#paleontology
1 messages · Page 23 of 1
right around 10m is the safest estimate right now
So that 46 feet estimation is outdated?
it’s based off scaling the legs to magnapaulia so I wouldn’t use it
Shantugasaurus was probably around that size though
Shant and edmonto are still the largest
every time i think about Big Paul it brings me great joy
Big Paul is just wonderful, 10/10 best hadrosaur
Compy solos deinosuchus
Whats Big Paul?
magnapaulia's generic name, when translated literally, means Big Paul
Do you guys think a 7500 KG sarcosuchus is plausible for an exceptionally large individual?
This is definitely Gonna get deleted by a staff member (sadly)
try to rizz on allo ai

Rizz
Please remember to remain on topic with the channel. Refer to the pinned messages and #rules before posting.
Tbh, you guys sound like bots half the time
It ate those big herbivores
It ate those big herbivores, Edmontosaurus and triceratops were probably somewhat common prey items, although I'm guessing Edmonto was hunted far more often given the massive risks that would come with attempting to hunt a triceratops
It also probably ate anky from Time to time
Those are average sizes for everthing?
Idk
Seem to be for the most part
I just got it from Wikipedia because it's like the only place I can find that has a clean looking size comparison that includes most of the creatures
Or maybe not? The triceratops is averaged sized I think
edmonto is at close to max size, iirc the average is smaller than that
The sizes are large fellas how about that 😐
Yeah I thought so, looked very big for smth where the average specimen is like 9 tons.
Rex might also be based on Sue or smth
this page gives a description of all the animals lengths for that image
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Hell_Creek_Formation_Fauna.png
Question for you lovely paleo-nerds. For pure speculative purposes, suppose that Bahariasaurus was indeed a neovenatorid or noasaurid that reached 10-12 meters long and was in the 4 tonne range. What niche would it fill? That is ridiculously light weight and it seems strange for a megapredator. What would it hunt, how would it hunt (especially if it did indeed only have two fingers), what did it specialize in?
Just curious if anyone else has thoughts
That's not very light, that's similar in weight to acrocanthosaurus and tarbosaurus
Wait tarbo is same weight as acro?
about ya. enough to say they are similarly sized animals
Tarbo W I thought it was smaller.
Acro was a max of 6.6 tonnes and was 11.5 meters, so still heaver
The most recent estimates for acro put it around 5.7 tons
I'm talking tonnes
Yeah that's what I meant
At what length?
11.7 meters iirc
Tbh, those are very similar proportions to torvosaurus tanneri
Hmm well still the lowest estimate for Acro has it at 5750 kg and the highest for Baharia is 3000 kg with a length of 39 feet
If it is a giant noasaurid it may not be a megapredator after all. It could be some kind of specialist or even a herbivore/omnivore. It's the new deinocheirus in a lot of ways, so much room to speculate due to lack of (definitive) material. I would guess it was doing something pretty unique whatever it was
Still lighter than the lightest estimate for torvosaurus tanneri which was 3600 kg at 33 ft
Yeah, use tons of KG
Thanks for answering the question! That is a good point of course, would be lovely if we actually had Deltadromeus' or Baharia's skull right? Though some Noasaurids certainly were mainly predators
Hmm, no. I used lbs intentionally because it's more specific.
Im just saying KG is better, but on topic, we don't really have enough material to determine the exact niche it filled in terms of how it hunted
That is why I asked for speculation
A reminder to please view pinned messages for appropriate paleo-chat topics. We recommend all off-topic conversations for paleo-chat be directed to DM's, the appropriate channel or another server entirely.
We will start deleting off-topic conversations or muting users that remain off topic
Well, it probably filled the niche of Apex predator possibly? I don't really know much about it but it easily could be the apex predator of it's environment
I’ve been hearing 5.8t but that doesn’t matter
i'm inclined to agree, noasaurids are really variable in terms of niche
In the same environment as Carcharodontosaurus and Spinosaurus? I kinda doubt it
The question is, what kind of niche does a 12m, 4 tonne noasaurid fill lol?
I don't really know much about it tbh
Ok, yeah it probably wasn't an apex predator, but spino also wasn't an apex predator either
Carch was most definitely the Apex predator of it's environment
The question in question being?
This
Some are considered cursorial, maybe it was a pursuit predator
I considered that too, it fits tbh.
Plenty of room for Carcharodontosaurus, Bahariasaurus, and Spinosaurus to coexist
You're welcome, it's definitely something I've pondered before. We definitely need skulls to really get anywhere with respect to diet, for sure. The herbivore thing intrigues me because of things like Limusaurus & elaphrosaurids in general, we know some ceratosaurs experimented in that direction & apart from sauropods it seems like we're missing some herbivore diversity in the southern continents. Perhaps more types of ceratosaurs (or some strange types of basal coelurosaurs, which Bahari/deltadromeus may be as well) were exploiting those niches. It certainly could have been a predator as well, not uncommon for there to be multiple large predatory theropods in the same formation
I'm just hoping that some day Bahariasaurus' skull is discovered with upscaled Masiakasaurus' teeth lol
That would be pretty interesting for sure!
does a 3.5-4.3 tons sarco is still accurate?
There is this chart (bolded estimates are the ones that are more likely)
i don't understand allat 😭😭😭
💀💀💀😔😔😔
Somewhere between 3-5.3t whatever
does 10.13 meters long sarco is max length?
wait can i use 9.5-10.13 meters long sarco?
I wouldn't nessecarily say it's the absolute max you can get
Please lord i dont wanna see the anime girl comparison again where is grey man 😭😭😭
Yea
thank u lambor
next time use 6 ft tall grey man for comparison
No, never
There have been Humans bigger than Utahraptor I believe
nikocado avocado???
No way nik is only 300
He lost a ton of weight recently I believe
A google searched has showed he is
In his own way
Trying to lose weight and has lost over 90 pounds since being 400
So yeah u right
Maybe hes finally giving up the act
Oviraptor is just a stain left on the ground then
now why are we talkin abt ourselves (humans in general)
Hell he almost challenges a medium Utahraptor in weight
Isn’t Utah around 800 pounds?
Well G O O G L E is saying 660-2600 pounds
Utah is around 500kg iirc
Well the average human is like what 180 pounds and the heaviest was 7 times that amount so i dont think its unfair to say that Utahraptor couldve not been over 2000 pounds
Eh, I stick with 1,100 for max, I think Utah is similar in weight to dilo
what is more accurate sarco + human size comparison???
much as it pains me, the middle one
other two are hella oversized
Sadly the middle one
aww man
@stiff osprey sarco is the best but the 3rd images is very oversized 
ok then...
Wait why is it so sad?
because the middle one looks like ass lol
you dont like Hoshino Ai used as the human scale?
No
Because the middle one sucks ass
Like the design?
Yeah
Ah
accurate size comparsion? (ignore the lipless rex)
I cant ignore the lipless t rex (you will die in 5 seconds)
I believe tyrannosaurus might be a little too big
5 sec has passed 
(sike i'm still alive)

oh no i'm a nerd 🤓🤓🤓
But the elephant might be too small and the rex might be too big
Actually i dont know
Elephant might be right but one google search is saying 10-20 feet tall for t rex
And 20 foot rex is F-ing insane i gotta dive deeper into this
Yeah google is just stupid
Sue and scotty are around 13 feet at the hip
Theoretically there could be a bigger t rex but none have been found yet
And that tyrannosaurus is slightly shorter than the current biggest by like 4 feet
Regarding pigment cells found on dinosaurs, what were the most common colourations? It seems from a few fossils it’s more on a scale of reds
That Rex is Sue right?
Yes
Seems like everyone and their mom uses Sue, anyone have a skeletal comparison with Sue and some other more mid Rex specimen, like idk, Stan?
I dont but sues second largest tyrannosaurus specimen and stan is above average iirc
The average Trex is like 12m long and Sue is like close to 13 right?
I think, sues larger than scotty in length but scotty is heavier im pretty sure
Average rex is 11.5-11.6m, possibly could be larger tho
I found this one, kinda obselete now but it works in showing the difference between a mid rex vs a big one I guess
Yeah I just said 12m cos thats what Ive been hearing of the average Rex being for my whole life so I went with it.
maybe using both random & dan folkes i can get rex length at 11.6-12.3 meters long
There are some smaller mature individuals, but yeah 11.6-12.4 meters long is between average and max from fossil record.
