this post was submitted on 18 Jul 2023
12 points (100.0% liked)

Palaeontology 🦖

831 readers
3 users here now

Welcome to c/Palaeontology @ Mander.xyz!



🦖 Notice Board



🦖 About

Paleontology, also spelled palaeontology[a] or palæontology, is the scientific study of life that existed prior to, and sometimes including, the start of the Holocene epoch (roughly 11,700 years before present). It includes the study of fossils to classify organisms and study their interactions with each other and their environments (their /c/paleoecology. Read more...

🦖 Rules

  1. Don't throw mud. Be kind and remember the human.
  2. Keep it rooted (on topic).
  3. No spam.


🦖 Resources



🦖 Sister Communities

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] FlyingSquid@mander.xyz 1 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Why is that the simplest explanation?

[–] givesomefucks@lemmy.world -1 points 2 years ago (2 children)

Because a 5lb animal rarely preys on a 10lb one...

Because there's no other evidence of mammals hunting dinosaurs...

Because the mammals paws was around the dinosaurs mouth, very few animals attack like that, but pretty much all defend like that...

Because this wasn't a normal occurrence, it was during a violent volcano eruption. The two animals might have just been stuck and attacked each other out of fear.

[–] FlyingSquid@mander.xyz 2 points 2 years ago (1 children)

That's not true at all. Wolves and lions constantly take on prey much bigger than them. And the dinosaur was an herbivore. Why would it be the aggressor?

I think I'll go with what the paleontologists who have had a chance to study the fossil have to say over someone who viewed a picture on the internet and came to their own conclusion that goes against the paleontologists.

[–] givesomefucks@lemmy.world 0 points 2 years ago (1 children)

I think I’ll go with what the paleontologists who have had a chance to study the fossil

So...

Not the one making the claim that the mammal was preying on the dinosaur?

Because he hasn't studied the fossil.

Glad we're on the same page

[–] FlyingSquid@mander.xyz 1 points 2 years ago (1 children)
[–] givesomefucks@lemmy.world 0 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 children)

“It does seem like this is a prehistoric hunt, captured in stone, like a freeze frame,” University of Edinburgh paleontologist Steve Brusatte, who was not involved with the study, said in an email.

If you read the study, they flat out said they dont know and have several hypothesis.

They're just running with the one that is least plausible because some people will believe the headline and share it on social media.

I don't understand what you're not getting, but I don't think explaining anymore will help

[–] FlyingSquid@mander.xyz 5 points 2 years ago

If you read the study, they flat out said they dont know and have several hypothesis.

I have read the study. It says that it was either predation or scavenging and gives reasons why. It also explains why the mammal would be the one being the aggressor. It does not suggest in any place in that study what you suggested. This is what you said:

The simplest explanation was the mammal was on defense

Please show where the paper agrees with that supposed simplest explanation.