#paleontology
1 messages Ā· Page 250 of 1
I hope it doesn't turn out to be a third of the size
I only know this because my brother has a gecko but that's getting off topic
crested gecko?
It's a leopard gecko, actually
i disagree š
i think large apexs are obligate carnivores
wrong reply. 
sulfuric acid.
I can't say my opinion on this they will make fun of me
The last time i got fumbled
I mean it's basically the opposite of herbivores occasionally supplementing their diets with animal material, so I wouldn't think it's out of the question
Oh yeah ty im glad im not the only one
One major difference though is that I doubt fruit would have been as widely available if even present
Physically impossible
when was fruiting plants present in the fossil recorded? early cretascous?
Ig so
Yeah early cretaceous
But regardless if made available as a supplement that they'd need and likely be drawn towards, it works in our context
Like lettuce on it? I'd assume so
Yeah
Tomato too
No mayo
I wouldn't take them to be too picky if it has what they prefer/need as a big part of the meal
I said no mayo cuz what if it hurt their belly and they got intestine problems
@full lagoon Does a Hadrosaur deserve a Boiled Egg?
Uh, perhaps, idk what the Hadrosaur did to deserve such a reward
Wtf, Permian angiosperm?
This specific one is our third apparently, pretty damn cool.
Apparently this guy who published it is unreliable however
The author of this paper keeps repeatedly finding permian angiosperms
that is such a random thing to be fraudulent about
idk early angios are very much a very interesting thing
Would you eat a Permian Angiosperm?
Yeah I'd be highly skeptical of these claims, they're far from equivocal. Paleobotany is very intensely debated
is it actually?
Yeah and the origin of angiosperms is a hot button issue
@little mauve Would you make a dinosaur park in Zoo Tycoon 2?
who would y'all say feel the safest with if your going on a dinosaur related adventure
Definitely Nigel
if im correct, he probably knows the most out of the three about dinosaur behaviors and such
And I would take his enthusiasm over the other two.
No Dr. Malcolm? š
@storm stone Hey Precise, I'm gonna have to annoy you, apologies. But which of these are better for Diabloceratops?
https://x.com/DoctorNova2/status/1754565026718052365?s=20
https://x.com/AmmoniteSeries/status/1889005891115946432?s=20
Nigel. Only one who will know what to do and keep everyone alive. I trust him.
In the first JP theyāll try to keep me alive but a raptor will do a trickshot and maul me.
With chriss pratt though heād sit there dead eyed as his raptors tear me to pieces. No thanks.
If your name isnt blue he aint helping you
skill issue
nigel has the most experience dealing with wild animals so it's not much of a contest 
i mean, owen was a professional animal behavorist
tbf it depends on the Nigel, if it's Chased by series Nigel? Absolutely
If it's Prehistoric Park Nigel? Definetly
If it's Primeval Nigel? You're both cooked
he was in primeval?
primeval nigel is an alternate universe he dosen't count 
yup, and was eaten by a Giganotosaurus.
damn
I mean, if it's a Deinonychus emergency, you can call me.
Could dinosaurs evolve smth similar to antlers?
Marginocephalians and thyreophorans feasibly couldāve, especially things like pachycephalosaurs which already had knobbing and whatnot
Hmmm yes
I was thinking the same thing actualy
Dinosaurs were do derived that i think if wasnt the sdteroid they might had evolved into more weirder forms
By the maastrichtian, most of laramidia at least was already pretty different to elsewhere around the world, and it was likely if things kept going on itād only have gotten weirder
Indeed!
Oh Nigel by a long shot
probably not. The thing is that, this would be more debatable on what is possible on their genetic profile.
Nigel confirmed he survived so itās canon 
How the fu-
Sheer aura
I believe he said he escaped into the anomaly
Do you see elephant sized frilled animals running around in asia or south america?
Or large sized pachycephalosaurs, or barely any sauropod species
Tbh, I think what would just happen, would just be more Ornithopod diversity, and those guys had plenty of years, and they did nothing.
" Oh yeah, we became Generalistic Feeders and Quadrupedal, and I guess some of our relatives are still like... Mesozoic Boomers or some sh#t ( Bipedal and thin snouted ) "
And that's it.
Unless stuff like Thescelosaurus had to re-evolve Hadrosaurs from Zero
Sinoceratops (Campanian and Asian), there are only four named sauropods from the Maastrichtian of Asia
And whoop de doo I guess Pachyshitsaurus is the largest Pachycephalosaur and Prenocephale is only the fourth largest I guess that means North America is a biogeographic funhouse of bizarrities
A single species made its way to asia. There are no more of it.
As for the sauropods I was not aware of that. Did South America also have that same issue, or do we have a good amount of maastrichtian sauropods from there?
Wow thanks for the patronizing that was necessary
Data deficiency is not really evidence that Ceratopsidae were or werenāt somewhat widespread through the whole of the Asian continent
I was referring mainly to stygimoloch and friends. Not many pachycephalosaurs went the spiky route or emphasized it. Pachyās larger size is intriguing but then again everything in the HC was humongous so fair on that.
the second part was unessicary
Basal species, aside from sino we have no derived ceratopsians and it was likely they were not āwidespread through the whole of the Asian continentā
I am aware that just because we donāt have the information doesnāt mean it couldnāt be plausible, but youād think we would have at least scraps or some sort of traces of widespread centrosaur coverage by now if it were true
Our fossil record is very poor outside of Mongolia and two or three Chinese basins during this time, even the Zeya-Bureya basin does not have excellent preservation for most its fossils beyond hadrosaurs, I donāt think thereās any expectation for whether itās most parsimonious to assume they shouldāve been present in the areas we preserved instead of elsewhere on the continent
Actually, there might be evidence of them being as widespread as far as the campanian. But it's only so on a matter of " Potentiality " rather than confirmed by a large scale of samples. While, I myself do not know how reliable this is, there are teeth from the Campanian of Japan that are comparable to those of Triceratops, per example.
Admittedly, this kinda of only would suggest the idea that Laramidia was connected to Asia, and that's how per instance, Tarbosaurus, Zhucheng and others are in that continent. Which, I am aware that most people do not support it, but I think it is very much possible.
@fossil ingot Do we have a size chart of the Bajo Barreal Formation?
Don't think so
Damn.
It was pretty similar to a good chunk of Asia tbf
wwhy?
also which titanosaur i that?
Sarmientosaurus, so arguably not a Titanosaur
how the mighty have fallen
Tbf when same posture deinoS IS longer
ā¦by like a few centimeters
oh yeah I meant more in how deino isn't 14m and sarco isn't 12m
Theyve still got the same stupidly huge skulls tbh

you didn't see anything
perhaps im dreaming
Still remember the times ppl said Sarco was a Huge gharial..
the gharial is obviously a small sarcosuchus silly
True
Given the proportions of its jaws, it might have still had a powerful bite/grip.
absolutely would have been powerful
the false gharial/tomistoma has narrower jaws than sarcosuchus and it regularly takes large prey
Maybe the jaw shape concentrates the force into the front parts when it bites
Ohh yeah
Definietly
Woah look how the jaws turn upwards
Ive never noticed that cuz the only media representation ive seen of it was POTs sarco
Yeah
Mfw my nose is higher than my eyes
Wouldn't that make it really good at ambushing since all it needs to stay submerged is just poke the end of it's snout outside the water and the rest of it stays submerged
Bro no longer looks out mogged
Except its Torso
Wait..sarco changed?
it's changed since 2001
Huh
Omg i love her art!!
Iām betting they are all getting a downsize again
how would you argue that it isnt a titanosaur?
diamantinasaurs have appeared outside of Titanosauria in recent phylogenies
can you show me sources?
interesting, big ah article though, is that normal or is it just really big
Omg
An paleo article bein big?!
Preposterous!!
Hopefully db/kto updates the size of their deino
Itās entirely possible Purussaurus may be smaller than this too
i hope we find a Metriorhynchidae this size

Db isnāt changing their size. Kto is downsizing theirs to like 12m which is still a lot bigger than irl deino but giving it the irl proportions
Maybe
But it been +10m is pretty consistant
Only way it gets Smaller is if P .Mirandai turns out weird
https://x.com/raftingzalmoxes/status/2055942305727791522 were mammoths and mastodons close enough to reproduce offspring with eachother?
#SurvivingEarth
šØNEW CLIP FROM E08: MAMMOTHS AND MASTODONS GRAZING TOGETHER!
Main plot: 'A mother giant short-faced bear tries to protect her young after a massive flood stops the Gulf Stream'
Other creatures from E08: humans, stag moose, dire wolves
Humans???
humans???
why y'all acting suprised
i was confused on why he was saying humans, is it because it says there are humans in the episode?
humans existed backthen?
Yeah no?
Im confused
humans???
Humans???
columbian mammoths and american mastodons coexisted in California
la brea tar pits is top 5 faunal assemblages ngl
i NEED a prehistoric park remake with prehistoric planet level quality
Realistically, the use of " Titanosaur " does not inherently infer it being used to describe a " Titanosaurian ", or member of Titanosauria, which would be proper to refer to the phylogenetically placement of " True-Titanosaurs " ( in the context here. ) The term is also utilized, either officially or unofficially, to describe members of Somphospondyli, or the older branch, Titanosauriformes. Which, although we can discuss this, makes " Titanosaur " not necessarily a literal term ( At least, not one that inherently emphasizes phylogenetic placement of the taxon )
There's also the complications from " Titanosaurs " having pretty inconsistent phylogenies, less from being unreliable, but more so that any information drastically changes the placement of multiple taxa. Which meant the term " Titanosaur " never could really adapt, in a natural way, to changes of what was: a Titanosaur or not. So most have adopted the version where the term is more generalistic, rather than specific.
What are the top 5
On topic of titanosaurs, Dinosaur Arcade Argentinosaurus mogs all. Find me a better Titanosaur design.
chinle, nemegt, ouled abdoun, la brea, and all of laramidia
Shaximiao is missingā¦ā¦.
no
Hi
Well, I think I'll motivate myself by drawing a Alamosaurus, because I've been incapable of finding literature with any references of Feathers.
what do people assume sauropods are untouchable all because their bigger then majority of their carnivores? arent majority of predators smaller then their prey in current day?
what do you think killed all the megafauna
global warming
that wasn't the only reason š there'd probably be at least some left outside of africa if everything didn't get overhunted
See, if the blue on the dewlap, and the green on the nose was extended further, or was utilized in more ways, I would agree this is peak design. Otherwise, this really boring...
