means you can see your prey with minimal exposure yourself.
Quote from: Malthus on October 31, 2011, 11:48:10 AM
Quote from: HVC on October 31, 2011, 11:39:35 AM
Ya, as a job description that beats most out there :lol:
Also, i'm not saying those transported humans would be wiped out in a week of arriving. They'd probably do very well (ignoring stuff like oxygen levels and disease). Humans are really good at killing stuff. This is made doubly impressive that as a predator we're awkwardly built. We can't see very well, can't smell very well, we're weak and have no claws or effective teeth. We're smart and have amazing endurance. i'm just not on timmy boat that they'd arrive and become new kings of the world. Short faced bears, sabertooth tigers, cave lions and my personal favourite those giant ass wolves are all impressive and all deadly, but tiny in comparrison to dinos.
I dunno If I'd describe a bear the size of an elephant as "tiny". :lol: It may be smaller than the largest predatory dinos, but it would give the majority a run for their money ...
i had only looked at the wiki one . didn't look that big (though i'd shit myself if i saw one up close haha)
Quote from: Berkut on October 31, 2011, 11:47:49 AM
I think the decline in most apex predators in the face of humanity is generally thought to be more based on humans out-compteing them for prey, rather than humans hunting them as prey.
I seem to recall reading somewhere that predators make crappy prey - they usually don't have much edible meat on them relative to the amount of energy needed to kill one, at least compared to prey animals.
I think it was a combo - humans on occasion killed predators off, and more commonly killed off their prey.
The primary reason to hunt apex predators, if modern human behaviour is any guide, was not simply as handy food, but to demonstrate prowess, for purposes of magic and ritual, and to eliminate a potential threat.
Humans have always found apex predators awesome - there's a Timmay in every era :D - and what could be a more convincing demonstration of a tribe's power than bringing one down and using its skull in rituals?
There is some evidence this happened - for example, some caves featuring prehistoric cave-paintings also feature bear skulls arranged in a purposeful pattern. Unknown as to whether the skulls were trophies or scavanged, of course.
I would guess that once humans started settling down (whether that be real settlements or just defined ranges) there was considerable pressure to kill off other apex predators simply so that humans could have all the prey to themselves.
Hell, this is kind of the first step towards domestication of herd animals, I would guess. Kill off all the other threats to them...
Quote from: Malthus on October 31, 2011, 11:55:50 AM
Quote from: Berkut on October 31, 2011, 11:47:49 AM
I think the decline in most apex predators in the face of humanity is generally thought to be more based on humans out-compteing them for prey, rather than humans hunting them as prey.
I seem to recall reading somewhere that predators make crappy prey - they usually don't have much edible meat on them relative to the amount of energy needed to kill one, at least compared to prey animals.
I think it was a combo - humans on occasion killed predators off, and more commonly killed off their prey.
The primary reason to hunt apex predators, if modern human behaviour is any guide, was not simply as handy food, but to demonstrate prowess, for purposes of magic and ritual, and to eliminate a potential threat.
Humans have always found apex predators awesome - there's a Timmay in every era :D - and what could be a more convincing demonstration of a tribe's power than bringing one down and using its skull in rituals?
There is some evidence this happened - for example, some caves featuring prehistoric cave-paintings also feature bear skulls arranged in a purposeful pattern. Unknown as to whether the skulls were trophies or scavanged, of course.
That's why we're so great: we're the only species that can consciously devote itself to a campaign of extermination. Fuck you, cave bears!
Human beings also tend to kill predators to get rid of competition.
Quote from: HVC on October 31, 2011, 11:01:30 AM
ya, but mammoths weren't trying to track us down and eat us either. Humans have been prey for many a large mammal until fairly recently in our species' time frame. Make that predator a few tonnes and spears wouldn't be as effective as you imagine. Could humans kill a T-Rex? sure. Could we as a stone age species over throw them and the other large predators? I don't see it.
Also, T-Rex's did hunt in packs, they think anyway. Juveniles and their parents.
That's speculative. I've read a ton of books on dinosaurs, and unless something new has come out in the last few years I don't think that's been proved.