Isnt Scotty like near 13m?
Sue and Scotty are both 12.6
Though Persons claims 13m isn't unreasonable for Scotty
so...
if ur still awake...
...
should i use 11.6-12.3 or 11.5-12.4?
Shouldnt it be 12.6 if Sue and Scotty are that length?
i-
...
i'm just gonna stick to 11.6-12.3 meters long
@stiff osprey i'm srry for the ping but if ur still awake, how heavy is ur MOR 555?
Doesn't matter those are just 10cm
About 7t, but wankel is also quite skinny
oh so it's just 7 ton?
if no. 7.?
6.9997268827
7.5 after it demolished the local adolescent edmontosaurus
oh...
ok imma stick to 7.0 tons
12.4 given that Sue and Scotty are roughly 12.36 or 12.37.
does a 10.3-11 meters long & 5.16-6 tons puru is still accurate?
No, 10.28-11.01
i know atm random got 12.4m for sue and scotty seems to flux so yeah i agree
largest puru from what i can recall is 10.8m but that was before the whole it may have a larger head for its body size thing
How about we say 11 meters and 6 tons and call it a day
Rounding up is always cool
Is it possible that pycno and carno are the same dinosaur
No? Maybe since they were like close geographically but I doubt the time periods and other stuff match
Pycnonemosaurus is within Carnotaurus’ temporal range.
The possibility of the paleontological community being trolled exists and Im all here for it
In all seriousness iirc the material we do have shows characteristics not seen in Carnotaurus so they seem to be distinct from one another.
Dont we have only one carno skeletal?
its known from only one specimen yes
Hmmmm, so one for each, same time zone, close by.
Prime trolling potential.
well one's in southern argentina and the other central brazil but, close enough for people not to care I imagine
call it carno's northern range
Devious stuff
So when are we extending this logic to T.rex being found in Central America?
never Tyrannosaurus is a flag waving, beer drinking, red blooded american and we lent it to canada
Let’s go crazy and extend ranges to places with 0 fossil evidence. Russian Tarbosaurus is a go
We already have a giant tyrannosaurine from the Russian Amur region 😈
How diagnostic is Pycnonemosaurus anyway?
Also, in most phylogeny matrix, this one is always put as a more basal animal than Carnotaurus within Furileusauria so I suspect that they wouldn't be the same animal.
Wait those are giant tyrannosaurine remains up there?
the metacarpal is larger than Sue's
Well darn
I just tested it, the same travel distance required to introduce Carnotaurus and Pycnonemosaurus to each other could also bring a T.rex to Guatemala
Well, you gotta change up the map a little bit to match how it looked back when they lived
Spinosaurus is they most mysterious dinosaur know to man because it gets more confusing the more we learn about it change my mind.
I think Guatemala was mostly underwater at that point. wouldn't change the distance tho
Not really tbh, we know basically what it looked like, it's not even all that fragmentary
Siberian Rex, POG
True but still hard to determine some things
We have all this material and that's not even counting the holotype that was destroyed
Spinosaurus is the most mysterious dinosaur because we basically have a complete skeleton by this point and yet still know heck all about it
We know it ate fish but we don't know how it caught the fish
Or did it 😳
It ate wombats fr fr
Do you guys think a mastodonsaurus could eat a human if presented the opportunity? And if it could do you think it would
Whats that thing?
Yes and yes. It's an amphibian, if it fits in its mouth it will be eaten (and sometimes if it doesn't too)
This guy
Bro this aint a question that thing would probably eat a cow.
So, do we know what this guy primarily ate? I'm guessing it mostly at fish and smaller amphibians
Head screams fisheater
That’s some nice paleoart
Yeah, that's my thought process but you never know, tomistomas eat all kinds of things
Tomistomas have a sarco like skull to be fair compared to that thing.
Fr, I wish I was this good at Paleo art
This guy was almost in primeval horizon
Amphibians are built different, btw, could this guy walk on land?
no idea, I would assume it was very slow if it could
Ohh this fella the Prionosuchus we have been checking this fella, its the longest amphibian rn
Is it da biggest?
Its the longest the largest might be Mastodonsaurus
Prionosuchus imo probably filled a similar niche to a Gharial,
And yeah iirc the largest Mastodonosaurus estimates put it at 2000kg
I’m not sure, so I’m asking you guys how many fossils are there of the Diabloceratops
6 m aprox i might be working to do a 3d model of Prionosuchus
Not so many of them but enough to use its cousins to complete it.
Thanks
M. giganteus is 2-2.1 metric tonnes and around 7m, whilst we don’t have many fossils of Priono using its relatives we can make estimates that it was around 1.7-1.8 tonnes and most definitely longer at around 9m.
What was the first prehistoric croc to adopt the iconic croc body plan
I estimated close to 8 m
Does Oxalaia even exist?
What do you think 🧐
No, you are in an alternate reality where Spinosaurus quilombensis is its own genus. Wake up, they miss you
Idk I heard about it, forgot about it, then remembered it and didnt know if it was changed or smth
It’s definitely a term which describes an animal
Ok so its still valid, neat, what does it look like? Any skeletals?
the remains were destroyed so we know it exists and was most recently synonymous with spinosaurus but other than that we can’t say anything
Huh, getting your remains destroyed must be a spinosaurine trait
Imo its most plausible for it to just be another species of Spinosaurus
It’s been synonymised, but there wasn’t much to begin with
Tyrannosaurus was ambidextrous
Tyrannosaurus using tools? Question mark?
Its arms are as big as ours so
Im sure if you gave it somthing it would grab it like how chameleons do
Lol
Isn’t the average 8-11 tons
rex specimen "MOR 555" was 11.6 meters & 7.0 tons, it was an average rex specimen
average is like 7-8, max is like 9-10.4
what new aquatic
Theres a new aquatic called eurhinosaurus
Its not new if it hasn't released yet, and if it has released and I'm hearing about it first from paleo chat of all things I'm going to be sad
eurhino is an ichthyosaur tho, yes
Whatever dude. Ty blub
What Dinosaur who lived in Bangladesh?
only bangladesh or all south asia?
Only Bangladesh
Most of Bangladesh has sediments too young for dinosaurs, it's Cenozoic sedimentary rocks. It is part of the Indian subcontinent geologically speaking and the dinosaurs would have been similar overall
O
It was part of the subcontinent when it was an island for most of the Cretaceous period & we know from India that there were titanosaurs like Isisaurus and abelisaurs like Rajasaurus, among others, living throughout that island
I still find it funny that dire wolf remains revealed that dire wolves evolved on their own branch of the evolutionary tree, separate from the lineage that led to wolves, coyotes, and dogs, and that dire wolves would be placed in a different genus (Aenocyon dirus)
Yet people still think dire wolves are actual wolves.
Look him in the eyes before I die- oh wait 😐
Move my head and strangle it, easy win no diff
Suplex
Anyone?
Trex was probably pretty even with trice and anky probably didnt stand a chance if it was a successful ambush
So like I’m not sure if this rlly belongs here but I rlly wanted to show this off cuz I’m rlly proud of it! I wanted to make a tribute vid to all my fav dino docs and series! Lemme know what y’all think!
https://youtu.be/GMTpep18W7U
With the the massive success of Prehistoric Planet, my love for all things dinosaur has been at an all time high! I’ve always loved tribute style videos and cool edits that people have made in the past and I’ve always had ideas for such kinds of videos but I’m only now learning how to go through with them. I’m learning and I’m not working with m...
Stand a chance at what
the average is between like upper 6 ton to 8 ton ranges
Beating trex
also keep in mind a vast majority of the tyrannosaurus we have arent even full grown we have a lot of subadults but not a lot of adults
Ah ok
I wish dinosaurs were real
As in you wish they still existed or you do you not believe they existed ever
either way it doesnt make sense cause we have birds
First one makes sense because it’s pretty obvious they mean non avian
spino bombin 
Stomato bombing
Oxalaia bombing?
what is more accurate diplo(docus) + human size comparison???
2nd image is better for diPLODOcus
diplo(docus) is valid considering the intention was shortening the whole name to just diplo. No one shortens it to "plodo"
But i do agree picture 2 seems the most accurate, but picture 3 isnt too far off either
@snow pivot Please be polite and respectful towards other members. Refer to our #rules .
bcuz if i just said diplo, then what diplo do i mean???
diplo as in diplodocus, or diplo as in diplocaulus???