The Yellow does not contrast hard enough against the brown stripes, which gives me the same feeling when I look at Pk's Apatosaurus ( Absolutely hate this Choccy Milk Sauropod )
aliens
it's such a good design
But, to be fair, then PK redeemed themselves by making the Brontosaurus ( 100% better )
pros: looks good and is big š
cons: spikes, blocky, roblox š¢
now this is just my opinion, its still a great design overall
Prehistoric planet dreadnoughtus in the corner:
Well the blocky style is the whole appeal of Dinosaur Arcade as a game. All its creatures were simplified and sort of cartoony, but still were accurate.
No, no, it was obviously a meteor strike in Mexico
Colors good, but too fat.
Woahohoh fat shaming a dinosaur??(im jokin)
He's not that fat tho
Everything in php has too much fat on it. Almost everything.
Or have a different take on soft tissues compared to most reconstructions, which in first impression make them seen " Fat. "
What about all the totally-not-extant background fish in the underwater scenes?
Exactaly!
Ppl are so used on the JP/JW dinosaurs looking like that,that some pol say thet r fat(not sayin this is the case,but still)
Ofc many ppl have their interpretation on what these animals looked like
And thats apreciated
I say that, because although I don't like PhP, you can compare the exact skeletals that Hartman released afterwards, and compare them with the models. Soft tissue is still pretty conservative in general. The difference is that there is a lot more emphasis on flexiblity and weight when animals move. Sauropods being pretty large animals, and scenes emphasizing on their size, the inclusion of those details make them seen " Fat ", but are, otherwise, not.
I don't know, I think the sauropods spending weeks on end in a desolate wasteland displaying and breeding would be just a little thinner than what is shown. Considering that I'm visibly thinner after just a few days of not eating.
Oh look at that, I'm using a modern mammal as an analogue for a dinosaur... how far I've fallen...
Indeed
The trex is a good exemple of that
Bein based on sue
And if u know sue
She's pretty chonky
Wasnt it just a one day thing one that whole scene?
They are definetly not skinny or " Shrinkwrapped ", but compared to the skeletal, they are following the exact silhouette.
Yeah see
No, its implied the females and old bull have been there for quite some time, and the ending shot of showing the herd dispersing was over several more days at least
*They
The specimen's official pronouns are They/Them.
Oh yeah?
Sorry i kinda forgot about that
It was a long time since i watched php
If only we had actual renders of the PP animals and not stitched together vibes
If only. We arenāt even getting a 4th season anymore.
Its more genuine this way since all of paleontology is just guesswork and vibes 
Are u fr?
Tbh what do you expect from a Documentary that every episode's behind the scenes were short ahh f*ck and only talked about ONE animal of the episode?
Give them a break, David Attenborough could only remember so much about the Mesozoic at a time
Are u guys excited for Surviving Earth?
Yuh. Idk about the Biotic interchange episode though..
Meh, all the characters die in the end anyway
Spoilers!
Dang, can't believe they made dinosaurs woke š
Wokenosaurus
they are on your pc you just gotta look
" Dinosaur Documentary "
put it on the screen
Compilation Series
Eeeehhh
I kinda disagree
Even tho yeah
Its more of a compilation of situations
" I DON'T LIKE THE CHEMICALS THEY PUT ON THE ROCKS!! "
" IT MAKES THE FOSSILS GAY!!! š š³ļøāš "
I hope surviving earth dont fall into that too
Personally I have no issue with the actual structure of PhP, its not like most real natural history docs follow actual storylines, a lot of Attenborough's more recent documentaries bar the few about primates definitely follow more of a compilation style.
What dinosaur would 2011X/sonic.exe choose as a vessel?
I bet its trex cuz obviously
Bro I just want Planet Dinosaur back. Reboot it with better accuracy, cgi, and same structure. The way they explained things was so good with the visuals.
maybe some megaraptoran like fukuiraptor or australovenator? (no idea how megaraptorans hunted prey)
or another carnivorous sprinter
Hnmmmm yes make sense
Maip woyld be cool to see too..now i wanna draw that
I mean, certainly. My critique is more so that, cause it's not really a informative documentary, what is displayed is: Obvious. Anyone shouldn't be missing anything, unless they are not watching the screen...
But the visuals seem to have sacrificed most of the discussions and speculation, where prior or other documentaries have been able to somewhat give them... I particularly don't like that PhP selled well to it's target audience, because it sent a very clear message to every new documentary on extinct taxa:
" People won't care what you put there, if you can compensate by making stuff look pretty "
And that's how you end up with WWD 2025, per instance. One can only wonder if this was the reasons executives were so persistent on interfering with PhP Ice Age, removing dedicated research to the animals showcased in episodes, speculation of behaviour has been defaulted to very generic analogues ( that most of the time did not make sense with the specific animals ) and of course... The adoption of, mostly, made-up " Common Names " for the animals on the screen, because after all... If it's pretty, nobody will expect anything else
...Or that was what they thought.
š š
Hey, now, David "I'm getting tired of spelling his last name" once dropped a fun fact about T. rex eyes so its perfectly fine
Also his nose
Yeah, I guess so. Thank you, Mister Attenborosaurus
We should just call him David Atten.
D.A. Borough
See, David's Dinosaur would be a Opisthocoelicaudia, because they share only one thing in common in name
Correct me if Iām wrong, but wouldnāt an overly chunky sauropod be counteracting the air-filled skeleton?
I wonder what āsueā thinks of this 66 million years later?
Id didnt had many ideias just this lil skeatch
ough...
irrelevant, I think.
Probably busy sunbathing up above
Or takin a nap
I think they're probably dead.
Only probably though.
Dont say that thats mean
Yes that is why i said up above
so then why is it odd or unheard of to see a "titanosaur" with large orbitals???
They didn't have the technology to reach orbit back then
I say it's odd, not to say that it's uncommon, if anything it's common among Sauropods in General. But usually, larger orbits would also somewhat imply larger sclerotic rings? Usually this cannot be determined, as it said that in larger animals these might be more cartiliginous, therefore making it harder to preserved, but if true ( In theory ), then this could imply that Sauropods have some extent of nocturnal vision. Since Larger Eyes would absorb more light.
Sarmientosaurus are known to have small orbitals? i guess that is odd
Nah.
Scleral rings have been studied in a few sauropods at least, the best one being Schmitz & Motani 2011 on potential daily activity patterns.
Photopic corresponding to diurnality, Scotopic nocturnality, and Mesopic cathermality
why did all my messages get deleted šššš can i not edit them?
i didnt know you can determine a specimens chathermality by its scleral rings, but based on these articles it is unreliable to predict an animals cathermality by its scleral rings https://www.researchgate.net/publication/51920676_Comment_on_Nocturnality_in_Dinosaurs_Inferred_from_Scleral_Ring_and_Orbit_Morphology
Dunno why things were deleted, good catch I didn't see this. Raises valid concerns the results probably are overstated
what would y'all say is the most accurate deinocherius depiciton in paleo games?
PK
Its feathering realistically wasnāt extremely dense though, right?
is this better for you
Oh my.
Yes
this will be a dumb question but is there a size limit to feathers? like, when does something get too big where feathers just , wouldnt be present on it or atleast non visible
Well no but gigantothermy
Yutyrannus is pretty big and fully feathered, but Deinocheirus lived in a fairly hot place. So its body size plus dense feathers would probably be overheating. Unless it had those weird feathers that cool the animal down, idk why it would have those.
Feather are insulating, meaning they can keep animals cool or hot depending on the environment. Insulation doesn't mean they just trap heat 
can i ask how they help keep a animal cool?
More surface area for heat to dissipate from
yeah, the thing that makes birds overheat easily is their inability to sweat, not feathering
In Games prob PK
Hatchling better still cooler not counting games
they also use their unfeathered parts for thermoregulation [like some birds crapping on their legs to cool off and such]
Also bird baths/water
yes I love this much more
i want our honest opinion, how feathered do we think deinocherius really was?
pk is the only paleo game here so it wins by default
PaleoNeolitic
I will forever love this dudes
The mighty Velocipodus
Love their Achillos Aswell
stupid answer/statement but I always love in paleo media where you can tell which dinosaur (such as most of deinoch recons) are made with the reference via a skeletal rather than a freeball reference another example being PCE Acrocanthosaurus to me
why dont the dinosaur survival games count? ( and jwe )
because they're not paleontology focused games and shouldn't be expected to recreate an animal faithfully unless that is their focus, and for that only path is the one that has expressed wanting paleo accurate models
oh alright
and it uses the inaccurate SH skeletal!!!!! SO IT SUCKS!!!! this is very /srs btw
what is the sh skeletal???
POT Deinocheirus main issue is that.
Its Old Asf
SH is shorten for Scott Hartman, which is the one in the back
the model doesnt look that bad though, how old is it?
isnt it from like, 2020, 2021?
the one in the back? i can hardly see it
yes the one in the back, the one with the oversized head,arms. tail and everything else
Hartmans isn't Exactly ALL that Horrible
Nothing few slights edits can't fix
oh yeah for sure
" ADMIN I MADE 1 PURCHASE AND THE 350 COINS DIDN'T ARRIVE... "
Its okay, we can get through this together joa
not that we kniow
Hello,
I am sorry to hear that you have not yet received your purchase. Please reach out to our support team at: https://alderon.games/support for further assistance with this 
Lancians is still pretty decent
It been Scaled to a different Specimen than Hartamns also works fine
yea admitally Scott Hartman skeletals (mainly his Deinoch in this case) do look much cleaner in a neautral pose in my opinion
dromaeosaurs are funny. The most early ones are the weird derived ones while the later ones are glupshitto-esque generalist small fellows
FAT DEINO DORSAL
AHH MY EYES
btw who did the SH edit was it Gus?
also speaking of herbivores with large claws and posture. Is upright theri a real thing or nah
Peak Theropod Pair
depends on what you depend upright as shown in Lancian schematic ofc wip you can still display this incomplete animal with posture akin to duonychus with a "slightly downturned neck" or like a pior reference such as Dan with a much more raised neck posture
Think so??
Lowkey forgot
dont necessarily agree with this, i think lances choice to use Duonychus was questionable
whats everyones opinion on deinocherius actually eating fish or if it was just a fish dying inside it or it dying ontop of a fish?
I was gonna come up with something clever to say but I had a brainfart
i think it ate fish
same
Weird fella
Same person who started ATTACKING and BEING RUDE to Dr. Dempsey btw...
Ugly fella
https://eartharchives.org/articles/deinocheirus-the-giant-hunchbacked-dinosaur-with-terrifying-hands/index.html --> this talks about deinoch as if it functioned almost as a pelican which i think it would have ate fish with the wide beak being able to scoop up fish and such
In 1965, a pair of arms as long as a full-grown ostrich's height were discovered in Mongolia. For more than 40 years, the rest of the animal remained a mystery.