Quote from: HVC on October 31, 2011, 11:06:32 AM
Quote from: Ideologue on October 31, 2011, 11:00:24 AM
Quote from: HVC on October 31, 2011, 10:57:03 AM
Quote from: Razgovory on October 31, 2011, 08:26:13 AM
I wonder if the increased oxygen would make the humans larger. Also wonder if there were any plants they could domesticate. Domesticating dinosaurs would be tricky, due to the long maturation, large size, and low intelligence.
i thought they had less oxygen back then?
Nope. In the Cretaceous, the atmosphere had 50% more oxygen, and also ~500% more CO2, but not enough to pose a health hazard so far as I know--at least in the short term; long-term exposure to five- or sixfold CO2 levels may manifest some bad effects. Actually, though, I suspect some devices might have to be redesigned to work properly--internal combustion engines specifically. And heightened O2 may mean greater incidence of cancer? I dunno, I'm not a doctor.
that's what i meant, as a mixture there was less oxygen. So for each breath you got less oxygen then you do now. As a general rule mammallian lungs sucks. That's why i was confused becasue i thought a theory for tiny mammals was that there just wasn't enough oxygen in the air.
People live fine in the Andes and Himalayas, they can adjust.
Is that why climbers take oxygen up there?
Quote from: jimmy olsen on October 31, 2011, 02:35:23 PM
People live fine in the Andes and Himalayas, they can adjust.
it's not just a matter of thin oxygen. Different oxygen mixes affect the transfer of CO2 and Oxygen in the blood. Also, high altitude people are not the most active bunch. Sure they don't get altitude sickness like others, but low oxygen levels (let alone high CO2 levels) should not be ignored. Humans, even those with a higher blood cell count like sherpas, are ill adapted.
also, how the hell did we get onto the topic of time traveling cavemen.
Quote from: HVC on October 31, 2011, 02:46:40 PM
also, how the hell did we get onto the topic of time traveling cavemen.
Timmay!
Quote from: Razgovory on October 31, 2011, 02:36:43 PM
Is that why climbers take oxygen up there?
Obviously not talking about the peaks of Everest here. :rolleyes:
People have adapted to living on the Tibetan plateau and other places with a lot less oxygen.
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2004/02/0224_040225_evolution.html
A giant Komodo Dragon lived in Australia that was 5-7 meters long. It went mysteriously extinct after the aborigines showed up.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Megalania#Size
Quote from: jimmy olsen on October 31, 2011, 02:54:50 PMA giant Komodo Dragon lived in Australia that was 5-7 meters long. It went mysteriously extinct after the aborigines showed up.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Megalania#Size
I'm pretty sure that Australia is more than 5-7 metres long.
Quote from: jimmy olsen on October 31, 2011, 02:54:50 PM
A giant Komodo Dragon lived in Australia that was 5-7 meters long. It went mysteriously extinct after the aborigines showed up.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Megalania#Size
and the aborinies showed up mysteriously after catastrophic climate change.
Sides, come on tim, comparing a monitor lizard (big though it may be) to dinosaurs. You know more than that.
Quote from: jimmy olsen on October 31, 2011, 02:54:50 PM
Quote from: Razgovory on October 31, 2011, 02:36:43 PM
Is that why climbers take oxygen up there?
Obviously not talking about the peaks of Everest here. :rolleyes:
One of my partners has gone to the base of Everest to help clean up all the oxgen tanks left behind by other climbers. Notice that is at the base camp level that the litter of oygen tanks starts accumulating - not the peaks.
Quote from: Jacob on October 31, 2011, 02:58:04 PM
Quote from: jimmy olsen on October 31, 2011, 02:54:50 PMA giant Komodo Dragon lived in Australia that was 5-7 meters long. It went mysteriously extinct after the aborigines showed up.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Megalania#Size
I'm pretty sure that Australia is more than 5-7 metres long.
It shrunk under the weight of the giant Komodo that lived there.
Quote from: HVC on October 31, 2011, 02:46:40 PM
also, how the hell did we get onto the topic of time traveling cavemen.
Black Widow reference.
Quote from: HVC on October 31, 2011, 02:58:15 PM
Quote from: jimmy olsen on October 31, 2011, 02:54:50 PM
A giant Komodo Dragon lived in Australia that was 5-7 meters long. It went mysteriously extinct after the aborigines showed up.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Megalania#Size
and the aborinies showed up mysteriously after catastrophic climate change.