Im sure they'd understand given the topic of the conversation
However if the topic is both just say the full name its just a few more letters
i like to shorten names 
No
My opinion on the pronunciation of diplodocus is OBVIOUSLY correct see
Its not even about the pronounciation tho :P never was
And thats all i have to say about that
i mean when you look at how long some animal names get
yeah. I could say metriacanthosaurus or I could just say metri.
Rex: will buying clothes at clothes store
Spino: will buying clothes at soup store
what
If we go by modern ecology, predators dying to their preys are extremely rare cases. They will avoid getting themselves in fatal situations so I doubt that a Trike or Anky killing a Rex was that common. I guess that if a Rex does not get its ambush right, it will suffer from some injuries if it is desperate. Otherwise, it would simply avoid the situation and try later on. Though, those preys are well capable of fending off this predator, once a certain size.
Its not as bad as it could be
WHY ARE YOU BUYING CLOTHES AT THE SOUP STORE???
Kurzgesagts designs are cartoony, thats a cartoony spoon,
Hol up… it’s arms are longer than it’s legs… and it’s feet are backwar-
Oh lord..
Also wth going with the mouth
wydm
I say anything that looks weird can be narrowed down to them using very specific shapes in the design, which is limiting
this is a cartoon why are we critiquing it
Idek 
Can I get the link for the suggestion page
It fun
It’s stylized I don’t think it’s meant to be accurate, regardless I really like this
This is a stylized piece of artwork so we can’t really critique it’s accuracy compared to realistic paleo art.
13 meters and like 35 tons iirc for livyatan
does anyone have a front and side view of the pinacosaurus skull ONLY? I am modeling a Pinaco atm and its hard to tell for the skull in the image im using
Does this help?
yeah! still need a front view, but this helps a ton, thanks!
It’s surprisingly difficult finding a fully front facing view, the closest I could find fairly accurate was this 3/4 side view, I hope it at least helps a little bit
Wait is a pinaco and an anky the same Dino or am I dumb lol
They’re different, but from the same family if I’m not mistaken
very different, same family, extremely different dinosaurs
To me they looks similar but tbh I haven't seen a side by side pic of them to notice differencees
Yeah, it’s an Ankylosaurid.
For example Ceratopsians, a Styrokasaurus and a Triceratops are from the same family but very different dinos
So the pinaco is slightly smaller in hieght am I right and the anky is a slightly stockier build
This is a Stegouros, another ankosaurid
pinaco is a lot smaller, closer to the ground, and has a smaller beak, anky is taller, (likely) differently shaped scutes and yeah, stockier
Ahhh Oki
Stegouros’ tail had ostioderms that fused together at the tip instead of a tail club
i am stealing this
So do you think we may ever get an anky or something else from that general family like we have styracosaurus and alberto's and trikes
Don't, it was extremely fast 😭 I felt lazy and only wanted a general picture, there's a better Anky thing coming soon™️
Hopefully
alr!
Imagine the anky just stomping around like a godamn land tank
Ikr!
anodontosaurus
The one that makes the snorting sounds, has the general build of a table, and is hated by a large part of the community
Never seen it tbh 😂
Is anky bigger than ano
yes like four times larger
Hi
Stegouros actually isn't an Ankylosaurid, its a parankylosaurian, a related but separate grouping from Nodosaurids and Ankylosaurids
By a LOT
Ano is a literal coffee table
Soo we talkin stego size trice size or what
Anky or ano?
Anky
Iirc this is pretty accurate, could be wrong #paleontology message
If you are basing ano off PoT don’t PoT ano is super oversized
Ano in PoT is anky sized. call it anky at that point.
I wish anky was the size of jw anky
I’m gonna call it ano still.
How much bigger is jw anky to irl anky?
Got damn
This is inaccurate
How so? Looking at the movies they seem about right.
Because in jw the anky was about double the height of the ball thing and that ball was like double the height of a person
Eu não falo português, mas esse é um papo de dinossauro de verdade, não o do jogo
Desculpe
Its an ANkylosaurian but not an ankylosaurid
Oh yeah, sorry, autocorrect suckss and I didn’t noticed
oh no i'm wrong 
dies & then explodes
Did quetzal run decently fast?
Yea
@hallow spear i'm sorry for the ping but if ur still awake, i just wanted to say thank you 
I think the spinos a bit too big in the picture and the weight may be able to get to 7.8-8.2... but idk
What were some upper estimates for tarchia
Actually whats known about tarchia have there been many fossils?
Tarchia is known from a lot of material.
If ZPAL MgD I/113 belongs to tarchia, the largest size would be between 5.6-6.7 meters and a bit over 3 tonnes.
Iirc its speculated to have the capability of galloping when hunting on the ground, so it could most definitely move fast.
what is theri most up-to-date length & weight?
5.5t weight length 9m iirc
Is Himalayasaurus still valid. Some say is synonym with Thalattoarchon
Nah it's valid
uhhh no theri is like 7.8 tonnes
wait what?
says who???
Dan Folkes
no theri got downsized, thats not accurate anymore, its 5.5t
uhhh when?
it was awhile ago but, Dan has tested for Version 2 to be more plausible and accurate, which came out as 5.5t from the gdi
bro where the hell is the ver2 weight??????
I mean, if its leg structure is very similar to those of vampire bats and giraffes, ye would assume it would move fast. XD
What happened to the pair of batteries?
He hasnt added it yet but its 5.5t i gdied it. and also, do not use the v1 estimates. V2 estimate is objectively more accurate
That’s lovely
What is the weight of purussaurus, deinosuchus, stomatosuchus, sarchosuchus and rhamposuchus
Iirc deino is 9-15 tons and Sarco is 4.5t. Dk bout the others though.
Largest deino specimen is 13-15 tons, puru is like 5.9 tons iirc and sarco is 5.4 tons
So I been working on a paper and for reasons I’ve decided to scrap what I have done so far just to completely rewrite it all
Imo puru can be higher than that
Probably, but around 6 tons is what I've been hearing
smallest estimate puru used alongside maximum estimate deino 💀
Biggest puru is quite fragmentary, I wouldn't be surprised if it's like 8t<
I didn't realize 5.9 tons is the minimum
from skull to femur to dorsal vertebrae, all preserved elements are similar in size between Deinosuchus and Purussaurus
deino's a little larger, but if we are to give 13-15t estimates to Deinosuchus, then the biggest Puru would be around 11-12t
of course, neither is particularly likely
Wasn't the skull used for fadenos estimate like, 2 meters long?
Is this a realistic t rex ?
brotha
blud, no.
Is this carno realistic ?
No, not at all
Pretty close, actually, for the Carno
Kinda? It's definitely not bad, not perfect though, or even close to perfect
Oh no, alderon koala is typing, they are probably gonna be like "uhm guys keep the channel on topic 🤓"
Man be nice to the mods they r just doing their job 
Koalas can talk ? And moderate tk maxx dinosaurs
the largest individual that has a skull preserved would be around 1.68m, with CM 963 (has no skull) potentially being larger
Microraptors skull is a microwave 💀💀💀🖥️🖥️🖥️🖥️🖥️🦅🦅🦅🦅
Puru is literally the best (sarco is also awesome), btw, what's the largest true croc, as in it's in the Crocodylus genus
Crocodylus thorbjarnarsoni
Ok, thx, how long ago did that live?
I want to get into paleontology but im not sure how?
One of the best I’ve seen
Hang around this channel. Occasionally people discuss things relating to the actual science of paleontology.
ehhh
okay
Yes!
What dinosaur is this
Heck I’ll insight some discussion rn (hopefully). Anyone know what red sedimentary beds connote?
What is this from
The better suicide squad movie
Ultimate humor
On a serious note though its a Australian Pied Cormorant
Here’s a good question for general paleontology. how do scientists find out how old something is
They count the rings in the bone ?
Carbon dating I believe
Doesn’t that mean its an oxygenated environment iirc?
How does carbon dating work?
Oh, you meant how old the creature itself is
Carbon dating is never used for dinosaur bones they are too old for the method to be effective
Then how do we know how old they are?
The rocks the fossils were found in iirc
For dinosaurs I believe we just look at the sediments where the material was found
Uranium isotopes used on the surrounding rock, which follow the same pricipal as carbon dating but are effective for much much longer
Hmm 🤔 that’s all it implies?
What is a uranium isotope?