Which would usually be a better choice?
Suzhou, Bissekty Taxon, Nanshiungo which is all what dan used
Duonychus is the best representation of a artist or gamer.
why is he built like a Valorant player
duonychus 100% played CS:GO back in the day
He weird
Digital Table Artist. ( Or is it called Desk? )
Got it
idk
The Paper Skeletal also looks like a gamer fella
whos fatter, theri or deinocherius
Deinocheirus ( It has a skeleton preserved, Theri is just some floating hands )
damn
Theriās potentially fatter, it could be wider but only if we have the material to prove it. There is a possibility it can be wider, but it must be shown first
Theri Prob
Deinoc is rather thin dorsally from above
Idk. If I'm not incorrect, it might be subjective to how Theri actually looked like, I might be outdated on this topic, but I do remember there exists Robust and Slim Therizinosaurs, and it doesn't seem to be much correlated to Gigantism ( Maybe it's correlated with Diet? Tougher vegetation requiring larger guts? but idk )
Dan's Theri is rather fat
GATs
I love making things up
And then we have this
@fossil ingot do you have a Titanosaur ( any kind ) in a neutral pose?
Does Patago Count?
I guess.
Alamo in case you prefer it
Who the dude
Rapetosaurus, skull
Aegyptosaurus
alamosaurus my goat
Actually, I'm doing Alamo currently
doing it? what are you doing?
Cool
Just posing it.
how so?
which specimen?
So, you just pick the selection tool, separate some parts into new layers, then you just transform it, and angle it around.
what is this in, blender? seems like your making paleoart or something if that is, then thats cool
Medibang Paint.
oh cool so you do paleoart, if you made anything can i see?
I mean, there are the more recent drawings, but I think most people in this chat may be tired of seeing the Hadrosaur dewlap, so... Let me see what I have...
There's the Primelephas.
thats pretty good, i like the wrinkles, and the proportions seem to be pretty accurate too, i will say the head may be a bit bony but other then that
Yeah, it doesn't have a lot of material. So I used, Mammuthus and Stegodon ( Optionally, it would've been better to use Stegotetrabelodon, but it doesn't have any cranium and postcrania preserved )
In this case, P. gomphotheroides, P. korotensis I didn't try to make it, but it has more mandible material.
thats all the skeletal material that its based on?
yah with that much material, its good to base it off relatives within the same time frame
If they also had good material. You kinda are only left with using close genetic relatives
you know alot, do you have a degree in paleontology if thats fine to ask?
No. @stiff osprey does, allegedly.
@queen oar this tweet reminded me of you. https://x.com/GarlotsBack/status/2056222763367760193
Nice
its because you like Agathaumas
Yup, only reliable Ceratopsid from the Lance Formation
Actually, there is " Triceratops eurycephalus ", but I'm not familiar with Schlaikjer's work. Wished there was better pictures of that specimen...
How accurate is Prehistoric Emergence
ummmm theres a talking t rex, and giant carnis over 100 feet long soo umm idk bro
@little mauve https://x.com/i/status/2056139290741289349
The loss of Dr. Mike Burns is sad repeatedly encouraged him to get his dissertation published. His section on taxonomy and variation in the nodosaurids for publication with Phil Currie, sadly it was rejected and never resubmitted the manuscript. https://t.co/w7heLSgTd5
shame Dan's stuff can't be used anymore since they expect to be paid for referencing their skeletals
T-REX DIDN'T HAVE LIPS?
T-Rex possessed significantly more holes in its jawbone compared to other lizard species (varanids) with lips. This suggests they had thick gum tissue, possibly covered by a layer of hard keratin to protect the gums from damage when biting into bone. Through phylogenetic bracketing, experts emphasize that crocodiles (distant ancestors) and birds (direct descendants) lacked lips, therefore it is highly likely that Theropoda also lacked this structure.
- birds have beaks, this disqualifies them as an example.
- crocs are highly specialized semi aquatic animals with far, far more rugose skulls than any dinosaur aswell as having splayed interlocking teeth.
- lips are the ancestral tetrapod condition which leans you have to argue why they lost them not why they should gain them.
- the formana count is not so substantially higher than lizards to rule out lips at all.
- crocs have a secondary palate to create a seal as they don't have lips, dinosaurs lack this thus required lips to form a seal.
if tyrannosaurus didn't have lips these depictions are wrong, they have lips still, just ones that don't cover the teeth.
I'd also say that if you compare the holes in the skulls, rex's resemble lipped lizards more. Very orderly, follows along the edge of the mouth
Vs crocs which have them all over their face
Spino likely didn't have lips since it has splayed interlocking teeth
case and point
outside of spino the whole lipless thing is dead
Carcharodons may have had lips because their teeth were shorter and smaller than those of Tyrannos, so their teeth could have been obscured by their lips.
all theropods had lips except for ones that lost them such as birds, Limusaurus, and possibly spinosaurids
U see
Weather cold=fairly fluffy for cold
Weather hot=over heating cuz of too much fluff and big animal so not much feathers on the body
That's my understandin
On dinosaur feathering
Yeah and aldo
Why wont a fully terrestrial predator dont have lips in the first place?
Their teeth would dry up and fall off
Idk why this is still a recurrent "debate"
"Uh but their teeth r too big for lips!"
No
Look at crocodile monitor's teeth
They r pretty long ans he still got lips
Ans u r ignoring the fact thea gums and other soft tissuie night covered great part of thode teeth
Some of the more derived land crocs like sebecids probably didn't have lips, but yeah, pretty much all terrestrial toothed animals have lips
Exactaly!
See how long his teeth r?
He still got lips!
Yeah no this is simply incorrect.
Nice hypothesis, still incorrect
āHoles in its jawboneā yes Iām sure heās got a good grasp of what heās speaking on
does Eocarcharia existed as spinosaur or carcharodontosaur?
I think one bone was a spinosaurid bone and the other one was a carcharodontosaurid
fr?
dawg atp i really doubted this guy is even real š«
I dont even know lol
Its just name stuff, there's still some type carch living with some spinosaur whose name is cristatusaurus and/or suchomimus or just one of those
It's not like carch teeth are that much shorter in terms of crown length
This isn't true.
Iād argue spino probably had them too
Kinda depends on the skull reconstruction though, doesnāt it.
the problem with spino is how it's teeth splay outwards and interlock meaning the lips would have to attach at an absurdly low angle on the dentary, though tbf this may be more of a teeth poke out of the lips rather than actual liplessness.
Also yeah since spino's skull doesn't have one complete specimen it could change.
Apparently the teeth āsplayageā can still allow for lips with certain reconstructions.
And the fact that the end of the lower jaw might not have actually been that much thinner than the upper jaw.
basically the point is Spino is the only theropod where this discussion has any merit because it once again is a problem child
https://tenor.com/view/carnotaurus-dancing-gif-14979737254514197794
this will be missed š (if it were true lol)
these are the radius and ulna, PhP is correct
Pretty grotesque
That's Majung's arm in the 2nd image, but yeah PHP is fine
arm display still is a bit ridiculous.
How so
I kinda don't like that PhP gave attention to that, technically it's a honorable mention to very old speculation about Abelisaur arms, the issue is that realistically it does not make sense
Even if we argue that the arms had some form of coloration, display is more likely to be done with the animal's head, rather than just the arms. Simply by the fact that there is more emphasis on the ornaments of Abelisaur skulls, rather than anything on the arms
Even the point where the arms have flexibility, I think there is other alternatives that may explain why that flexibility was present, it just depends on how tolerable one is to those alternative interpretations.
Its fine for some fun speculative abelisaur behaviour, but Carno was probably the least likely to have it since there's a much better option for display.
For most abelisaurs I feel like it wouldn't make sense. Even those without bony horns, you kinda have the issue of soft tissues:
Skorpiovenator is so nice
Alternatively, there is Abelisaurus, but I'm not familiar with the cranial material of that animal.
Llukalkan, Auca and Abelisaurus have flatter skulls, iirc Delcort 2018 talked a bit about abelisaurus skull
ornamentation/display features on the head does not at all necessarily exclude other forms of display on the body in the slightest.
I don't see any other decent explanation for hyper mobile ball and socket joint for the arms either.
That I am aware of, but realistically if we found the fossil of a Ceratopsian, you would imagine the display would've mostly utilized the head of the animal, and not the tail tip, for instance ( Not similar, I know, but Abelisaurs have such reduced arms, that realistically to even imagine they had such a role, for me at least, does not make sense. )
Is the arm mobility a characteristic of abelisaurids in general or specific to Carnotaurus
mostly and only are two different things, also the head kinda obscures alot of the body from the front anyways
Still a valid example. I think that regardless of perspective, the presence of bony ornaments or soft tissue ornaments are more likely to had a primary role in potential display behaviour.
it would seem to be abelisaur wide as majungasaurus seems to have a similar ball joint
Aight so as a characteristic of abelisaurids in general, I'm inclined to just think of their mobility as a "consequence" of the evolution of their arm limbs ancestrally rather than evolving them in part for the purpose of display, especially when abelisaurids seem to put skill points into head ornamentation, Carnotaurus being the most notable example
Not to say it couldn't of course secondarily
Yeah, there is Abelisaurus who, for most images I've found, doesn't seem to have a whole lot, for example.
- you originally discredited the arms being used for display entirely.
- there's a pretty big different in promince between ceratopsian heads (which feature multiple display structures) and carnotaurus' horns.
- I don't see how the arms and horns would conflict with eachother rather than being used together like how Elands use; horns, head tuff, face mask darkness, knee clicking, dewlap, fighting and shoulder height to convey fitness.
There is no reason however for them to gain such hyper mobility + having some still fairly prominent muscle attachment points on the arms despite they become entirely useless for manipulation of any kind
Doesn't seem to have a whole of differences for me
So, let's say realistically, if Abelisaurs, in general, use arms for display, wouldn't it be logical ( to some extent ), if they also emphasized on their arms as much as they did with their heads? Legit question.
Once again, display structures do not cancel each other out even if one is the centre piece.
answer my question.
I did, you seem to insist that the horns somehow make any other form of display a mute point dispite many living animals proving that to not be the case
No, you didn't. You legit avoided answering what I asked specifically. If the arms were used for display, why are there less emphasis on them in most species of Abelisaurs? Legit answer that.