Sides, come on tim, comparing a monitor lizard (big though it may be) to dinosaurs. You know more than that.
Komodo Dragons kill people today and they barely get to 3 meters long. A Komodo Dragon that was twice as long and far more massive would obviously be quite dangerous to come into contact with.
Quote from: crazy canuck on October 31, 2011, 02:58:43 PM
Quote from: jimmy olsen on October 31, 2011, 02:54:50 PM
Quote from: Razgovory on October 31, 2011, 02:36:43 PM
Is that why climbers take oxygen up there?
Obviously not talking about the peaks of Everest here. :rolleyes:
One of my partners has gone to the base of Everest to help clean up all the oxgen tanks left behind by other climbers. Notice that is at the base camp level that the litter of oygen tanks starts accumulating - not the peaks.
Tibetan plateau is 13,000 ft higher than sea level and has been populated for over 20,000 years.
Re komodo's since my phone won't let me quote:
They're cold blooded. Get em between a few hours of of dawn and after dusk and they're easy kills. You can't use that as a comparison.
Quote from: jimmy olsen on October 31, 2011, 03:47:03 PM
Quote from: crazy canuck on October 31, 2011, 02:58:43 PM
Quote from: jimmy olsen on October 31, 2011, 02:54:50 PM
Quote from: Razgovory on October 31, 2011, 02:36:43 PM
Is that why climbers take oxygen up there?
Obviously not talking about the peaks of Everest here. :rolleyes:
One of my partners has gone to the base of Everest to help clean up all the oxgen tanks left behind by other climbers. Notice that is at the base camp level that the litter of oygen tanks starts accumulating - not the peaks.
Tibetan plateau is 13,000 ft higher than sea level and has been populated for over 20,000 years.
So
Quote from: HVC on October 31, 2011, 02:58:15 PM
Quote from: jimmy olsen on October 31, 2011, 02:54:50 PM
A giant Komodo Dragon lived in Australia that was 5-7 meters long. It went mysteriously extinct after the aborigines showed up.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Megalania#Size
and the aborinies showed up mysteriously after catastrophic climate change.
Sides, come on tim, comparing a monitor lizard (big though it may be) to dinosaurs. You know more than that.
What happened 40,000 years ago?
Quote from: crazy canuck on October 31, 2011, 03:57:03 PM
Quote from: jimmy olsen on October 31, 2011, 03:47:03 PM
Quote from: crazy canuck on October 31, 2011, 02:58:43 PM
Quote from: jimmy olsen on October 31, 2011, 02:54:50 PM
Quote from: Razgovory on October 31, 2011, 02:36:43 PM
Is that why climbers take oxygen up there?
Obviously not talking about the peaks of Everest here. :rolleyes:
One of my partners has gone to the base of Everest to help clean up all the oxgen tanks left behind by other climbers. Notice that is at the base camp level that the litter of oygen tanks starts accumulating - not the peaks.
Tibetan plateau is 13,000 ft higher than sea level and has been populated for over 20,000 years.
So
So people can adapt to less oxygen.
Quote from: jimmy olsen on October 31, 2011, 04:08:51 PM
So people can adapt to less oxygen.
[/quote]
Ok, all species can adapt to changing conditions. At some point the species may adapt to the point it becomes a different species. How does that help your that oxygen tanks are only used in the peaks of the Himalayas?
Quote from: crazy canuck on October 31, 2011, 04:21:55 PM
Quote from: jimmy olsen on October 31, 2011, 04:08:51 PM
So people can adapt to less oxygen.
Ok, all species can adapt to changing conditions. At some point the species may adapt to the point it becomes a different species. How does that help your that oxygen tanks are only used in the peaks of the Himalayas?
I was using the peaks of Everest as a metaphorical example. Don't go all Grumbler on me.
Quote from: jimmy olsen on October 31, 2011, 10:42:20 AM
Chickens are extremely dumb and basically dinosaurs and we domesticated them.
