Why were dinosaurs so large?

[Moontanman]

You mean besides the facts that they were reptile, the brain structure involved in regulating metabolism is not developed enough to do it in them, and that other structures and organs for endothermism are incompetent or nonexistant in them? Not to mention, of course, that the environment was warm and stable enough for internal heat production to be unneccesary.

 

You need to provide some evidence of your claims, links to sources would be the general idea of Hypography, all the stuff you are claiming is a half a century out of date.

 

It has recently been discovered that some reptiles of today and then have some behaviors in common with warm blodded animals such as caring for their young, hunting in groups, "sustained" high speed locomotion. There is some evidence that they had some degree of internal heat generation cpacity. But that is not saying that they had as high levels of metabolic demand as mammals. No where near it in fact. To extend these discoveries into a fact that they were as endothermic as mammals or even gigantotherms is pure pop science fiction.

 

 

Show some evidence of this, I would love to know the truth but one thing you forget is that even mammals have "levels" of endothermy and your assertion that reptiles do not is demonstrably false and as birds are a subset of dinosaurs and that many non avian dinosaurs had feathers I think you need to show us some proof of your assertion.

[belovelife]

The Earth doesn't gain matter that fast, the time of the dinosaurs was only 200 million years ago to 65 million years ago, not billions of years.

 

cosmic dust

 

 

@ 40 tons per day

14,600 tons per year

2,190,000,000,000 tons per 150 million years

 

earth @6,600,000,000,000,000,000,000 tons

 

isnot too much of an addition, although if the core of the planet is a chunk of dark matter that slowly popcorns , adds matter and heat

then the size of the planet at the time of the dinosaurs may be much smaller

[belovelife]

http://www.terradaily.com/reports/Diamond_Impurities_Bonanza_for_Geologists_Studying_Earths_History_999.html

 

 

 

so from reading this it supports this in a way

 

 

if the continetal crust was formed in the initial formation of the earth, then it relates to the older diamonds, then as the earth expanded, the crust broke and moved, wich created the second type

[Moontanman]

http://www.terradaily.com/reports/Diamond_Impurities_Bonanza_for_Geologists_Studying_Earths_History_999.html

 

 

 

so from reading this it supports this in a way

 

 

if the continetal crust was formed in the initial formation of the earth, then it relates to the older diamonds, then as the earth expanded, the crust broke and moved, wich created the second type

 

 

Are you suggesting the expanding earth theory? from your link

 

"The simplest explanation," says Shirey, "is that this change came from the initial subduction of one tectonic plate under the deep mantle keel of another as continents began to collide on a scale similar to that of the supercontinent cycle today.

 

"The sequence of underthrusting and collision led to the capture of eclogite in the subcontinental mantle keel along with the fluids that are needed to make diamond."

 

Concludes Richardson, "This transition marks the onset of the Wilson cycle of plate tectonics."

 

What are you suggesting?

[belovelife]

yes i am, say you have a core of material that slowly decays

 

then as you have lower atomic number atoms, then you have more space taken up by the mass

 

now in my theory, you would have a core that does not go throught the impetali process, therefore it does not create gravity

then at the top layer, you have impetali occuring, but as you reach the next layer, nuclear decay happens, therefore allowing more atoms to get an electron shell

 

and the core "popcorns"

 

 

so then theoretically, at the formation of the earth, you have a ball of primordial energy, it's shell popcorns and creates the matter that comrises the initial size of the planet,

 

while the outer shell of the earth cooled, it created the concept of pangea

 

then as the core expanded, the tectonic movements created different continents

 

as the ocean cools the newly surfaced matter

[Moontanman]

This guy explains why the expanding earth is just not true so well

 

http://www.youtube.com/user/potholer54#p/u/22/epwg6Od49e8

[belovelife]

his main point was they could not define a mechanism, my model defines the neccesity of this mechanism for the creation of matter in the universe

 

from planets to stars to galaxies

[Moontanman]

his main point was they could not define a mechanism, my model defines the neccesity of this mechanism for the creation of matter in the universe

 

from planets to stars to galaxies

 

 

So you have no mechanism either?

[belovelife]

i thought my mechanism worked well

[Moontanman]

i thought my mechanism worked well

 

 

No better than the invisible twists of nothing the other guy said made the earth expand.

[belovelife]

the difference is in this concept, (similar to what we know as a quasar) as solar systems are formed, from matter being ejected from a central point, the ejected matter would go through this process

 

forming planets and each planet forming the majority of the atoms it is made from, where the reactions would be similar to the star, but the star is the major chunk of a potential "dark matter"

 

thus the active volcanic processes on planets would be due to this action, and the eventual swelling of the planet, until either the core is completely turned into matter,

[Moontanman]

the difference is in this concept, (similar to what we know as a quasar) as solar systems are formed, from matter being ejected from a central point, the ejected matter would go through this process

 

I have no idea what you mean by this, planets are not formed by matter being ejected by anything.

 

forming planets and each planet forming the majority of the atoms it is made from, where the reactions would be similar to the star, but the star is the major chunk of a potential "dark matter"

 

There are no chucks of dark matter and stars form from collapsing gas and dust clouds, matter clouds.

 

thus the active volcanic processes on planets would be due to this action, and the eventual swelling of the planet, until either the core is completely turned into matter,

 

Again, a planet starts out as a cloud of gas and dust, it is matter from the beginning, the core is matter as is the rest of the planet and the entire gas cloud. I don't understand where you get the idea that dark matter is involved.

[belovelife]

its because i see the galaxy similar to those spinning firecreackers

 

where the matter is ejected from a central mass

 

where the atomic nucleus is matter antimatter pairs annihilating and recreating powered by time, where this frequency definces absorbed

and reflected electro magnetic spectrum

 

(gravity is powered by time and is a weak force)

 

in this case, the amount of hydrogen is because it takes very little light to be bound by the internal nuclear function

 

 

 

this is just a theory,

 

if you have any questions, i'd be happy to answer

 

also if you have any holes in my theory, i wpould love to hear them

 

 

 

but i was saying that this "popcorn" action could be a explanation for the potential growth of our planet

 

in this specific case, there would be less gravity, thus allowing for the great size of the dinosaurs

 

 

 

[fahrquad]

The average size of a dinosaur was not much larger than a turkey. The predators got larger to be more effective against their prey, and the prey animals got larger to more effectively survive an attack by a predator. The higher oxygen content of the atmosphere at the time allowed the dinosaurs to get to such gigantic proportions. In response to the absurd comment that humans are small to avoid the dinosaurs, I will remind you the dinosaurs became extinct about 65 million years ago, long before our primitive ancestors came down from the trees.