My biggest grumble with these sort of speculative biology projects is that it ends up being more of a "what if there were dinosaur versions of ____" than "what if dinosaurs never went extinct". Convergent evolution is a thing that happens, but when every animal is just an archosaured version of an extant bird or mammal it gets to be very excessive.
and why would dinosaurs would change so much in 65 millions years when they barely changed their basal forms for way more time during all their existence, it just doesnt have sense
I hate this project because dinosaurs were around for so, SO long and they never stopped being recognizable as dinosaurs. Don't get me wrong they were super diverse. But they weren't shifting into mammals or weird abominations. They looked like regular animals. And what's worse is that they never went extinct to begin with. And you know what? They STILL look like very typical dinosaurs. You can't look at a cassowary and tell me much has changed at all.
Not only that but when you look at animals like therizinosaurs and micro raptor and even T-Rex if you add feathers, none of the birds are even weird for dinosaurs.
Given the time, along with the continual shifting of the plates, they would have changed. Just not as extreme in a situation where Nature is desperately trying to fill all niches after an extinction event.
Large flightless birds like that look like "dinos" (I know they are) because convergent evolution. All birds alive today including large flightless birds evoled from small not so tharopod looking flying birds. Matter fact there feet, the thing most people point to as being vary dinosaur dont look like dinosaur feet at all when close examined. Because they evoled to perch on tree limbs then back in to walking. A emu and pigeons feet have more in common than with any trex. Birds are dinosaurs but blue whales platypus and humans are all mammals.
@@robertstone9988 Birds actually evolved from very typical theropods. Early birds even had teeth. Their feet are still very dinosaurian, having scales, long and skinny toes, and digitigrade posture (except penguins.) If you look at the foot prints of a theropod such as allosaurus, and then of an emu, they look REMARKABLY similar. Anyway, there are many ways in which birds are unusual for theropods. But there were many dinosaurs which had unusual traits other than just birds. They all, however, still looked like an animal that- if you saw it- you'd have no trouble realizing it's a dinosaur. I think the hardest ones to recognize would be something like a sauropod, because their body plan is so different from the first dinosaurs. Quadrupedal, featherless, extremely long neck, herbivorous, and the front feet lack toes. Still, they don't come even close to being as unusual as most of the creatures people invent when doing these "What if no extinction" projects.
I enjoyed the video a lot. It was written and edited extremely well.... the only thing that kept popping into my mind, was wanting the author to have narrated it themself. Using text-to-speech removed the creator's passion for the topic, and I felt it would've been better if they'd spoken the script even if their English was spoken with a heavy accent.
@@Anomyron If you think about all he did right... it's a quick fix to hire a narrator. *shrugs* let's encourage the dude if you delved in and listened to his video
Peter Jackson actually referenced this book in creating the dinosaurs of Skull Island in King Kong(2005). It took me quite a while to find both this book and the history of skull island, but it was definitely worth it.
Favorite species from "The New Dinosaurs"...? One of mine is the Bricket. I think the way in which it rids itself of exterior parasites is very clever and inventive.
@@ChicagoScorpion The New Dinosaurs. He also did one for After Man. He's not going to do that with Man After Man because he disowns it thanks to the publisher going against his original idea for the book.
I feel like this Documentary has potential in the speculative biology concept, and as far as the writing is concerned it's by the strong suit and is well researched. Plus if the art accompanying the organisms was original then it's even better. The only problem is that text to speech voice just cheapens the work and makes it unwatchable. However, if it could be remade in a way that would do the heart of the project justice, hell I'd do all the narration free of charge in a week just so I could watch what this Documentary deserves to be. Until Curiosity Archive snags it and eats all the views lol.
You just have to think about this sort of thing with the evidence of the changes the dinosaurs had already gone through. The dinosaurs are an interesting group of animals because for about 180 million years they evolved pretty much unhindered, which is very rare for most large vertebrates. Their evolution essentially went like this: Triassic: small and very few specific niches, with very little diversification - Jurassic: large and beginning to fill various niches, with enormous amounts of diversification - Cretaceous: even larger and filling extremely specific niches, but with much less diversification. It seems as time went on the dinosaurs became larger and much more specified to their roles in their environment but this meant that there weren't quite as many dinosaurs filling the more common niches, because other animals such as mammals, birds, and other reptiles filled those roles. So, the logical next step would be that the dinosaurs would actually continue to decline in number. They were already declining, they were just getting bigger in their body mass and more advanced in their evolution. There would be fewer dinosaurs around as they continued to get bigger and mammals and birds took over more roles in the food chain. This means that the large dinosaurs would become even more vulnerable to changes in their environment, and therefore they probably would have gone extinct anyway, just later on. I think it's safe to say that until that happened, the abelisaurids, tyrannosaurids, ceratopsians, ankylosaurids, and hadrosaurids would have continued to evolve, and it's likely that the sauropods may have dwindled and died out as they already seem to have been doing. Most of the pterosaurs would have disappeared, although some of the largest (such as Quetzalcoatlus and Hatzegopteryx) would have continued on and diversified further. It's probable that the birds (which were dinosaurs, mind you) would have taken over most of the food chain and probably would have dominated the skies just as they do today, though they probably would have retained their teeth and been a bit bigger. As for the mammals, they likely wouldn't have evolved into anything much bigger than a dog or maybe, *maybe* a horse-sized creature. I think the hadrosaurids would have eventually shown convergent evolution and would have become animals much like the plateosaurs of the Triassic, and then eventually they would have become something similar to the sauropods in size. The ceratopsians probably would have continued to get bigger, and the tyrannosaurids along with them. The ankylosaurids likely would have grown in mass but remained low in their body posture to the ground. The abelisaurids eventually would have lost their arms completely and would have likely reaches sizes much akin to the carnosaurs of the late Jurassic, such as Allosaurus or Saurophaganax, perhaps even as big as Acrocanthosaurus.
Have you seen that speculative zoology piece about if birds were placed on a habitable environment and left to evolve ... It's called Serena or something like that.
The idea they lost diversity in the Cretaceous isnt at all accepted any more. There was a good few groups that diminished after the Jurassic but dinosaurs were still incredibly diverse. As well as that, many lineages (mainly theropods) got smaller overtime instead of larger as you said. Most notably birds, but also many other lineages or ceolurosaurs. Hell, there was even dwarf sauropods.