Basically? :glare:
Quote from: Neil on October 31, 2011, 07:11:24 PM
Quote from: jimmy olsen on October 31, 2011, 10:42:20 AM
Chickens are extremely dumb and basically dinosaurs and we domesticated them.
Basically? :glare:
-_- They are 100% dinosaurs
Quote from: Ideologue on October 31, 2011, 11:00:24 AM
Nope. In the Cretaceous, the atmosphere had 50% more oxygen, and also ~500% more CO2, but not enough to pose a health hazard so far as I know--at least in the short term; long-term exposure to five- or sixfold CO2 levels may manifest some bad effects. Actually, though, I suspect some devices might have to be redesigned to work properly--internal combustion engines specifically. And heightened O2 may mean greater incidence of cancer? I dunno, I'm not a doctor.
Which model are you using to support your argument?
Quote from: Neil on October 31, 2011, 07:59:50 PM
Quote from: Ideologue on October 31, 2011, 11:00:24 AM
Nope. In the Cretaceous, the atmosphere had 50% more oxygen, and also ~500% more CO2, but not enough to pose a health hazard so far as I know--at least in the short term; long-term exposure to five- or sixfold CO2 levels may manifest some bad effects. Actually, though, I suspect some devices might have to be redesigned to work properly--internal combustion engines specifically. And heightened O2 may mean greater incidence of cancer? I dunno, I'm not a doctor.
Which model are you using to support your argument?
For CO2 levels, Pearson and Palmer's boron proxy method, which relies on indicators of oceanic pH (and hence dissolved CO2) in plankton shells to estimate CO2 levels in the atmosphere. Admittedly, other methods (such as stomatal index as a proxy for carbon dioxide concentration at ground level, fewer stomae meaning more CO2) produce significantly lower estimates. 2000ppmv+ for boron proxy, as opposed to like 400 or so for stomae concentration, i.e. present-day concentrations.
The O2 one I may have pulled out of my ass, but it's what Wikipedia says. I know less about how they arrive at that, perhaps simply suggesting animals of a given size and assumed activity level couldn't pull it off without it. (I did run across a paper that argued than significantly-higher-than-present O2 concentrations drove a slow plant extinction over the last ten million years of the Cretaceous.)
Edit: I kept spelling it "stroma."
OK. Well your oxygen number is too high. I don't really have a problem with CO2.
I keep mistaking this thread for something about Twisted Sister rather then "Twin sisters". Also Ide, you should have gone into engineering or something rather then law.
Quote from: Razgovory on October 31, 2011, 09:12:11 PM
I keep mistaking this thread for something about Twisted Sister rather then "Twin sisters". Also Ide, you should have gone into engineering or something rather then law.
Engineering? No, I'm not good enough at math (actually, it's something I really wish I'd applied myself more to--not necessarily for monetary gain, but to understand science better for personal edification).
But medicine, that's where it's at. Hell, nursing school. That's retarded easy. My stepsister's kind of a moron and makes like $100k a year as a
part-time nurse anaesthetist.
I suggested engineering so you could be useful in your life. My cousin in a nurse. She has a PhD in nursing which is kind of weird I thought.
Health care is pretty much infinitely more useful than lawyering. But it can still be harmful to society.
Quote from: Neil on October 31, 2011, 09:30:08 PM
Health care is pretty much infinitely more useful than lawyering. But it can still be harmful to society.
Health care creeps me out. I don't like needles and stuff. Whole business gives me the willies.
Quote from: Razgovory on October 31, 2011, 09:21:22 PM
I suggested engineering so you could be useful in your life. My cousin in a nurse. She has a PhD in nursing which is kind of weird I thought.
I'm highly useful, simply unused.
Quote from: Ideologue on October 31, 2011, 09:46:08 PM
Quote from: Razgovory on October 31, 2011, 09:21:22 PM
I suggested engineering so you could be useful in your life. My cousin in a nurse. She has a PhD in nursing which is kind of weird I thought.
I'm highly useful, simply unused.
Like that general said in
Spies Like Us," an unused weapon is a useless weapon". Same thing with you your skills.
Quote from: Razgovory on October 31, 2011, 09:44:17 PM
Health care creeps me out. I don't like needles and stuff. Whole business gives me the willies.
