AvPGalaxy Forums

General => General Discussion => Topic started by: DoomRulz on Jul 10, 2008, 12:17:08 AM

Title: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on Jul 10, 2008, 12:17:08 AM
I'm under the impression there are a few dino nuts round here so what the hey, let's discuss anything and everything dinosaur-related :)

My favourite's always been T.Rex. First dinosaur I was ever exposed to as a child and even now in my adult years, there's quite a bit of discussion surrounding the animal's behaviour, its relatives, etc...
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Private Hudson on Jul 10, 2008, 12:18:25 AM
I've always been interested in Raptors.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: SM on Jul 10, 2008, 12:19:22 AM
Iguanadon was always my fave as a kid.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on Jul 10, 2008, 12:22:17 AM
Quote from: Private Hudson on Jul 10, 2008, 12:18:25 AM
I've always been interested in Raptors.

That term is so overused. It was never used to refer to dromaeosaurids until Jurassic Park came out.

Quote from: SM on Jul 10, 2008, 12:19:22 AM
Iguanadon was always my fave as a kid.

Ahh yes, one of the first dinosaurs discovered.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: SM on Jul 10, 2008, 12:24:43 AM
I think I knew that; rings a bell - though I don't remember why I liked it.  Might've been the thumbs.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: XenoVC on Jul 10, 2008, 12:25:36 AM
For some reason I like the Carnotaurus also

(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fusuarios.lycos.es%2Fdinosaurios%2Fimagenes%2Fdinosaurios%2Fteropodos%2Fteropodos06.jpg&hash=e154776e22ae359a04de1846a5ad5ff53401210f)
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on Jul 10, 2008, 12:28:53 AM
Those might've been a form of defense, or perhaps even a means of foraging for food.

Quote from: XenoVC on Jul 10, 2008, 12:25:36 AM
For some reason I like the Carnotaurus also

(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fusuarios.lycos.es%2Fdinosaurios%2Fimagenes%2Fdinosaurios%2Fteropodos%2Fteropodos06.jpg&hash=e154776e22ae359a04de1846a5ad5ff53401210f)

Meat-eating bull; that thing had arms smaller than T.Rex if you can believe that.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: CELTICPRED on Jul 10, 2008, 12:42:31 AM
Tyrannosaurus Reich is my fav:

(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fv481%2Fsuncrush%2FTReich1.jpg&hash=4775ace3ac6bb9f643d594b90b0a8859b6352167)
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on Jul 10, 2008, 01:19:03 AM
Rofl, wtf :D
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Private Hudson on Jul 10, 2008, 01:25:01 AM
Nazl Dinosaur lol.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: SM on Jul 10, 2008, 01:29:29 AM
Musta had a tough time putting them band aids on what with them claws of his.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: War Wager on Jul 10, 2008, 01:39:49 AM
 :D

Next to the T-Rex and the Raptor, I loved the Spino when I was wee:

(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.marshalls-art.com%2Fimages%2Fipaleo%2Fpaleopg16%2FSpino_v4.jpg&hash=aa38347da7fc0d0570829c99924b8a18267bb84d)
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on Jul 10, 2008, 01:40:01 AM
Quote from: SM on Jul 10, 2008, 01:29:29 AM
Musta had a tough time putting them band aids on what with them claws of his.

I'd be more concerned with the jaws.

Speaking of which, I was reading an article on the web the other day about T.Rex apparently not having the strongest bite of any animal in history anymore; it comes in at 2nd place behind Dunkleosteus, an armoured fish of about 350 million years ago.

This fish could snap its jaws shut with 12 000 lbs. of force vs. T.Rex with only 3 000.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: SM on Jul 10, 2008, 01:55:07 AM
QuoteI'd be more concerned with the jaws.

Nah, how did he manage to get the band aids out of the packets and put them on?   Very fiddly.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: XenoVC on Jul 10, 2008, 02:02:56 AM
Quote from: War Wager on Jul 10, 2008, 01:39:49 AM
:D

Next to the T-Rex and the Raptor, I loved the Spino when I was wee:

(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.marshalls-art.com%2Fimages%2Fipaleo%2Fpaleopg16%2FSpino_v4.jpg&hash=aa38347da7fc0d0570829c99924b8a18267bb84d)

Spinosaurus is alright,but I'm not the biggest fan of River-Fish-Eaters  :P
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on Jul 10, 2008, 03:04:42 AM
Quote from: SM on Jul 10, 2008, 01:55:07 AM
QuoteI'd be more concerned with the jaws.

Nah, how did he manage to get the band aids out of the packets and put them on?   Very fiddly.

He has les friends.

Quote from: XenoVC on Jul 10, 2008, 02:02:56 AM
Spinosaurus is alright,but I'm not the biggest fan of River-Fish-Eaters  :P

The guy did extremely well for himself; grew up to 9 tons, largest land carnivore ever.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Dachande on Jul 10, 2008, 03:40:21 AM
TBH Dilophosaurus has become one of my new favourites, after discovering they're actually like 9 feet tall, and much bigger than they seem in JP.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: CELTICPRED on Jul 10, 2008, 03:41:30 AM
STICK

STICK STUPID!

