In 1982 Dale Russell put forward an idea: What if dinosaurs like Troodon continued to evolve and the K-T extinction never occurred? The hypothetical "Dinosauroid" had body proportions similar to that of a human with large eyes and grasping, three-fingered hands. The Dinosauroid would have given birth to live young and did not possess mammary glands so instead the mothers will feed her babies by regurgitating partially digested food. The Dinosauroid's skull was based off of Troodon's and how it could have morphed if it had a brain similar to that of a human's. Russell also speculated that its language would resemble singing birds.
Ever since this fictional creature was created it has received various criticism from paleontologists. Criticism includes the body being overly anthropomorphic and that its body would keep a more traditional theropod build (such as retaining its tail and horizontal stance). Troodon, in life, is often considered to be the most intelligent dinosaur to ever live. Troodon had recurved teeth like a predator, but the teeth were also serrated -- like that of a herbivore. Obviously this dinosaur was a carnivore, it had long legs, large eyes, a big brain, and sickled toe class like that of a carnivore, but it is possible that Troodon was omnivorous. Scientists will never know how non-avian dinosaurs would have further evolved because they died out sixty-five million years ago so all of this is mere speculation.
In my household, it was believed that as long as we only used one ROM at a time per copy of any one game we owned, ROMs were completely acceptable to use. Is this true, or have I been breaking the law?
I've been wanting to watch Jurassic Park for some weeks now, and I finally got to do it on Thursday! It has always been and will always be my favorite movie! :)
Today we're grilling in the back yard, and planning to watch the second and third movies this afternoon! I seriously doubt that they will be anywhere near as good as the first, but they should be pretty all right.
Chalicotherium is a genus of odd-toed ungulates that roamed in Africa, Asia, and Europe from the late Oligocene to the earlier part of the Pliocene epoch. Everything about Chalicotherium is weird...and wonderful. It had long arms that ended with mighty claws, these claws made it to where Chalicotherium was forced to walk on its knuckles like a gorilla and to support knuckle walking as a form of locomotion, fossils reveal bone growths that would have supported pads. Calluses on their rumps also suggest that Chalicotherium would sit on its rear for long periods of time while browsing; similar to pandas today. To help with a browsing lifestyle, Chalicotherium's lengthy arms and claws were used to strip down leafy branches so where the animal could chow down. These arms and claws are quite similar to that of a sloth's. Also, as these creatures reached maturity their incisors and upper canines were shed, leaving their muscular lips, padded gums, and tongue to crop the soft foliage where it was then passed to the short molars. Despite sharing characteristics with sloths, pandas, and gorillas... Chalicotherium was still an odd-toed ungulate which means this animal would have been more closely related to horses!
So here it is. The first time I'm nearing the end of something without knowing the continuation. I'm about to be unemployed. Got my last paycheck earlier in July. It feels weird. I still don't know what my next job will be. I do not fear my future though. I've racked up good savings and I'm in good hands. However, I need to find out what I want to work with and I gotta figure that shit out real soon. August 1st I'm not longer considered a working citizen...and it feels real weird.
I'm going to be posting my pictures in a special album in my gallery called "Zoo Trip". Each one will be labeled to the best of my ability and memory. :) They were all taken with my 3DS camera, so they might seem lower quality than they could be.
A large Tyrannosaurus could exceed 12 meters in length, possess 60 banana-sized teeth, and weigh up to 9 tons! But perhaps the most famous dinosaur of all time had one comedic flaw...tiny arms.
It didn't take long for people to deem the tyrant's arms as vestigial. And while it is true that their arms are proportionally small when compared to their body size and their exact purpose is unknown, but they certainly are not weak. A Tyrannosaurus' arm is about three feet long and according to bone size and muscle attachments... "The bicep alone -- and this is a conservative estimate -- could curl 430 pounds," according to Jack Conrad, a vertebrate paleontologist at the American Museum of Natural History in New York. Humans on the other hand are only known to max out at about 260 lbs. But at the end of the day, despite their sheer strength, the T. rex's arms weren't very flexible -- movements like twisting and rotating was impossible. "The T. rex probably couldn't have done the arm-wrestling move," Conrad says. "So maybe you could get him on a technicality."