Idk 💀
Where’s gbones when you need em
An isotope of uranium, they decay to half the original amount over a certain amount of time called a half life. We can use that to determine an inorganic thing's age.
What is a isotope
Its an atom which has a different number of neutrons to that of the standard element. For example carbon 12, carbon 13, carbon 14 are all isotopes
Ok thank you (don’t worry ik what a neutron and atom is)
Carbon 17 is what is used for carbon dating iirc, but its only usable for a few thousand years.
Uranium isotope dating is good for billions of years iirc
What's up
Red bed sediments. What’s it mean
How do we know what the environment looked like during the deenosaur times?
Primary red beds come from sediment with iron oxide in its mineral structure
Usually implies a hot climate but they can be sandstone, siltstone, or shale so it doesn't necessarily mean dry
So theyre red for the same reason blood is red.
So deserts, floodplain, tidal flats can all produce red beds in the right conditions with the right mineral content
Ah ok, the one I was referring to was a siliciclastic bed
Siliciclastic could be mudstone, sandstone, or conglomerate
So not dry (?)
Potassium/argon dating. How it is done has already been explained so I won't need to.
Do you know the specific sediment type? Mudstone or sandstone?
no dating!!
No unfortunately
that whole process, taking the element out of the equation, is called radiometric dating right?
Ok no wait I did some more reading; it appears the primary sediments are sandstone, siltstone, and mudstone
Okay that's what I figured, yeah there might be some semi-aridity but in general those are floodplain deposits
Seems typical for Southern Asia at the time
Speaking of paleo-climate; do we have any Maastrichtian material which happened to fossilise in a rainforest?
When you want to date sediments, bones, fossils, rocks and other minerals, you gotta need to study isotopic couples. The most well known example is Carbon-14, an isotop from Carbon-12 (the atom in its most stable condition). Through time, your carbon atoms will see its population being depleted, this population will change into Carbon-14. Carbon has an half-life which is approximately 5 734 ± 40 years. That means that every 5 734 ± 40 years, half of the Carbon-12 quantity will become Carbon-14. The next 5 734 ± 40 years later, half of the first half will transform again and so on. We consider bones or fossils as closed systems, they do not exchange matter with their environment.
From there, you have a certain quantity of carbon-14 and carbon-12 in your bone or rock. The total quantity of those is equal to the original carbon-12 quantity when the animal died. From that, you can do some simple maths and estimate how long it has been since the animal died with both quantities.
I didn't need the wikipedia article I just needed the term lol
The red beds themselves may represent periodic aridity or a drying trend over time, as floodplain sediment ages and dries the oxidization can occur. Southern Asia then and now is dominated by the monsoon effect of the Pacific & Indian oceans. So extremely intense wet & dry season fluctuations potentially
actually that message doesn't even sound like it was meant for me
I thought you were asking for an explanation about the process lololol
But yeah, it is radiometric dating.
So these extreme arid climatic depictions seen in media are not a stretch when compared to the most extreme dry period that may have occurred?
oh no lol just if it was called radiometric dating. I wasn't 100% sure but there was nothing else I could pull from my vague memory of high school science lol
Here are some pics from Google comparing Monsoon climates during the wet and dry seasons. Quite a bit of difference that can definitely be intensified in times of extremes
Oh those are some lovely comparisons I’ve been scouring the internet for something like this lol
So as I understand this drying of floodplains seems to be coinciding with the global climatic shift at the time? The Mesozoic gets colder and dryer so concurrently places like these get more extreme aridity to their environment.
What’s iirc stand for?
If I remember correctly
Thank you
No we're talking about normal regional shifts between wet and dry seasons year after year, with some years being extra dry (or wet) due to other factors. The climate warmed slowly throughout the Mesozoic
I thought by the Maastrichtian there was rapid cooling?
There was a little dip with respect to the trend but that trend wouldn't hit its peak until the Paleocene-Eocene Thermal Maximum
I was under the impressionthe K-Pg extinction was the transitional event into the dramatic cooling
No, happened a bit later in the middle Eocene. All that Maastrichtian & Paleocene volcanism had a big effect along with the higher sea levels
I'm mostly talking about very macro level climate trends, which at the scale of tens or hundreds of millions of years mostly have to do with the breakup of the supercontinent. There are many fluctuations, peaks and valleys, within that trend due to other factors (mostly CO2 levels in the atmosphere) because the climate system is incredibly complex. To your original point about Maastrichtian cooling having an effect on local environments, that's very likely the case, but how, where, when etc. are really hard things to pin down
Nah k-pg is the astroid and the aftermath caused by it iirc
You’re correct 🥳
Can we all take a moment to appreciate this chonky gal
Hopefully this face musculature is a good rendition
Because it’s very cool and distinctive
Thats not even the best image of it
I cant take screenshots on console apple tv but the full body pic of majungasaurus is just
Precious
Pnso sucho pfp w
I forget what the dino is in your pfp chonksaurus
It’s the prehistoric planet Qianzhousaurus
Was carnotaurus bigger than pycnonemosaurus
nah. Pycno is the largest described abelisaurid
From the material we have, it doesn’t seem to be close
I KNEW IT I FRICKING KNEW IT I COULDNT PINPOINT IT BUT I HAD A FEELING IT WAS QIANZHOUSAURUS
Prehistoric Planet is at its best when it’s not about Tyrannosaurus lol
kenyan giant description waiting room 🕐
I was just about to say that 💀
still waiting on the pile of undescribed brachiosaurids
Palaeontologists on their way to make the 1000th tyrannosaurus paper instead of describing and naming all this other material
Only reason i got a job was to watch prehistoric planet
there's a chinese one, one from the middle east, the archbishop, and at least two from europe
Nice
Why cant you
He’s certainly neat isn’t he
Paleontologists on their way to argue about spinosaurus
Please do not give out any personal information.
Also keep in mind the pinned guidlines in each channel before posting, as well as server rules.
This channel is for the discussion of past and present paleontological discoveries, scientific news, and depictions of prehistoric creatures in media in relation to paleontology.
I found a Majungasaurus skull. How do we feel about it?
He has a lot of teeth
He needs braces
Here’s a 3D model to accentuate the girth of the skull
Although I can’t tell how accurate it is
💀, Chad Bary
Okay I gave the model the once over seems to be right
I really want to talk about this guy
Because hes so silly and i want to know more about him
I have zero idea what that means
I think someone has a YouTube video on him
can i get the length? 
Its prehistoric planet stuff
Tho is there is a youtube video of that it would preferred.
Unreliable, dan made two versions and stated that the version2 which was 5.5 was probably more realistic
What other azhdarchids are there other than the 2 everyone knows
Azhdarchidae (from the Persian word azhdar, اژدر, a dragon-like creature in Persian mythology) is a family of pterosaurs known primarily from the Late Cretaceous Period, though an isolated vertebra apparently from an azhdarchid is known from the Early Cretaceous as well (late Berriasian age, about 140 million years ago). Azhdarchids included som...
Yknow like the 10+ foot tall onesa
Ik alanqa cant be one of those
Read through the list you’ll find em
What if the best and coolest dinosaurs are in north korea
Thank you chad bary for giving me a very straightforward answer
Because god for bid i have to read on my own
ALANQA IS ONLY KNOWN FROM ITS BEAK?
Because they're either complete or they have 3 finger bones found of them
Jesus christ what on earth are you typing
Its been 5 minutes
More than half of those are disputed jesus christ
Phosphatodraco and Arambourgiania are safe to stay
Tethydraco is definitely a Pteranodontid though.
No 😳
Earth needs a hero yknow
Wikipedia lists the correct information on those genera I just checked.
Edit and remove everything about t rex even possibly being soley a scavenger
In 2022 Tethydraco was reaffirmed as a Pteranodontian, and Phosphatodraco’s disposition was over its phylogenetic relationships iirc.
that is correct
there's more than one species of quetzalcoatlus which is what you're seeing here and why it seems so small
also true ^
i think thats the smaller species of quetz
I think thats Q. lawsoni at the bottom
Funny how they include a hypothetical skull for Hatzegopteryx, but not Arambourgiania
s c y t h e c l a w e d
No fluff?
here's the fluff
Not very fluffy smh. Makes sense though it’s a bigass animal
far far less
Not to be annoying but i think you’ll find its “far far fewer” since pterosaurs can be quantified?
Who is the biggest bird? (Argentinosaurus is the largest non avian dinosaur.)
Flight capable?
No.