@@flightlesslord2688 I was talking about the megafaunal dinosaurs as it pertains to the topic of mass extinction. Megafauna are always at the greatest risk during an extinction event, and unfortunately for the dinosaurs their evolution meant that by the Maastrichtian the most significant of those megafaunal types (your tyrannosaurids and ankylosaurids and such) were generally larger and less diverse than they had been before. The smaller dinosaurs were still incredibly diverse, but they were being met by increased competition from avian dinosaurs. Of course, the pterosaurs were in a lot of trouble for a long time prior to that, and they were certainly 'bottle-necking' as one might say. The issue with this when it comes to the hypothesised continued evolution of the dinosaurs had the Chixculub Impactor missed or never existed or what have you, is that the dinosaurs were probably not going to change all that much, but they likely would have gradually decreased in diversity as they seemed to have been doing since the mid Cretaceous. The Late Jurassic and Early Cretaceous were very much alike in terms of prevalence of diversity, but from the middle of the Cretaceous to the end of it the dinosaurs appear to have become so highly evolved and broadly-reaching that the occupations on the food chain shrunk to levels we see today, particularly in Africa - one large predator dominates the large prey, a select few medium sized ones dominate or scavenge from the rest, etc. This may seem an odd thing to say but during the Kimmeridgian this was not the case, at least not in North America. At that time there were multiple apex predators of approximately the same or similar sizes, living in the same environment and (presumably) hunting the same or similar prey. Allosaurus, Torvosaurus, Edmarka, and Saurophaganax living together alone is enough to cause confusion, let alone the fact that Ceratosaurus, Marshosaurus and Fosterovenator were also all living together in the same way, and in the same environment as the former. This seems to have been a trend throughout the Mesozoic until the massive shifts in the Earth's climate during the Early-Mid Cretaceous, which also saw the decline in the carcharodontosaurids and the spinosaurids and the rise of the tyrannosaurids and the megaraptora. Quite frankly, it is possible that-had the asteroid never hit-these groups might have actually filled out their environments much like the aforementioned genera of the Morrison Formation, and maybe it's just a case of the organisms of the Late Cretaceous beginning to evolve down that path, but we'll never know for sure.
@@a.m11558 k, in terms of megafauna. But pterosaurs dying is now thought to be more due to lack of fossils and less to do with them actually losing diversity (at least for pteradactyloids). African finds show that both Nyctosauroids and Pteranodontids survived to possibly the end of the Maastrichtian.
Dinosaurs existed for 200 million years and didn't change excessively. For therapods and ornithomimids, three toes, upright posture balanced on a rigid tail is the norm. It seems like such hubris that we'd think dinosaurs would evolve to be like today's mammals, especially in only sixty-five million years
@@bigbcor ... yes, but the point of the video is evolution across 65 million years until today. Even across the Triassic, Jurassic, and Cretaceous, extinctions and all, there were always three groups. Ornithicians, Sauropods, and Theropods. On average, most species remained the same across 165 million years and two mass extinctions. The development of wings on certain groups of small Theropods was one of the only things that allowed them to survive the third and final extinction.
Some remarkable ideas make this video valuable due to insights that can take a while to develop otherwise, such as traits that become retained by subsequent evolutions of a species because they serve an adaptation-driven need. What I found myself wanting to see, were a video that traces dinosaur evolutions from the earliest known creature to the modern creature itself. This would leave out a number of dinosaurs that went extinct, of course, yet include progressions of anatomy across millions of years.
"What if the Dinosaurs Weren't Extinct"? And then they play the descendants of the Dinosaurs in the background: Songbirds. And they show animals that do not exist and will never exist, such as a Giraffe with the mouth of a Maiasaura duckbill dinosaur. In a Docu with a title like "What if the Dinosaurs Weren't Extinct"? Do I actually expect something like 'The true Jurassic Park' In the time of now' , where these animals are just as they used to be and people and current animals have learned to live side by side and with each other, such as Lions and Elephants in Africa, Tigers and Humans in India, and Humans and Wolves alongside Alligators and Crocodiles in America. This in this fantasy film is not what I expected with this title. This isn't a movie either, this is a Slideshow with some background noise and a 'Computer voice? Narrator' , and this Narrator makes it very difficult for us to follow the info in the subtitles because the voice shows very different info than the info that can be read as subtitles, meanwhile the Slideshow continues with two different kinds of info . Difficult and complicated. You should actually see this Slideshow twice: Once to hear what is being said, and the second time without sound to read what is written, who has time for that with a film of 1 hour and 33 minutes?
@@SA1em_Biot_2 The title is, What if Dinosaurs never when extinct, fact is they aren't, the clade Dinosauria still lives on in one group (Birds). It would be more correct to say, What if (these) Dinosaurs never when extinct, that lead to the evolution of so and so.
I understand the concept of convergent evolution but for the vast majority of these proposed dinosaurs, all you've done is take modern animals and made them a dinosaur. From flying Squirrels to Flamingos to the Dodo. Just because a lot of the environmental niches would be taken up by the dino's doesn't mean they'd look identical. Furthermore, one of the reasons for mammals being small was the size of the dinosaurs. With smaller dinosaurs and more conducive environmental factors there would be no reason why mammals wouldn't increase in size and complexity to live alongside them. Still an interesting "what if" video though so don't take that as criticism, merely observation.
That don't seem right. Do you have any evidence of that claim? Also, I assume that we are talking percent of biomass, not percent of individuals, because the rodens alone would easily outnumber all humans and all our mammalian livestock and pets.
@@khalil8043 No, birds are dinosaurs. They are dinosaurs with wings. They aren't a separate group. It doesn't matter that 66 million years ago they were already a successfull group, all the other dinosaurs were successfull groups. Every scientist on this planet agree on the fact that birds are actually dinosaurs
@@khalil8043 So you wouldn't classify modern mammals as mammals, since they aren't the same that lived 200 million years ago? Come on, the scientific classification don't count the period or the age
List of inaccuracies in this book: 1.the wasp eater would most likely descents from bug eaters like mononykus who has a feather coat and large claws to break the hives of bees and wasps 2.azhdarchids can’t not become plant eater because their not specialized in fruits,nuts or leaves besides they would be outcompete by sauropods 3.if tree dinosaurs are going to evolve they must have the traits like microraptor 4.pterosaurs can’t go from 4 legs to 2 5.think mammals would still fill the nich of sand predators 6.snakes would easily outcompete those long body dinosaurs 7.think the descents of rapetosaurus,majungasaurus and masiakasurus would rule Madagascar alongside lots of land crocodile and descents of lemurs. 