And if the squirrels had oral histories of where acorns were buried, I’d be inclined to call it a civilization.
That’s my point. Unless a civilization uses tools it’s unclear how you could tell.
What i think we know is that no dinos used tools.
Well, modern dinos use tools, and avian dinos existed since the Jurassic. I don’t think we can rule out the level of tool use that crows or parrots have in dinosaurs, avian or otherwise.
What they didn’t do - what very few species do to any extent, aside from us - is modify tools (and more to the point, permenantly modify stone tools) on any major scale.
The same arguments work for both sides, just negating the one and affirming the other.
You’ve been given sufficient information - the Earth is well-enough studied that evidence of a dinosaur civilization would have been found - and yet you’re still arguing about it, so my only conclusion is that nothing is going to satisfy you.
If earlier dinosaurs were intelligent enough to make a civilization, but later ones weren’t, then the clade, overall, would have had to devolve in intelligence.
Earlier dinosaurs were physiologically less-advanced in having simpler dentition, more sprawling body posture, less thermoregulation, etc, etc.
Then it is obvious that a sophisticated species arose with an innate understanding of their plight. They realized that increased size and predation would eventually consume all available resource. So, they developed ecofriendly, sustainable practices and meticulously followed a policy of ‘leave no trace’.
This is confirmed by the lack of evidence in all the places we haven’t looked.
I’ve specified exactly what will satisfy me to conclude no sapient dinosaurs evolved: fossil specimens with a resolution of about 8 million years and 3 million square miles. We don’t seem to have that yet. See, for example:
There’s a lack of specimens from 165 to 130 million years ago. That’s enough time for a species to evolve sapience, build a regional civilization, and go extinct without us knowing, because we have no dinosaur specimens then.
What the hell do you mean by the “resolution” of fossils?
If your concern is the area covered by the artefacts of an H. ergaster-level of material culture (not even a civilization), you need to think bigger:
And that is early enough that my previous point about that not being where intelligent dinos would occur still stands.
Not without them having a noticeable effect on what their descendants are like, it isn’t.
The interstitial distance between specimens. Spatial resolution of 3 millions square miles (roughly the area African Great Apes evolved in, one quarter of Africa) means that we have some specimen in every area about that size. Temporal resolution of 8 million years (roughly the time from now to the most recent common ancestor of the African Great Apes) means that we have some specimen in every time interval about that size.
Can you explain that again? I didn’t understand that as a point of any of your previous posts.
Not all clades have descendants.
What do Great Apes have to do with this, they’re not civilized or even technological?
Dinosaurs show a steady degree of becoming more physiologically sophisticated over their entire tenure. You have given no convincing reason to suppose there might be a missing blip where they developed at an accelerated rate, then backslid in that development such that it looked like their advancement was continuous. The only logical place to look for intelligent dinosaurs are when they are at their most advanced.
You have a particular clade in mind? You think Heterodontosaurus was chipping away at the old flints?
Great Apes are already very intelligent, and are a crown group atop a larger clade of highly intelligent animals (monkeys) who sit atop an even larger clade of fairly intelligent animals (primates).
The first true primates evolved 55 million years ago. Why is your target resolution 8 MY and not 55 MY?
You seem to be making a point that escapes those of us who aren’t very swift. The current sampling strategy of fossils does not yield evidence of “civilization” (whatever that is) in dinosaurs. There is much to be discovered by emerging technologies. Is there a reason why civilization in dinosaurs should be a field of interest?
Here’s your critical fallacy.
Lack of specimens does not mean that the area has not been examined. Dinosaur hunters do tend to look at areas where it is plausible that dinosaurs lived. They are not the only paleontologists in the world. That era may be extremely valuable for hordes of other fossils. In fact, dinosaur hunters often spend years at a site collecting every other plant and animal fossil without ever uncovering a dinosaur bone. Only looting amateurs ignore the entire ecosystem.
A civilization by definition changes the landscape and the ecosystem. Numerous archaic human sites have been found without any human fossils at all, identifiable by pits, tools, charcoal, accumulations of bones, pollen transference, and other far more specialized markers. Even if dinosaurs created their civilization by telekinesis without using any technology, these markers would stand out from the surrounding landscape. No evidence for any such an alteration exists anywhere.