Aepyornis I think
No, the biggest non avian dinosaur is also a bird, but what classifies a bird again?
Bird
Feathers
Legs
Carnivorous or insectivorous
Can fly or ancestors could fly
Scaly feet
Bird is the common name referring to animals in Avialae
So Aepyornis would be the largest “avian dinosaur” I guess. If you want one that can actually fly, nowadays Pelagornis is the biggest fella.
Ah okay, so argentinosaurus is officially not the biggest bird.
Wait what aren’t there herbivorous birds?
wouldn't the flying one is argentavis???
las time i heard pelagornis took the wingspan (abt 6.5 meters, ~36 kg) but argentavis took the weight (abt 6 meters, ~70-80 kg)
There are, idk what they're on about
Figured, thanks
Like, arent parrots herbivores?
Thats the easiest example.
No they are omnivorous, the only truly herbivorous bird is the Hoatzin of South America. Their diet consists of leaves,flowers,swamp roots,etc. Many birds eat seeds, however they also will eat insects, etc. Hoatzins will not.
Isnt there a threshhold tho? Like if over 60% of their diet is plant based theyre herbivores?
They're still considered Omnivorous if they have a significant meat % in their diet.
Basically if they eat nothing but plant matter (with some small portions of meat for certain nutrients) then it's an "herbivore"
If it's diet is almost all meat (with small amounts of plant matter, think dogs eating grass to help with digestive issues) then they are considered a "carnivore".
I think its not that black and white.
Like you have to have a 70% meat based died to be a hypercarnivore, for just a carnivore its less.
From what I have found, only 3% of animals are classified as omnivores.
And everywhere I look, parrots, finches, waterfowl are classified as herbivorous, even tho they dabble in some meat time to time.
Hypercarnivores are animals that eat exclusively meat, the only true hyper-carnivores live in the ocean, such as sharks or whales.
No? Hypercarnivore means your diet consists of over 70% meat.
Parrots and Waterfowl are still considered omnivores. Their diet consists of significant % of animal and plant matter. Even google will tell you this.
Ok, by who? Cos when I search it, every source says they are still classified as herbivores.
Even google will tell you this, which is quite a surprise from google. Literally search up something like ‘are parrots herbivores’
Heres Google.
My response I could get a better source if you’d like.
Might this be a case of what's popularly thought of (parrots being herbivores) vs what's scientifically correct?
Kinda like tomatoes being considered vegetables by most, when they're fruits.
Huh, neat. Tho there still are herbivorous parrots it seems.
I just looked and there were only like 2 maybe 3 places on the front page that said parrots are herbivorus.
However there is more than one species of parrot and not all of them have the same diet.
Macaws probably are more insectivorus than parakeets.
The only true herbivorous bird is like I said the Hoatzin, they will not eat animal matter at all. They exclusively stick to plant matter.
Yeah, but you can still eat some animal matter and be called a herbivore.
Like even cows will eat small animals from time to time, they arent herbivores then?
Yeah but that doesn’t make a significant % of their diet. Their diet will usually consist of around something like 95% plant matter, 5% animal. So they are still herbivorous
Ok, but wheres the source for that? Cos like hypercarnivore is over 70%, whats an herbivore diet at?
It’s probably around the same, if not higher. Most herbivores spend multiple hours a day just eating.
they mostly do that for nutrient deficiency, some cases it's not caused by that but most it is
Yeah, but I coulndt find anything on it showing exactly the figures, while for carnivores its like 60% iirc for just carnivore and over 70% for hypercarnivore.
@exotic quest That still means they need meat or stuff thats not plant based, which impacts their diet.
I just wanted to know how much can an animal not eat plant matter and still be considered herbivorous.
Well the reason things are classified as herbivore, omnivore,carnivore are because they regularly eat meat,plant, or a variety of both for omni. A deer isn’t consuming small birds every day, so they aren’t considered omnivorous . They do however regularly consume plant matter, thus they are herbivores.
Well the diet percentage decides that really, or maybe theres like another biological reason like how their digestion system is structured.
Sadly I couldnt find anything on herbivory either then, animal eat plant hmm tasty.
Tho I did find out that most species are carnivores, around 1/3 are herbivores and only a small number like 3% are actually considered omnivores.
Which is interesting, I expected the herbivore and carnivore numbers to be switched, tho I guess digesting your neighbor is easier then digesting leaves.
I mean thats still a ton of herbivores, and they each have their own population. If everything was a herbivore the world would be overrun.
I think herbivores still make up most of the biomass but are less diverse, but Id have to resarch that before saying.
I mean herbivores are some of the larger animals in their environments, elephants, bison, etc. So they probably do make up a lot of the biomass
I think its less of elephants and more of like, the giant mass of stuff like phytoplankton and stuff
look at the UK for a very small example of what the world would be like if the animal population was predominantly herbivores
Yeah the deer have gone mental in that country, they have no natural predators there so they just eat and eat away at the environment.
Dont they want to drop bison there too?
Id think they need wolves first.
Or cave lions whoever drops first lol
They have implemented bison in a tiny population already. But there is plans to reintroduce wolves and lynx.
Im just waiting for the mammoth pack to come back.
Thylacine dlc when?
wolves are a big if. there's a lot of dispute over whether wolves should be reintroduced or not
Wolves should be high on the priority list tho.
tell that to the government
Some sheep will be lost.
Buy guard dogs I guess.
I mean there is also the case of where the wolves would live. A lot of the UK consists of farmland. So farmers will not want to have wolves near them.
Paleo chat moment
We learn from the past and deal with the future lol
Very very paleontological talk rn.
Hoatzins are absolutely not the only herbivorous bird?? There is a huge swathe of birds that subsist nearly entirely on nuts, seeds, fruit and grain. animal-based protein makes up a similar small percentage of their diet as in ungulates. Finches, parrots, songbirds, a lot of waterfowl, sparrows etc
I thought they also had a significant percentage of animal matter in their diet though. Iirc Hoatzins don’t.
I dont think finches and waterfowl eat like 50% meat.
No. In basically all the birds i mentioned its incidental and not necessary for their diet at all. You don't see people giving their pet parrots any meat because they don't need it and its very easy to overdo it. They eat meat just as much as something like a deer does
Do you by any chance have any idea of how much an animals diet should consist of plant based matter to count as a herbie?
there's specific percentages but I can't remember off the top of my head
Yeah I couldnt find them sadly.
I think it's very subjective and depends on who you ask. Personally I'd define it as what is actually necessary for their diet to achieve peak health and nutritional balance. If an animal mainly eats plants but does actually require a small amount of animal protein for peak health, i would call that an omnivore. If they can benefit from meat but it isnt something they need to seek out and can live their whole life touching 0 meat, I'd call that a herbivore
Won’t something like a parrot eat animal matter if it’s available though. Hoatzins won’t. Iirc a study was done and the Hoatzins diet made up something like 82% leaves,10% flowers and 8% fruit. I think Parrots will eat insects if they can.
Frankly I think if you offered a hoatzin a bug they'd take it to be fair. Basically every animal ever will eat bugs sometimes. That doesn't mean they care to seek it out.
Hmm, so then by this definition, most parrots are herbies cos they can go without meat pretty easily.
But I guess there are maybe some proper definitions for it, like for hypercarnivore you have to have an over 70% meat based diet.
Yes, parrots are absolutely herbivores. So are a lot of other birds. They may not be 100% strict but very few herbivores on earth are anyway. Nature does not fit nice and snugly into the categories we try putting it into
Now this makes me think, are there any species of carni parrots?
So not parrots afaik, they're all largely herbivorous although i recall there being some that might take meat more frequently. However if you want an oddball, finches are usually all pretty herbivorous... aside from the vampire finch. While they usually eat seeds, when food is scarce they'll seek out the blood of seabirds by pecking above their tails and drinking the blood :3
usually during hard times most finches just... deal with it. Many even migrate accordingly. But because they're found on the galapagos islands they can't really migrate, so they have to find alternative ways to survive. iirc they'll also take eggs sometimes, but the blood drinking is what they're known for
I think the Kea is the most omnivorous of all the parrots, but they don't even begin to get close to carnivory. They will eat carrion or even small birds, but still largely subsist on plant matter
Please keep discussions here on topic. This channel is for the discussion of past and present paleontological discoveries, scientific news, and depictions of prehistoric creatures in media in relation to palaeontology.
what is edmonto regalis & annectens most up-to-date length & weight?
