Which extinct animals would you like to see?

When did the Syrian Camel die out?

Neanderthal 

Glad you posted here DW!

I have wanted to make a small statement concerning the greatest of the Brachariosaurids pictured earlier in this thread.

They are depicted as being 30 meters or more in length, and weighing 200+tons! With all of this weight, it seems they might well have to be very careful where they walked? And it also seems that they might well be unable to regain their footing if they fell, assuming their bodies could actually survive falling over!

It has been proposed, if we actually consider the great size of these beasties to be correct, that for these creatures to have lived, then gravity must have been less at that period of time?

For example, the King Tiger tanks of WWII, weighed about 69-70 tonnes and had trouble when encountering anything but the hardest dryest ground, it even cracked paved roads! You can read about it here;

http://science.howstuffworks.com/panzerkampfwagen-vi-tiger-ii.htm/printable

So, our 70 Tonne tank, weighed only about 1/3rd of what the greatest land animals weighed, and they were supported not by a large tread, but by four legs, and foot pods of some size! One might well reason that if these beasts moved by lifting one or two feet off of the ground at one time, like our current four legged friends, that this would tremendously increase the pressure upon the other two or three feet!

Thus my mention that the beast had to be very careful where he/she would step! When it came to mating, then other large problems might arise?

It might even be questioned just how much of a grade this beast could traverse? Slipping and sliding might well also become a problem?

Or did the beasts only live in shallow lakes, with hard bottoms?

So, was the ground harder back then or was gravity lower, or is there some other explanation?

Edited by opuslola - 28-Jul-2010 at 05:11

OK, Hollow Leg Bones! But bones do not make us a really significant part of an animals weight! Do they?

As far as I know about anatomy, etc., it is muscle and fat, and the significant part of water, etc., that determines weight?

But, perhaps I could be wrong?

Edited by opuslola - 01-Aug-2010 at 18:59

Originally posted by Carol Originally posted by TheARRGH All of them. But the top three would probably be Neanderthals, Whatever the largest and nastiest sea predator was, and the little-known Honest Politician. Yes, I was thinking Neanderthals too.

Agreed. Dinosaurs would prove difficult to clone (little DNA remaining) but more recent extinct mammals might prove worthwhile.

Woolly Mammoths also, I think. Plenty of frozen carcasses to help reconstruct the deteriorating DNA from.

Actually if dinosaur bones are anywere similar in weight to size as a human being, then a 200 tonne brute's bone structure would weigh about 40 tonnes, maybe less if they were hollow!

I still don't know how they managed to move and survive at that weight! That is, without them being full time creatures of the water!

But, it seems great creatures lived mostly upon dry land, even in those times! Again, at that weight, even getting near to a river bank could be deadly! Maybe they were very, very smart?, and careful?

This site is perfect for this thread.  It is about replacing animals in North America that died out long ago. 

http://www.actionbioscience.org/newfrontiers/barlow.html Which large animals are suggested for rewilding? Barlow: If one adopts an end-Pleistocene benchmark, then it is time to bring back the American cheetah, the American camel, the American plains lion, the American mastodons and mammoths, and other species by using proxies from the Old World to restart their evolution in the New, and to restore their vital roles as shapers of ecological landscapes. Let’s take the camel as an example. Camels originated here in North America, not in the Old World, around 50 million years ago. They spent most of their time here, but then around 3 million years ago they crossed from Alaska to Siberia and moved down into Asia and into the African continent. The camel is a good candidate for rewilding.

opuslola, it is nice when say something that is not an insult, and can actually be used for discussion.  Animals, and probably humans, crossed the Bering Straits.    It is not that camels left for better jobs in Asia, but they just spread,  Climate conditions changed and those that remained in North America died out while the woolly mammoth survived.  This could lead us to believe the camels and horses could not survive the ice age North America when it was covered by a sheet of ice, but woolly mammoth could survive these cold conditions. 

Right now melting of ice is opening the Bering Straits to warm ocean waters, and this of course causes more melting of ice.  I also causes a change in ocean currents that cause weather change globally.   Life as we know it will probably come to an end and we will face a different survival channel, even more challenging than our present economic crisis. 

http://archaeology.about.com/od/bcthroughbl/qt/beringia.htm

I have to eat my words.  I am deleting what I said in this space, because I was wrong, and you are right, Opuslola.  Evidently the horse and camel didn't even begin until the last ice, and they followed the melting ice north and crossed over the Bering Straight, while animals that began in Europe crossed over the Bering Straight into the Americas.  Now it makes some sense for some humans to stop in this region and make it home.  They got animals coming from both sides coming to them.   




Edited by Carol - 10-Sep-2010 at 11:49