Dragons cold blooded?

[TheDungen]

No cold one knights should only have it if their riders are dead, the diffrence is a dragon isnt removed if the rider is.


Didnt the sunderign claim that Caledor changed the dragons somehow to help them igore their natrual instincts? Maybe that removed their cold blooded sentiment.

[Andy p]

Id say dragons are magic blooded.

[TheDungen]

I just read the 5th and 4th edition army books they say tat the dragons went to sleep because the world got colder.

[Arnizipal]

The whole cold climate for dragons and lizardmen before the old ones came was a big biological booboo for GW, its the complete opposite of what it should be. There is no way to scientifically explain it, which is why we just have to hand wave the whole thing =) There are other examples, like skaven being cowardly and back stabbing each other (recently proved that rats are very empathetic and will save their own kind with no reward), stegadons and carnosaurs living in dense jungle (real life counterparts lived on savanna type terrain) etc etc.

A lot has to do with image. A "rat" is an untrustworthy person, so rat-people must be untrustworthy

As for big dinosaurs in jungles, this may be a homage to old science fiction novels and films (The lost World, A Journey to the Center of the Earth, King Kong, ...).

I just read the 5th and 4th edition army books they say tat the dragons went to sleep because the world got colder.

You mean warmer surely?
The Old Ones moved the planet closer to the sun to end its ice age after all.

[TheDungen]

Not back in 5th and 4th, it says as the fire of the mountains died out the dragons went to sleep.

[Naanomi]

Not mutually exclusive, of course. The Old Ones could have been calming down the volcanoes of the world at the same time they were warming it up.

[zoggin-eck]

I must admit that after all my years I've never even considered whether dragons were cold blooded or not.

Maybe dragons need to lose the excess heat they generate by breathing fire?

Ha, but what about frost dragons, storm, venom etc.? Actually, there's at least one fantasy world I'm thinking of where dragons actually do need to spit out fire to live, but I can't remember which (not Discworld, they blow up).

There are other examples, like skaven being cowardly and back stabbing each other (recently proved that rats are very empathetic and will save their own kind with no reward), stegadons and carnosaurs living in dense jungle (real life counterparts lived on savanna type terrain) etc etc.

Perhaps it's worthy of a thread of it's own, but the "cowardly rat" image does annoy me sometimes (despite the Skaven background and army being my favourite!) when I look at my partner's and mine pet rats. These little guys look out for each other, play together, keep each other warm and the younger ones look up to and learn from the older ones. Sadly, not exactly the sort of traits for a fantasy battle games race, so the image taken from public opinion, the whole "you dirty rat!" image and the short story GW apparently borrowed ideas form makes much more sense.

The dinosaurs in a jungle thing as said is really just in homage to the popular image. They've said before the dinosaurs were really added to the army just because it's cool, and the same should go for this.

[Urgat]

The rats you find in Paris subways or the ones I spotted in the Southampton Commons are no cute or friendly animals at all, I'd like to point out. They are nasty buggers. There's a difference between animals raised in captivity and wild ones. They don't have to compete for anything, for starters, that kinds of totally changes their behavior.

[TheDungen]

Yeah food shortages do that to animals, to people too.

[Urgat]

Yeah food shortages do that to animals, to people too.

That's right, and then the followup would be: are Skavens well-fed, or often starved? And I think we already know which it is

[Lord Squidar]

Hehe I know pet rats and wild rats are different, I have two pet rats myself! Wouldn't be a proper skaven warlord without them. I did read an article about rat populations in urban areas that get so well fed from scavenging they switch into predator mode and can collectively hunt cats and other small mammals. Anywhoo off topic unless clan moulder gets hold of a dragon

[Gromdal]

Are Dragons giant reptiles? I'm not sure you can present scientific proof of that claim...

In the strict biological sense Birds are an Order of feathered Dinosaurs. Birds warm-blooded, Dinosaurs ... lets's say 'debatable' ... in any case, Birds are essentially advanced Reptiles (as we are as well by the way). Since it would seem that Dragons are also quite advanced (and possibly magically augmented), it is no stretch to say it is at least not unreasonable to believe they should be warm blooded.

In case my cryptozoology fails me here there is also a concept mass homoiothermy which basically means when your body mass exceeds a certain point it is almost impossible to become entirely hypothermic; the body's core temperature will always remain at a certain level thanks to the heat produced by the normal bodily functions. And if anything dragons are BIG.