Depends on the specimen, you want the average, the biggest or the smallest of both?
average to biggest
fluff version made by sm friend of mine
Annectens can get to 15.3t (largest i think)
great, i'll take that thx
Np, and shant is 16.2t+ if u need
thx again 😂
No problemo
More than two decades ago, the depiction of a 25-meter-long Liopleurodon in the BBC’s documentary series, Walking with Dinosaurs, instigated fervent discussions about the true size of this pliosaur. The portrayal was generally deemed as excessively exaggerated, with the more accepted theory suggesti
damn thats from the university i plan on going to
HES BACK (in spirit)!
In another reality WWD had a dwarf liopleurodon and the real one was the size of a blue whale
This was downsized to...10-11m iirc?
Still gigantic but certainly not 14m
Could an 11 metre liopleurodon still pull off the iconic intro shot in some way or another? or would it be too small
Not really? Tho theropods are fairly lightweight comparatively, so maybe it could
That's an 11 meter one?
Ehh i suppose at a stretch it could stick its head out and pull the little fella in, since it only seems to be around 5-6m long?
Narp, it's Liopleurodon holotype...iirc? So not 11m, idk about scaling it to 11m
Ill scale it in procreate real quick
I think a 11 m pliosaur would make a lot more sense in that scene than a 25 m one
We see later that the 25 m Liopleurodon gets beached and dies horribly, but at the start of the episode it beaches itself intentionally to grab Eustrepto? Tf
No, it snatches it from the side, doesn't beach itself
But how is that water deep enough for it to submerge 3 feet away from land 
At the start of the episode its on a rock face, we can imagine that under the water it drops quite sharply so is not totally implausible i suppose
https://media.discordapp.net/attachments/512497290829758467/871558793455104000/image0.gif
(I know it's a meme, but I don't have any other gif)
Aqautic
hm, the Eustrepto is also quite a bit bigger than the real one in this shot, so you could probably recreate it with a much smaller Lio
I feel like you could still recreate the scene, just that the eustrepto would probably be pulled straight in, instead of being lifted in the air.
You could easily recreate it with a 11m one, the head of that thing would probable the size of the eustrepo
Minor error let’s pretend it says Argentavis 😳
dan got pretty close to 12m yeah
also isn't there a big 9m lio now? https://twitter.com/DanPalaeon1/status/1612506636136091648
So Liopleurodon is what size?
I’ve been staring at pics of Spino’s holotype and neotype like a rabid animal and like how do people who make skeletals or other reconstructions go about scaling them together to make a full animal? I’ve heard it get thrown around that the neotype could be a smaller or younger individual (though i think that might’ve been someone’s theory) due to the awkward proportions of the legs.
They overlap in the hips and a single caudal vertebra, which is enough to tell us that they are, if not identical, at least close in size
The neotype is a young individual, but one around the same size as the holotype; and dinosaurs tend to have proportionally shorter legs when they're older, not the other way around
@stiff osprey Oh wow thank you so much, that’s been on my mind for a longgg time. Does that mean the holotype could be a young individual too?
It's possible? The spines are almost all disconnected from the centra of the vertebrae, which could mean it's not done growing. But it's not a reliable character for telling age in dinosaurs, you would need to look at the inside of the bones (which are now exploded. rip)
ripppp. brb lemme go back in time and rescue the holotype from WWII
How far away do 2 animals need to be apart in time to be considered a different species?
iirc a good example would be allosaurus fragilis and allosaurus maximus
Aka Saurophaganax
Did they decide what saurophaganax is? I swear they change their minds once every month
Time is a horrid split for species, never use it
Allosaurid?
Did they decide if sauro is sauro or just big allo is what I meant, everyone knows its an allosauroid thats not really debatable
Than what distinguishs daspletosaurus from t rex then
…A lot more than time? Such as bone characteristics?
I think it’s been a stable genus for a hot minute
Im gonna assume you to be correct because i dont know much of a lot
several differences in the skeleton, they look similar bc they're related but there's enough material to tell that they're different genera
they're not split into genera by time, there's just plenty of differences between them. rex isn't a scaled up das and vice versa
Its most likely its own thing. Sauro shows up after Allo and Torvo go.
Can someone give me reliable size estimates of T. rex?
~7-11t depending on specimen
Big
real
Ty, do you know a reliable height and length as well pls?
Hip or neck height?
Hip
hip height ~3.5-4m, length ~11-12.6m
Thank you
8 tons on average I believe
Average is 6-7 iirc
The smallest rex we have is 6 tons
Oh
If the smallest is 6 tons and the biggest is, 11-12?, would the average be like, 8.8 smth
Something like that
That would make the average 9 tons if you round it
any decent dacentrurus skeletals recently?
Is that the stegosaurid
yes, I have skeletals for it but I'm just not sure if there's a more recent one available
A mathematical average maybe
Isn't that how averages are found?
Most representative Tyrannosaurs taxa werent 9 tonnes to my knowledge
So a proper mathematical average using all the representative specimens would result in a lower number. Instead of a single specimen representing each ballpark weight estimate
a mathematical average isn’t necessarily the size most of the species will be, a really big or small individual can skew it especially when you have a limited sample size
Medians are often a far better representation of the "middle" average size, in particular with a small sample size
The typical way in which I’m assuming the lot of ya calculate your average is using the assumption there is an equal representation of animals at each size range. Which is wrong 😐
Who's calculating an average with anything other than the the sum of weights divided by the sample size
If you only have one of each value you get an inflated result
I don't follow. Give example so my pea brain can process what you're saying
I think I’ve got piss-poor wording as well; here’s the example hypothetical/wrong way to write it; (6+7+8+9+10)/5
What's wrong with it
That's how you calculate average
It’s using the premise that each weight has an equal representation among all the representative specimens
Like there are as many 10 tonne tyrannosaurus as there are 7 tonne ones.
As opposed to say 6+7+7+7+8+9+9+10?
basically what we mean is that the mathematical average isn’t really the best way to look at the size of most individuals of a species, a really big animal that doesn’t represent the species well as a whole can skew the result and give a misleading average for the species
But that's how average works
What other kind of average is there
Yes that model right there results in a lower number
that’s how the average works yes what we’re saying is that it’s a bad way of looking at what’s typical for a species
There is no need for a model
Just use actual specimens
Damn
no offence to blub, but damn
the people hated blub because he spoke the truth
The only thing that makes 6+7+7+7+8+9+9+10
Different from
6+7+8+9+10
Is the sample.
No one is more right than the other if those are the numbers you have to work with. Giga's average is 9.6t. Is that an accurate representation of the animal's average on a population level? Probably not, it's a sample size of two vs how ever many rex has. But that is the average
Yes that’s what I mean use an accurate sample size
Tri just came in unexpectedly to diss blub sadly
really came in dissed and dipped, how is it the mods don’t see that but the instant it moves to modern animals they’re here
Fr
@fervent herald A reminder to please remain polite and respectful of other members while in conversation. Refer to our #rules
there we go
Idk how the Admins take this disses from us honestly
Ye. The definition of average never changes, reliability rests on the sample and sample size. So like in the case of giga it looks like it is heavier on average than rex, which by all technicalities and current knowledge is true. But that's why you gotta look at the factors that resulted in that average comparatively and judge it from that pov.
right that’s what I’m saying, the average is the same but it’s not always a great way to see what’s ‘normal’ for a given species
Blud also spam pinged a mod server btw.
And is messaging me the n word
Myself, I think Gigas were very similarly sized to rexes, maybe even identical, but with its sample size I can't say is reflective in any way of a population. Because its two specimens lol
I mean in extinct fellas there’s definitely a higher chance of getting the average sized fella, so maybe G. Carolinii is on average larger 🤷
If you have encountered a user or more, breaking our Terms of Service please report them by creating a Support Ticket via https://alderon.games/support. This will allow us to provide support and assist with the situation as reports to our Team will always be seen and investigated.
Oh def. That's a factor to consider
that’s an issue we see a lot with sauropods because usually the sample size is only a few individuals if we even have more than one
Even so, the sample size is so small that I can't begin to call it reliable as a reflection of the animal as a whole
Yeah, I kinda doubt average giga is 9.6 tons, probably around 8-9 but we can't just say that 8-9 is the average because we have no evidence that 8-9 is the average so for now 9.6 is the average even if that's not the real average. I hope what I said made sense
The 90 tonne Patagotitan that never got fossilised. Oh the possibilities 😈
Course, the sample some dinosaurs have to run with is just 1 lol.