I find PrehPlanet's Carnotaurus dance a little silly but the reasoning isn't out of reach given that Abelisaur arms are quite mobile. I just, personally, would not expect a group of animals that reduced their arms over millions of years to actually use them in an extensive manner and to select mates. Sexual selection selects the bigger and most absurd characters, until a point where it is too detrimental to the animals' survival. So, allocating energy (either in gene expression for the formation of micro crystals that allow light reflection, or growth so the structure becomes large enough to impress other species members) on one of the most reduced body part that you have is not what I'd expect.
When it comes to how many sexual attributes an animal can have, I don't think there are perhaps any particular limits, but the more you have the more expansive it becomes as it means you'll allocate resources to the growth and maintenance of these structures. The bony ornaments are the most obvious thing we see with dinosaurs such as frills, osteoderms, crests, bumps et cetera. Yet, it does not exclude the presence of fleshy structures that could very well have been present, at least in Manniraptoriforms I think, and some nice pigmentation.
I do not understand this question, abelisaurs don't need to be equally as flamboyaunt as eachother display wise, I don't understand that line of reasoning especially when we just lack the knowlegde of what soft tissue structures they may or may not have.
I find your point very confusing, why do other abelisaurus need to match carnotaurus in display?
You fail to convince me.
Have Eoabeli and spectrovenator been looked at for their own arm mobility
Don't think so, they don't have the most detailed descriptions yet
So are you saying for example Aucasaurus should be expected to have equally flambouyant displays to Carnotaurus in some way? and that it is not possible some abelisaurus were more "drab"?
looks like eoabeli's arm doesn't have the same ball joint, also spectro doesn't preserve arms
I think that if you are going to make a point that the arms are equally as used for display, then what i'm saying is that the arms should also be unique in each species, likely because they contribute to display that only works in that species. If they don't... Then guess what that likely means
And you also bringing this example of like " Ornaments aren't necessarilly the only display a animal have ", yeah I know that. You are the only one, that at least for me ( as I cannot speak for anyone else ), fails to convince me how Abelisaurs arms would've been a equally important feature for display in them.
I can sort of understand the reasoning because usually it isn't limited to one species as the evolution of sexual display is a driver to speciation (songbirds, paradise birds, anoles, a good bunch of insects, ungulates, reef fish). So, if we assume that Carnotaurus could have had some particular coloration around its arms, so perhaps other Abelisaurs could have had some too, but different. I wouldn't see why would Carnotaurus be the sole species to have display coloration or doing some arm dances.
I made it very clear at several points that I was not saying the arms were equal in display prominence, I was countering your point that the arms can't be used for display period because the horns are the only possible display structure as you implied that animals in general can't have multiple features for displaying fitness.
But, do you think there is uniqueness in the arms of Abelisaurs who likely used it for display?
The ball and socket joint? and how PhP depicted their usage and appearence. It doesn't need to have some hyper specialized massive bone correlate for it to have some kind of role in display.
The point I was making earlier was that some characteristics evolve as a "consequence" to others. Abelisaurs have reduced front limb sizes and functions, but maintained their overall mobility or gained some in the process. That doesn't automatically default to "that happened for display", and truthfully I find b-lining to that to be unimaginative. Not that it couldn't have happened of course.
Let's take a look at the comparisons just made with animals that have extra display features. I describe said features as "additive". A giant spinosaurus sail, big plumes of colorful feathers, long excesses of skin. Abelisaur arms aren't much like any of these. As a whole on the animal, they wouldn't stick out as much compared to these other features.
Not to mention Carnotaurus is also known from another notable visual, it has feature scales across its body
Isn't that in every Abelisaur? C'mon buddy, I know you can find something that stands out more! I believe in you!!!
Why can't other abelisaurs do the same? I do not understand your point here let alone the basis for you snarkiness.
I didn't say that, but sure. I meant " Isn't that in every Abelisaur " as that being present on every Abelisaur
I don't think there is any actual literature to rely on this sort of speculation anyway. I agree with Vividsky that having one display structure doesn't exclude the possibility to have other ones, but I don't think that it could have been exclusive to Carnotaurus among Abelisauridae.
Is Z being Z again 
I'm extremely confused as to how my previous answer doesn't answer that question, I never stated that swivelling around the arms is something unique to carnotaurus. My entire main point is that carno's horn don't prevent it from having any secondary display features.
Personally, I think Carnotaurus's horns, to a lesser extent its scales, as well as other possible ornamentary features in abelisaurs tells me more that Abelisaurs were using their heads and faces in the display department a lot, which isn't exclusive to them. That is kind of the trend for a lot of theropod groups
I would say also, and this doesn't really have any strong basis, if abelisaurid arms are consistently similar then that consistency might indicate something else. Displays usually bank on variety and often extravagance, and you see stuff like that on their heads not their arms
what was the largest Jurassic therapod besides Saurophaganax?
Apatosaurus
torvosaurus i think
African elephant (uh I think Torvosaurus)
no i mean predatory therapods not sauros
@ionic linden thats what i thought XD
Apatosaurus theropod trust
I think the php's big flaw though is it put the spotlight on the arms as the main display and basically did nothing for the face or horns which like
Come on look at it what are we doing
Maybe abelisaurids drummed their sides with their lil mobile arms
thats a cute idea XD
to summarize everything I'm saying:
-
the only explanation for abelisaurs gaining hyper mobile ball and socket joints in their arms and retaining respectable muscle attachments despite being useless for manipulation is PhP's depict of the wiggle dance or something in that vein.
-
Carno's horns do not have to be the sole display feature of the animal, this is an objective fact.
-
Other abelisaur species may not have horns or head ornamentation not because they used their arms more, but because they were more drab as they don't have to arbitrarily match carno's flambouyence.*
this is a reasonable point, though tbf the horns may just sorta speak for themselves with size being their way of conveying fitness, and the wiggle dance conveying coordination in their movement or something
@scenic flame Also, cause I value you as a friend, I have a gift for you.
Unimaginative to think they'd only be like that for display. That's the only explanation you could come up with, and it wasn't something you came up with
so?
So, nothing lol. There's nothing more to say
I also didn't like the PHP narraration going on how Carno doesn't have "...any huge antlers or a spectacular tail, but small arms...". Like... c'mon you can't even mention the most unique feature of the animal.
the horns could have been for fighting against its own kind right or is this theory disproven?
like I don't think your wrong in taking issue with it but idk if unimaginative or originality are reasons for me to be wrong
They seem usable for fighting slowly like rhinos a bit, not biomechanically tested yet iirc. But there's a goood chance
I feel people are way too needy in the need for some "uniqueness" in either dinosaurs designs or behavior without actually understanding the dinosaurs they're talking about it
i would guess that they were for fighting seeing todays animals with horns always use them that way usually
At the core of it, you can't conceive of other reason, functions or purposes for their arm evolution. That's a limited perspective and thus presents a flawed view
yeah
On the contrary, big horns might be incoporporated into the Carnotaurus dance. Big horns no other abelisaurid is known for (outside of its hypothetical closest relatives)
it's more that I don't think PhP is wrong but I don't think your critique is wrong either
That's fair. I think php is wrong in their emphasis, especially on Carnotaurus specifically which is arguably the most display heavy abelisaur
And php features two other abelisaurs lol. Also known for having horns
we should've gotten more abelisaurs
Amen sister
We got a decent amount, basically all of the Maastrictian ones described upto that point iirc
Sister?
( I don't know how to draw these guys, so it might just be ugly ahh f#ck )
Also I realize now I was thinking spectro hard arms because that one skelly basically gave it eoabeli's arms
Liopleurodon. I think?
Yeah that's a weird looking liopleurodon
Yeah, it has lips.
is predator x not real anymore?
It is just has a proper species name
Pliosaurus funkei
Well no, there are many more Abelisaurs than the 3 in the show from the Maastrichtian.
Regarding the width of the skull of Tarbosaurus, it can be seen from the complete Tarbosaurus skull specimen collected by Mr. Mauricio Fern Ć” ndez that despite being subjected to some compression, its snout and nose bridge bones are actually wider than those of Tyrannosaurus rex
lowkey i forgot about tarbo i never see its name anywhere
There's Rahioli and Chenani I guess. Rest were published too late to be in the show(Koleken in 2024) or their dating was updated later like Middle Allen formation being Late Maas in 2024
I think niebla may possibly have a basis for carno-like horns, though theyāre either damaged/snapped off or very minimal in life
Another abelisaurid having horns?
Clearly this means pycnonemosaurus had them
I do not think the Lower-middle Allen is Maastrichtian, but it matters not because Quilmesaurus is from the upper Allen. beyond that there is Arcovenator, Indosuchus Betasuchus, and Pycnonemosaurus from the broadly Campanian/Maastrichtian Cachoeira do Bom Jardim.
Bald.
Don't almost all abelisaurids have traces of extensive soft tissue ornaments?
Yes
Nah, Abelisaurus and Llukalkan seem to have rugose dorsals ( more referring to the angle of the skull ), but for instance lack the foramina and lateral crests in Skorpiovenator and Rugops, and also don't have any bony ornaments.
The North America and Mongolia spam of PhP tired me
iirc there was a draft for a megaraptoran hunting sequence and like, in what world do you scrap that
carno, majunga and raja are the only ones with horns, rugops has the wierd holes which could be for large soft tissue structures, the rest have very rugose skull but there's alot of things that could imply
How rugose we talkin
Is it possible to infer approximately the size of the structure mounted there? Or if it would've been fleshy or keratinous?
Well, for Abelisaurus I can only find reconstruction casts, so I don't know how verifiable their quality is, but they seem to depict it as pretty rugose. Llukalkan, you can sorta of see it from the lateral view ( only stuff I found ), but the reconstruction cast seems to show that too.
There is a study that sorta of touch on this subject, from 2018. Delcourt et al. 2018 " Ceratosaur palaeobiology: new insights on evolution and ecology of the southern rulers " https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-018-28154-x
Particular issue I would have here, it's mainly that this study does not really define the textures on the skulls of Abelisaurs, or at least does not make the necessary effort to analyze them in depth ( shape, distribution, etc. ), so there might be some subjectivity, depending on the person's perspective and extant analogies they may use.
Where for Abelisaur horns, the only way you can really determine how they look, and that also applies to other horned theropods and dinosaurs, is if there was a more dedicated study on the histology of those structures.
ehm ehm over estimate
On Llukalkan they kinda seem to extend all the way down to the postorbital and lacrimal
You know that paleoart meme where they give a... certain theropod a sort of keratin spectacle encasing the eye. Could that have been a thing in abelisaurids?
Allosaurus fragilis is likely the largest named species, but there are some fragmentary specimens in the 6-7 ton range
this guy
Possible, most people seem to do that, as far as I know.