While I have not yet received any calls back from any of my prospective employers, and I can only think of one more place to apply in my town, I am in for a fun-filled day tomorrow! We're planning to go to the zoo in Asheboro, North Carolina, the largest natural habitat zoo in the world. First, we have a four-hour drive, and my brother and I just bought some CDs, mine country, his tropical, so we'll be listening to them on the way. I'll try to post some pictures afterward, maybe Wednesday or Thursday!
Okay, "King Kong" might be bit of an exaggeration but nonetheless its name means "giant ape" in Greek. Gigantopithecus existed roughly 9 million years ago to as early as 100,000 years ago in what is now China, India, and Vietnam...that means Gigantopithecus could have coexisted with some hominin species! Fossils imply that G. blacki was the largest ape to ever live -- standing almost 10 feet from the ground and weighing around 2,000 pounds (roughly 3-4x that of a gorilla and 7x heavier than the orangutan; its closest relative). Thanks to its immense size, Gigantopithecus probably had few predators once fully grown although tigers, pythons, crocodiles, hyenas, bears, saber-toothed cats, and even Homo erectus would've been threats for young, old and injured Gigantopithecus.
This ape's locomotion is currently uncertain due to lack of fossil evidence. Majority of scientists think that Gigantopithecus was a quadruped (like modern gorillas and chimpanzees) to better support the animal's massive weight while the minority suggests that Gigantopithecus was bipedal. In life, Gigantopithecus probably inhabited the bamboo forests of Asia and fed on seeds, fruits, and bamboo.
In the 2001 film Jurassic Park III there was a short fight between these two dinosaurs where the Spinosaurus emerges as the victor by snapping the tyrannosaurs' neck. There has been alot of debate about who would really win in this fight. And well, you won't like the answer I'll give you... Neither.
Spinosaurus lived in the early to late Cretaceous period (approximately 112 - 93mya) in what is now known as north Africa. While Tyrannosaurus lived 65mya in North America, that's at least a twenty-eight million year gap! So simply put, these animals would never meet. But for the sake of the arguement if, hypothetically, these two theropod dinosaurs did live at the same time and same place then they still were not likely to ever cross paths. Tyrannosaurus was a terrestrial based theropod while Spinosaurus was semi-aquatic. Tyrannosaurus' diet would have primarily contained other dinosaurs such as hadrosaurs, ceratopsians, and even ankylosaurs. Meanwhile, Spinosaurus was a piscivore and would've fed on various species of lungfish, giant coelacanths, and huge sawfish like Onchopristis. Simply put: the two dinosaurs would not be in competiton with one another. However, during times of drought, when the rivers dried up Spinosaurus might would need to adjust its diet in order to survive... While currently there is no solid fossil evidence that supports Spinosaurus hunting terrestrial animals there is some evidence elsewhere... Another, earlier spinosaurid known as Baryonyx was discovered with Iguanodon (a dinosaur) bones in its stomach region -- but this could easily have been scavenging rather than hunting. In South America a pterosaur (a flying reptile) bone was uncovered with a spinosaurid tooth stuck into it.
So even after all of that, if these two dinosaurs were to meet they probably wouldn't even fight. Both of these animals are quite large and engaging in an actual fight could prove fatal for both as the smallest infection could seal their fate. Usually, modern day carnivores will try to avoid conflicts with others by retreating. Playing safe is always smarter than playing reckless. If you're not satisfied with that answer than I don't know what to tell you. Both of these dinosaurs are forever extinct and a fight between them would be mere speculation as a real-life fight simply has too many factors in deciding the winner.
Been a while since I've been around these parts, but just felt like jotting down a few things about life and the universe - put my thoughts on to paper, so to speak.
