Have we all been wrong all these years?

Discussion in 'Cephalopod Fossils' started by Phil, Mar 19, 2006.

  1. Phil

    Phil Colossal Squid Supporter Registered

    Joined:
    Nov 19, 2002
    Messages:
    3,034
    Likes Received:
    16
    Have a look at this bizarre reconstruction of ammonites at the top of the page. Ammonites depicted as marine snails?

    :bugout: :goofysca: :shock:
     
  2. cthulhu77

    cthulhu77 Titanites Supporter

    Joined:
    Mar 15, 2003
    Messages:
    6,642
    Likes Received:
    2
    You? Wrong? Never ! Wish I could read german better...I only got about half of that text.
     
  3. chrono_war01

    chrono_war01 Colossal Squid Supporter

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2004
    Messages:
    2,580
    Likes Received:
    4
    ...If we're wrong, then at least we it's not the first time assumed something wrongly...but I seriously doubt that ammonites with large and heavy shells that are upright would most certinaly topple, no?
     
  4. Architeuthoceras

    Architeuthoceras Architeuthis Staff Member Moderator

    Joined:
    Nov 19, 2002
    Messages:
    2,391
    Likes Received:
    94
    Location:
    somewhere under the desert sky
    Well, since I flunked algebra, there is no way I could proove this theory wrong or right. Physicists got involved in the T. rex scavenger/predator debate too. :wink:

    I need more than math to show me it dont float. 8-)
     
  5. Nancy

    Nancy Titanites Staff Member Moderator

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2002
    Messages:
    5,584
    Likes Received:
    71
    Location:
    Dallas Texas
    Actually, I do read German fairly well - the author is using that picture to illustrate the old theories of ammonites. The article talks about them floating and he even uses the word "swimming".

    Now, I'm not up on my ammonites since I have so much to do on the Ceph Care forums - what is the current theory?

    Nancy
     
  6. cuttlegirl

    cuttlegirl Colossal Squid Supporter Registered

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2005
    Messages:
    4,891
    Likes Received:
    236
    Location:
    Pittsburgh, PA
  7. OB

    OB Colossal Squid Staff Member Moderator

    Joined:
    Oct 19, 2003
    Messages:
    3,084
    Likes Received:
    46
    There's nothing wrong with retro-extrapolating from Nautilus, whilst assuming some varieties of ammonites where shuffling along the bottom. Octopus sp. do a lot of that also, if I might say so :grin:

    PS: Some of this is in English
     
  8. Tintenfisch

    Tintenfisch Architeuthis Staff Member Moderator

    Joined:
    Nov 19, 2002
    Messages:
    2,083
    Likes Received:
    171
    Great first paragraph. :roll:

    'Ammoniten konnten ganz sicher nicht schwimmen. Das lässt sich mit den von Archimedes schon vor 2000 Jahren gefundenen Regeln der Hydrostatik sowie der Hebelge- setze ganz eindeutig nachweisen. Sie waren ausnahmslos Bodenbewohner und mussten sich somit kriechend fort- bewegen, auch wenn es mancher Thomas nicht so recht glauben mag - not my problem.'

    'Ammonites were certainly unable to swim. This is proven, without a doubt, by the rules of hydrostatics (discovered by Archimedes more than 2000 years ago), as well as the principle of the lever (?). They were, without exception, benthic ('floor-residents') and therefore moved by crawling; if some people choose not to believe this, not my problem.'
     
  9. OB

    OB Colossal Squid Staff Member Moderator

    Joined:
    Oct 19, 2003
    Messages:
    3,084
    Likes Received:
    46
    The use of "thomas" for unbeliever is striking :grin:
     
  10. Tintenfisch

    Tintenfisch Architeuthis Staff Member Moderator

    Joined:
    Nov 19, 2002
    Messages:
    2,083
    Likes Received:
    171
    Yeah, decided not to tackle the finer nuances of translating that one. :wink:
     
  11. Architeuthoceras

    Architeuthoceras Architeuthis Staff Member Moderator

    Joined:
    Nov 19, 2002
    Messages:
    2,391
    Likes Received:
    94
    Location:
    somewhere under the desert sky
    Some very persuasive arguments (no x+y stuff to confuse me) are brought up on the hydrostatics page. One question though, Spirula is used as an example for vertical shell (or body) orientation, why is it not crawling along the bottom like a snail? :hmm:

    Should I really question my belief in Santa Claus?
     
  12. djbirdnerd

    djbirdnerd Pygmy Octopus Registered

    Joined:
    May 30, 2006
    Messages:
    7
    Likes Received:
    1
    I must say everybody is entitled to their own opinion, but i strongly disagree with this German guy Eble. He is by the way a physicist and not a paleontologist, who also claims that archaeopteryx was a underwater swimmer. He states that all ammonoids (heteromorph or not) were benthonic (and by this he mains really benthonic on the bottom and not demersal like some fish). He came to this by making false assumptions on ammonoid growth and his own calculations of negative buoyancy of ammonoids, which were proven wrong by all other studies, which all gave values within the margin of error of neutral buoyancy. If would by the way be very hard to live on the seafloor with a negatively buoyant shell (must of been drag carrying that around). It think it is ok to assume that the hydrostatic apparatus was working, because they all (even the weirdest heteromorphs like Nipponites) posses (and did not lose) their siphuncle. So per definition they would be somewhere in the water column from swimmers to planktonic floaters or vertical migrants. Some of them could have feeded demersally on the bottom (some orthoconic forms without adapical ballast) or potentially gyroconic forms, while other must have unmistakenly fed in the water column with a stabile upward pointed aperture (assuming soft parts filled the entire body chambers => see some of the discussions from Neal Monks)...
     
  13. cthulhu77

    cthulhu77 Titanites Supporter

    Joined:
    Mar 15, 2003
    Messages:
    6,642
    Likes Received:
    2
    I think they were whitegold wielders.

    Yeah, a little bit of unrealistic explanation going on here...sort of like scientists who state that bumblebees can not fly.

    Ummm....ow.
     
  14. bigGdelta

    bigGdelta Vampyroteuthis Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 29, 2005
    Messages:
    403
    Likes Received:
    0
    Thomas Covenent as ammonite?
     
  15. Sordes

    Sordes Wonderpus Registered

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2006
    Messages:
    215
    Likes Received:
    19
    Cthulhu77: Thing with the bumblebees turned out to be false, there are no physical problems to prove that they can fly...just BTW
     

Share This Page