Interestin, i haven't seen that so far
Then again i haven't seen a lot of abelisaurid paleoart that try to do something interesting with their cranial tissue
-# Except for the goated Heitoresco of course
Allosaurus fragilis typically measured 8.5 meters (28 feet) long, stood about 2.4ā3.2 meters (8ā10.5 feet) tall at the hips, and weighed between 1.5 and 2.2 metric tons, with some individuals reaching up to 9.7 meters (32 feet) and 2.7 metric tons.
how is it the biggest lol
trust, undescribed specimen collecting dust somewhere
š sure bro
AMNH 5767 is a specimen that likely belongs to A. fragilis and is nearly 12 meters long and around 5.8 tons
that just cant be true judging by almost all allosaurus fragilis specimens are roughly the same size, if anything what that is is a different species all together seeing how huge the size gap is
Rib fragment nicknamed super destroyer that was totally for real 80% larger than the largest specimen and was like toootally 20t when scaled trust me
Wait no that'd be another theropod from the cretaceous
size cannot be used to determine species, and A. fragilis does NOT have a consistent size range. A. fragilis actually has one of if not the widest size ranges of any non avian theropod (true there are probably like 10,000 species lumped into it but still).
Also it isn't even 2 meters longer than the 2nd largest specimen. Are you trying to say that Robert Wadlow wasnt a human because he was tall? Or that fat people arent humans because they are large?
See, the specimen was using steroids when it was alive... And also became bald, cuz Steroids cause hair loss
All carnosaurs used it, that's why they were all featherless!!!
Only Concavenator was able to rehab š„¹
its just that the size gap is massive like stupidly massive, makes pots allo look ity bitty lol
never let bro find out about edmontosaurus (the largest adult is over 10 tons larger than the smallest)
There's a few pretty big allos.
Peterson Quarry Allosaur
Is there a nausea inducing version of this like the Edmontosaurus one?
Actually, size can be used to determine species, cuz if there is size difference, this also affects offspring size. It's why Tigress often die giving birth to Ligers, cuz the offsprings are usually too large for them.
why are using felids as a reference and espeically for a hybrid
also how many bones for this allosaur have they found?
same specimen, just to show the material
It's an example, a population of a certain species often works cause both genders have size that are compatible for mating, compatible offspring size, and of course, compatible genes, that result into fertile offspring. If there are specimens larger than average and often result into larger offspring, this already causes some complications. Of course, I don't know if Offspring size can affect Reptiles, for instance, given that they lay eggs, but I'd imagine so.
4
1 neck vertebra, 1 back vertebra, 1 coracoid, and a toe
More than Anax Holotype!!
see this is where i say this gets to even more bs lol
true but to play devil's advocate for any fragmentary scraps, at least with Epanterias is very obivously a decently large animal
Are we talking about Epanterias?
they forgot the metatarsal how dare they
I'm talking about this one
I wouldn't say it's a A. fragilis. There is a good reason, this thing was firstly mistaken as a Sauropod, and no Allosaurus fossil seem to share that.
wait hold up this is fire
tbh i think any of these dinos that are being talked about as a giant or a whole new species that are known by 1 or 5 bones r just bs lol
I like this.
it matters more what the bones are rather than how many there are
like 2 bones is better than 5 bones if the 2 bones are a femur and tibia but the 5 are the tip of the tail
^
Agreed. The thing is that Epanterias vertebra are too robust. Which is why it was first thought to be the remains of a Sauropod species, but later, in description, was found to be a Theropod.
i prefer seeing a whole skeleton or at least enough to actually see its size not just a toe and then they say well because of how big its toe is it must have been 60+ feet longš
like u can see a bunch of animals today with stupidly big bones but a tiny body lol
If we go by whole or only most of the skeleton described, then the biggest jurrassic theropod is Yangchuanosaurus
could be true there aint any real way to know how big a creature described by a finger joint is lmaoo
via gdi or scans, or actual real photos of the fossils
you can't be fr.
wdym also Alpkarakush depsite being on the "smaller" side of a metriacanthosaurid ofc still represent an giant predator easily within the 1,000+ kg range
how accurate is pots metri size wise?
I think citing gdi or scans, or actual real photos of the fossil as a argument to " There ain't any real way to know how big a creature by a finger joint is ", is something that cannot be taken serious in any way
Like, even for more known animals, like Allosaurus and Tyrannosaurus, you would had to address or deal with the fact that those genera show a large diverse variety of individuals, limbs proportionally different, body proportions different, etc
Which would mean, to determine the size of a individual only known from one bone, you would had to subject your estimates to some form of selectiveness, cause NO ONE is going to make a unique reconstruction of an individual's entire skeleton, when they are only known from one bone, so reconstruction is always going to be subjected that " Let's hope that it's exactly like this one individual ", which coincidentally tends to be the largest most preserved specimen.
Sauro had both sauropod and allo stuff and took years to identify the sauropod stuff
Epanterias shows no real stuff that make it exactly different from Fragilis
If you say so.
look am just saying, saying there's no "real way" to know how big these animals are is quite dubious in my opinion since even if its ofc not 100% we do have methods to at least estimate and measure said size regardless of your personal stands on either methods
we dont even know what any look like besides a few lol let alone how big they could actually get
Thats why most times they are estimates based on material and relatives
I get that but again to we have NO idea or no "real way" is also kind of weird to say since we at very least to a degree can still more complete or more well stuided relatives or such as Srumis just said
But given how those methods would need to compromise to certain selectiveness, wouldn't you argue that they are, to some extent, dubious? Like, I'm sorry, but this is just like O. megalodon size estimates, which I do understand they are got from certain methods, and often there aren't other alternatives to determine how large some specimens get, but general consensus on these types of size estimates, it's that they are partially-inaccurate or simply " Not Precise ", given the lack of more material to draw a complete picture of the animal's skeleton, and their general body.
what galloon aquarium would i need to keep a anomalocaris?
ehm ehm Psittacosaurus, it was so well preserved that it included fossilized tissue i believe, we were able to figure out the pigment of its skin too
Its really atp depends on the species itself and the animal
Thats why Gaps are always filled up with closest relative
Fragmentary species are never a 1:1 to what they most likely looked at cause they are to fragmentary
But we can get a probably close idea to "it probably looked like this"
Carcha itself is just a partial skull
Doesn't mean we don't have a possible idea of its appareance or size
Otodus is pretty consistent even with more general people's unawareness of which depiction of megalodon to use but a lamnid body which ranges from a nearly 13-23 meter animal is fine also kind of if said material to scale animal was from say a maybe a very poorly understood,lost or mostly undescribed specimen again with some outliers I will not explained further
im sure it will be fine in a 10 galloon
That, I know. However, it's cause of that reason that I'm saying that one is justified to think that it's dubious. Having a animal only know for 1 vertebrae, and three different, pretty complete close relatives that look nothing like each other, deciding to reconstruct such animal based entirely on one of those relatives, anyone is going to find it dubious, after all, what makes it valid using THAT relative specifically over any other?
Yes, I also know there are exact cases like that, and there have been various arguments to support cases like that, but generally this is never with any amount of certainty and it's often agreeing that such estimates are more " What Ifs ", rather than anything definitive about the animal going forward. O. megalodon was mentioned, mainly cuz it's an exact example of that happening multiple times.
i said besides a few
About that, I can't say for certainty, but consistent probably not. The thing is that there have been multiple studies discussing O. megalodon size, previously it was mostly based on the teeth that we had, until we had one specimen with vertebrae preserved, there are also other aspects such as how O. megalodon is reconstructed, even tho most people won't care about it... Cuz it's just some teeth and vertebrae, so O. megalodon is, as far as I know, a animal that how it's reconstructed, and how people perceive such reconstructions, something entirely subjective ( Also a reason why discussing accuracy of any O. megalodon reconstruction is often perceived as something " Silly "... Unless you are EvoIncarnate, which are likely to take such subject very serious )
oh ... well still i think the methods of reconstruction are fairly acurrate for some but for specimens with one bone thats when you really dont know what it could of looked like
idk i mean look at how much they keep changing how dinos looked lol
lol ik but even then the modern reconstructions look similair to the old ones
thoughts?
thats not even that bad because you can see the similarities between the old 1910 version and modern, also we have uncovered more skull fragments from then and science has improved along with our machines, if you look at megalosaurus (first discovered dinosaur), its first depiction of what it could have looked like was a giant monitor lizard and now its known to be a theropod that stood upright
its still crazy lol, i bet a few more years and they will say spino looked like a hole fish lmao
theropod that stood upright?
whats the point of bringing back extinct animals if you wont do anything to save animals today from extinction
wait guys this is what spinosaurus look like trust šš
LMAOOO
its gonna look like this just give the researchers a few years
is it wrong to say that it looks accurate š
it aint to crazy
im talking about megalosaurus
I know but which recon of megalosaurus because it wasn't standing upright in today's recon
oh really, it wasnt standing upright in todays recon? show me which recons show that
What did i miss?
Looks pretty conservative tho
Even tho its missin the basilisctic tail
Yeah...?
oh whoops i meant standing upright as in bipedal š , i was just saying how megalosaurus went from monitor lizard to bipedal theropod ...
that's because it's the 2014 verison and Joshua said himself he didn't want to upload the updated ver on the wiki but his newest one does have the paddletail
I see
Still
Even then its quite "conservative"
Not much crazy sheite goin on..like some Penders guy
I mean yeah there isn't suppose to be much going on
I think we need more designs like this
Like
Speculative enough to be plausable but not tooooo crazy
Like
Furry arizonasaurus
what is the most up to date accurate spinosaur recon?
spinosaur? or spinosaurus
spinosaurus
This one
i havnt seen arisonasaurus before but it looks pretty cool
Randomdinos 14.7 meter skeletal although he does have an "edit" that scales slightly above 15 meters long based on some apparent 'new neotype material' (its just an upscaled ver of his current spinosaurus)
Arizonasaurus is a pretty cool lil guy
I like him
*Arizonasaurus
no no no no, though that would look insane
Typo
My finger slipped
What do u guys think about this spino?
(Idk who made this one help me)
pretty good spino
it is pretty accurate, i do think that spino would have its teeth exposed though
but its teeth are exposed
Im more of a lipped or semi-lipped spino but hey
More spino is always good
No wonder i love spinosaurids i found em facinating creatures
hmm yah i like it when the theropods are lipped but i feel like spino would be more like a crocodile, spending more of its time in the water looking for mawsonia and whatnot, this would keep its teeth hydrated
Fair enough
I do think the more "terrestrial like" spinosaurids like Suchomimus or Baryonyx would have lips or at least only their front teeth would be exposed cuz they would only put the point of their snout in the water
But thats speculation on my part
yah i feel like the morphology of thosse kinds of spinosaurids was because they spent more time on land of course and they would need to protect their teeth with lips
https://www.instagram.com/p/DYdiRQ6Dlt8/?img_index=4
Wonder Artistic Models Opthalmosaurus.
