32 replies to this topic

[Myles]

I'm not sure the pyramid arguement is valid.   They are about 4500 years old now, right?   That is a very small slice of 65 million years.

[Royal]

Arbitran,I only mentioned evidence in that other lifeforms of that epoch{dinosaurs,flora and fauna etc.}existance was preserved by time.Had there been any intelligent activity it;s excistence probably would be in the geologic layer encompassing that era.

[ealdwita]

Intelligent life before the Chicxulub event? I've no idea, but there's been precious little in evidence since!

[spud the mackem]

Maybe there was , but they shoved off to somewhere and took everything usable with them, when they saw disaster looming.

[Taun]

I really can't see any (known) species of ~200 million years ago becoming sapient... Mainly because I believe that a creature would need some means of manual dexterity to make tools and to develop past the 'semi-sapient' level...

I believe that mental development and tool use went hand in hand, and I just can't see any of the known species from that time being manually dexterous enough to 'spark' their consciousness... Probably why dolphins (for example) never developed a recognizable civilization and climbed their way to full sapience... (I'll probably be proven wrong - rather quickly- but that is my current belief in this matter..)

[ranrod]

Taun, on 27 June 2012 - 02:24 AM, said:

I really can't see any (known) species of ~200 million years ago becoming sapient... Mainly because I believe that a creature would need some means of manual dexterity to make tools and to develop past the 'semi-sapient' level...

I believe that mental development and tool use went hand in hand, and I just can't see any of the known species from that time being manually dexterous enough to 'spark' their consciousness... Probably why dolphins (for example) never developed a recognizable civilization and climbed their way to full sapience... (I'll probably be proven wrong - rather quickly- but that is my current belief in this matter..)

The world was covered with an amazing amount of animal life.  What we've found is a small fraction of what was there.  A large percentage of the land recycles itself such that no traces of the past remain.  That said, we have found fossils of a certain human-sized animal that had opposable thumbs.  It could be a fossil of an animal that eventually gained intelligence and smarts.

[Paracelse]

Myles, on 25 June 2012 - 04:44 PM, said:

65 million years is a long time.  The climate changes that come with that must also be considered.

Unless the time stops in 4,6 billions years hehehe http://www.unexplain...time stop&st=0

ealdwita, on 26 June 2012 - 05:02 PM, said:

Intelligent life before the Chicxulub event? I've no idea, but there's been precious little in evidence since!

There was but it's disappearing at the speed of light

[ranrod]

Paracelse, on 27 June 2012 - 02:55 PM, said:

Unless the time stops in 4,6 billions years hehehe http://www.unexplain...time  stop&st=0


There was but it's disappearing at the speed of light

Good point.  If we ever develop FTL travel, we can outpace all the emissions of light from Earth and look back onto it with a super gigantic lens (several light years across), and see dinosaurs.

[Ryinrea]

Hypothicaly if a speice of ape or ceature reached sapenit life before the Chicxulub eventevidence of these people could surive in a dry & cool eviourment like caves or mines for an exmaple. I mean look at the pyarmids for exmaple, yes thier only accoriding too carbon dating at least 5,000 years old or longer. However, their might be evidences put forth in the layers of rock crust before that time. As they've said before in this thread it could be like a time capsual type thing.

[Abramelin]

Taun, on 27 June 2012 - 02:24 AM, said:

I really can't see any (known) species of ~200 million years ago becoming sapient... Mainly because I believe that a creature would need some means of manual dexterity to make tools and to develop past the 'semi-sapient' level...

I believe that mental development and tool use went hand in hand, and I just can't see any of the known species from that time being manually dexterous enough to 'spark' their consciousness... Probably why dolphins (for example) never developed a recognizable civilization and climbed their way to full sapience... (I'll probably be proven wrong - rather quickly- but that is my current belief in this matter..)

Some are catching up ("look mama, no hands") :

(...)
So what in the name of Sam Hill is going on here? Well, there are a couple of considerations concerning possible crow intelligence. First, understand that sheer brain size does not equate to intelligence. It is in fact the ratio of the brain mass to the total body mass that offers some IQ indicator. (More accurately, that ratio is referred to the "Encephalization Quotient" or EQ.) Put another way, large animals need large brains to regulate temperature, breathing, control muscles, etc. Unfortunately, as animals get larger, they tend to have disproportionately smaller brains, or lower EQs. In general, the non-aquatic creatures with the best brain to body ration are the higher primates, with humans at the top. But following closely behind (and possibly even in front of the great apes depending on how one measures the EQ) are the corvids and some parrots... Hmmm... And what's the second consideration concerning crow intelligence? Take a look at the crow brain below.


http://www.ebirdseed...row_brains.html

.

