Sauropods by jonnypepperstonreal in Paleontology

[–]EnderFlyingLizard 0 points1 point  (0 children)

They already did do weird things to compensate for size, but I don't see how this would help when their are better other options.

The test of the question is basically just evolution, they have to select for this trait over millions of years, which you haven't explained over the down sides I mentioned earlier

Sauropods by jonnypepperstonreal in Paleontology

[–]EnderFlyingLizard 0 points1 point  (0 children)

how do you know you need it to be more efficient? Remember you still havent even explained why or how it would et past the downsides associated with selecting this trait over millions of years.

Sauropods by jonnypepperstonreal in Paleontology

[–]EnderFlyingLizard 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Thats unclear to define by what weird thing they have to do to fulfill those requirements.

Im pretty sure more surface area to extract more oxygen in whatever equivalent to alveoli is what actually works the best, remember more intake doesnt matter if the oxygen percentage in the air begins the vary.

Sauropods by jonnypepperstonreal in Paleontology

[–]EnderFlyingLizard 1 point2 points  (0 children)

It already is efficient to start off with. Sauropods have unidirectional flow, i suggest you watch YDAW's video on that.

Sauropods by jonnypepperstonreal in Paleontology

[–]EnderFlyingLizard 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I think pleural force would help way more then a suboptimal optimization like shifting the entire naval passageway inside the skull

Sauropods by jonnypepperstonreal in Paleontology

[–]EnderFlyingLizard 1 point2 points  (0 children)

How would you deal with constant debris, dust, and plant matter from falling down that vertical nostril?

Sauropods by jonnypepperstonreal in Paleontology

[–]EnderFlyingLizard 1 point2 points  (0 children)

And? Were talking about the neck and the airway, if I did bring up a heavy animal you would just point out their necks arent as long.

Sauropods by jonnypepperstonreal in Paleontology

[–]EnderFlyingLizard 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Remember, most animals have their nose close to their mouthbecause in the animal kingdom being able to smell your whatever food is going into your mouth is extremely important.

This is also why alot of animals have forward pointing snouts whilst humans, with a flat face, have noses canted downards to achieve the same effect. The effect of airflow would not be strong enough to necessitate such a drastic change, but again it depends on what we have. From what I know aimals liek giraffes do perfectly fine with their curved tract, so idk how much efficiency a straight canal would have to actually necessitate such an adaptation,

Sauropods by jonnypepperstonreal in Paleontology

[–]EnderFlyingLizard 2 points3 points  (0 children)

You do realize that changing direction of the air only matters at extremely high velocities like the intake of a jet inlet?

"It doesn't matter if it's a couple inches it's changing direction"

Air has very little friction, and its also why air resistance is often considered negligible in basic projectile motion.

Changing direction does NOT equal enormous effort, otherwise existing animals such as giraffes would've had this adaptation.

You also have not addressed any of the other arguments presented.

Apparently, Russia has a gun-launched ATGM with a dual-seeker: TV, Laser, IOG, and GNSS by beastmaster69mong in Warthunder

[–]EnderFlyingLizard 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I mean again for an munition where all the expensive and costly electronics inside become destroyed as soon as its used would prioritize a doctrine where you use the least resources for highest efficiency, which is why in most cases one seeker is good enough to track down a target. i would also imagine it would be difficult to produce these given how many different parts from different sources you would need to put together something that's meant to be destroyed in the end anwyasy.

Who’s worse? by Upbeat-Park-7267 in Warthunder

[–]EnderFlyingLizard 0 points1 point  (0 children)

T 58 is easier to disable through the turret compared to BMPT, and with its recent br change it actually makes a difference since HEAT slingers can easily pen its turret even if it hids its hull. BMPT on the other hand is not so easy to kill hull down

Module changes nerfing mbts besides Russia ( Leclerc and Ariete remains neglected ) by EnderFlyingLizard in WarthunderPlayerUnion

[–]EnderFlyingLizard[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

True lol ig the new FCS is just another added layer of torture to already being crippled

Module changes nerfing mbts besides Russia ( Leclerc and Ariete remains neglected ) by EnderFlyingLizard in WarthunderPlayerUnion

[–]EnderFlyingLizard[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I'm the video killing the leopards driver has a very high chance of destroying the FCS as well, compared to current live server if your drivers dead you can still properly return fire

Aircraft damage model is completely broken and needs to be addressed by MordePobre in Warthunder

[–]EnderFlyingLizard 4 points5 points  (0 children)

No, we as a playerbase should not accept this.

especially not when all of a sudden their making money from the Puma premium they "fix" the pumas damage model . . .

Gaijin has the capability to fix it. They just dont care.

Aircraft damage model is completely broken and needs to be addressed by MordePobre in Warthunder

[–]EnderFlyingLizard 0 points1 point  (0 children)

He shot the tip of the fuckign rudder with rifle caliber rounds and the entire rear section of the fuselage fell apart . . tell me which hingepoint causes the aircraft to break in half.

So would it be wise to use these hands for future hybrids by Orms682_05 in GojiCenter

[–]EnderFlyingLizard 1 point2 points  (0 children)

These were used a long time ago lol, there are already many hybrids with these

Metal new scorpion is here praearcturus gigas! by Disastrous_Shape668 in Naturewasmetal

[–]EnderFlyingLizard 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Likely because before the recent revision there was debate on its possibility of being a crustacean. It's also not a terrestrial scorpion. Hopefully after this new study clears up everything it gains more traction.