Hey I need help identifying a tooth I found, for reference Iām from south eastern Alabama(not sure if the tooth is from here or flowed down the river) found it while looking for arrowheads also Iām not even sure if itās a tooth or not but it looks like one
2027 trust
Almost certainly not a tooth, it's extremely eroded and the condition makes it hard to ID. Possibly fragmentary bone. The specific geological horizon is also necessary for an ID
I found it in some clay while digging for arrow heads not sure if thatās specific enough
Not specific enough, no, you should find a geological survey for the area and determine how old the local sediments are and what type of sediments they are. From there you can determine the horizon and cross reference your material with other material found in the same beds
Based Eternaut pfp
Finally someone recognizes it
so im trying to convince a group to allow me to make a Dryptosaurus pokemon for their US East Coast Pokemon region...
this fossil is well-known in paleontology, right?
Not a lot of great material but it's important historically as one of the first theropods described in North America
It's also one of the very few appalachian dinosaurs known
That too, you can't really do an East Coast US dino thing without it
This one is pure aura
here's the design I cooked up (Rock/Fighting btw)
(minor inspiration from the Izuchi from Monster Hunter)
you have to do a hadrosaurus one. definitely the most historically significant fossil on the east coast.
I was actually going to do arambourginia but mayhaps...
I think Hadrosaurus and Driptosaurus are the best option
arambourgiania is cool and all but it simply has to be hadrosaurus. like its not even a question, itd be strange if it wasnt lol
yeah thats fair
like hadrosaurus is what made dinosaurs famous to the general public in the us, its one of the most important finds in paleontology, and recent ornithopod finds could give you some cool creative freedom
yeah thats fair
maybe give it that crazy pseudo-quill stuff haolong had, could be an electric/rock type that uses that integument to generate electric fields
up to you obviously but now im getting inspired lol
@kind bane made a Hadrosaurus Skeletal, I think
I did
I might make some edits to it but that's mostly using like a basal brachylophosaurine skull instead of Eotrachodon, and making the feet a bit less weird looking when you really look close. it's still mostly good
How much would it cost if I asked you to do a " Bison alticornis " skull rec, and gave you all creative liberties?
they're hitting me with the "haven't heard of it so doesn't exist"...
Preach
well if these guys havent heard of hadrosaurus then theyve also probably not heard of half the creatures that canon fossilmon are based on
did they know about amargasaurus, dunkleosteus, archelon, or crinoids either lol
or the pseudo-fossilmons like dragapult being diplocaulus or arctibax being concavenator
fossil pokemon dont always have to be super popular animals, they just have to be significant to the region and have some sort of aspect that lends well to creature design and possible moves/stats
also bastiodon is based on more obscure chasmosaurines that most people dont know, same with paradox entei
yeah lol thats what I said
They made some lame excuse like "oh but i know what those are" YEAH I WONDER WHY
Also for the galar fossils vish is obv dunk, but I'd like to theorize arcto to be a pliosaur and zolt to be an austroraptor
no clue what drake is lol. It cant be a stegosaur bc all known stegosaurs had thagomizers but idfk what else it could be
my belief is that drake is hylaeosaurus, one of the famous crystal palace dinosaurs
ahhhh that makes sense.
people say im crazy with zolt being austro but like, he looks like one. I think he's MEANT to js be generic raptor but in my mind he's austro.
given its an electric type and therefore gonna be associated with speed, its probably velo specifically (and also it looks super small)
ehhhh its bigger than velo. Like, substantially
it doesnt really matter i guess, but its not like other fossilmon are super accurate with size anyways lmao
If its a dromeo inspired mon, a lightning shaped sickle claw might be fun
real
i mean deinon is another east coast dinosaur nvm this is wrong, i forgot where it was found in association with acro and tenonto.... (but there are no ornithopod dinosaurs in pokemon and hadrosaurus gets no love compared to its historical significance)
Im actually working on a paleo pokemon region, and the gimmick is ancestor pokemon (for instance, there's a microraptor mon thats an ancestor of murkrow, spearow, and archen)
I'm gonna list all the fossils and their other mons they're combined with one sec... (plus some bonus mons!)
Paleontology is so cool i wish paleontologists were real(joke)
Kabuto - +Wimpod, Megalograptus
Omanyte - +Octillery, Cameroceras
Aerodactyl - apparently his mega is alr his final form soooooo
Anorith - +Clauncher, Mantis Shrimp
Lileep - also having issues...
Shieldon - Itself, Protoceratops/Velociraptor mythical (uses soundwaves for velo jojo stand)
Cranidos - +Scraggy, Dracorex, Pachyceph, etc.
Carracosta - +Drednaw, Archelon
Archen - +Spearow/Murkrow, Microraptor
Tyrunt - Eevee clone, nanotyrannus, evolves into drypto, yuty, dilong
Amaura - See I alr am using Meganium & Tropius for a Yunnanasaurus/Plateosaurus...
-Zolt - +Sceptile, Austroraptor
-Vish - +Barraskewda, Dunkleosteus
-Draco - +Torterra, Hylaeosaurus
-Arcto - +tbh idk yet, Pliosaur
Trevenant/Exeggutor, Redwood tree/general cedars
Venipede/Sizzlipede, Arthropleura
These are NOT all
i mean anorith is anomalocaris and not a mantis shrimp. also please pretty please do all the pseudo-fossil mons cause they are so dope. seeling a diplocaulus water/dragon ancestor form for dragapult would be beyond dope
no ik but they both shrimp
Also the pseudo is water/poison dragapult ancestor dw
now do this for every grass type starter since their based on a prehestoric animal
torterra is there, sceptile is there, meganium + tropius is yunnanosaurus, serp uhhhhhh ngl i alr have a fire type titanoboa based on apophis so its unneeded, chesnaught + sandslash is a glyptodon, decidueye also is unneeded and a bit too modern for my taste, rillaboom is literally a gorilla, meowscarada is also literally a cat
I think the trend of grass starters being prehistoric kinda fizzled out in gen 7. It also was kinda a stretch even w venusaur
what other sauropods are there besides meganium and tropius...
meganium and tropius are not yunnaosaurus
its a protosauropod
meganium isnt, tropius is
I'm pretty sure GameFreak designers just know the average dinosaurs
So probably both are the classic apatosaurus lol
no no ik they're both sauropods, im using the protosauropod bc thats the ancestor of them
for the most part, but they do occasionally make based choices like feathered tyrantrum and ghost/dragon pseudolegendary diplocaulus
Tbf, feathered rex was, extremely saturated to the point it appeared anywhere
Diplocaulus is surprisingly kinda famous (I met people who knew about it's existence before I ever did kekw)
ok help the same person keeps saying "Idt this region should have fossils bc it doesnt have any fossils" and when I said that drypto and hadro are important they essentially js said "nuh uh" because apparently thats "not important"
Pro tip, ignore em, turn discord off, go play videogames or enjoy fresh air
Your brain will enjoy it more
well no bc they're making a full on game and im advocating for fossil mons
What did Sauropods soundlike?
we odnt know
Like ur mom
something being famous doesnt mean its not an extremely based choice (and its arguably some of the more reasonable feather covering for a fictional rex)
Didn't say it wasn't based choice, indeed it is
Dragapult the goat
ok paleontology people
say someone's argument boils down to "I live on the east coast and havent heard of any fossils. This means the East Coast doesnt have an abundance of fossils." How can I explain that almost every place on earth has an abundance of fossils
hawaii dosent
i did say "almost". ofc islands dont count i am aware.
I seriously cannot wait for an ichthyosaur to be top dog finally. Wwd Opthalmosaurus and the lack of ichthyosaurs in media really just set them in my mind as background creatures, whether I like it or not. Hopefully this will be a game changer.
I mean first off, we know the east coast HAD good fossils because we've found some decent stuff (most recently, we found a juvenile Acrocanthosaurus in Maryland iirc)
It's just the problem that the glaciers and human development turned any and all fossils into rubble
Thatās like me asking āwhere the phytosaurs atā, though
Like sauropods, obviously
I bet we wouldāve found an Eastern Siats if not for that last bit š
The results show that giraffes do produce vocalizations, which, based on their acoustic structure, might have the potential to function as communicative signals to convey information about the physical and motivational attributes of the caller.
The data further reveal that the assumption of infrasonic communication in giraffes needs to be cons...
uhhhh yeah does anyone know any other sauropod mons?
trying to think of one to pair w amaura...
It's a Paradox Pokemon, other Universe.
dude wait dont elephants use vibrations on the ground to talk to one another? is it possible that giants of the prehistoric to do the same behaviors
explain that they clearly dont know much about fossils lmao
I don't think sauropods have the ears for that
you could pretend breloom is a plateosaurid, the whole meganium line, you could definitely stretch the hydreigon line to be sauropod hydras, idk anything else
Tropicanus or whatever is a good one too
i did have some other ideas when scrolling the dex tho. prehistoric giant penguin variant for empoleon, yi variant for noivern, hallucigenia shuckle, yanmega-flygon ancestor, glyptodon sandslash or golem, estemmenosuchus nidoking/queen, prototaxites parasect (i know its not a fungus but we can pretend), gastornis golduck.....
phorusrhacid dodrio, treefern exeggcutor, crystal palace iguanodon rhydon, palaeophis gyarados/milotic, the whole typhlosion line works great with early mammal evolution, feraligatr could be any number of pseudosuchians...
i probably should stop there though since this is not my project lmao
Where did the "sauropods with trunks" came from?
Good thing that those eyes are not like that
Those r actualy yellow rings!
uhhh im alr using breloom convergent as therizinosaurus BUT THE HYDREIGON ONE IS GOOD!
also for ur next message
Im doing a yi-qi thats unrelated to noivern, hallucigenia is its own mon, yanmega and flygon unfortunately dont have the BEST relationship to justify an ancestor, glyptodon is covered with sandslash/chesnaught, that prototaxite is the convergent breloom therizinosaurus lol, i have a dodrio/porygon terror bird, a trevenant/exeggutor redwood ancestor, and a feraligatr/skeledirge deinosuchus
so u got it kinda spot-on
@little mauve Doctor Gregory Bones, do you perhaps know any literature on Javelina Formation's Flora?