8.it can be true micropachycephalosaurus can evolve smaller but not smarter more accurate it would dig or build shelter for itself not for a calzone 9.chronosaurus would be a possibility descents but also shantungosaurus would be a likely descents for Asian hadrosaur 10. Hadrosaur would most likely evolve a thicker crust like the antlers of a deer and they would survive temperate to polar habitats 11.think the descents of borogovia would be the best predator in the temperate forests and polar lands 12.mammals would get larger just as big enough to hunt young dinosaurs example repenomamus 13.therizinosaurus would be a mostly descent for a temperate browser like the tromble 14.birds would still be visitor to the poles 15 most like descent of the taranter would be the tarchia 16.the new ice age dinosaurs would be descent from ceratopsian like packyrhinosaurs and hadrosaur like edmontosaurus 17.hadrosaur would still have long tails 18.think a dinosaur like the struthiomimus would be a better model for a flashing tail Dino 19.a raptor like the atriociraptor or Dakotaraptor would be a possible descent of the north claw and raptor claws are found only on their foot and are used for stabbing not desimboling 20.don’t think triceratops horns would fused together they would be divide and their qills would turn in hard spikes like rhino horn 21.thesosaurus would be more accurate then hypsilophodon due to it being extinct 22.troodon would be a better descent 23.woodpecker would this be alive 24.useless spinosaurs their no way dinosaurs can adapt to full aquatic habitats 25.armadillosuchus would still be alive and evolve into a large armor animal 26. While true many smaller sauropods would go extinct but some bigger sauropods would survive due to the tree’s of the Amazon and southern savanna 27.hummingbird and guiding lizards would survive and out complete them 28.saltosaurus would be a likely descent for a armor sauropod 29.dreadnoughts would be a likely descents for the lumber and should a inch similar to the elephants of the Congo 30.cutlasstooth shouldn’t event existed due to gignotosaurus,mapusaurus dying of before the Cretaceous extinction and carnotaurus and other abelisaurs except majungasaurus would die as tyrannosaurus toke the role of apex predator 31.T. rex wouldn’t lose his arms all together only fuse into one large claw and scavenging is still up for questioning until we find another large apex predator in hell creek,still think the v rex is the most likely T. rex ancestor 32.the dip would evolve from struthiomimus and evolve into a creature similar to the deinocehus 33.bat winged dinosaurs like yi qi have gone extinct 34.isisaurus would be a likely descents 35.pachycephalosaurus wouldn’t get smarter but it dome crust could evolve into a giant horn 36.either a type of pterosaurs or flamingo would do this inch of filler feeder 37.pterosaurs wouldn’t evolve into aquatic animals for their diving birds and marine reptiles roaming the ocean besides aquatic pterosaurs are outdated 38.the last iguanodon was found in Europe not Australia in short by the time Europe became a continent iguanodon was fully extinct 39.think for a decent for the dingum would be a thorny devil or some other species of lizard 40.think for descent for the crack beak and tubb would be leyllaosaurus a small orthinopod than has big eyes 41.think emu’s and moa’s would still evolve on New Zealand instead of kloons and wandles 42. Coconut crabs would still evolve instead of ammonites 43.small pterosaurs can fill niches of island scavenger’s 44.sea pterosaurs would continue to fill the role of dividing flyers 45.hesperoins would still fill the nich of aquatic birds 46.either a giant fish or a filler feeding mosasaurus would do the nich of whales 47. Ammoites would get large but they wouldn’t ride the current more they would share the giant squid as deep giant cephalopods 48. Elasmosaurus can catch pterosaurs so maybe evolve to fully hunt them 49.the small pliosaurs would get larger and become deep divers like beaked whales but they hopefully get big enough to prey deep sea cephalopods Well that maybe all inaccuracies in this book but what other things are inaccurate and could happen in a world of new dinosaurs
@@canonbehenna612 you did not give 1 single reason to back up any of your arguments. I agree that the book is giga cringe, but you are doing the same thing. "X animal would probably do Y to reach Z state, because I said so"
Sometimes I think about how the tyrannosaurus rex would have evolved had the meteor not hit. Given it's already a complete killing machine what would it's evolution looked like to the present. Thoughts?
@@sonofmovienerdking7230 I saw a book where this was speculated once, and I think its plausible. The trend seemed to be to get bigger, bulkier, with all the power concentrated in the legs and skull, and the arms shrinking.
@@lightman3581 I'm not sure what the upper physical limit on that body type would be, size-wise. We do know of one therapod, at least, that likely got significantly bigger than Rex- Spinosaurus. But mostly the top several biggest types all max out around the same size. I think it likely that they couldn't practically get much bigger than they did.
Whzts with this two different narratives, one spoken and the other written. I would like to see the theoretical looks of the animals, but the scrip gets in way on some, irritating. But still would we be hunting them instead of deer, antelope, bears, ect . And what would we do with the flying reptiles?
If you're referring to the hypotheses about dinosaurs, no scientists ever claimed that they were facts, paleontologists are always very clear that these are educated guesses. Sometimes very educated (T. rex ate meat, we're pretty sure of that) sometimes total guesses (what color was T. rex? Any representation is as hasardous as the other). Most of the times between the two ^^ The problem, as often, is with the persons realying the information, it's easier to say things are that way, rather than to say that we suppose it's that way.
@@krankarvolund7771 Exactly. Most of the people, it seems, think ALL theories are verified, proven fact. It's hard to have an intelligent debate from that starting point. You, on the other hand, seem to know the difference between fact and fiction. Kudo's.
@@coledrevenj I follow real paleontologists who discuss things like that, one in particular often say that the only thing we really know is the bones. So, everything related to the bones themselves are quite sure, everything related to the behaviour, or the flesh on the bones is a lot more suspicious ^^
Hardly a new concept West of Eden -1984- Harry Harrison At the Earth's Core -1914- Edgar Rice Burroughs Are the first things that come to mind personally but it's always good to have new stories that can make use of updated knowledge.
Dougal really could've just made after man 2. I feel like there's much more to touch on with after man that i think he missed. Like insects,sea life, ecs. Especially with a particular island in which he list's no predators? I just feel like he could've touched on more of his amazing world.
Because mammals are fast breeders: they are polygamous, the males don't wait for female's consent, and they inseminate a large number of females. Birds instead are largely monogamous, males need the consent of the female, they mate only one/two time a year with the same female, and they lay eggs. Basically, the things that for us humans are crimes (rape and betrayal) were the key of the success of our evolution
@@celestialrowan because mammals just happened to be better adapted to the modern cenozoic era climate than birds or reptiles were. That's literally it. Contrary to popular belief, survival of the fittest isn't always the case in nature as oftentimes animal groups dominate and thrive in the world simply because of luck. Unlike the mesozoic which had a hotter and more humid overall global climate, the cenozoic had a colder and drier climate especially near the poles which mammals were just better adapted for. That's not entirely the case though, as there are cases where birds and reptiles managed to fill in major niches despite the dominance of mammals in that area (i.e. ratites like ostriches and emus occupying large grazing herbivore niches even in the modern era, large land crocodiles becoming the largest and most dominant predator of South America throughout most of the cenozoic until recently, giant monitor lizards becoming apex predators in Australia despite the presence of predatory marsupials, the terror birds able to reclaim an ecological niche that their raptor ancestors once had, etc.). And heck, until just recently, birds DID manage to become the dominant animal group in places like New Zealand and other isolated islands. Until the arrival of humans, only small bats can be found in new Zealand and pretty much every niche was filled by birds. Mammals didn't get the upper hand immediately. In fact, during the early cenozoic, since the overall climate was very similar to that of the late mesozoic, reptiles and some birds were actually taking over the world just as fast if not faster than mammals were. If the conditions had been different (like the world continuing to have a more humid overall climate until the modern period and hot tropical rainforests still covered every continent), we might have had a world dominanted by birds or reptiles right now. And finally, no, the success of mammals wasn't because of "rape" like the weirdo above me keeps saying💀 Would've loved to debate the man, but honestly I prefer keeping my braincells intact lmao
Mammals had a better anatomy for evolving into many different forms where as birds lost a lot of features making it difficult to take over as terrestrial mammals. Most of the dominant reptiles in the Mesozoic were warm blooded but most if not all died from the KT impact. If more warm blooded archosaurs survived they would have taken over the world instead of mammals
They didn’t they’re the birds… They just had to give up body size for flight. Whales are the mammalian equivalent to the dinosaurs where it makes sense to save energy metabolically to grow bigger because it leads to a lower surface are to volume ratio. We also see this at the bottom of the ocean with squid.
