Mankind versus Pterosaurs

http://pterosaur-net.blogspot.pt/2012/04/its-dumb-its-awesome-its-our-lives-with.html

So, according to the article:

1- Azhdarchid pterosaurs had no geographical barriers, and individual species could easily have cosmopolitian distributions.

2- Some of them were big enough to eat people.

Thus, not only we would have giant people-eaters (hopefully purple), but they could fly everywhere and thus the methods that we use to deal with bears and felines, transporting them elsewhere, would not work.

Therefore, would civilisation even develop in the first place, with azhdarchids eating us left and right everywhere on Earth, and coming back every time we would drive them off?

There are several animals that no longer exist, in part because ancient man killed them off for food. Like mammoths, and those were fucking huge. I imagine that ancient man, clever enough to figure out a way to kill the mammoths, would have figured out a way to deal with the flying menaces. Either kill them off like the mammoths, or domesticate them. I can imagine that the domesticating would have been the more difficult endeavor.

But yeah, society would have developed. Differently, certainly, but it would have developed. Civilization, at its most basic, is a group of people that are living together, and usually trying to do so in a way that ensures survival. Protections against pterosaurs is just one bit of that. (I imagine that ancient man would have been a lot more fond of living in caves and building stone structures those things couldn't get into.)

Yeah, I could see human settlements tending to be underground.

No, civilization would not have developed, for the simple fact that this change would change evolution enough that no humans would evolve.

The presupposition here Octo is that pterosaurs and humans are inhabiting the same area and time period, Octo. Somehow. And humans having to deal with death from the skies as a daily threat.

I get that they're big enough, but are they strong and/or fast enough to catch humans on a regular basis?

They wouldn't necessarily even have to catch us to be able to kill us. Just like, bite our heads or something to cause injury. And they'd go after the little and sick ones separate from the herd, most likely. So. I guess we'd have much more grouping behaviors for safety's sake. (Some of those species are pretty fucking huge, so I'd say that yes some of them would have been strong enough to take off with an adult.)

Well, the ones being focused on, azhdarchids, did have forelimb proportions similar to those of ungulates, so they were adapted to running.

That said, I think they'd only truly go after us after we'd fuck up the world in the ice ages; like the Haast's eagle in New Zealand, they'd go after us once we killed off other prey animals.

Only that, while the Haast's eagle was forced to eat on the ground, making it vulnerable, pterosaurs could just swallow humans whole...

We wouldn't be human, because the dominant hominid that would evolve (if any) would have evolved with traits very different from modern homo sapiens due to the different circumstances.

Language and long-distance spatial coordination (needed for projectile weapons) would still be extremely adaptive, so the other hominids would have picked them up. They would likely have gone subterranean or arboreal; the jungle ape rather than the plains ape, living in a safer environment given these airborne predators. Once we reached pack sizes and tool sophistication where we could fight them off, the pterosaurs would start adapting and developing an instinct to avoid humans, just like every big intelligent predator in Africa (and more than a few places elsewhere) has done. Developing in a mostly arboreal environment would have had a big effect on our physiology. I can also see some degree of camouflage being adaptive. We're likely talking pack ambush predators rather than endurance predators.

edited 30th Apr '12 3:21:44 PM by RadicalTaoist

So in other words Taoist, instead of being what we are today, we'd be Catachans.

Sounds like a plan for me. I welcome our Pterosaur overlords openly if it means I get satchel charges and shotguns from birth.

But then we can't have 50+ models per unit and those really huge artillery pieces!

You know, I don't think much would be different. Humans drive animals extinct all the time, always have. If we actually TRIED? they'd be screwed.

I think we would live in cover more though. Cities underground. Living in caves, whole nine yards.

Hell, we might adapt to the dark and small spaces and evolve into Dwarves!

...Oh, I want to write a story about these things surviving in the Americas and the Native Americans being Dwarves so badly now.

We don't even know if Pterosaurs would be overly aggressive. Their bodies were sort of fragile, so I doubt that there'd be selection in their populations for an unconditional hunting instinct against large prey. And this is not to mention that larger pterosaurs probably wouldn't be able to fly (or even breathe) in our atmosphere anyway.

Also, I'll bet they taste like chicken.

KFP?

Well, we are the greatest single predator species ever to roam this planet. Us. Humans. That is why we are top of the food chain. Yeah, animals have killed lots of us but we have obliterated whole populations of them. Pterosaurs? Nets. Even T-Rex would be no match for a baited pit trap with spikes at the bottom and a few dozen angry cavemen with spears.

Because we are smart. We never take animals on at their own game. We make them take us on at ours. And if it means that the only way to take big prey is dogpiling them, almost literally, then we do it. Fairness counts for nothing against hunger.

Also, have to note that the oxygen level at the time of Mesozoic Era was much higher than it is today, so whether or not today can even support large flying pterosaurs is questionable.

I think we're skipping the why and how and just doing what would happen IF. Rule Of...something...

Tam is right. We'd kick this things ass, assuming evolution was the same.

We'd sling the shit out of it!

The problem is that we can't. For example, the fact that the oxygen level is different will mean that the pterosaurs won't be as large, and they won't be able to fly as well, which will make a huge different as to how well we are able o deal with them.

The trees make carbon diyoxide into Oxygen and carbon slightly faster, and the pterosaurs are slightly smaller. Happy?

edited 30th Apr '12 7:32:32 PM by Joesolo

Pterosaurs have eggs, humans can always searching their nest and destroying their eggs. Competition between species often decided by species that reproduce more winning, not combat capacity.

Very true.

I imagine the mountains being somewhat of a Last Stand for them.

And because if the higher oxygen content we are bigger and our brains smarter (due to higher oxygen), so we punch them out on a regular basis.

...and we eveolved so that we would be slightly weaker if it wasnt for the extra oxygen because some radiation got blocked by one of them that caused us to evolve this way...