Tropius
Ooo hydreigon
U should try feraligtr:3
alr used it and meganium for smth else
im using hydreigon dw (closest thing i can get)
Xaorus imo deserves a paradox
its...not really paradox
What I meant is haxorous should have got a paradox it would have looked so cool. Are you turning regular pokemon into fossil Pokemon ?
not quite
Is it like tryna find a pokemon that fits a extinct genus/species
Have you used mamoswine yet?
Saurophaganax is a dubious indeterminate saurischian.
Wdym roughly the same size lol we have 7.4 m and 10-11 m specimens
metatarsal piece not toe and also 2 cervicals
is it not 1 cervical and a dorsal neural spine?
This means nothing lol
2 cervicals and a dorsal neural spine.
They use their pads
What happened
Baller. Dude is this like a tabletop pokemon game youāre running cause it sounds awesome
spinofaarus soon...
People saw the high nares on some groups like macronarians and thought it could be where a trunk attached. No evidence other than that, just speculation more for fun than anything.
I see
Noasaur Deinocheirus
Im scared
The older Jose Creek also has some lower canopy elements preserved in case you need a broader picture of low latitude structure, Celastraceae and Myrtaceae wood
Full spinosaurus mummy shows it has all so far known dinosaur integument including whatever haolong had
Jose Creek is definitely worth looking into as well, some excellent forest preservation there https://digital.library.txst.edu/items/8309c021-91ce-4a8a-a9da-720add96a26c
So I havenāt been up to date on paleo news but is the new spinosaurus species confirmed?
Yes
Drives me up the wall that the climate completely flipped on its head so we donāt know what kind of plants were around in the Hall Lake desertic conditions
We've got some flora from Hall Lake but presumably not from the most arid conditions there. Sequoia growing this far south always blows my mind though
I think these are likely from Jose creek
Could be, there is continuity in the species, do you have any good lit on the desert phase there?
unfortunately i havent decided what im doing w it
I can NOT code or sprite lol so a fangame is...difficult
Give learning it a try, coding espcially is even easier nowadays
The strat on this flora is quite ambiguous itās only known to be near elephant butte which encompasses both formation but in terms of the depositional setting, thereās some pretty developed calcretes found here which are not condusive to a mesic flora.
@little mauve oh yeah, I forgot. Thank you, Doctor Gregory Bones.
Here's how its described in https://geoinfo.nmt.edu/publications/periodicals/nmg/details.cfml?id=132431 increased aridity but major channel deposits. There are turtles and dinosaurs as well so water must have been somewhat available, maybe enough to support gallery forests of a similar floral type to earlier more humid phases
@little mauve how possible is lack of coloration in Archosaurs?
Like albinism?
Not necessarily. More so, genes that don't allow the expression of color
So.... albinism
Yeah.
It's been documented in crocs and birds. Wild animals don't do well with it.
I see.
Melanin expression/ lack thereof and by extension most of general pigmentation is very conservative across animals, it basically works the same in everything so you can have albino vertebrates and invertebrates of virtually any type
Isn't there the case where some animals may have genes that express light coloration later in life?
Sure, the expression and pattern of melanin usually isn't stable over any animal's life. You can see it in most vertebrates that the young are differently colored and patterned than adolescents and adults etc
@little mauve do we have Titanosaur integuments?
Yeah we have embryonic skin from Auca Mahuevo that is described quite well https://pubs.geoscienceworld.org/paleosoc/jpaleontol/article-abstract/81/6/1528/139776/EMBRYONIC-SKIN-FROM-LATE-CRETACEOUS-SAUROPODS?redirectedFrom=fulltext I am sure we have random patches from larger specimens as well but I don't recall anything published on it
Do we know about the life-appearance of Titanosaur Osteoderms or is that something up to interpretation?
Histologically they are most similar to ankylosaur osteoderms and were embedded within the stratum compactum of the dermis
https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/02724634.2014.905791?needAccess=true a decent amount has been published on titanosaur osteoderms so there probably is a best way to do it
more so curious about the soft tissues of osteoderms, if they are like the old ass spikes in prior titanosaur depictions
sick af
Very large spikes no, the surfaces aren't vascularized enough or the right shape to suggest big keratin extensions. However the osteoderms themselves are deeply vascularized and could have supported some kind of keratin sheath or cornified skin potentially.
up to interpretation then.
Yes I know. The pedogenic character is of strong vertic to aridic characters however, with the well developed coalesced calcrete horizons and gypsum pseudomorphs. Those braided channels deposits also have erosional surfaces and rip-up clasts which occur under flashy water flow. Redbeds are also very bad at preserving organic matter there are no recorded organic horizons here because the water table has far too low to induce reducing conditions.
gallery forests or something like that almost always but I highly doubt there was any carry-over or that the hall lake could preserve leaf mats
Were acroās neural spines really this tall?
There are no acro specimens with complete dorsal spines.
The neck and tail spines were indeed that tall though
Sounds like strong seasonal precipitation, that would be a serious selector on forest composition for sure. Was it that radically different from the Jose that we'd truly have a totally new floral community? Not doubting it's possible but with the continuity among the large animals for example I just wouldn't expect it.
The paleosols from Jose creek preserve clay infilling of and silicceous root traces, in situ stumps, and highly leached clay illuviation which classify them as argillic soils with no input of pedogenic calcrete.
Is there faunal turnover? And was the general trend due to marine regression and by extension did Jose style habitats follow that regression as it progressed?
Mm ok
I donāt think thereās enough dinosaur material to discern a turnover and less due to marine regression specifically and more so global reordering of climate as it rapidly cools across the boundary between the two
Interesting, thanks. Aren't similar patterns detected elsewhere in north america?
Creates a cool image, seasonal vegetation in that kind of habitat can be spectacular
Yeah itās a shame itās not been depicted accurately, these stark landscapes I find more interesting and it is a crazy thing that big animals could live in places like this or Willow Creek
Put your next Tyrannosaurus here folks
10/10 bleedout spot
^ the lone triceratops that just got eviscerated by our hypothetical tyrannosaur
whos cooler, torosaurus or triceratops
Honestly, Triceratops is cooler since it is a Triceratops
If evidence of nesting is evidence of non-migration as argued in Druckenmiller 2021 then the ootaxa at Willow Creek would suggest they were permanent non-seasonal residents no? Very intriguing. Potential long term fat storage, seasonal fluctuations in metabolism, strategic starvation. Probably similar strategies in both Arctic and desert conditions
I always liked Torosaurus' frill better
This is awesome
Both
But I kinda like toro more
1 vote trike 2 votes toro
Also kiwi bird solos every megatherapod only by simply existing
I should mention https://anatomypubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/ar.22428 as well, I'd love to see a follow-up examining LAGs in large arid climate dinosaurs and see how they compare
Interesting study for sure!
would any ceratopsian suffer the issue modern horned mammals do where their horns sometimes grow into their scalps or eyes?
High Spined Lizard for smth smh
However mammals managed to do it Iām sure the mighty dinosaurs found a way
Hadrosaur standing motionless for weeks as snow accumulates around it/dry season parches the landscape š§ āÆļø
TriGOATatops vs ToroFRAUDus
why is toro a fraud?
Because I like it less
Torosaurus kept the family frill structure going
Torosaurus
And the Goat will most likely get a very good specimen published this year
With Hopefully its Post Crania Described
Trike should learn that now all is skull getting described
Hopefully Trike gets more post crania described
Technically one horridus specimen with a lot of vertebrae & ribs has been very well researched but hasnāt had a paper on it for some reason (specimen being ākelseyā)
Even has a scan of the mount, but itās not public too
Does anybody have a model of quetz northopi?
I had that experience once.
Which group do y'all like better, centrosaurines or chasmosaurines?
Both actualy
I like those horned faces
i think chasmos have the big ahh frills so i pick those ones
Those r actualy the group that triceratops is in
Centrosaurinae i like how spikey they look
They r awedome
The spikes on the fril are rad af
when we getting Carcharodontosaurus buffs or rex size nerfs XD
chasmosaurines are great because they can be everything from absolute clown to walking fortress
Why would carcha need a buff?
I mean
Isnt like carcha kinda dubius nowadays cuz of tameryraptor or smth?
lowkey hope rex gets dethroned at some point
Why u want that
What did trex did to u
im just sick of seeing it everwhere being talked about like royalty then giga carcha and spino are like everyones after thought, im still holding hope that spino was the largest out of them
also feels like everyday they keep adding a extra foot in length to the rex
rex has been the same length since ~2000, it just keeps getting heavier
nuh uh
I mean
Trex is one of the most well studied dinosaur
I get ur frustation
But some ppl just like specific dinosaurs and they like to research what that dinosaur did when it was alive
Theres estimates that need to be correct
There's theories that need to be rethink
And if u ask a paleontologist if he want to do a trex research he would say yes in less than a second
if you see any estimates for T.rex over 12.8m/42ft those are just cope
it's been at that max length since sue was discovered in the late 90s
i just want to spino to get its props
Spinosaurus is the longest theropod and it'll stay that way, if it was heavier than rex then it would be unable to leave the water due to its little baby legs
another thing is seeing just how large spino is i feel like there are 100% larger ones out there
Giga is getting a new osteology soon, carcha is just a skull, and spinosaurus was not larger than Tyrannosaurus
Just so happens we have so many rexās because the environment it lived in preserved fossils well, so it gets studied and excavated the most
Yes
Look at egypt
Dry af
No wonder we only have scraps of spino(most of the time)
And besides who cares if rex is āthe largestā anyways? Thereās so much more that makes an animal interesting; size is the last thing anyone should care about.
I personaly dont care about size or
Heavyness
I just like the animal becuz he is interesting af
Like for exemple we talked about spino
I love spinosaurus
It's my fav dinosaur ever
Its so weird but in a way that make it very interesting
And i love it!
Dinosaurs and other pre historic can be facinating in general
The aridity has little to do with it
Ik but u get what im sayin
trust its accurate
Size is crucial for most factors in biology, it's just that the difference between an 8t theropod and a 10t theropod is so minimal it doesnt change anything about their lifestyle
I love Spinosaurus anyway because it's so unique anatomically
I kinda like this one tho
Tbf if you ignore that it was made before the tail fluke it's 100% accurate
trust...