I'm sorry, but I didn't see where you credited the author and artist. Dougal Dixon. The New Dinosaurs: An Alternative Evolution is a 1988 speculative evolution book written by Scottish geologist and palaeontologist Dougal Dixon and illustrated by several illustrators including Amanda Barlow, Peter Barrett, John Butler, Jeane Colville, Anthony Duke, Andy Farmer, Lee Gibbons, Steve Holden, Philip Hood, Martin Knowelden, Sean Milne, Denys Ovenden and Joyce Tuhill.[1] The book also features a foreword by Desmond Morris. The New Dinosaurs explores a hypothetical alternate Earth, complete with animals and ecosystems, where the Cretaceous-Paleogene extinction event never occurred, leaving non-avian dinosaurs and other Mesozoic animals an additional 65 million years to evolve and adapt over the course of the Cenozoic to the present day.
Very interesting. This proves that humans and dinosaurs could not coexist. If the dinosaurs did not go extinct than it`s probable that mammals could not have competed with them and would not have evolved much more than small rodent like creatures.
Just say want to say this. If we had mass flooding of the earth and now cities under the ocean. Why not dinosaur bones under the sea and ocean beds as well?
It would be a dangerous and savage world for us humans, we need an futuristic styles and materials for our homes and communities to survive those giants , even waters will be dwelling with monstrous giants that will sinks ships and submarines
Since it takes around 20-30 years for even the largest mammals to decompose, where (Other than someones vivid imagination) did all these dinosaur bones come from. If they were supposed to have been wiped out 65 million years before man even existed, It should be impossible for any remains to be found. especially in some of the areas where people claim they are.
Dinosaur fossils aren't really bone anymore. Over many years minerals leaked into the bone and replaced it, forming what is essentially a very accurate cast of stone. It does take specific conditions for fossilization to occur though so fossils are relatively uncommon compared to the number of animals that actually lived and died.
@@snappycenter7863 It proves to me that mankind doesn't know as much as they think they do, (Especially how old the Earth is and what was here millions of years before we showed up.) and that some people are gullible enough to believe anything.
@@Spyderram57 🤔 we human can only know so much…a little at a time. Once in a while a bit of information is thrown at us n we can only speculate. It’s like the universe n fossil …what’s beyond the Milky Way?…or we can conjure life way back then!…nothing is clear!
You all need to chill in this comment section these aren’t accurate non-Avian dinosaurs that’s just common knowledge this isn’t about what if dinosaurs didn’t go extinct even if the title of the video may be misleading to some it’s about biogeography that’s why it uses biogeographic realms
My biggest grumble with these sort of speculative biology projects is that it ends up being more of a "what if there were dinosaur versions of ____" than "what if dinosaurs never went extinct". Convergent evolution is a thing that happens, but when every animal is just an archosaured version of an extant bird or mammal it gets to be very excessive.
and why would dinosaurs would change so much in 65 millions years when they barely changed their basal forms for way more time during all their existence, it just doesnt have sense
I totally agree. Some speculations don’t take into account that many dinosaurs can remain relatively the same, and filling the niche they always have.
Birds are classified under the Clade dinosauria
@@paulgray5099 birds ARE dinosaurs
@@paulgray5099 what are you saying?
I hate this project because dinosaurs were around for so, SO long and they never stopped being recognizable as dinosaurs. Don't get me wrong they were super diverse. But they weren't shifting into mammals or weird abominations. They looked like regular animals. And what's worse is that they never went extinct to begin with. And you know what? They STILL look like very typical dinosaurs. You can't look at a cassowary and tell me much has changed at all.
Not only that but when you look at animals like therizinosaurs and micro raptor and even T-Rex if you add feathers, none of the birds are even weird for dinosaurs.
yeah it is like they only gained beaks and they lost their megafauna but they are essentially the same
Given the time, along with the continual shifting of the plates, they would have changed. Just not as extreme in a situation where Nature is desperately trying to fill all niches after an extinction event.
Large flightless birds like that look like "dinos" (I know they are) because convergent evolution. All birds alive today including large flightless birds evoled from small not so tharopod looking flying birds. Matter fact there feet, the thing most people point to as being vary dinosaur dont look like dinosaur feet at all when close examined. Because they evoled to perch on tree limbs then back in to walking. A emu and pigeons feet have more in common than with any trex. Birds are dinosaurs but blue whales platypus and humans are all mammals.
@@robertstone9988 Birds actually evolved from very typical theropods. Early birds even had teeth. Their feet are still very dinosaurian, having scales, long and skinny toes, and digitigrade posture (except penguins.) If you look at the foot prints of a theropod such as allosaurus, and then of an emu, they look REMARKABLY similar.
Anyway, there are many ways in which birds are unusual for theropods. But there were many dinosaurs which had unusual traits other than just birds. They all, however, still looked like an animal that- if you saw it- you'd have no trouble realizing it's a dinosaur. I think the hardest ones to recognize would be something like a sauropod, because their body plan is so different from the first dinosaurs. Quadrupedal, featherless, extremely long neck, herbivorous, and the front feet lack toes. Still, they don't come even close to being as unusual as most of the creatures people invent when doing these "What if no extinction" projects.
This AI robot man made a really cool documentary. Keep it up.
😂😂😂
I enjoyed the video a lot. It was written and edited extremely well.... the only thing that kept popping into my mind, was wanting the author to have narrated it themself. Using text-to-speech removed the creator's passion for the topic, and I felt it would've been better if they'd spoken the script even if their English was spoken with a heavy accent.
Yes I was thinking to myself why the narrator doesn’t speak for himself., the text to speech makes it a bit boring
I had to turn it off when I heard the awful AI voice. Ugh.
Instant turn off for me
@@Anomyron If you think about all he did right... it's a quick fix to hire a narrator. *shrugs* let's encourage the dude if you delved in and listened to his video
Peter Jackson actually referenced this book in creating the dinosaurs of Skull Island in King Kong(2005). It took me quite a while to find both this book and the history of skull island, but it was definitely worth it.
its one of my favorite books especially that it dedicated such a detailed life cycle of my favorite the Vastatosaurus Rex
Wait I think you just found some lost media :D
thats awesome ngl
Time to grab popcorn and watch a movie
Favorite species from "The New Dinosaurs"...?
One of mine is the Bricket. I think the way in which it rids itself of exterior parasites is very clever and inventive.
They need to do an updated version of this series, The Future is Wild and Alien Planet.
The original author plans to do just that in the near future when he reprints the book.
@@troin3925 for all those books?
@@ChicagoScorpion The New Dinosaurs. He also did one for After Man. He's not going to do that with Man After Man because he disowns it thanks to the publisher going against his original idea for the book.
