Why weren't dinosaurs more intelligent?

[pretender]

Hey Peon Our so called intelligence will also be our death, We are not the brightest of beings...

[silkworm]

Yes, but why didn't these things evolve in another species before Homo Sapiens?

 

Perhaps one thing evolving led to another and that's what lead to the human race. For example, you're not going to have increased intellect without free hands, and you're not going to have free hands without a hips structure that will allow you to walk upright.

[noz92]

Hey, who said the dinosaurs were not intelligent? Show me a dinosaur IQ test. Can't, can you? They were smart enough to exist for a few million years, which is a lot longer than homo sapiens looks like doing at the present rate of progress. They were smart enough not to destroy their own environment.

 

Who says the dinosaurs were smart enough not to destroy thier own enviroment. If they did, it would certainly explain the climate change between the mesazoic era and the current ( )

 

My dad says jokingly that the dinosaurs died from smoking, but I think that would be an example of intelligence killing itself off. Perhaps the dinosaurs went through the same problems that we're going through (such as global warming--or cooling in the case of the dinosaurs) that could have been there fualt.

 

However unlikely this may be, you can't eliminate it as a possibility until you have actual evidence that it's false.

[Sisyphus]

Hey Peon Our so called intelligence will also be our death, We are not the brightest of beings...

 

What's smarter than a human?

[FreeThinker]

Why should they have?

 

Its like saying " why should flight have evolved?". For flight to be possible all aspects of the body have to be modified , its not just the wings. Yet, we have seen this happen in a number of species independently ( insects, bats , birds...) Intelligence , as we know it, requires the rest of the body to be modified as well. But is there only one, human, way that intelligence could have developed? Even if so, given such a long time, why hasn't it happened before?

[ScrnE11]

Ok well i am coming into this conversation a few pages in so ionno if anyone else has said anything like this already.

 

I believe a great deal of how much inteligence an animal has or can get is effected by how there body is setup. We as humans have a body that is good for learning. For example if humans didn't have a thumb we would most likley be nowhere close to where we are with knowlege and understanding of things. There is actually a good chance that the human race would have died out hundreds of years ago. Inteligence has to come from "hands on" ways aswell as just a brain that is devoloped enough. Try to imagnine a dinosour adding two different liquids together. They don't have the body for that. Since they could never mix the two liquids together, they don't know the result is. therefor they cannot learn it. [that wasn't a very clear example.. but the point is that they cannnot hold two containers of liquids (like test tubes) and poor them together to see how the two liquids react to each other..]

 

i do believe that dinosours had some level of inteligence as all animals do. The only thing is that they could never advance to far due to there bodies.

[padren]

I think the basic reason is that creatures evolve towards being the most successful reproducers they can, and they got so good at it with their claws and sharp teeth and instincts, that at a certain point it is more advantageous if their bodies adapt to put more resources into their already well honed capacities, than burn them up on mediocore intelligence.

 

When you look at humans, to be smart enough to make good tools, we had to evolve a little and be smart enough to make pretty worthless tools as a stepping stone, and actually be better at surviving for our fairly worthless tools.

We were actually very fortunate that our skin is weak, our nails break, our teeth can't crack almost anything, and our muscle strength to body mass is mediocore at best.

Without those failings, base level intelligence would never have made a real difference, since our early tools would still have been worse than natural claws and the like.

Without base level intelligence making such a difference, natural selection would have favored improving our physical capacities over our minds, and we would never have advanced to higher levels of intelligence.

 

Thats what I think at least.

[WillTheNewf]

Im pretty sure you can estimate their brain size (and thus their intelligence) from looking at their skull anatomy

[pretender]

Hey SISYPHUS

Who on this planet dertroys there own environment apart from man.and you call that inteligent. If we died off the rest of life would live in some what ballance. So who is the smarter????

[Edtharan]

In 65 million years there will probably be no evidence that humans were intelegent, there will be no remains of cities or any other trappings of a thriving civilization. There might not even be any fossils of humans. This is what time will do.

 

There might have been a privitive civilization of Dinosaurs, but we will never know. Hominid civilization has existed fro less than 1 million years, Human civilization for less than 100,000 years. If in the vast 165 million years (IIRC) that the dinosaurs existed there rose and fell a 100,000 year Dino civilization, we will most likely never know. Even if this DIno civilization wiped them selves out with a massive nuclear war, we would most likely never know about that either.