It gets tricky speaking in hypotheticals. And for all we know the "true average" of gigas might have been larger than rex. Larger on average as they tackled larger prey or something
titanosaurs as a whole need a re-evaluation desperately but that would be an insane undertaking, the entire group is a disaster
Cladistically?
oh yeah big time, the more basal you get the worse it gets
This is why Maastrichtian continues to be the goated period I guess
Man
I want giga to have the same level of appreciation as rex has in some circles where its not just a spam fest about being the largest but appreciation for the animal itself and its characteristics
somphospondylidae is particularly bad because it's a good old fashioned wastebasket, I'd bet half of the stuff in there doesn't belong but it had one character similar and got thrown in there
Are you suggesting that paleo discussions be anything other than how heavy an animal is? Oh the heresy 😳
it really doesn't help that any sort of late cretaceous fragmentary sauropod immediately gets thrown in with the titanosaurs on principle, if we did a comprehensive analysis then a lot of things would probably get moved to other families (especially on the basal end of things) and I guarantee that some size estimates would change as the tribes and clades get shifted around
This will be my first and only message acknowledging that tri guy, that was amusing lol.
Yes chonk, it must be said
I think I try my hardest to engage in topics that aren’t just mass estimates
I dislike them. Though I welcome them over the vs battles of old
Paleoeocology is the goat of all discussions 😎
Who would win irl, megalania vs gigantosaurus??
Chonksaurus
Well we must first list their stats
bear vs rex part 2
Chonksaurus solos
Never forget that when the bear vs rex conversation was recently reignited on twitter a bit ago people were genuinely defending 'bear wins' takes
I still think chonksaurus solos
That’s not true lol
Oh nvm I just saw the rest of the convo, see somebody already helped
I’m sure 90% of the people involved in that discussion were incoherent
Bears are alive
Rex is not
Checkmate, rex
How do you fight a ghost tho, bears are in a pickle now
You’re missing the point, chonksaurus solos
I think you’re on to something
what is allo jimmadseni & allo europaeus most up-to-date length & weight???
8m
nvm lol
the what
a conversation that pops up now and then anytime this old image does the rounds
The three metre tall bear is truly something to behold
Gimme an adolescent Rex and up and I give you a dead grizzly
Well maybe late adolescent…. Fresh adol probably loses
Love that skin
My honest reaction:
Polar bear is actually huge if thats accurate gawd damn
Sue my beloved
Put Palaeoloxodon there 😏
Eh, overhyped
This looks to be easier then a trike for rex tbh.
She pretty ain’t she
This Scotty or Sue?
I sometimes forgot how big ancient mammals were, jeez
Depends if its based on the lost femur
Scotty has the weird maxilla
Yeah and bigger horns it seems.
Actually lacrimals are the correct term 🤓 👆
Im talking about the graph, idk about the femur thingy.
Aren’t the T rex horns on the frontal?
no i would still call it "Horn"
Lacrimal and postorbital.
Lacrimal to post-orbitals contain the bosses, horns don’t exist on rex
Yes yes. The post-orbitals I checked the skull 😭
The horn stuff in the end.
The lost femur makes it 25 tons lmao
So its like the bracho titan sauropod thingy
who's gonna stop me from callin it "Horn" 😈
Me because they're bosses, not horns
Pointy thing growing from skull.
What is a boss if not a round, not-hornlike horn
Erm... kinda
wait bosses???
wait why am i suddenly hears boss music
Maybe it was round 🤷
i mean tbf 'boss' is what we basically call any not-pointy keratinous horn-sized growth. i feel like the only distinction is that horn is pointy-ish, boss is not
So like the growth on the head of a pachyrhinosaurus?
Yes
👍
Is Mapu's 8,5-9 tons weight estimate still up to date?
I think so
yup
Mapu cool af
I bet he got big like Giganotosaurus 😎
Giganto the jaw specimen.
What about lenght? 12,5-12,7m ?
MCF-PVPH-108 seems to be 12.3 metres now actually. Unless that skeletal is bollocks
Same about carch and tyrannotitan? 12-12,3?
11-12.3
So maybe not as heavy? Unless Giganotosaurini are just heavy for their length compared to other Carcharodontosaurids?
Do we even have enough specimens to even make that assumption for them?
Heared carch is 12,3-12,5m and 7,5-8,2t and tyrannotitan 12m and 7,5t
We have a bone bed. Varied growth stages
For mapu right?
Isn't this one the most up to date?
No, Chonk's is the best
falcon, you got alpha8's mapusaurus skeletal on you by chance 🥺
They both are like, basically identical minus the spines on the hip.
That's the 2nd version, the one above is the 3rd
thanks I wonder, been hearing which is more accruate Lamborlobators and Beagliam, or alphas?
Yes that’s a major difference I think
Dunno actually, Alpha's is just slightly edited Tyrannotitan, but Beag + Lambor is from scratch? But I've heard praises for both so 
I think Lambor’s is more accurate
There was a reanalysis on what the shape of the sacral vertebrae would be
i wrote "Argentina" wrong tho
Nvmd it’s a sh*t skeletal
real and true
How much did S. Aegypticus weigh
~4t
@light osprey A reminder to please remain polite and respectful of other members while in conversation.
If I left a /j would it be fine smh
It’s just a prank bro
is deinosuchus 5 tons?
More than that
so like 13.6 tons?
Thats a lot better, iirc the max is like 15 tons but I don't know the average
is that from the newest weight of deinosuchus hatcheri?
Most popular
Its from this I believe
dinopedia?
Yes
is the information not from dinopedia if not then i wanna know the name of the website
Utah vs Kelenken who win
Utah, it's larger and has teeth
How big was Kelenken?
K
Utah also weighs a heck of a lot more than Kelenken
Largest estimates place it at 15 tons iirc
How about achillo or austro vs it
But BEAK
What would keleken bite force be compared to a human
Utah weighs as much as a polar bear, Kelenken isn't getting a chance to bite it before it's crushed. Austro is a maybe, but Achillo would be much the same
How much does austro weigh again?
but ma bird
Austro weighs like... 227kg, comparable to a lion
This skeletal says that Kelenken was heavier than Austro then
Austro's not a big game hunter either, while Kelenken is. I think Kel's got it
Austro is about the limit for Kel tho, right?
Probably. Definitely not taking a Utahraptor, Utah is built like a brick
Isn’t achillo like 250 kilos or smth
Also have to remember Kelenken is a bird, Utah isn’t. Theres a clear advantage to the Utah.
Bro is speciesist against birds 😔
Utah eats Kel for lunch
More of the fact this would make Kelenken have hollow air filled bones iirc.
hollow bones can still be pretty strong but utah is built like a brick anyway so it probably has it
Really, thought bird bones were quite brittle?
Nah, hollow ≠ brittle, bird bones can be quite strong. Just depends on the forces applied. Like human femurs for example are really good with compressive forces but shear forces snap em like twigs
aye, they are weaker compared to mammal bones, but by a small margin
you probably wouldn't be able to snap a human-sized bird's bones bare handed
Mhm
Average is like 8.
and the highest is 15 tons?
12-15, idk if the 15 tons are extremely agreed upon but they exist
alr
I think 15 tonnes was Fadeno’s original estimate. IIRC he’s adjusted to 13 now
who is IIRC
If I remember correctly
is IIRC a paleontogly?
No 😭 it stands for “if I remember correctly”
Its an abbreviation, like idk.
oh
mind blow
I recently visited my grandfather yesterday since I finished college and decided to show him prehistoric planet, since he was the one who got me into dinosaurs when I was younger, the amount of questions and curiosity and wonder he showed really made me feel something, like he showed me what dinosaurs used to be, and 20 years later I got to show him what dinosaurs are now
Thoughts on this?
https://twitter.com/sirblameson/status/1674144409947086852?s=46
Dinosaur fights, we love 'em and hate 'em.
Here's mine.
A thread of how depicted it 🧵(1/9)
3462
774
Excellent. Could do with some facebiting though
that tail at the end was downright disrespect
Reminds me of that one Komodo dragon fight
that komodo was so funny
Bro was flabbergasted
Bro lost a few chromosomes after that slap
that last slap was personal
Please tell me where I can find that video
Fr, bro is a sore loser ( well now that im looking at it neither of them won)
I think I found it
👍🏽
what is the more accurate gigantoraptor + human size comparison?