It is worth noting that Dragons are described as the 'original inhabitants of the Warhammer world' (along with dragon Ogres strangely) and were forced into hibernation in the snowy wastes when the Old Ones arrived and decided to start a global greenhouse effect in the literal sense. Their dislike of warmer temperatures seems to imply that they're not very good at adapting to climate change and also lack means to regulate their body heat in an efficient manner; both of which would be traits usually ascribed to a cold blooded metabolism. This however goes against the notion that they prefer lower temperatures; a condradiction I have not been able to resolve to this point. Maybe it's just like bears who hibernate when it's too cold to be outside, only the dragons do it when it's too hot so it must not necessarily mean they're cold blooded. However since the dinosaurs of Lustria thrive in the hot climate, it can be assumed that their body chemistry differs quite a bit from the Dragons'. What this means in terms of relationship of the two I cannot say.

In the strict biological sense birds are dinos? I was laughing so hard i almost fell of my chair. Theories about dinos and their origins, their extinction or change is nothing but THEORIES. Yet some would pass it as truth. Funny that biology cannot decide on simple things that can checked right now, but something that supposedly happened eons ago some are sure about.

Zero self distance.

As for the dragons they are generally seens as cold blooded in fantasy that I have come into contact with, warhammer is diffrent in alot of ways though.

[Athelassan]

The definition of "theory" - well. Suffice to say it doesn't just mean "an idea I had on the bus". To use the old example, gravity is a theory, but it's difficult to dispute.

I'm not a biologist, but my roommate at uni was (and still is) a zoologist, and I recall his telling me that the evidence that birds were dinosaurs was overwhelming. It will probably never be proven beyond doubt, but there's no other theory that's half as credible as to their origins.

[Spedgal]

If we are getting into biology, lets all remember that 'warm blooded' VS 'cold blooded' is a pretty elementary-school level distinction between animal's thermal regulation, and isn't terminology used at any scholarly level

[TheDungen]

Ok sorry i'm a physicists not a biologist. But i can say this regarding theories, all knowledge possessed by mankind is theories. Its impossible to prove anything, it is only possible to disprove something. That's why science deals with Falsifiability. A good theory is supposed to be backed up be evidence (Empirical findings) and be explainable (Rational Argument), I'm pretty sure birds evolving from reptiles of the dinosaur era is well supported. Is a reptile during the dinosaur era a dinosaur? well that's up to you I'm pretty sure dinosaur isnt a proper species designation.

[Laser guided fanatic]

Ok sorry i'm a physicists not a biologist. But i can say this regarding theories, all knowledge possessed by mankind is theories. Its impossible to prove anything, it is only possible to disprove something. That's why science deals with Falsifiability. A good theory is supposed to be backed up be evidence (Empirical findings) and be explainable (Rational Argument), I'm pretty sure birds evolving from reptiles of the dinosaur era is well supported. Is a reptile during the dinosaur era a dinosaur? well that's up to you I'm pretty sure dinosaur isnt a proper species designation.

It's perfectly possible to prove things in a purely mathematical context, i.e. all prime numbers except 2 are odd is a provable truth.

[Urgat]

Is a reptile during the dinosaur era a dinosaur? well that's up to you I'm pretty sure dinosaur isnt a proper species designation.

Dinosaurs are supposed to be reptiles that stand upright (legs going down, as opposed to, say crocodiles or turtles) and lived during the juras/jurassic/cretace, they're divided in two groups depending on the setup of their pelvic bones. That's why the flying and swimming lizards from the same eras are not classified as dinosaurs.
Man, first time the knowledge I've accumulated as a kid have served me since... decades.

It's perfectly possible to prove things in a purely mathematical context, i.e. all prime numbers except 2 are odd is a provable truth.

Except maths is also a theory For instance it's theorized the laws of mathematics don't apply inside the event horizon of a black hole.

[Laser guided fanatic]

Except maths is also a theory For instance it's theorized the laws of mathematics don't apply inside the event horizon of a black hole.

You're confusing the pure structure of maths itself with mathematical models that are applied to the real world. In pure maths we can prove things, in applied mathematical models we can prove things within the actual model, however, you can't prove that a particular model is a 100% perfect fit for a real world phenomena.

anyway I don't want to hijack this thread or anything so I'll just leave it at that

[Arnizipal]

Shall we keep this on topic maybe?

[TheDungen]

all mathematical proof is actually derived from a few theories. Euclid's axioms. They cant be proven only commons sense tells us they are true. We assume the correctness of these statements and from that we can derive the proof for any modelled scenario. These axioms along with causality is what fails in certain situations and thus diverges the model from reality.

Pure maths is just something we've made up. You can prove something there because you've decided that you can prove it.