I feel like this Documentary has potential in the speculative biology concept, and as far as the writing is concerned it's by the strong suit and is well researched. Plus if the art accompanying the organisms was original then it's even better. The only problem is that text to speech voice just cheapens the work and makes it unwatchable. However, if it could be remade in a way that would do the heart of the project justice, hell I'd do all the narration free of charge in a week just so I could watch what this Documentary deserves to be. Until Curiosity Archive snags it and eats all the views lol.
Do you know that this is a reupload sir?
@@Denneth_D. Yes I do… and what does that have go do with anything?
You just have to think about this sort of thing with the evidence of the changes the dinosaurs had already gone through. The dinosaurs are an interesting group of animals because for about 180 million years they evolved pretty much unhindered, which is very rare for most large vertebrates.
Their evolution essentially went like this: Triassic: small and very few specific niches, with very little diversification - Jurassic: large and beginning to fill various niches, with enormous amounts of diversification - Cretaceous: even larger and filling extremely specific niches, but with much less diversification. It seems as time went on the dinosaurs became larger and much more specified to their roles in their environment but this meant that there weren't quite as many dinosaurs filling the more common niches, because other animals such as mammals, birds, and other reptiles filled those roles.
So, the logical next step would be that the dinosaurs would actually continue to decline in number. They were already declining, they were just getting bigger in their body mass and more advanced in their evolution. There would be fewer dinosaurs around as they continued to get bigger and mammals and birds took over more roles in the food chain. This means that the large dinosaurs would become even more vulnerable to changes in their environment, and therefore they probably would have gone extinct anyway, just later on.
I think it's safe to say that until that happened, the abelisaurids, tyrannosaurids, ceratopsians, ankylosaurids, and hadrosaurids would have continued to evolve, and it's likely that the sauropods may have dwindled and died out as they already seem to have been doing. Most of the pterosaurs would have disappeared, although some of the largest (such as Quetzalcoatlus and Hatzegopteryx) would have continued on and diversified further. It's probable that the birds (which were dinosaurs, mind you) would have taken over most of the food chain and probably would have dominated the skies just as they do today, though they probably would have retained their teeth and been a bit bigger.
As for the mammals, they likely wouldn't have evolved into anything much bigger than a dog or maybe, *maybe* a horse-sized creature.
I think the hadrosaurids would have eventually shown convergent evolution and would have become animals much like the plateosaurs of the Triassic, and then eventually they would have become something similar to the sauropods in size. The ceratopsians probably would have continued to get bigger, and the tyrannosaurids along with them. The ankylosaurids likely would have grown in mass but remained low in their body posture to the ground. The abelisaurids eventually would have lost their arms completely and would have likely reaches sizes much akin to the carnosaurs of the late Jurassic, such as Allosaurus or Saurophaganax, perhaps even as big as Acrocanthosaurus.
Have you seen that speculative zoology piece about if birds were placed on a habitable environment and left to evolve ... It's called Serena or something like that.
The idea they lost diversity in the Cretaceous isnt at all accepted any more. There was a good few groups that diminished after the Jurassic but dinosaurs were still incredibly diverse. As well as that, many lineages (mainly theropods) got smaller overtime instead of larger as you said. Most notably birds, but also many other lineages or ceolurosaurs. Hell, there was even dwarf sauropods.
@@flightlesslord2688 I was talking about the megafaunal dinosaurs as it pertains to the topic of mass extinction. Megafauna are always at the greatest risk during an extinction event, and unfortunately for the dinosaurs their evolution meant that by the Maastrichtian the most significant of those megafaunal types (your tyrannosaurids and ankylosaurids and such) were generally larger and less diverse than they had been before. The smaller dinosaurs were still incredibly diverse, but they were being met by increased competition from avian dinosaurs.
Of course, the pterosaurs were in a lot of trouble for a long time prior to that, and they were certainly 'bottle-necking' as one might say.
The issue with this when it comes to the hypothesised continued evolution of the dinosaurs had the Chixculub Impactor missed or never existed or what have you, is that the dinosaurs were probably not going to change all that much, but they likely would have gradually decreased in diversity as they seemed to have been doing since the mid Cretaceous. The Late Jurassic and Early Cretaceous were very much alike in terms of prevalence of diversity, but from the middle of the Cretaceous to the end of it the dinosaurs appear to have become so highly evolved and broadly-reaching that the occupations on the food chain shrunk to levels we see today, particularly in Africa - one large predator dominates the large prey, a select few medium sized ones dominate or scavenge from the rest, etc. This may seem an odd thing to say but during the Kimmeridgian this was not the case, at least not in North America.
At that time there were multiple apex predators of approximately the same or similar sizes, living in the same environment and (presumably) hunting the same or similar prey. Allosaurus, Torvosaurus, Edmarka, and Saurophaganax living together alone is enough to cause confusion, let alone the fact that Ceratosaurus, Marshosaurus and Fosterovenator were also all living together in the same way, and in the same environment as the former.
This seems to have been a trend throughout the Mesozoic until the massive shifts in the Earth's climate during the Early-Mid Cretaceous, which also saw the decline in the carcharodontosaurids and the spinosaurids and the rise of the tyrannosaurids and the megaraptora.
Quite frankly, it is possible that-had the asteroid never hit-these groups might have actually filled out their environments much like the aforementioned genera of the Morrison Formation, and maybe it's just a case of the organisms of the Late Cretaceous beginning to evolve down that path, but we'll never know for sure.
@@a.m11558 k, in terms of megafauna. But pterosaurs dying is now thought to be more due to lack of fossils and less to do with them actually losing diversity (at least for pteradactyloids). African finds show that both Nyctosauroids and Pteranodontids survived to possibly the end of the Maastrichtian.
I ant reading allat 💀
They didn't all go extinct. We call them birds.
Have this book in my collection since I was a kid.
Then it's not very old huh
Dinosaurs existed for 200 million years and didn't change excessively. For therapods and ornithomimids, three toes, upright posture balanced on a rigid tail is the norm. It seems like such hubris that we'd think dinosaurs would evolve to be like today's mammals, especially in only sixty-five million years
you forgot multiple massive extinction events during that time…took 65 million years to get to us today..
@@bigbcor ... yes, but the point of the video is evolution across 65 million years until today.
Even across the Triassic, Jurassic, and Cretaceous, extinctions and all, there were always three groups. Ornithicians, Sauropods, and Theropods.
On average, most species remained the same across 165 million years and two mass extinctions. The development of wings on certain groups of small Theropods was one of the only things that allowed them to survive the third and final extinction.
I woke up in the middle of the night to this
If only this show had a good narrator it would be amazing.
Some remarkable ideas make this video valuable due to insights that can take a while to develop otherwise, such as traits that become retained by subsequent evolutions of a species because they serve an adaptation-driven need.
What I found myself wanting to see, were a video that traces dinosaur evolutions from the earliest known creature to the modern creature itself. This would leave out a number of dinosaurs that went extinct, of course, yet include progressions of anatomy across millions of years.
That was a huge work! Thank you very much!
Hannibal would have utilized the dinosaurs instead of elephants for his shock troops.