Been thinking about updating my PC lately - about 5 years old now and, whilst I've updated some parts that have failed (graphics card and PSU come to mind) I think I need to bite the bullet and go for the jugular and update the CPU and motherboard with it. Currently running an AMD 1100T which has given good service, but I would like to go for something beastly. In addition to the CPU, I'd LOVE to add a M.2 SSD to my system - sadly, that's big dollars at the moment haha.
I'm sorted to go and see 'The Beguiled' sometime next week with the family (trailer below) - it looks like an awesome thriller, and with an all-star cast (Kidman, Dunst and Farrell) headlining it, it should be one film full of twists and traps along the way. Can't wait!
Of course, my main picture that I am hanging out for is Dunkirk (trailer below) - I'm a bit of a WWII buff, and combine the 'Miracle of Dunkirk' with the masterful storytelling of Nolan, and it's sure to be a winner :rainbow:
Song of the day Fortunate Son - Creedence Clearwater Revival
Do you know this feeling when you finally found what you would like to do, and then somebody pours cold water on your aspirations using valid arguments? You may get such experience if you decide to become an indie game developer and create games alone or with a small team. There is too much competition in a video games market. How would you present your creation among 4207 games that were released on Steam In 2016? There are success stories; however, it looks like they are exceptions that prove the rule.
Since I want to engage in creating games, I have decided to have a look at the industry from the perspective of a gamer. What would make me buy an indie game?
Almost nobody likes spoilers, but still, people like to know what they are paying for beforehand. Some details will not be superfluous but intriguing. For instance, I am much more inclined to buy a game, when I see what new features it provides. For example, Remothered: Tormented Father would seem another unremarkable survival horror if there were no mentioning about a fanatic cult of cloistered nuns in red, not present in beta, as well as about new mechanics (your enemies never give up or die, the soundtrack alerts you when they are getting closer, etc.) I mean, the way you present your game is also important. Obviously, I would not like empty promises that would significantly change my attitude to a studio and for the better as it was with No Man’s Sky.
Reasonable comparison with AAA titles
I do not like when developers compare their games with more famous ones and say that their creations are better. It sounds too presumptuous and abstractly. As a player, I would like to know, what the difference between the games is, and what new features I can get. Have you created something like Dark Souls, but better? The comparison makes no sense until there is an explanation that it is something like DS, but MMO.
No sky-high technical requirements
I appreciate the possibility to feed my eyes with modern colorful graphics, but I cannot afford myself to buy another laptop for gaming. My MacBook Air is not designed for playing high spec video games, but that does not mean I am destined to work and watch videos only. I would buy a well-balanced indie game that I can download and play immediately without using Mac maintenance software or Game Boosters. Besides, I do not think that hand drawn indie graphics are worse. Pixel art is also not necessarily a sign of a game made by lazy developers, although it can be sometimes. An interesting game plot along with stylish artistic work can beat any expensive game with realistic 3D models in my eyes.
The game has to be either unique or universal
There are players that prefer AAA titles and there are players who like games “with a soul”. I remember how glad they were when Child of Light came out. The latter, including me, appreciate unique experience they cannot get anywhere else.
For instance, Paradox Interactive decided to take a chance and did not passed it up. This company creates games many players feel squeamish about. However, they found their audience, which was eager to find just that kind of games like Magicka, Europa Universalis and War of Roses.
There are also indie games that do not have homogeneous audience, but still provide gaming experience that AAA games lack. That’s one more type of games that I would be interested in as well. By the way, Minecraft is a very good example of a game with simplistic graphics that became popular thanks to giving players various tints of emotions and providing them with experience that was not available before. There were times when Minecraft had more Twitter followers than Kotaku.
The last but not least: turning again to Minecraft, I think Markus Persson unintentionally gave players an opportunity to become creators and that worked. As a player, I appreciate it, like millions of others do. I also suppose, it is possible to analyze players’ needs and foresee what can become the next big thing.