AzurePhoenix

On the same note, "Repenomamus" was a rather large mammalian predator that has been recently discovered. Maybe as large as a small dog, with stomach contents that showed it likely preyed on small and/or young dinos. It came from a later era in the cretaceous, but its discovery was similar in magnitude as that of this jurassic "psuedopus," making us rethink our long held thoughts on the place of mammals in the age of the dinosaurs. Does anyone know of any other "large" mammals from those times?

Really it looks and supposedly acts more like the platypus. Anyway, none of those three are closely related yet are relatively similar superficially, another convergence over so many millions of years shouldn't be that wierd at all.

It's great that they're fianlly finding relatively large mammals that show such specialization. We're finally getting out of that "all primitive mammals were shrew-like" slump.

"Scientists have uncovered fossil evidence today lending support to the well-supported scientific theory of Creation" "Flat-Earth Theorists are rapidly gaining ground on the scale of intelligence, with studies indicating they actually possess more brainpower than their age-old rival the Junebug" "You know, Pixar owes so much to Disney"

"Mokele needs a proper pet; he'd love this kitten more than any squirmy old snake" "Don't you just love how Discovery Channel abandoned science in favor of reality programs?" "If I were going into a firefight with enemy troops, I'd want Dick Cheney providing my cover fire"

By my standards, this isn't even close to twisted

I just tend to associate the term "taking out" with assassins or aerial bombings.

"Excuse me, where would one go to apply for French citizenship?"

That would be the equivalent of a mammalian flu spreading to and wiping out almost every species of mammal; unlikely. Also, The dinosaurs were just a amsll though notable portion of the KT-Event extinctions. All the carnivorous and non-dinosaurian sea-reptiles were wiped out (there were no whales) and almost nothing heavier than something like fifty pounds or so survived on land. The pterosaurs died out, large reptiles of other groups, many, many types of animals, most of whom wouldn't be affected by a disease that could remarkably wipe out every variety of dino in turn. Why did birds, dinos themselves, survive this extinction? They should have been more vulnerable than some of the other victims if it were a disease, yet they pulled through. Why? Because they were small and adaptable, like all the other surivivors. Rare indeed, but all the evidence, including the kt boundary itself and a whopping crater in the yucatan point to the conclusion that it did happen, whther or not it was wholly or only partially responsible. Yes, but by the time the cretaceous rolled around, millions of years had passed and it was an entirely new era; too much time had passed for this miracle-disease to just lay dormant then suddenly awaken everywhere at once and strike creatures that had diverged for countless generations. Even in the Jurassic itself dino-variation was hugely diverse.

Europa orbits Jupiter. I'm constantly torn between the idea that life will arise in a plethora of bizarre ways unique to each origin, vs the idea that certain aspects of chemistry and anatomical effectiveness will lead to convergence by way of "the road of least resistance." Maybe it will be a limited version of both. Of course, it'll be utterly impossible to know until we can actually examine and compare/contrast life from multiple sources of origin, so probably not in our lifetimes.

When you call your boyfriend named Clay "Klaynos" Insane; I'm flattered

Indeed

The dry humor of the post was hard to miss, I just just belittling the attitude sarcastically myself.

It wasn't brilliantly hilarious, but it was quite funny. Makes me appreciate that my own didn't kill me when he took me out to the desert for a mountaintop dinner last night. You have a very poorly developed sense of humor Next time try to make the death related to the hotdog in some way, then it'll be funny. Lighten up, enjoy the twisted irony.

Simply put, hardness is resiliance against changing shape, the way silly putty is soft, but rocks are hard. A diamond might burn or shatter, but it will be very, very difficult to scratch or warp. The long answer is quite extensive. this wiki link will have a more in-depth explanation.

not to mention it's no different from just burying it; just instead of dirt and rock, you're simply buried under more lead. Anyway, how would you get it all and construct it? I very much doubt we have a bunker-material that could withstand a direct nuke and survive with only thick walls rather than mountains of shielding.

Welcome to the forums. This particular quirk is what makes us fun and worthwhile Anyway, this thread seems to be fairly clear of the typical level of sarcasm

Hardest known substance? Yes. But diamond's brittle, and can be shattered quite easily if hit right. A fire doesn't even have to be that hot to burn a diamond. All "strong" substances are going to have there own strengths and weaknesses. Flexibility, absolute hardness, resistance to extremes of temperatures, tensile strength, chemical... erm, "inertness"? "Inertitude"? Aye, a swell way to turn anything into instant plasma

I'm not sure what the ancestors were directly before apes, but prior to that, primates were lemur like, farther down I would compare them to tree shrews, and just further back along the insectivorous scale, which we probably sat in for a long, long time.

I can't imagine how terrifying and mentally destructive that kind of anxiety would be.

I wouldn't be surprised if politicians soon started to hire people whose only purpose would be to monitor and nudge their wiki articles, or even entries about policies and such that might concern them.

(f)19 I'm normally anti-abortion, with a number of exceptions, and this scenario is one of them. First off, I have to consider the potential psychological harm and depression that might afflict a woman forced to harbor for nine-months the seed of the man who violated her. Secondly, and with less force, I have to wonder if some such child could ever lead happy lives. As long as the pregnancy is terminated early on, I don't have any qualms about it.

Oh, maybe I shouldn't have then, I was serious, just using the wink to point out the levity of everything

I think you'd get more laughter by throwing away the whole ignorance thing, and just laugh at everything bad rather than ignore it. For instance, rather than walking around the spray of blood left by a suicide jumper, comment on how it sort of makes a picture of a gerbil wearing a top hat, maybe take a picture or later indulgence