Can we dump paleo knowledge here?
Yes I believe
A little over 3 metres tall I think. Visually Gabriel’s should be the best
yall just aint gonna talk about how alamosaurus subfamily is opisthocoelicaudiinae
funfact, theres a therapod that filled the niche of a polluniating insect
T.rex does not have horns though, it is the postorbital which is shaped like an orb. People oversize it a lot and give it a pointy shape when it is rounded and a lot of time quite flat.
You mean a bird or a non avian dinosaur ?

Eh, it could have also ended up in a more pointy end keratin cover considered, we dont know.
But yes rex was usually smooth, or at least smoother then an albertasaurine
thx for the recomendation, got any idea of what is gigantoraptor most up-to-date length & weight?
How? The bone shape does not suggest any sort of pointy end. Keratin sheath follow the bone shape so we can assume it wasn't pointy as a lot represent it to be, such as Max bellomio's model (except if based on Tuft's love which seem to be sort of pointier than in any specimen)
Witton commented on it : https://twitter.com/MarkWitton/status/1479144941704130568?t=e7S6pLmZxthfRX41UOPcGg&s=19
@YutyrannusM @EDGEinthewild I don't think Tyrannosaurus had horns around its eyes, no. The swollen dorsal lacrimal bones do not have cornified tissue, but evidence of a sheet of dermal armour. The postorbital bosses look like they were cornified, but they're rounded, not pointed.
Tuft's love maybe is the only specimen which you can give a pointier boss, but it still wouldn't be very big. The keratin extention wouldn't go very far based on osteological studies about keratin sheath. Most other Tyrannosaurus have their postorbital covered by an osteoderm and those are quite rounded.
2 first pics are Tuft. The others are Sue, Stan and Trix.
Also when it comes to skull rugosities, Albertosaurinaes are even smoother than Tyrannosaurinaes, but their lacrimal is pointier. However, it is highly pneumatized and so likely wasn't covered much by dense hard tissues such as keratin.
tbf keratin growths dont always necessarily follow the bone core, at least not in a predictable manner. You might not assume that the helmeted guineafowl's casque curls back the way it does considering how overall straight the bone core is. And stuff like rhinos have huge horns despite lacking any bone core whatsoever. Although this is just to counter horns following the shape of the bone, its still important to consider what the actual texture of the bone tells us about the presence of keratin/how it grew, because that does indicate a lot
It's unfortuante that we don't really have many animals today that grow big, rounded keratinous bosses the way so many dinosaurs did, because that would make it a lot easier to understand and visualise
I remember Gigantoraptor being about 1.4 tons iirc.
Does anyone here have a barsboldia skeletal?
At least the guineafowl has an extensive bone core. For rhinoceros I don't know how in particular it works, those are very particular. Guess the texture has more importance for the mammal.
I forgot the name of the bird but it’s a bird species that’s still living and has claws, with fingers(from the rainforest)
Sooo i bought pnso eurhinosaurus
One of the upcoming animals in pot
hoatzin is probably the oldest living relative of dinosaurs, cuz it still has claws on its wings with fingers, they are most visible when their chicks.
Probably the only avian-dinosaur with fingers and claws on its wings
Narp, several ratites have clawed fingers
Oh cool
I learned that Ostriches have one small claw on their wing by watching Ben from the Urban Rescue Ranch lift one's wing up
Most birds just have a small finger and the rest of the wing
The Hoatzin is my favourite bird cuz it’s claws are probably the most noticeable out of other birds
Don't cassowaries have pretty noticable claws as well?
Iirc rheas are the only ratites that don’t have wing claws.
Anyways, before the mods yell at us… paleontology.
Hoatzin? Wait nvm you already said.
a bird
( humming bird )
Hummingbirds are the smallest dinosaurs
Aye good ol uncle Ben from da urban rescue ranch 👍
What about that one clean bird in Africa
The secretary bird
Manhandling an aggressive Rhea like it's nothing
Glad to see that he got his wildlife rehabilitation permit
Oh yeah I’m glad he finally got it
I wonder if anyone here has any insights on kevin's never ending rage
Please keep all discussions in here on the topic of the #paleontology, we recommend all off-topic conversations be directed to DM's or another server entirely. Refer to our #rules
7.5 metres long. Anywhere from 1.4-2 tonnes I’d reckon
no. it is equally as evolved as all other birds, it is equally as old, it is equally as close to non-avian dinosaurs. it just has more pronounced claws. many other birds have claws, they're just smaller and harder to see.
the presence of primitive traits in a modern animal doesn't actually make that animal primitive, it's still a modern animal.
I think by “oldest” he means closest to
Mozartean's point still stands
again, though, all birds are equally close to non-avian dinosaurs. all modern birds share a common ancestor, and that ancestor came well after bird-y dinosaurs (like avialans) split off from the less bird-y ones (like everything that's not an avialan).
Ok
Ty for correcting me, I don’t have a good sense of grammar
chonksaurus solos
I said “probably” so I didn’t knew it as a fact, I just make hypophysis cuz I like doing that, but still I can’t stop you from correcting me anyway
tbf they alone do not make it the definitive oldest living relative of dinosaurs. Evolutionary relationships are complex and require careful analysis of multiple factors to draw accurate conclusions
@fallow quiver Please be polite and respectful towards other members, refer to our #rules .

Would birds have any reason to evolve more pronounced claws and maybe revert back some of their older features? (Like tails, mouths with teeth etch.)
When the niche opens itself I guess
Yes, baby Hoatzins use their claws to climb up to the nest if they fall (which is their defense mechanism if a predator discovers the nest)
Sounds very prehistoric for a bird with claws to do that
for these phenomena to unfold, specific environmental conditions would need to align, providing clear advantages that drive the development and perpetuation of these traits
Excuse me?? How does that sound "prehistoric"???????????????????????????????????????????
Yes, then again, while Roadruners and Secretary Birds would be better off with tails and teeth, they haven't evolved any
Fair, but the fact that Roadrunners and Secretary Birds haven't evolved tails and teeth despite the potential advantages indicates that they have found successful adaptations in their own unique ways
Mhm. I wonder if Jack Horner goes through with the Chickensaurus project if we'll see Secretaries with tails and claws
Wrong one buddy
U sure?
This dude
one is a concerning person with a noticeable stand in pop culture and the other is a concerning person with a noticeable stand in pop culture
yeah its clicking in my brain, heya, anyways someone mentioned gigantoraptor so more of that
Good
re: claws, yeah, pretty plausible. some birds already use 'em for climbing and fighting, it's reasonable to think that a future bird could take it to another level. probably wouldn't evolve specifically for handling prey, though, since they're already doing fine with beaks and talons.
toothed snouts and long tails are more questionable. i think there's possible pressures for a tail (a large terrestrial bird might benefit from having one to aid with balance and turning, 'specially if it's cursorial, although afaik nothing like that has re-evolved so far so it seems unlikely imho), but it seems like they're sticking with the beaks for the foreseeable future. they can do pretty much everything a snout can, and as a bonus tend to be lighter and less expensive.
this is literally the nerd channel what r u doing here
Same person who reacted to their own message with laughing emojis. I wouldn’t worry about it
I agree with ya. Although I kinda find it confusing how no bird has taken the Pelagornis route and just evolved teeth-like ridges on their beaks
geese have sorta done it! the "teeth" are... a lot smaller, but they're there!
and penguins. oh dear. oh no. Penguins
(they have nightmare mouths)
Penguins kind of copied sea turtles in that aspect tbh
true lol
So lame that the KPG extinction happened. We could have been santient Troodontids
Do y’all think the smaller dinosaurs like micro raptor and velociraptor could speak?
Speak what? Human language, Dino language?
Unless you mean "speak" as in the same way a dog can "speak" as a command, I'm going to say a definitive no
they might mean how parrot can mimic us but don't fully understand it normally
dunno what they namely mean but basically: as in just normal comminucation? yeah, human speaking style? some could probably mimic but thats just speculation off of chance and less language breaking and more copying noises
I thought the intelligence levels of Troodontids was greatly exaggerated
The earlist syrinx appeared in birds and their relatives after the KPG extinction, so no, velociraptor couldn't "speak" or make very complicated noises
@west quarry no, Troodontids were pretty smart. They had the largest brain-to-body ratio of any non-avian dinosaur irrc