| Welcome to Carnivora. We hope you enjoy your visit. You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free. Join our community! If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features: |
| Why did mammals take over? | |
|---|---|
| Tweet Topic Started: Nov 19 2012, 12:04 PM (5,724 Views) | |
| Carcharadon | Nov 21 2012, 11:32 AM Post #31 |
![]()
Shark Toothed Reptile
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Well the real reason why mammals took over the planet is because of the KT extinction event that wiped out the dinosaurs, as with them out of the way the mammals were able to take their route on evolution. But there are still large reptiles living today like komodo dragons, constrictor snakes and crocodiles |
![]() |
|
| SpinoInWonderland | Nov 21 2012, 01:58 PM Post #32 |
|
The madness has come back...
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
How about you go run around and continue worshipping your precious feline toys? Your statements are made completely out of bias against anything non-mammalian... |
![]() |
|
| theropod | Nov 21 2012, 09:58 PM Post #33 |
|
palaeontology, open source and survival enthusiast
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
you know your favourite animals are just on the way to die out as well, and yet you think they are superior to just about everythign else on this planet? and why did you list a number of animals that could never survive in places where lizards and snakes can thrive, and that could never attain the hights some birds can fly in without dying? Why don´t you give me an example were mammalians outmatch birds or non-avian reptiles int erms of adaptability? I haven´t seen that so far, except for cetaceans (which are specialized in a very specific niche birds did not adapt to, not because of lacking adaptability but simpyl because there were already mammals in this niche). In nearly every ecosystem on earth, the number of bird species does by far outnumber that of mammals. If I leave my house, I see lots and lots of birds, and not a single mammal save for the neighbours dog and other humans. |
![]() |
|
| Ausar | Nov 21 2012, 10:09 PM Post #34 |
|
Xi-miqa-can! Xi-miqa-can! Xi-miqa-can!
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
But of all the creatures, why mammals? I'm not asking how mammals took over, I'm asking why. |
![]() |
|
| Ausar | Nov 21 2012, 10:10 PM Post #35 |
|
Xi-miqa-can! Xi-miqa-can! Xi-miqa-can!
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
You do realize cetaceans are also dying off right? |
![]() |
|
| theropod | Nov 21 2012, 10:37 PM Post #36 |
|
palaeontology, open source and survival enthusiast
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
I know Why mammals? You mean why mammals are including the largest living animals? birds had a natural size limit that was hard to overcome, as they had to breed their eggs, and the climate got cooler. |
![]() |
|
| Ursus panthera | Nov 22 2012, 02:41 AM Post #37 |
![]()
Artiodactyla
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Mammals are dying out, Crocodylia are becoming superior |
![]() |
|
| Shaochilong | Nov 22 2012, 02:52 AM Post #38 |
![]()
Herbivore
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
To Prehistoric Cat and FelinePowah, fur + endothermy = strength, intelligence, stamina, and all-round superiority. In reality, fur + warm blood = fur and endothermy......... Mammals tend to do best in cooler climates. As we're still coming out of a glacial period, mammals are dominating. Before this ice age, you'd find hot deserts in Siberia and tropical rainforest in northern North America, and reptiles were everywhere. High temperatures are detrimental to mammals, while reptiles just go along with it (to a point of course). |
![]() |
|
| Shaochilong | Nov 22 2012, 03:01 AM Post #39 |
![]()
Herbivore
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
I've been writing a story on another forum of how humans die out and mammals decline very sharply. Reptiles (including birds), amphibians, and invertebrates then rise up and take over. I might post it here. |
![]() |
|
| spalea | Nov 22 2012, 03:53 AM Post #40 |
|
Heterotrophic Organism
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Being warm-blooded, they were the best evolved animals on Earth. After the dinosaurs extinction they have no more natural predators able to keep and to maintain them at the shadow. |
![]() |
|
| Jinfengopteryx | Nov 22 2012, 04:44 AM Post #41 |
![]()
Aspiring paleontologist, science enthusiast and armchair speculative fiction/evolution writer
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
You know Felines are endangered, so Tigers may not last very long anymore? I don't know if our generation will witness their extinction (I hope not), but it could be. |
![]() |
|
| theropod | Nov 22 2012, 04:55 AM Post #42 |
|
palaeontology, open source and survival enthusiast
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
You know about animals such as megalania, barinasuchus, purussaurus, titanoboa that would pretty easily be able to kill any modern and most extinct mammals? Plus dinosaurs didn´t go extinct and after the KP extinction (yes you have seen right, it´s KP! Tertiary has been dismissed as a valid name for a time period) they actually dominated the planet for another 10 or so million years and afterwards they remained top predators in many ecosystems, both aerial forms and terrestrial ones. |
![]() |
|
| FelinePowah | Nov 22 2012, 05:38 AM Post #43 |
![]()
Pussy Lover
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
This topic isnt about felines its about mammals and whats the reason felines are going to go extinct? its because of another mammal. The fact is after the dinos bit the dust every spieces had a chance to become top dog, mammals got there first and have held it ever since. |
![]() |
|
| Black Ice | Nov 22 2012, 05:40 AM Post #44 |
![]()
Drom King
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
That actually sounds pretty legit ^ |
![]() |
|
| theropod | Nov 22 2012, 06:14 AM Post #45 |
|
palaeontology, open source and survival enthusiast
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
the point it they are not holding it at the moment and they didn´t "get there" (were they didn´t get) because they were superior in some sense, just simply because they had an easier time growing large than birds have. mere body size is not an indicator for evolutionary success, and as you see in all other points they are basically outmatched by birds |
![]() |
|
| 1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous) | |
| Go to Next Page | |
| « Previous Topic · Zoological Debate & Discussion · Next Topic » |






![]](http://b2.ifrm.com/28122/87/0/p701956/pipright.png)



not very superior then!
why dont you run along and play with your ickle dinos toys...... 




2:09 AM Jul 14