[swansont]

Its like saying " why should flight have evolved?". For flight to be possible all aspects of the body have to be modified , its not just the wings. Yet, we have seen this happen in a number of species independently ( insects, bats , birds...) Intelligence , as we know it, requires the rest of the body to be modified as well. But is there only one, human, way that intelligence could have developed? Even if so, given such a long time, why hasn't it happened before?

 

You haven't established that intelligence hasn't evolved before. Things like flight, and they eye, have independently evolved before because it's a useful trait, and was attainable from existing features.

 

It took more than 3 billion years for flight to evolve. Why didn't it evolve sooner? Well, you need land animals to start with. Nobody would reasonably expect flight to have evolved before that. So I think you have to look at intelligence the same way: what other features, and requirements demanded by the environment, are also necessary?

[FreeThinker]

You haven't established that intelligence hasn't evolved before. Things like flight, and they eye, have independently evolved before because it's a useful trait, and was attainable from existing features.

 

I agree. But if intelligence, at the human level, had evolved before I would assume, maybe wrongly so, that we would find some evidence for it.

 

It took more than 3 billion years for flight to evolve. Why didn't it evolve sooner? Well, you need land animals to start with. Nobody would reasonably expect flight to have evolved before that. So I think you have to look at intelligence the same way: what other features, and requirements demanded by the environment, are also necessary?

 

Flight evolved when all the conditions ( land animals, right body structure...) were present.If we look at intelligence as 'software' and our bodies as 'hardware' the mechanics for intelligence to evolve were present in the age of dinosaurs. Especialy since any progress in software would pressure the hardware evolution as well.

 

My only point is that intelligence might be a "one off" and therefore extremly rare where ever life is found in the universe.

[gcol]

Intelligence is relative, surely. Against what are they being judged? Against any co-existing life form? Against us?

 

There was no reason for them to be more intelligent. They were top of the heap, kings of the hill.

 

You might just as well ask "why are humans not more intelligent? Against what can you compare? Intelligent does not, arguably, equate with smart.

We may be more intelligent, but we are not smart enough to see the ecological precipice towards which we are rushing.

[swansont]

Flight evolved when all the conditions ( land animals' date=' right body structure...) were present.If we look at intelligence as 'software' and our bodies as 'hardware' the mechanics for intelligence to evolve were present in the age of dinosaurs. Especialy since any progress in software would pressure the hardware evolution as well.

[/quote']

 

Right. So, like flight, it may be that the some of the conditions did not exist earlier, and until they did, they extra burden of a large brain would have been a detriment instead of an advantage.

[Sisyphus]

In 65 million years there will probably be no evidence that humans were intelegent' date=' there will be no remains of cities or any other trappings of a thriving civilization. There might not even be any fossils of humans. This is what time will do.

 

There might have been a privitive civilization of Dinosaurs, but we will never know. Hominid civilization has existed fro less than 1 million years, Human civilization for less than 100,000 years. If in the vast 165 million years (IIRC) that the dinosaurs existed there rose and fell a 100,000 year Dino civilization, we will most likely never know. Even if this DIno civilization wiped them selves out with a massive nuclear war, we would most likely never know about that either.[/quote']

 

From a single fossil a paleontologist could tell at least that we had huge brains for our size (much bigger than any dino brain), walked upright, and were able to use tools.

 

They also might notice all the oil from before our time appears to be missing...

 

Hey SISYPHUS

Who on this planet dertroys there own environment apart from man.and you call that inteligent. If we died off the rest of life would live in some what ballance. So who is the smarter????

 

We're the smarter.

[pretender]

If you destroy your house, and I live in mine with no problems. Who is the smarter then Sisyphus. No way is it you>>>>>

[ScrnE11]

Hey SISYPHUS

Who on this planet dertroys there own environment apart from man.and you call that inteligent. If we died off the rest of life would live in some what ballance. So who is the smarter????

 

lol sorry to comment on this but it seems kinda funny. Just because other animals don't destroy the enviremnet doesn't mean ther more inteligent. It means they are less inteligent. I'm sure that if a dog could was just as inteligent as a human it would have simular problems with advancing but still keeping the earth safe.