Your argument devolves entirely into “evidence may have vanished with time.” This cannot strictly be ruled out, of course, but it is not positive. As I said above, if you allow this to be your argument you cannot distinguish it from any other argument using the same rules. Aliens may have therefore lived on earth for millions of years. How would science preclude this? As someone properly said above, this argument is untestable and therefore is not science.
It does much more closely look like the flip side of the “god of the gaps” argument. Fundamentalist Christians argued that god used supernatural means to advance animals in the gaps between known finds. Such an argument had no basis when first proposed and has been almost completely eradicated today because the gaps keep getting smaller with each new find, leaving less and less to explain. Technically speaking, a god we don’t know about, doing magic we can’t see, and leaving no evidence cannot be ruled out by science. Nevertheless no scientist will take such an argument seriously. Relabeling “god” with “unknown, unseen evidence” does not change the argument.
Nitpick. I’m not sure what this has to do with the thread, but we know that neutrinos do have mass. Or at least that they experience time, which implies mass unless relativity is simply wrong.
See, that is not my argument at all, which is we don’t have evidence yet in some areas at some times, and given that, we cannot rule out some civilizations yet. It’s not scientific to over-generalize our evidence.
I arbitrarily decided that orangutans are not near sapience, while the clade including gorillas and humans is. Mostly because orangutans are less social and I consider that a necessary condition for sapience. The clade of mammals seems too wide, and maybe primates as well, but there’s a lot of subjectivity. Most of mammal and primate evolution is not directed along a path of increased sapience.
Also, it’s a stronger statement to say “we’ve found all dinosaur clades that survived more than 8 million years” than the same with “55 million”. So in terms of rejecting counterfactuals, it is much more useful.
Therapods seems the like the most intelligent dinosaur clade. Have we discovered all sub-clades of the therapods that survived more than 8 million years?
You’re right. Poor analogy muddled by incorrect details.
This is the correct assessment.
Neither of you seem to understand god of the gaps arguments. If the OP was a GotG argument, it would go something like: we can’t exclude this type of dino civilization based on the data, therefore a dino civilization must have existed.
But just asking to put bounds on our knowledge? That’s one of the fundamental approaches to all of science: work out where our gaps in knowledge are and come up with ways to fill them.
Another crucial difference between GotG and what the OP is curious about is that we already know that it’s possible to develop an advanced civilization. We don’t know how rare it is, or really much about the prerequisites aside from high intelligence. But unlike God, it is not supernatural.
Do you mean Theropods? A clade that was distinctly improving in cranial capacity up until Chicxulub ? No blip there.
And theropods couldn’t use their forelimbs to grip jackshit. If they had evolved that ability, we’d see signs in the remnant groups.
Do we need to? We have enough of a progression as it is. The only subgroup not to make it to the extinction are the allosaurs. Are you seriously proposing that clade for these intelligent dinosaurs?
I think the photo of the Jigokudani Monkey Park is a funny response. But I think you missed my point. Exploiting geothermal energy is feasible in geologically active locations. You wouldn’t expect to find fossils, or pipes and generators, in these areas. I think this is a fun thread. How did you come to your conclusion that humans are the pinnacle of evolved life and intelligence on Earth? Folks can bring in unicorns or ancient alien visits if they want, but I don’t think humans are privileged observers of Earth. We might not recognize advanced technology if it doesn’t conform to our own technology. This thread seems to me to be a discussion about possibilities. I like SD because it a venue to ask questions, learn, and share ideas. It’s not always about trying to prove that someone else’s ideas are wrong.
Oh,wouldn’t I?
You seem to have Factual Questions confused for In My Humble Opinion. Correcting mistakes of fact, like “don’t look for fossils near volcanoes”, is part of the forum’s remit.
Some studies show that orangutans (or their very close ancestors) used to be social animals, but as the climate cooled and led to the fragmentation of their environment. Only the orangutans that adapted to a solitary existence survived.
If this is correct, orangutans are SECONDARILY solitary - they evolved as social animals but bevame solitary over time.