I will admit that this text to speech bot actually sounds much better than most
Its wild that Dougal Dixon predicted featherlike integument on Ornithiscians.
These are all really good guesses. We really don't know for sure about what these animals did or didn't do.
Yeah, we do. They got wiped out.
200 million years and no increase in intelligence.
Ivve been looking for soemthing like this for a while now. This is pretty epic
"What if the Dinosaurs Weren't Extinct"?
And then they play the descendants of the Dinosaurs in the background: Songbirds.
And they show animals that do not exist and will never exist, such as a Giraffe with the mouth of a Maiasaura duckbill dinosaur.
In a Docu with a title like "What if the Dinosaurs Weren't Extinct"? Do I actually expect something like 'The true Jurassic Park' In the time of now' , where these animals are just as they used to be and people and current animals have learned to live side by side and with each other, such as Lions and Elephants in Africa, Tigers and Humans in India, and Humans and Wolves alongside Alligators and Crocodiles in America.
This in this fantasy film is not what I expected with this title.
This isn't a movie either, this is a Slideshow with some background noise and a 'Computer voice? Narrator' , and this Narrator makes it very difficult for us to follow the info in the subtitles because the voice shows very different info than the info that can be read as subtitles, meanwhile the Slideshow continues with two different kinds of info .
Difficult and complicated.
You should actually see this Slideshow twice: Once to hear what is being said, and the second time without sound to read what is written, who has time for that with a film of 1 hour and 33 minutes?
This book is litteraly just modern animals but as dinosaurs.
If man survived along with dinosaurs we'd have at minimum moved them to preserves more likely hunted them to extinction
What if Dinosaurs never when extinct. Birds, HELLO!
The name was about non-avian
@@SA1em_Biot_2 The title is, What if Dinosaurs never when extinct, fact is they aren't, the clade Dinosauria still lives on in one group (Birds). It would be more correct to say, What if (these) Dinosaurs never when extinct, that lead to the evolution of so and so.
@@zebedeemadness2672 Do you think I don't know?
@@SA1em_Biot_2 Don't care either way.
@@zebedeemadness2672 you need to chill
I understand the concept of convergent evolution but for the vast majority of these proposed dinosaurs, all you've done is take modern animals and made them a dinosaur. From flying Squirrels to Flamingos to the Dodo. Just because a lot of the environmental niches would be taken up by the dino's doesn't mean they'd look identical. Furthermore, one of the reasons for mammals being small was the size of the dinosaurs. With smaller dinosaurs and more conducive environmental factors there would be no reason why mammals wouldn't increase in size and complexity to live alongside them. Still an interesting "what if" video though so don't take that as criticism, merely observation.
Its amazing to think that of all mammal lofe on earth, 96 percent are livestock, pets and humans and 4 percent are wild.
That don't seem right. Do you have any evidence of that claim? Also, I assume that we are talking percent of biomass, not percent of individuals, because the rodens alone would easily outnumber all humans and all our mammalian livestock and pets.
@@Kris_Lighthawk The stats are true, but they are in biomass.
@@Kris_Lighthawk it’s not true
This would be m7ch better if it had an actual person reading the line.
Tbh i dont expect titanosaurs to change their body plan at all.
Well maybe they will developed some armor
More illustrations while speaking please ❤️
We already had dinosaurs and they are the birds
No they are not, go read some books son, there were plenty of bird species 65 million years ago, they are only close relatives to dinosaurs.
@@khalil8043 No, birds are dinosaurs. They are dinosaurs with wings. They aren't a separate group. It doesn't matter that 66 million years ago they were already a successfull group, all the other dinosaurs were successfull groups. Every scientist on this planet agree on the fact that birds are actually dinosaurs
@tf_uwu Yeah, but even avian dinosaurs are dinosaurs. So birds are still dinosaurs
I wouldn't classify modern birds as dinosaurs, they are different animals period.
@@khalil8043 So you wouldn't classify modern mammals as mammals, since they aren't the same that lived 200 million years ago? Come on, the scientific classification don't count the period or the age
Oops, I'm on THAT part of youtube again.
Better question: what if dinosaurs never even existed?
That would be a huge mystery
Very cool bro
We would be on the menu.
Even though the idea and book sound quite interesting, it was very outdated in a lot of reason
In the YT chat I talked with my Russian friend. There I said all the theses about, as well as everything that does not suit me
List of inaccuracies in this book:
1.the wasp eater would most likely descents from bug eaters like mononykus who has a feather coat and large claws to break the hives of bees and wasps
2.azhdarchids can’t not become plant eater because their not specialized in fruits,nuts or leaves besides they would be outcompete by sauropods
3.if tree dinosaurs are going to evolve they must have the traits like microraptor
4.pterosaurs can’t go from 4 legs to 2
5.think mammals would still fill the nich of sand predators
6.snakes would easily outcompete those long body dinosaurs
7.think the descents of rapetosaurus,majungasaurus and masiakasurus would rule Madagascar alongside lots of land crocodile and descents of lemurs.
8.it can be true micropachycephalosaurus can evolve smaller but not smarter more accurate it would dig or build shelter for itself not for a calzone
9.chronosaurus would be a possibility descents but also shantungosaurus would be a likely descents for Asian hadrosaur
10. Hadrosaur would most likely evolve a thicker crust like the antlers of a deer and they would survive temperate to polar habitats
11.think the descents of borogovia would be the best predator in the temperate forests and polar lands
12.mammals would get larger just as big enough to hunt young dinosaurs example repenomamus
13.therizinosaurus would be a mostly descent for a temperate browser like the tromble
14.birds would still be visitor to the poles
15 most like descent of the taranter would be the tarchia
16.the new ice age dinosaurs would be descent from ceratopsian like packyrhinosaurs and hadrosaur like edmontosaurus
17.hadrosaur would still have long tails
18.think a dinosaur like the struthiomimus would be a better model for a flashing tail Dino
19.a raptor like the atriociraptor or Dakotaraptor would be a possible descent of the north claw and raptor claws are found only on their foot and are used for stabbing not desimboling
20.don’t think triceratops horns would fused together they would be divide and their qills would turn in hard spikes like rhino horn
21.thesosaurus would be more accurate then hypsilophodon due to it being extinct
22.troodon would be a better descent
23.woodpecker would this be alive
24.useless spinosaurs their no way dinosaurs can adapt to full aquatic habitats
25.armadillosuchus would still be alive and evolve into a large armor animal
26. While true many smaller sauropods would go extinct but some bigger sauropods would survive due to the tree’s of the Amazon and southern savanna
27.hummingbird and guiding lizards would survive and out complete them
28.saltosaurus would be a likely descent for a armor sauropod
29.dreadnoughts would be a likely descents for the lumber and should a inch similar to the elephants of the Congo
30.cutlasstooth shouldn’t event existed due to gignotosaurus,mapusaurus dying of before the Cretaceous extinction and carnotaurus and other abelisaurs except majungasaurus would die as tyrannosaurus toke the role of apex predator
31.T. rex wouldn’t lose his arms all together only fuse into one large claw and scavenging is still up for questioning until we find another large apex predator in hell creek,still think the v rex is the most likely T. rex ancestor
32.the dip would evolve from struthiomimus and evolve into a creature similar to the deinocehus
33.bat winged dinosaurs like yi qi have gone extinct
34.isisaurus would be a likely descents
35.pachycephalosaurus wouldn’t get smarter but it dome crust could evolve into a giant horn
36.either a type of pterosaurs or flamingo would do this inch of filler feeder
37.pterosaurs wouldn’t evolve into aquatic animals for their diving birds and marine reptiles roaming the ocean besides aquatic pterosaurs are outdated
38.the last iguanodon was found in Europe not Australia in short by the time Europe became a continent iguanodon was fully extinct
39.think for a decent for the dingum would be a thorny devil or some other species of lizard
40.think for descent for the crack beak and tubb would be leyllaosaurus a small orthinopod than has big eyes
41.think emu’s and moa’s would still evolve on New Zealand instead of kloons and wandles
42. Coconut crabs would still evolve instead of ammonites
43.small pterosaurs can fill niches of island scavenger’s
44.sea pterosaurs would continue to fill the role of dividing flyers
45.hesperoins would still fill the nich of aquatic birds
46.either a giant fish or a filler feeding mosasaurus would do the nich of whales
47. Ammoites would get large but they wouldn’t ride the current more they would share the giant squid as deep giant cephalopods
48. Elasmosaurus can catch pterosaurs so maybe evolve to fully hunt them
49.the small pliosaurs would get larger and become deep divers like beaked whales but they hopefully get big enough to prey deep sea cephalopods
Well that maybe all inaccuracies in this book but what other things are inaccurate and could happen in a world of new dinosaurs
@Zekeriya Şentürk hey there could be a universe were the meteorite never hit earth
@@canonbehenna612 you did not give 1 single reason to back up any of your arguments. I agree that the book is giga cringe, but you are doing the same thing.