Edited by Abramelin, 29 June 2012 - 02:50 PM.

[Arbitran]

Royal, on 26 June 2012 - 03:39 PM, said:

Arbitran,I only mentioned evidence in that other lifeforms of that epoch{dinosaurs,flora and fauna etc.}existance was preserved by time.Had there been any intelligent activity it;s excistence probably would be in the geologic layer encompassing that era.

I understand that. But far from all life on Earth was preserved in fossil form. And it is very unlikely, as I said, that much technology or civilization which might have existed then would still exist today (in recognizable form at least).

[libstaK]

Taun, on 27 June 2012 - 02:24 AM, said:

I really can't see any (known) species of ~200 million years ago becoming sapient... Mainly because I believe that a creature would need some means of manual dexterity to make tools and to develop past the 'semi-sapient' level...

I believe that mental development and tool use went hand in hand, and I just can't see any of the known species from that time being manually dexterous enough to 'spark' their consciousness... Probably why dolphins (for example) never developed a recognizable civilization and climbed their way to full sapience... (I'll probably be proven wrong - rather quickly- but that is my current belief in this matter..)

I read a book on SETI many years ago which possited the same.  Intelligence requires an "opposing digit" like our thumbs and the capacity for the "finer faculties" of say writing or sculpting in the muscular dexterity of a creature for civilisation to arise with "techological" attributes.

[DKO]

Abramelin, on 29 June 2012 - 02:49 PM, said:

Some are catching up ("look mama, no hands") :

(...)
So what in the name of Sam Hill is going on here? Well, there are a couple of considerations concerning possible crow intelligence. First, understand that sheer brain size does not equate to intelligence. It is in fact the ratio of the brain mass to the total body mass that offers some IQ indicator. (More accurately, that ratio is referred to the "Encephalization Quotient" or EQ.) Put another way, large animals need large brains to regulate temperature, breathing, control muscles, etc. Unfortunately, as animals get larger, they tend to have disproportionately smaller brains, or lower EQs. In general, the non-aquatic creatures with the best brain to body ration are the higher primates, with humans at the top. But following closely behind (and possibly even in front of the great apes depending on how one measures the EQ) are the corvids and some parrots... Hmmm... And what's the second consideration concerning crow intelligence? Take a look at the crow brain below.


http://www.ebirdseed...row_brains.html

.

I love that video of the crow making a tool. I've seen on two occasions where crows have picked up some scrap piece of food and dropped it in a puddle to soften it up. Sounds simple but the first time I saw it, the crow walked around for a few minutes until it found the puddle to dunk in.

The second time happened only this week (no joke!) and I was able to film a bit of it on my phone.

I also find magpies very intelligent.

Edited by DKO, 30 June 2012 - 05:09 AM.

[Arbitran]

libstaK, on 30 June 2012 - 03:27 AM, said:

I read a book on SETI many years ago which possited the same.  Intelligence requires an "opposing digit" like our thumbs and the capacity for the "finer faculties" of say writing or sculpting in the muscular dexterity of a creature for civilisation to arise with "techological" attributes.

This is a point where the demarcation between semi-sapient and sapient need be made. Sapient is what humans are. Semi-sapient species likely include the dolphin, parrot, octopus, etc. They have many traits which could lend themselves to civilization (intelligence, for one), but not all. An octopus has manipulatory appendages, in the form of tentacles, and high intelligence; however, they are generally anti-social, and thus the formation of society and civilization is unlikely. Parrots are much the same way, however in their case, it is not anti-sociality which presents an obstacle, but the ease with which they can manipulate objects; having only feet and their beak (both of which can only lift or manipulate a very limited range of objects), they are cut off from the general scope of manipulation which would be required to form a human-like civilization. As for dolphins, they are highly intelligent, as well as highly social, but have virtually no capacity for the manipulation of objects.

As for things like chimpanzees and orangutans, I am of the opinion that they represent other fully sapient species on our planet; they either have not had the needed time for the development of civilization like ours (remember how long our own species existed in essentially ape-like nature), or perhaps, they are simply more inclined not to develop civilization like ours. That in itself may be a factor in sapience: our species, the naked ape, is virtually helpless without the use of tools, social cooperation, etc.; this is seemingly not the case with chimpanzees, for example, who are adapted to their environment in such a way that perhaps they have less natural incentive to form civilization.

[ShadowSot]

It could, yes. However there's no real path in evolution. I will say that I can see some theropod dinosaurs having the manual dexterity to be able to manipulate tools, though. If I were looking forevidence, I'd look for ceramics and plastics, both very durable and long lasting.

Also tossing out the dinosaurs seemed to be dieing out on their own, at least from what the fossil evidence seems to show, there were also dinosaurs that post dated the impact by thousands of years.