Are you a trypanophobe? I passed out watching 127 Hours.
No. I just don't like it. I'm not deathly afraid of hospitals or needles and blood and stuff, I just don't like it very well. Kinda sets my teeth on edge. I do let them draw blood and the like, I just look away when they do it.
Quote from: Ideologue on October 31, 2011, 09:46:08 PM
Quote from: Razgovory on October 31, 2011, 09:21:22 PM
I suggested engineering so you could be useful in your life. My cousin in a nurse. She has a PhD in nursing which is kind of weird I thought.
I'm highly useful, simply unused.
You got a law degree. That's the opposite of useful.
Quote from: Ideologue on October 31, 2011, 08:47:38 PM
For CO2 levels, Pearson and Palmer's boron proxy method, which relies on indicators of oceanic pH (and hence dissolved CO2) in plankton shells to estimate CO2 levels in the atmosphere. Admittedly, other methods (such as stomatal index as a proxy for carbon dioxide concentration at ground level, fewer stomae meaning more CO2) produce significantly lower estimates. 2000ppmv+ for boron proxy, as opposed to like 400 or so for stomae concentration, i.e. present-day concentrations.
I would like to read more about this. Do you have any links?
Quote from: Razgovory on October 31, 2011, 10:10:54 PM
No. I just don't like it. I'm not deathly afraid of hospitals or needles and blood and stuff, I just don't like it very well. Kinda sets my teeth on edge. I do let them draw blood and the like, I just look away when they do it.
I like getting shots, but yeah having blood drawn makes me queasy and even faint on occasion. :Embarrass:
Quote from: Neil on October 31, 2011, 10:11:04 PM
Quote from: Ideologue on October 31, 2011, 09:46:08 PM
Quote from: Razgovory on October 31, 2011, 09:21:22 PM
I suggested engineering so you could be useful in your life. My cousin in a nurse. She has a PhD in nursing which is kind of weird I thought.
I'm highly useful, simply unused.
You got a law degree. That's the opposite of useful.
Personally I think he ought to become a latter-day John Edwards.
Quote from: Ideologue on October 31, 2011, 09:46:08 PM
Quote from: Razgovory on October 31, 2011, 09:21:22 PM
I suggested engineering so you could be useful in your life. My cousin in a nurse. She has a PhD in nursing which is kind of weird I thought.
I'm highly useful, simply unused.
http://chronicle.com/article/High-Demand-for-Science/129472/ (http://chronicle.com/article/High-Demand-for-Science/129472/):)
Quote from: Caliga on November 01, 2011, 11:40:12 AM
Quote from: Neil on October 31, 2011, 10:11:04 PM
Quote from: Ideologue on October 31, 2011, 09:46:08 PM
Quote from: Razgovory on October 31, 2011, 09:21:22 PM
I suggested engineering so you could be useful in your life. My cousin in a nurse. She has a PhD in nursing which is kind of weird I thought.
I'm highly useful, simply unused.
You got a law degree. That's the opposite of useful.
Personally I think he ought to become a latter-day John Edwards.
I always liked you, Cal. :hug:
Quote from: Caliga on November 01, 2011, 11:40:12 AM
Quote from: Neil on October 31, 2011, 10:11:04 PM
Quote from: Ideologue on October 31, 2011, 09:46:08 PM
Quote from: Razgovory on October 31, 2011, 09:21:22 PM
I suggested engineering so you could be useful in your life. My cousin in a nurse. She has a PhD in nursing which is kind of weird I thought.
I'm highly useful, simply unused.
You got a law degree. That's the opposite of useful.
Personally I think he ought to become a latter-day John Edwards.
So unemployed, facing a federal indictment, and nationally despised?
Heroism doesn't come without sacrifice.
Quote from: Ideologue on October 31, 2011, 09:18:15 PM
But medicine, that's where it's at. Hell, nursing school. That's retarded easy. My stepsister's kind of a moron and makes like $100k a year as a part-time nurse anaesthetist.
I have two pieces of news for you.
1) Medical school is fairly rigorous.
2) Everyone is "kind of a moron". It all depends on what facet of their life you happen to be looking at.