"X animal would probably do Y to reach Z state, because I said so"
They look almost like mythical creatures tbh.
2:27:45 Legs and tail?
Ancestor: 6 legs mammal?
Sometimes I think about how the tyrannosaurus rex would have evolved had the meteor not hit. Given it's already a complete killing machine what would it's evolution looked like to the present. Thoughts?
Maybe we could have seen monstrous species of about 13 meters or 15 meters in length if Tyrannosaurus would continue to evolve if meteor never hit
Duck genitalia
Further down the evolutionary ladder, it would've lost its arms entirely, similar to how whales and dolphins lost their back limbs.
@@sonofmovienerdking7230 I saw a book where this was speculated once, and I think its plausible. The trend seemed to be to get bigger, bulkier, with all the power concentrated in the legs and skull, and the arms shrinking.
@@lightman3581 I'm not sure what the upper physical limit on that body type would be, size-wise. We do know of one therapod, at least, that likely got significantly bigger than Rex- Spinosaurus. But mostly the top several biggest types all max out around the same size. I think it likely that they couldn't practically get much bigger than they did.
Whzts with this two different narratives, one spoken and the other written. I would like to see the theoretical looks of the animals, but the scrip gets in way on some, irritating. But still would we be hunting them instead of deer, antelope, bears, ect . And what would we do with the flying reptiles?
Great video
I love how these 'facts' of history get changed as often as underwear. Why not state these aren't 'facts', they are 'theories', AKA= educated guesses.
It was originally an invention of Dougal Dixon. Too bad he didn't take into account the fact that dinosaurs were never tree climbers.
If you're referring to the hypotheses about dinosaurs, no scientists ever claimed that they were facts, paleontologists are always very clear that these are educated guesses. Sometimes very educated (T. rex ate meat, we're pretty sure of that) sometimes total guesses (what color was T. rex? Any representation is as hasardous as the other). Most of the times between the two ^^
The problem, as often, is with the persons realying the information, it's easier to say things are that way, rather than to say that we suppose it's that way.
@@krankarvolund7771 Exactly. Most of the people, it seems, think ALL theories are verified, proven fact. It's hard to have an intelligent debate from that starting point. You, on the other hand, seem to know the difference between fact and fiction. Kudo's.
@@coledrevenj I follow real paleontologists who discuss things like that, one in particular often say that the only thing we really know is the bones. So, everything related to the bones themselves are quite sure, everything related to the behaviour, or the flesh on the bones is a lot more suspicious ^^
@@krankarvolund7771 Completely agree.
I expected to see what evolved into the upright, thinking dominant species instead. We can't bee that special.
I have an entire world centered around this idea. Humans still manage to evolve, but were basically slaves.
I agree that you are basically a slave.
Hardly a new concept
West of Eden -1984- Harry Harrison
At the Earth's Core -1914- Edgar Rice Burroughs
Are the first things that come to mind personally but it's always good to have new stories that can make use of updated knowledge.
Hi! The Living God was here.
fun thought expiriment/ creative project
What if dinosaurs were not extinct? Hey! I once married one, don't worry I am not extinct, I got away.
We don't call them dinosaurs anymore.
We call them _"matures"_ lol
Brilliant.
❤
They didn't all go extinct. Birds are modern day dinosaurs and see how they evolved to their new surroundings.
it was talking about non-avian dinosaurs
this kinda make me think the rex would just bite and play at a large ancient crochodile. its teeth were the size of hippo tusks and much more sturdy .
The wyrm is so trippy
Argee it shouldn’t exist because snakes would be more common
Dougal really could've just made after man 2. I feel like there's much more to touch on with after man that i think he missed. Like insects,sea life, ecs. Especially with a particular island in which he list's no predators? I just feel like he could've touched on more of his amazing world.
its weird how birds survived but never took the niches of land animals again instead it was only mammals that did that
im not counting the acceptions like terror birds ykwim
Because mammals are fast breeders: they are polygamous, the males don't wait for female's consent, and they inseminate a large number of females. Birds instead are largely monogamous, males need the consent of the female, they mate only one/two time a year with the same female, and they lay eggs. Basically, the things that for us humans are crimes (rape and betrayal) were the key of the success of our evolution
@@celestialrowan because mammals just happened to be better adapted to the modern cenozoic era climate than birds or reptiles were. That's literally it. Contrary to popular belief, survival of the fittest isn't always the case in nature as oftentimes animal groups dominate and thrive in the world simply because of luck. Unlike the mesozoic which had a hotter and more humid overall global climate, the cenozoic had a colder and drier climate especially near the poles which mammals were just better adapted for. That's not entirely the case though, as there are cases where birds and reptiles managed to fill in major niches despite the dominance of mammals in that area (i.e. ratites like ostriches and emus occupying large grazing herbivore niches even in the modern era, large land crocodiles becoming the largest and most dominant predator of South America throughout most of the cenozoic until recently, giant monitor lizards becoming apex predators in Australia despite the presence of predatory marsupials, the terror birds able to reclaim an ecological niche that their raptor ancestors once had, etc.). And heck, until just recently, birds DID manage to become the dominant animal group in places like New Zealand and other isolated islands. Until the arrival of humans, only small bats can be found in new Zealand and pretty much every niche was filled by birds. Mammals didn't get the upper hand immediately. In fact, during the early cenozoic, since the overall climate was very similar to that of the late mesozoic, reptiles and some birds were actually taking over the world just as fast if not faster than mammals were. If the conditions had been different (like the world continuing to have a more humid overall climate until the modern period and hot tropical rainforests still covered every continent), we might have had a world dominanted by birds or reptiles right now. And finally, no, the success of mammals wasn't because of "rape" like the weirdo above me keeps saying💀 Would've loved to debate the man, but honestly I prefer keeping my braincells intact lmao
Rheahs like ostriches and eliphant birds are of note. And many new zeland birds are grounded
Mammals had a better anatomy for evolving into many different forms where as birds lost a lot of features making it difficult to take over as terrestrial mammals. Most of the dominant reptiles in the Mesozoic were warm blooded but most if not all died from the KT impact. If more warm blooded archosaurs survived they would have taken over the world instead of mammals
They didn’t they’re the birds…
They just had to give up body size for flight.
