|
|
Post by Infinity Blade on Jul 3, 2024 3:37:27 GMT 5
Two more questions, one of which seems subjective. 1. Why have passerines been so successful? 2. Should groups of machairodonts be called prides, or not? Does the sexual dimorphism aspect matter? 1. Most passerines are insectivores or omnivores, meaning they eat a diversity of food sources or highly abundant food sources. They also tend to be smaller than typical members of other avian orders, as the Wikipedia page helpfully pointed out to me. 2. Your call (machairodonts are extinct, so it doesn't really matter), but know that cheetahs (particularly brothers) will form what are called coalitions. Groups of male lions working together are also called coalitions. So it may depend on the nature of the group. Personally, I just call them packs for simplicity. |
|
|
|
Post by razor45dino on Jul 3, 2024 10:03:05 GMT 5
how does agility scale with size? Linearly, squared, or something else
|
|
|
|
Post by Exalt on Jul 4, 2024 6:06:43 GMT 5
I was thinking earlier and I've kind of gotten into the idea of calling them a round of sabertooths, as in the knights, as they are call carrying swords, so to speak.
Two more:
1. When did the first true birds emerge, and how would they have looked? I wouldn't be surprised if this one is uncertain, considering how it is with true mammals.
2. Why is Felis Catus so efficient at hijacking ecosystems, anyway? I had considered that there are simply far more of them than, say, bobcats, but there is supposedly an example where just one singular cat managed to wipe out a species.
|
|
|
|
Post by Exalt on Jul 11, 2024 6:39:02 GMT 5
1. Why do some orcas at times seem to be...wasteful? With their food, particularly given that some hunts last for hours? (Honestly, I feel like you could make a book about questions regarding orcas.)
2. Do birds of prey fight over mates? I've not seen much in terms of encounters between con-specifics. I think either planet earth II or III had two golden eagles fight over food.
|
|
|
|
Post by Infinity Blade on Jul 12, 2024 4:38:05 GMT 5
|
|
|
|
Post by Supercommunist on Jul 12, 2024 20:55:24 GMT 5
|
|
|
|
Post by Infinity Blade on Jul 15, 2024 5:01:33 GMT 5
I'm just curious...what do you guys think of the recent assassination attempt on Trump?
(If you want to debate about it, you can create another thread about it, I just want to know your thoughts here)
|
|
|
|
Post by Supercommunist on Jul 15, 2024 8:43:52 GMT 5
I am pretty deattached. I mean, I thought it was definitely the most interesting political situation in awhile but I am not letting it occupy too much of my attention. I don't like the guy and I am aware that this could boost his chances but I realize that there isn't any point in stressing over this.
One thing I think people are overlooking is the possibility Trump croaks from a stress induced heart attack or disease after all this drama.
|
|
|
|
Post by Exalt on Jul 23, 2024 7:52:47 GMT 5
I will get back to that one when I feel like it.
A question came up with some friends: Have large whales ever killed anybody? Whether deliberately or not. I suggested that Mocha Dick maybe could have caused casualties, but I'm not exactly sure. We couldn't find anything ourselves.
|
|
|
|
Post by Infinity Blade on Aug 19, 2024 4:33:56 GMT 5
|
|
|
|
Post by mechafire on Sept 4, 2024 6:56:33 GMT 5
Why is it that marine mammals don’t seem to need pelvic/anal fins? Most fish retained their back bottom flippers and the many marine reptiles kept their back legs even when they their tails were the main tools for propulsion. Is it related to vertical undulation not really benefitting from them?
|
|
|
|
Post by Infinity Blade on Sept 6, 2024 3:20:05 GMT 5
Why is it that marine mammals don’t seem to need pelvic/anal fins? Most fish retained their back bottom flippers and the many marine reptiles kept their back legs even when they their tails were the main tools for propulsion. Is it related to vertical undulation not really benefitting from them?I'd imagine so. It's a bit hard to get it clear through my head, but if a tail is moving directly to the side to propel something, it would probably help to have paddles (or at least fins), stabilizing the animal's body laterally |
|
|
|
Post by Infinity Blade on Sept 8, 2024 8:39:46 GMT 5
Actually, I have a question for some of y'all (I rarely ask on WoA these days).
If another K-Pg-style extinction event were to happen today (asteroid slams into an iridium-rich part of the Earth and causes a mass extinction event), what animal groups do you think would "dominate"? Do you think mammals will just dominate the land again, birds will continue to dominate the skies, and mammals recolonize the oceans? Or do you think another clade of animals will rise to prominence?
|
|
|
|
Post by Supercommunist on Sept 9, 2024 16:12:26 GMT 5
Actually, I have a question for some of y'all (I rarely ask on WoA these days). If another K-Pg-style extinction event were to happen today (asteroid slams into an iridium-rich part of the Earth and causes a mass extinction event), what animal groups do you think would "dominate"? Do you think mammals will just dominate the land again, birds will continue to dominate the skies, and mammals recolonize the oceans? Or do you think another clade of animals will rise to prominence? I actually feel that mammals would struggle to "recapture the oceans". The KT impact wiped out most animals that weighed more than 25 kg. Off the top of my head, the smallest marine mammal are sea otters, and apparently a lot of them get bigger than that. Hypothetically, a smaller subpopulation might be able to survive but they are already endangered to begin with. In contrast, there are a lot of sea birds that would be small enough to survive and could evolve into penguin-like forms. Heck, some of the smaller and more common penguin species may be able to survive. On the ground, I think mammals would do well again, since ectothermic animals would struggle in the harsh winter a large asteroid would cause. There might be a resurgence of "land crocs", large terrestrial birds, giant snakes, and huge predatory lizards though. As for the sky, bats may pose more competition for birds. |
|
|
|
Post by Infinity Blade on Sept 9, 2024 16:45:23 GMT 5
Actually, I have a question for some of y'all (I rarely ask on WoA these days). If another K-Pg-style extinction event were to happen today (asteroid slams into an iridium-rich part of the Earth and causes a mass extinction event), what animal groups do you think would "dominate"? Do you think mammals will just dominate the land again, birds will continue to dominate the skies, and mammals recolonize the oceans? Or do you think another clade of animals will rise to prominence? I actually feel that mammals would struggle to "recapture the oceans". The KT impact wiped out most animals that weighed more than 25 kg. Off the top of my head, the smallest marine mammal are sea otters, and apparently a lot of them get bigger than that. Hypothetically, a smaller subpopulation might be able to survive but they are already endangered to begin with. In contrast, there are a lot of sea birds that would be small enough to survive and could evolve into penguin-like forms. Heck, some of the smaller and more common penguin species may be able to survive. On the ground, I think mammals would do well again, since ectothermic animals would struggle in the harsh winter a large asteroid would cause. There might be a resurgence of "land crocs", large terrestrial birds, giant snakes, and huge predatory lizards though. As for the sky, bats may pose more competition for birds. I agree with most of this, but I actually doubt bats would do well in the long-run in a K-Pg scenario. They got most things going for them, but the real problem is the impact winter. It's been calculated that the mean annual surface temperature across the globe after the impact would've been below freezing for three whole years. Under worse scenarios, the average temperature would've been even lower, reached at later times (5-9 years after impact), and subfreezing temperatures would have persisted for anywhere between 7-16 years. I say all this because bats cannot survive freezing temperatures (the whole reason they hibernate), and the most generous scenario above (3 years of below freezing global temperatures) is three times longer than the current mammalian record holder for the longest hibernation ( link->), which doesn't even belong to a bat. The longest I've found for a bat was 230-240 days. www.willisbatlab.org/uploads/8/0/0/6/8006753/norquay_2014_j_zool.pdf |
|
