'Biggest dinosaur ever' discovered • Hacker News Board

Re: 'Biggest dinosaur ever' discovered

#11

Post by privong » Sat, May 17, 2014, 2:59 PM UTC

HillOBeans wrote: post #5

Does anyone else here ever wonder if some of these "new" dinosaurs are really just re-discoveries of known dinosaurs? The article even mentions that the skeletal remains are incomplete. What if a number of these sauropods are really all the same species, albeit at different stages of their life? Is size alone enough to create a new classification? Perhaps growth continued throughout the life of a sauropod, and the la…

I don't think species are classified solely on size. I'm pretty sure juvenile specimens have been discovered and identified as being the same species as the adult specimens. Yes, mistakes have been made, but my impression is that the bone shapes play a substantial and important role, perhaps moreso than just the size.

Re: 'Biggest dinosaur ever' discovered

#12

Post by [deleted] » Sat, May 17, 2014, 3:09 PM UTC

spindritf wrote: post #9

So what's their secret? How did they manage to feed themselves? Were they living sparsely? Was bioshpere denser then? Were they capable of eating just about anything? And how was such massive size selected for? Is it just a matter of warmer climate and a feedback loop with larger and larger predators?

[deleted]

Re: 'Biggest dinosaur ever' discovered

#13

Post by dfc » Sat, May 17, 2014, 3:09 PM UTC

The crazy thing is despite being 10 meters longer than a blue whale this puny landlubber is still 100 tonnes lighter.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blue_whale

Re: 'Biggest dinosaur ever' discovered

#14

Post by givan » Sat, May 17, 2014, 3:14 PM UTC

spindritf wrote: post #9

So what's their secret? How did they manage to feed themselves? Were they living sparsely? Was bioshpere denser then? Were they capable of eating just about anything? And how was such massive size selected for? Is it just a matter of warmer climate and a feedback loop with larger and larger predators?

I don't know what was different before but also humans were bigger http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Giant_of_Castelnau

Re: 'Biggest dinosaur ever' discovered

#15

Post by Yetanfou » Sat, May 17, 2014, 3:56 PM UTC

Yetanfou wrote: post #7

blisterpeanuts wrote: post #3

We need to clone these beasts. Would love to have grilled dino meat some day!

Why bother, it'll taste like chicken anyway...

Hmmm, judging by the number of down-votes on my "it'll taste like chicken" comment I have the feeling I need to remind some of the evolutionary grandparents of the humble chicken. Remember that chickens, being birds, most likely are descended from small carnivorous dinosaurs. While the mentioned dinosaur is a vegetarian sauropod, both share a common ancestor.

Re: 'Biggest dinosaur ever' discovered

#16

Post by Dn_Ab » Sat, May 17, 2014, 4:41 PM UTC

spindritf wrote: post #9

So what's their secret? How did they manage to feed themselves? Were they living sparsely? Was bioshpere denser then? Were they capable of eating just about anything? And how was such massive size selected for? Is it just a matter of warmer climate and a feedback loop with larger and larger predators?

The short answer for why dinosaurs got so large is because they could. That might seem a flippant answer but they had much less constraints than most animals left living today:

Air sacs not only allowed more efficient breathing but were also within skeletal structure, allowing for light weight strength. They also laid lots of small eggs so less reproductive investment per chick. Small heads on long necks with a sturdy body allowed long range eating without moving. With small heads and no chewing the disadvantages of long necks are well handled. For much more depth I encourage reading:

http://phenomena.nationalgeographic.com/2013/02/25/dinosaur-...

Re: 'Biggest dinosaur ever' discovered

#17

Post by noselasd » Sat, May 17, 2014, 5:33 PM UTC

givan wrote: post #14

spindritf wrote: post #9

So what's their secret? How did they manage to feed themselves? Were they living sparsely? Was bioshpere denser then? Were they capable of eating just about anything? And how was such massive size selected for? Is it just a matter of warmer climate and a feedback loop with larger and larger predators?

I don't know what was different before but also humans were bigger http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Giant_of_Castelnau

No. One man was big. Or it might have been a fraud.

Re: 'Biggest dinosaur ever' discovered

#18

Post by eponeponepon » Sat, May 17, 2014, 5:54 PM UTC

givan wrote: post #14

spindritf wrote: post #9

So what's their secret? How did they manage to feed themselves? Were they living sparsely? Was bioshpere denser then? Were they capable of eating just about anything? And how was such massive size selected for? Is it just a matter of warmer climate and a feedback loop with larger and larger predators?

I don't know what was different before but also humans were bigger http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Giant_of_Castelnau

Nothing was different. The "Giant of Castelnau", even if he/she was actually as tall as the discoverer conjectured, wasn't wildly outwith the recorded range of human height - Robert Wadlow was 8'11" (2.72m) when he died, and was only 22. It's completely plausible to me that someone afflicted by the same disorder as Wadlow could've reached 3.5m just by being lucky enough to live longer, and it's also completely plausible to me that it could've happened more than once in the vast, vast swathe of human history about which we know next to nothing.

Scant evidence that a human was once very large certainly isn't evidence that "humans were bigger", and that in turn wouldn't be much evidence that a difference in the environment was causing it.

Re: 'Biggest dinosaur ever' discovered

#19

Post by guelo » Sat, May 17, 2014, 6:06 PM UTC

givan wrote: post #14

spindritf wrote: post #9

So what's their secret? How did they manage to feed themselves? Were they living sparsely? Was bioshpere denser then? Were they capable of eating just about anything? And how was such massive size selected for? Is it just a matter of warmer climate and a feedback loop with larger and larger predators?

I don't know what was different before but also humans were bigger http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Giant_of_Castelnau

That was not before, that was now. Those human bones are 10,000 years old while the dinosaur bones are 100 million years old.

Re: 'Biggest dinosaur ever' discovered

#20

Post by learc83 » Sat, May 17, 2014, 6:28 PM UTC

eponeponepon wrote: post #18

givan wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't know what was different before but also humans were bigger http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Giant_of_Castelnau

Nothing was different. The "Giant of Castelnau", even if he/she was actually as tall as the discoverer conjectured , wasn't wildly outwith the recorded range of human height - Robert Wadlow was 8'11" (2.72m) when he died, and was only 22. It's completely plausible to me that someone afflicted by the same disorder as Wadlow could've reached 3.5m just by being lucky enough to live longer, and it's also completely plaus…

>It's completely plausible to me that someone afflicted by the same disorder as Wadlow could've reached 3.5m just by being lucky enough to live longer,

That's not plausible at all. Robert Wadlow as at the very limits of human height. He already numerous medical problems caused by his height and needed leg braces just to walk.

There is no way a bronze age man with access to bronze age medical care was able to live long enough to grow nearly 3 feet taller than Wadlow.

Since weight doesn't scale linearly with height, a 12' tall man would be enormous. Robert wadlow weighed nearly 500 pounds. A 12' tall man would weigh much much more than that.

I think there are only 2 real possibilities to explain the giant. Either he wasn't really as tall as the discoverer thought, or something was different to allow him to get that tall.