Whales are the mammalian equivalent to the dinosaurs where it makes sense to save energy metabolically to grow bigger because it leads to a lower surface are to volume ratio.
We also see this at the bottom of the ocean with squid.
You got it wrong. Birds are a branch of dinosaurs as they came from a common ancestor but the warm blooded non avian dinosaurs died out
You realize most large Dino’s couldn’t exist in todays world due to lower oxygen levels? It’s the main reason why most animals have grown smaller……
I'm sorry, but I didn't see where you credited the author and artist. Dougal Dixon.
The New Dinosaurs: An Alternative Evolution is a 1988 speculative evolution book written by Scottish geologist and palaeontologist Dougal Dixon and illustrated by several illustrators including Amanda Barlow, Peter Barrett, John Butler, Jeane Colville, Anthony Duke, Andy Farmer, Lee Gibbons, Steve Holden, Philip Hood, Martin Knowelden, Sean Milne, Denys Ovenden and Joyce Tuhill.[1] The book also features a foreword by Desmond Morris. The New Dinosaurs explores a hypothetical alternate Earth, complete with animals and ecosystems, where the Cretaceous-Paleogene extinction event never occurred, leaving non-avian dinosaurs and other Mesozoic animals an additional 65 million years to evolve and adapt over the course of the Cenozoic to the present day.
Thank you for reminding
My only problem.... we know what dino turned into.... birds
I've been wondering the same question.
Would we, mammals, exist?
No, without the astroid that killed dinosaurs no elephants,no whales, no primates and other large mammals
Yes but still small
1:30:21 The legs are too close to the head, too close to the middle of the thorax..
Very interesting.
This proves that humans and dinosaurs could not coexist.
If the dinosaurs did not go extinct than it`s probable that mammals could not have competed with them and would not have evolved much more than small rodent like creatures.
Omg my wish would came true if this happened
Just say want to say this. If we had mass flooding of the earth and now cities under the ocean. Why not dinosaur bones under the sea and ocean beds as well?
If they didn't go extinct that means plokute and his goons would start crying
Not listening to a robot
2.5 hours on what if the dinosaurs hadn’t gone instinct? 😅
the thumbnail is elasmoceratops
Real voice>Subtitles>robo voice
This is a reupload STOP COMPLAINING!
Im confused...
What is this? Why is this? Why am I watching this only to wonder why & what this is ?
When you say they (diversified) you are willing to dispose of the first law of biogenesis
"More, limited area"? Wow.
They are not , they taste good with some fries
Im dont think they would look like this
All this talk of evolution is funny considering these so-called evolved dinosaurs are a product of intelligent design by whoever drew these images.
Yes and they also look terrible
@@Lanval_de_Lai One more reason I'm glad we're not our own creators.
Hay guys . Who do you think would survive if the new dinosaurs. After man . And man after man got put into the same world
It would be a dangerous and savage world for us humans, we need an futuristic styles and materials for our homes and communities to survive those giants , even waters will be dwelling with monstrous giants that will sinks ships and submarines
No human civilization would survive if dinosaurs 🦖🦕 weren't extinct
This is pure speculation, no one knows or will ever know what would've happened if dinosaurs had survived.
This is really cool but... Text to speech
A.I. generated Dinos.
Love me some computer generated narration, not.
Lion took a ferry to komodo island nice. Cross eggs need babysitting how nice of the Nile lizard. Animal man really know his animals
Since it takes around 20-30 years for even the largest mammals to decompose, where (Other than someones vivid imagination) did all these dinosaur bones come from. If they were supposed to have been wiped out 65 million years before man even existed, It should be impossible for any remains to be found. especially in some of the areas where people claim they are.
Dinosaur fossils aren't really bone anymore. Over many years minerals leaked into the bone and replaced it, forming what is essentially a very accurate cast of stone. It does take specific conditions for fossilization to occur though so fossils are relatively uncommon compared to the number of animals that actually lived and died.
Perhaps it's proof the Earth isn't as old as some say it is.
@@snappycenter7863 It proves to me that mankind doesn't know as much as they think they do, (Especially how old the Earth is and what was here millions of years before we showed up.) and that some people are gullible enough to believe anything.
@@Spyderram57 You are a kid right? I hope so because an adult should know a fossil isn't bone but basically a rock shaped as a bone.
@@Spyderram57 🤔 we human can only know so much…a little at a time. Once in a while a bit of information is thrown at us n we can only speculate. It’s like the universe n fossil …what’s beyond the Milky Way?…or we can conjure life way back then!…nothing is clear!
is author of these arts the same one who wrote "all tomorrows"?
I wanted to see dinosaur's driving to their office jobs, stuck in traffic.
Good luck.
They would of evolved into our over lords if you believe in evolution theory 😉
Might have been interesting but I will not tolerate robot voices. Why do they do that!?
You all need to chill in this comment section these aren’t accurate non-Avian dinosaurs that’s just common knowledge this isn’t about what if dinosaurs didn’t go extinct even if the title of the video may be misleading to some it’s about biogeography that’s why it uses biogeographic realms
And I have to admit most of these animals are just dinosaurified versions of modern animals and I don’t really like that
Hey I can read a book too 😀
The english subtitles are timed wrong.
The dinosaurs didn't all go extinct some continued on and evolved. Modern dinosaurs are called birds.
This is the base
Wanna watch and see what you have to say but that monotonous computer voice is too much for me
Vocals and script do not match .. can't do it....
Kenya
Oh, but they did!
Do it with modern science!
This book came out before the movie Jurassic Park - here you already need to do a reliable remake
What are you talking about, Dinosaur like lizards, birds are all over the world! They have an evolution rather than a distinction!
Did you watch the video at all, or did you come running because of the title? Nobody argues with this.
What if humans actually grew up and got along with each other what if?
Perhaps you should lead the way.
monocorn is call maned norteamerica emela-ntouka
Why not
you are just taking an old book from the 90s, the new dinosaurs, and adding pictures and sound effects. No animation. oh bummer what a jip.
29:32 lmao "de la casa" just means 'from the house" in Spanish