 

---

 

But on the topic at hand. I think that the dinosaurs body would have to completly change for it to better adapt to learning rather then eating. Humans dont have sharp teeth or deadly bodies but we have bodies that can learn and do hands on stuff. Other animals on earth have bodies more for surving the elements and hunting for food.

[gcol]

As I said before: Intelligent maybe, but smart? I sometimes doubt it. Loony bins have more than their fair share of super intelligent psychopaths, n'est ce pas?

[pretender]

When you go upwards ..or downwards . whatever the case may be , tell that to the ghost next to you..Sisyphus

[Sisyphus]

Tell him what? That I'm smarter than a fish? I think that would be self-evident.

[FreeThinker]

Right. So, like flight, it may be that the some of the conditions did not exist earlier, and until they did, they extra burden of a large brain would have been a detriment instead of an advantage.

 

 

An organism with a large brain would benefit by having a body that could exploit the brains capabilities. If a large brain, relative to body size, did arise in some species of dinosaurs, it would have provided the pressure for the rest of the body to develop to suit increasing intelligence. I don't think this happened and see difficulty in assuming that intelligence only developed because evolution "progressed" towards greater complexity. It is safer to assume, I think, that intelligence is really rare in evolution and Homo sapiens are the rare species that acquired the characteristic. I don’t disagree that a greater complexity within the brain gave rise to higher intelligence but I do think that for the process to get started is a rare evolutionary event. If it was otherwise, shouldn’t we see other intelligent species in the present time?

[Steph]

Why do you need land animals for flight to exist? There are gliding fish and flying out of the sea is a rather effective way to escape a sea-going predator. It gives an advantage even if food is nonexistent above water. Flight could have happened earlier. and so could have intelligence.

 

and saying dinosaurs were dumb is a pretty, well, dumb statement. From the evidence we have, the dinosaurs were the equivalent of land mammals today (barring primates) in the range of their intelligence. While larger animals had smaller brain to body ratio, the smaller ones and the nocturnal species had more developped brain cavities. For some reason, people keep thinking of the slow and stupid sauropods that they were showing in shows in the last century. really, a good example of just how varied the ecosystem was is the BBC documentary "Walking with Dinosaurs" which is still accurate enough for this purpose.

 

now, with this said. dinosaurs were nowhere near as brain-intensive as the humans are today. but asking why didn't smart dinosaurs evolve after 165 MY isn't a very significant question. the same could be said for mammals since they appeared in the cretaceous and until 3 MY ago, they didn't have any human-like species. The thing is that intelligence is probably unlikely to appear (through evolution) in the timeframe of a 100 MY.

[pretender]

A thug has knowledge but he is not smart.

[pretender]

Man is hell bent on destruction so Sisyphus, this is why I am so certain that other species are smarter, They dont have the knowledge we do but that is different to being smart.

[MattC]

The truth is we dont really know. That is why I think it is very unlikley that there is intelligent life anywhere else in the universe. Intelligence looks like one of those very rare , to put it midley, evolutionary events.

 

 

The number of stars in the known universe is currently estimated to be somewhere on the order of:

1000000000000000000000 give or take a few zillion

 

That's why I think it's overwhelmingly likely (though nothing is certain) that there is "intelligent" life of some sort, somewhere, if not somewhere in almost every direction we can look (at some distance ...).

 

As for why humans have apparently done so much in so little evolutionary time, I see it as being akin to a match - a critical temperature is reached, and then an exothermic, self-sustaining reaction occurs (let's hope the analogy ends there, and we don't burn out all of our fuel and rapidly fade away. With humans, language and eventually literature allowed for the exchange and ultimately exponential growth of knowledge, which is why we have managed, in a few centuries, to go from candles and coaches to computers and space stations. So while the benefits intelligence may be high, if you have enough intelligence and tool making ability and so on, evolution occurs in steps, over long periods. Another way of looking at it is to consider the use of a great big brain ... if you're a duck. Without the body (for instance, an opposable thumb), the brain is only going to do so much, and the two aren't going to evolve together, in the same steps. Who is to say that dolphins, if they had more to work with, wouldn't be able to use tools?