Quote from: fahdiz on November 01, 2011, 03:39:09 PM
2) Everyone is "kind of a moron". It all depends on what facet of their life you happen to be looking at.
:huh: I'm not. :contract:
Quote from: DGuller on November 01, 2011, 03:40:23 PM
Quote from: fahdiz on November 01, 2011, 03:39:09 PM
2) Everyone is "kind of a moron". It all depends on what facet of their life you happen to be looking at.
:huh: I'm not. :contract:
I forgot:
3) Almost everyone believes that they are the exception to #2.
He's right though, that qualifier disqualifies him. :P
Quote from: DGuller on November 01, 2011, 03:40:23 PM
Quote from: fahdiz on November 01, 2011, 03:39:09 PM
2) Everyone is "kind of a moron". It all depends on what facet of their life you happen to be looking at.
:huh: I'm not. :contract:
So you're full moron then? :hmm:
I am. I have no marketable skills and barely an education. Sure sign of a moron.
I'm not a moron.
Quote from: fahdiz on November 01, 2011, 03:39:09 PM
Quote from: Ideologue on October 31, 2011, 09:18:15 PM
But medicine, that's where it's at. Hell, nursing school. That's retarded easy. My stepsister's kind of a moron and makes like $100k a year as a part-time nurse anaesthetist.
I have two pieces of news for you.
1) Medical school is fairly rigorous.
2) Everyone is "kind of a moron". It all depends on what facet of their life you happen to be looking at.
Now nursing school isn't medical school, is it?
Quote from: Ideologue on November 01, 2011, 05:32:35 PM
Now nursing school isn't medical school, is it?
Nursing school's pretty rigorous too, as degrees of that length go. Having said that, I believe we've all encountered people who go through even the *most* rigorous degrees with flying colors and still seem to not know their ass from a hole in the ground, haven't we?
Quote from: fahdiz on November 01, 2011, 05:38:58 PM
Quote from: Ideologue on November 01, 2011, 05:32:35 PM
Now nursing school isn't medical school, is it?
Nursing school's pretty rigorous too, as degrees of that length go. Having said that, I believe we've all encountered people who go through even the *most* rigorous degrees with flying colors and still seem to not know their ass from a hole in the ground, haven't we?
Yes. Oh, most definitely.
As much as we'd like to believe they are, possessing common sense and being competent in one's job are not necessarily correlated.
Dark Horse Comics agrees with me! :menace:
Although, I suppose the Navajo were neolithic, not paleolithic
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.rebelscum.com%2Fcomics%2FTurok2.jpg&hash=3b523b37ff85d2e8814f8f6d1a1c0af401c73c36)
You know nothing of Turok, Son of Stone.
That's not a tyrannosaurid.
Quote from: Neil on November 01, 2011, 09:57:49 PM
That's not a tyrannosaurid.
Happy?
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.majorspoilers.com%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2010%2F07%2FTurok11.jpg&hash=47bd2a23efffa2d6e15626e730b7870e647d39d9)
That painting is historically unlikely. There were no blonde Navajo.
Quote from: Valmy on November 02, 2011, 09:12:23 AM
That painting is historically unlikely. There were no blonde Navajo.
:D
Turok is a 15th century Navajo warrior who gets thrown into another dimension.
The woman is from that dimension.
Quote from: jimmy olsen on November 02, 2011, 09:31:24 AM
Quote from: Valmy on November 02, 2011, 09:12:23 AM
That painting is historically unlikely. There were no blonde Navajo.
:D
Turok is a 15th century Navajo warrior who gets thrown into another dimension.
The woman is from that dimension.
There are worse fates than being thrown into the dimension of the buxom blonde women.
Cabot?
Quote from: Ideologue on November 02, 2011, 11:33:26 AM
Cabot?
:huh:
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimages.sodahead.com%2Fpolls%2F001269469%2Fcabot_answer_3_xlarge.jpeg&hash=3669714a2c48c5597ba308ebb118fecb14e811fd)
or
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.fototime.com%2F4264F8ACD27592E%2Fstandard.jpg&hash=48c098c9a00927a3db59eb4a6f97b4e40de87ff9)
God, Tim, how can you be such a nerd but miss a basic MST3K reference?
Cheese. :mmm: