Bikini Miltank
Reaction score
14

Profile posts Latest activity Postings About

  • Thank you so much for telling me, it's great to know that you haven't given it up completely. Take your time, I just wanted to make sure. c:

    Oh, and congratulations on your marriage.
    Fossil Pokémon are indeed extinct, but I do draw a distinction because it would appear that the fossilization altered them (one could argue that Anorith and Lileep were originally Water-type). Even if I'm wrong and they were always associated with the Rock type, that obviously can't be true for all extinct Pokémon and I'd like to see some variety. There was something different about the way Genesect was revived, which makes me curious how it would have turned out had Team Plasma not modified its abilities. That, and time travel is always a possibility.

    But truthfully, I'm biased toward mammals, so what I really want to see are proto-mammalian Pokémon. I feel that ordinary mammalian Pokémon aren't exotic enough anymore.
    Do you share my hope that the reveal of Genesect may lead to more Paleozoic Pokémon in the next generation? I am actually rather tired of fossil Pokémon which I see more as actual fossils than extinct species, but the range of species Game Freak could choose from is enormous. I've discussed this with some people and they think the idea of extinction may be too dark for Pokémon, but considering that the cat is out of the bag thanks to Genesect (a vicious predator that was wiped out some 300 million years ago), I can't really accept that argument.
    I should have been more precise. Are there other mammals like the primates which are unique in that they most likely do not have extinct counterparts from the Paleozoic and Mesozoic eras? I know this is difficult to answer because "counterpart" is ill-defined, but think about it intuitively.
    I understand. Then how many modern animals are the end result of a long adaptation process?
    This is all fascinating. Superficially speaking, dogs seem more similar to the cynognathus than they are to, say, elephants. Although I understand the logic, I still find it surprising that all mammals originated from a common ancestor that lived after those striking species, or at least around the same time.

    Has anyone ever proposed that there may have been human-like or at least ape-like species some hundreds of millions of years ago? If this possibility has been ruled out or has no basis in fact, then what is it about the past 20 million years that has allowed creatures like the ancestors of the Hominidae family to come into being for the first time? Or perhaps I'm jumping to conclusions and most modern mammals have no extinct counterparts, as it were.
    The most recent common ancestor lived only 180 million years ago? Does that mean that at least some of the mammal-like cynodont species shown here are unrelated to the mammals they resemble? For instance, the Thrinaxodon lived around 248 million years ago and it was apparently similar to several modern animals. How would you explain that? And were there mammal-like species in the Paleozoic era, as well?
    This might seem a bit random, but how's your knowledge on cynodonts? I'd like to know how many species evolved into modern mammals and how many went extinct.
    Dying for the new Origin of Species. I'll be honest... if you're not planning on doing any more, please tell me? I won't mind, but I check it every week, and every time I see that it hasn't been updated, it puts a damper on my mood, just a little bit. If you aren't going to do any more, it would be really helpful, because then I'll stop checking. XD;
  • Loading…
  • Loading…
  • Loading…
Top