RE: Sinosauropteryx filament melanosomes challenged

[Sim Koning <simkoning@msn.com>]

> That's debatable. Some lineages undergo simplification over time (snakes 
> becoming legless, avian
> genomes becoming more compact, etc). Sometimes simpler is best.

Yes, there are is tendency to lose parts, sometimes more often than they are 
gained. However, I would say a modern bird, or a dolphin, is more complex than 
the organisms living 2.5 billions years ago. My point was, that overall, the 
universe has emergent properties that produce things like the human brain and 
the computer you are using right now.
 
 
> Given that 99.9999+% of species that have ever existed managed quite well 
> without 'intelligence'
> (whatever that is), it would seem to be an adaptation that is no more 
> important than any other.
 
I was referring to complexity *not* superiority or "importance". I also made it 
clear that I agree with everything Tim Williams said, so I'm not sure who you 
are arguing with.
 
> This can be a detriment in areas of low productivity. Ectotherms pretty much 
> rule the planet's
> deserts because of their lower energy requirements.

Yes and some mammals have been to the moon, split the atom and broken the sound 
barrier, which is result of an extremely complex brain, as in the most complex 
organ in the history of this planet. Again I was referring to higher and lower 
degrees of complexity and energy consumption.
 
 
> As with intelligence, I don't see this as an adaptation that is any more 
> important than any other.

What I said had nothing to do with importance.
 
 
> The most successful form of life in the planet's history would be bacterial. 
> In fact they are *still*
> the most successful forms of life. They don't exhibit any of your 'higher' 
> characteristics, yet if a
> catastrophic event were to happen to the planet, they would likely be the 
> only life forms to survive.
> Now that's what I call a 'higher' life form.
 
 
The only form of life that could possibly have a chance of surviving the death 
of our sun in 5 billion years would be a technologically advanced civilization. 
A species that has effectively adapted to space in the same way sea life 
adapted land could potentially last until the heat death of the universe all 
while being driven by what would essentially be a form of Lamarckian evolution. 
Based on estimates done by Fermi, Drake, and others, a space faring 
civilization could colonize most of the galaxy in less than 100 millions years, 
which is only a small fraction of the age of the Earth. 
 
But once again, I was making a point about EMERGENCE not SUPERIORITY. It's 
probably my fault for not being more clear about that in my last post. 
 
 
Sim Koning
 
 
   ----------------------------------------
> Date: Wed, 8 Dec 2010 13:46:12 +1100
> From: dannj@alphalink.com.au
> To: dinosaur@usc.edu
> Subject: RE: Sinosauropteryx filament melanosomes challenged
>
> On Wed, Dec 8th, 2010 at 12:30 PM, Sim Koning wrote:
>
> > I would definitely say that archosaurs and
> > mammals are higher forms of life than reptiles, but not because they are 
> > "superior" but because
> > they tend to be more complex...
>
> That's debatable. Some lineages undergo simplification over time (snakes 
> becoming legless, avian
> genomes becoming more compact, etc). Sometimes simpler is best.
>
> > more intelligent...
>
> Given that 99.9999+% of species that have ever existed managed quite well 
> without 'intelligence'
> (whatever that is), it would seem to be an adaptation that is no more 
> important than any other.
>
> > use more energy...
>
> This can be a detriment in areas of low productivity. Ectotherms pretty much 
> rule the planet's
> deserts because of their lower energy requirements.
>
> > and have the potential to produce sapient life.
>
> As with intelligence, I don't see this as an adaptation that is any more 
> important than any other.
>
> The most successful form of life in the planet's history would be bacterial. 
> In fact they are *still*
> the most successful forms of life. They don't exhibit any of your 'higher' 
> characteristics, yet if a
> catastrophic event were to happen to the planet, they would likely be the 
> only life forms to survive.
> Now that's what I call a 'higher' life form.
>
> --
> _____________________________________________________________
>
> Dann Pigdon
> Spatial Data Analyst Australian Dinosaurs
> Melbourne, Australia http://home.alphalink.com.au/~dannj
> _____________________________________________________________
>