Not exactly. A fossil taxa can be preserved very well, but there are other aspects as such, workers available to help on digging the specimen, and of course, after the specimen being dug up and moved, you also need more researchers to study that specimen
Tyrannosaurus luckily have all of those things... For whatever reason
Yeah
The only thing i kinda meh about its the white in the body for me
Ehh the sail is still angled kind of weird even with what we have
that was a common hypothesis pre-2020 that the longest spine was a caudal, it was debunked when the rest of the tail was found
Why they added legs but no arms and a thin ahh tail
hmmmmmm
Best spinosaurus reconstructuon
the poor legs 
He's a winnie dog
tbh this doesn't seem like to much of a stretch
modern reconstruction by the same person who made that one
Diet and movement matter
Uh I mean, yas!! Or something
Literaly not true
i would've reacted with FAKE instead of x but i don't have nitro š
Nitro is for babies real men/women stay in misery!!!/j
Fat Women?
thoughts?
Who doesnt like one emirite?
True.
Pretty paleo art
But why tail drag
No tail drag pls
Also is he fluffy?
THICK
It was on that time that people thought Spino's front was too heavy. So Tripod Spino was born ( All because of a stupid thing Ibrahim said )
I like the colors on this one
this gives me herbivore vibes with the main body ngl
Yeah
Hate that guy
Also prehistoric kingdom's spinos still have the tails draggin thing
also, you lost this š
Still no gdi for him š
i found peak
the tail dragging on the PK spino doesn't bother me as much as the neck pose
Put that man in an S-curve for the love of god why is he slouching
Oh shi
Ty my dudeš¤
Gregory s paul's 13 ton spinosauridae indet
Nah, the neck stays in a semi-circle.
this one was about 7t, the default ibrahim one was 6.5
I love heitoreco's art but this is is kinda funny to me
gives me these vibes from the bird like rex
Tbh, I think the models are the least priority to complain about PK, when the habitat requirements exists
Both very good arts tho
Remmember when rex was feathered for a time
This one from the newest book?
also ngl i think a few of these body features could have def been features on irl rex if it had feathers like feathered arms for example
Yeah kinda
idk how he gets the holotype so big, people did that a lot back before ibrahim
i hope the feathered dinos are a reality some day, to me i believe they had feathers it just looks correct
Hes like those oc creators that try to make their oc so badass and strong
Bro's scaling from the spine height lol
Do you guys think GSP is a chud?
Eehhhh debateble
But big dinos?
No
Too much heat
Trex lived in hot envirioment so no feathers for him
idk i still hold out hope seeing as today there are birds living in extremely hot places and they have thickk feathers lol
U see
They r smaller than trex
I forgot but GSP has Tyrannotitan as one of the biggest theropods
still tho i dont see why not lol at least on the babys or young rexs
Actually, although Extant Feathers can trap heat, we don't know how much of that is true to filaments and fibers, notebly birds who have more sparse integument are capable of living in more dynamic environments, who suffer extreme or casual changes in climate and temperatures.
me when i include the matrix on tyrannotitan vertebrae as part of the bone
plus we have a few we know 100% had them nothing huge but smaller things that preserved those features
Tyrannosaurus also lived in very diverse environments depending on locality, so not improbable to see some diversity of integuments in the animal, might even vary between individuals.
the reason i see feathers as a huge probability is do to there closest relatives today having feathers u never see a naked bird XD
Yeah but bigger animals
Such as elephants dont have a full coat of fur
Im sayin that the bigger the animal
The less fur/feather he had
Unless it in a cold olace like for exemple
Yutyrannus
Who lived in a colder area than trex
Im not sayin trex couldn't have some feathery coat on his neck of back
But a full feathery coat seems too out the box
And we also have skin imprints of trex and he can say for sure it was scaly
With small scales all over it's body
wooly mammoth
??? Are u like ragebaitin me
I literaly said if the animal live in a colder area its ok for it to have a full coat of feather/fur
and i dont think full feathers i think arms head and back would have had them and its tail not its legs or lower body
This is very different. Elephants aren't a good example, because both Asian and African Elephants lived in habitats where climate and temperature is very consistent, extreme changes do not occur, or when they occur it is for extremely short periods of time. It is specially known that Elephant offspring fatality might rise due to climate/temperature differences, as it happens with Elephants in Captivity, who tend to be mostly in places not compatible to their original habitat
The lost of hair length regulation genes in Mammoths, seem to have occured mainly cuz of mutations from Mammoths surviving in more dynamic environments, where change in climate/temperatures was much more constant. So, not implausible to imagine that Large Theropods, who we know their environments experienced constant changes in climate/temperatures, to have some form or extent of fuzzy integuments.
might be my favorite depictions of a rex ive ever seen
well no actually this is my fav and will 4ever be it
Also, elephants do have a full coat of fur. It is not visible to the naked eye, because the hair is really small.
Again
Im not sayin its not plausable for mega therapods(such as trex and others) to have feathery coat all over their body
Im sayin that for trex specificaly is less plausabke that he has a full coat of feathers all over his body(like i said before we have skin impressions of it)
And yes i know aboyt the elephant fur
Also..i kinda think that trex had the same as elephants
Like how PHP did their trex
With this thin feathery filaments all over his body
Anyway
Feathered or not
Trex is cool
But I explained why Elephants are not a good example, the two genera that we have are very sensitive to extreme climate changes ( Also why it's impossible to make any of them replace Mammoths. ) Even if we argue that they are a good analogy on size, their environments do not show the same diversity of conditions or changes that we know have occured within the habitats of many large theropods.
Ok that's too much even for me
mopsaurus rex
Also does anyone knows the name of the documentary that had a drunk/high shunosaurus?
if rex looked like that i dont know if it would be more horrifying to see or less lmao
Also u gave him feathers but made exposed teeth?
Truly tragic
Truly Wonderfully Chaotic.
i feel like showing this to the chat has blessed everyone's eyes ngl
dinosaur revolution (2011)
Ty
You've opened their mind 
No,
In the contrary i made a arch-enemy/j
(Im jokin,but i still don't like feathered mega therapods
I can't force u to dislike what u like)
one day they will reveal the truth that THIS is the true way trex looked
I hope u choke on ur water
and they will tell us that it gave live birth and also had hairy legs not feathery but hairy
popularity vote
which negment clawed giant are you choosing?
therinosaurus
deinocherius
gallimimus
Old man hairy legs
Deinocheirus. I love duck from the hell.
deinocherius
Therizinosaurus i like him
I'll spin a wheel
2 votes deinocherius, 1 vote theri, 1 vote agnes
Mononykus
Oh god wth is that pfp u scared me
Theri
2 votes theri, 2 votes deinocherius, 1 vote mononykus
Rude
i switch my vote to theri
Your profile picture is from Tomodachi life?
@delicate trout What is the name of the creature in your pfp?
3 votes theri, 1 vote deinocherius, 1 vote monoykus
Wait but mononykus wasnt in the list
It doesnāt have a name. It was mainly inspired by my Roblox avatar and my friends just associate it with me
well it got added
clawed giant
mononykus
I think you should name them Carnivores 2 Velociraptor
Why when he blinks the lil "hairs" near his head moves?
whos your favorite rivarly?
1 - velicoraptor and protoceratops
2 - spinosaurus and carchadontasaurus
3 - rex and trike
4 - stego and allo
stego and allo
Rex and trike cuz it makes more sense to me
I love the rivalry between the spinosaurus and the carcharodontosaurus but... Tyrannosaurus versus Triceratops is way more popular and badass.
isn't Spino and Carcha like merely a hypothetical? I'm pretty sure the fossils that suggest that are private, and dubious, no?
as velicoraptor and protoceratops are in a fossile with eachother fighting to the death lmao
I didnt say the other ones arent real
I just like trike and rex
Carcharodontosaurus bite marks were found on a Spinosaurus vertebra. Or so it seems to me.
planet dinosaur mentions a spine that was broken off yeah, but that was never published and i don't think that spine is even in a museum
I'll give a different vote...
Brachylophosaurus vs Daspletosaurus
I think that one was just for the show no?
if i had to imagine what happened was prob the spino scavenging a kill then the carcha saw it taking the kill and wanted to stop that lol
I should watch that documentary again; in my memory, it's great, even though a lot of the information is no longer accurate.
there's also that hilarious ''carcharodontosaurus vertebra with spinosaurus tooth'' where the tooth is inside the vertebra as if spinosaurus had an atomic bite force that caused its teeth to shoot all the way through its prey
it's probably from a private collection, and cannot be verified in any trustable way.
Spinosaurus had bulled teeth!:0
which was the better planet, planet dinosaur or dinosaur planet?
The spinosaurus probably did not have a very impressive jaw strength compared to some Theropods.
I also will change my vote to stego and allo cuz of the funny fossil
i feel like spinos biggest weapon was its huge arms and claws
I'll be the number one Dinosaur Planet defender
If they had a bigger budget and better models i think PD would be the best dinosaur documentary of our era
Planet Dinosaur, at least it doesn't replace the megaraptor with Argentinian carcharodontosaurus (that's what I remember most about Dinosaur Planet).
Well at the time those remains where ???
It wasnāt a heheh decision for sake of it
Didnt watched neither so idk
poor allo had it rough that day lmao
It probably did not had those, but that is just my personnal opinion.
the CGI environments are pretty rough... and the fact every herbivorous dinosaur uses the same pig sounds...
can we admit planet dinosaur spinosaurus is up there in the top 5 most iconic spinosaurus depictions?
any four legged therapods?
Also, don't forget the appearance of the saltasaurus in Dinosaur Planet. BIG CHONKY BOY!
No iirc
none known so far
What about the Aetosaur in When Dinosaurs Roamed America?
it is BEAUTIFUL, be NICE
OHHH MY THICKKK
I mean go back a feel years and u would see spino bein four legged lmao
He's handsome but he's fat. It reminds me of when my cat was in
a good chunk of planet dinosaur is GSP fanfiction and honestly thats kinda beautiful
that dosent count as 4 legs. it just walked quad on its knuckles
I love the scene where they're trying to run from the carcharomegaraptors but the animators decided saltasaurus can only move at a max speed of 0.5 mph
Why do they made his face weirdly human like
I may be high
real question is any 1 legged dinos??
Yup, like how prior documentaries on North American Dinosaurs were mostly Jack Horner fanfiction.
Sacisaurus is known from a bonebed of 20+ individuals where there are like 28 right legs and only 1 left leg
The megaraptors were replaced by carcharodontosaurus.
Sacisaurus
*Carcharodontosaurs
you are forced to watch one of these documentaries for 24 hours straight with no breaks, which are you choosing and why?
my bad it was 35 right legs and 1 left leg
speckles XD
Jurassic fight club
Erm dinosauriform you must be jailed
They also decided the carcharomegaraptors moved that fast so technically itās realistic as the megatheropod could not run
Please do not spread misinformation next time or we will contact the authorities