FETCH THE STICK!
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Dachande on Jul 10, 2008, 03:46:29 AM
Surprisingly the Dilo in the book, was proper sized, and i think the whole 'Lulz my intestines are in my hands' scene would of been great in a movie.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: CELTICPRED on Jul 10, 2008, 03:54:49 AM
And Grant had a beard in the book.

Neill had no beard.

I require beard.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Dachande on Jul 10, 2008, 03:56:09 AM
Beard can be forgiven, Hawaiian shirt cannot. And drunk Muldoon, and Wu....
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: CELTICPRED on Jul 10, 2008, 03:56:47 AM
Muldoon sitting in a tube and launching rockets at raptors.


>:( >:( >:(
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Iron Hide on Jul 10, 2008, 04:08:51 AM
They should have also included the part where the juvenile rex played with Gennaro before eating him.




Topic....



Tyrannomuthaf**kinsaurus rex......My favorite as a kid.


(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.feenixx.com%2Fprehistoric%2Fimages%2Fdino-tyrannosaurus_rex.gif&hash=5e4548f27607778532dd7809df8ed2ba7165ecdc)
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Dachande on Jul 10, 2008, 04:10:25 AM
Gennaro didnt get killed in the book. Ed Regis the publicity guy did.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: CELTICPRED on Jul 10, 2008, 04:11:23 AM
So did Henry Wu

We only saw him in the egg lab.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Iron Hide on Jul 10, 2008, 04:15:26 AM
Quote from: Dachande on Jul 10, 2008, 04:10:25 AM
Gennaro didnt get killed in the book. Ed Regis the publicity guy did.

XD Shit my bad, it's been a couple of years since I last read it. I also wouldn't have minded seeing Grant coming across the raptor chick, it would have been interesting to see them interact.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Undeadite on Jul 10, 2008, 07:45:41 AM
Damn, I havnt thought seriously about dinos since  I was a kid. Back then I could name a million of them, now I can barely pronounce more than five without drawing a blank. All my childhood friends are the same way, and I wonder why children are so quick to learn dinos but adults are quick to forget them?
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Alien³ on Jul 10, 2008, 08:07:35 AM
I'm writing a novel about a dystopian future where man and dinosaurs live together.
It'll be published by the end of this year and will be available through a web-site that i'll link it to whens everything is completed, but man I an excited.


My favorites always been Tyrannosaurus after jp
And I always loved baryonyx, pretty mean fish eater.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Dark Passenger on Jul 10, 2008, 02:11:29 PM
My number one favorite has always been Tyrannosaurus Rex...

QuoteThe guy did extremely well for himself; grew up to 9 tons, largest land carnivore ever.

well he may be big, but he's a big, fish eater.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: WisePredator on Jul 10, 2008, 02:31:07 PM
Quote from: Dachande on Jul 10, 2008, 03:46:29 AM
Surprisingly the Dilo in the book, was proper sized, and i think the whole 'Lulz my intestines are in my hands' scene would of been great in a movie.
That would have been too great for the movie.

What about the bit where they discover a male raptor, or the part where they are on a small boat and they see all those microceratops in the trees? Those would have been good for the film.

I love all the known types of dinosaurs.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Master Chief on Jul 10, 2008, 03:39:18 PM
The Triceratops is still my favorite from when I was a kid.  The three horns, size and look are what do it for me.  I've always wondered how the famous battle between it and the T-Rex would've played out.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Iron Hide on Jul 10, 2008, 03:48:20 PM
Quote from: Master Chief on Jul 10, 2008, 03:39:18 PM
The Triceratops is still my favorite from when I was a kid.  The three horns, size and look are what do it for me.  I've always wondered how the famous battle between it and the T-Rex would've played out.


(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.archkckcs.org%2Fstjoe%2FDinosaurs_file%2Ft-rex%2520eating.jpg&hash=bc92e0a0ee99e97b998945879529bad7c433e949)



XD
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Master Chief on Jul 10, 2008, 04:30:36 PM
haha!  Only you.  Surely, this would've been the outcome if the Rex had got the positioning.  Head on, I think it would've been a different story.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Purebreedalien on Jul 10, 2008, 05:08:49 PM
I used to be really interested in Dinos but now I'm less enthusiastic.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Huol on Jul 10, 2008, 06:22:37 PM
My favourite was always the Triceratops.

Seeing one at the natural history museum did it.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Alien³ on Jul 10, 2008, 09:44:34 PM
So does everyone agree that they were wiped out by a meteorite and the few that managed to survived died of malnutrition due to lack of food.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Dachande on Jul 10, 2008, 10:03:40 PM
No, because that wouldnt explain why all other species on earth survived.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Alien³ on Jul 10, 2008, 10:14:55 PM
Quote from: Dachande on Jul 10, 2008, 10:03:40 PM
No, because that wouldnt explain why all other species on earth survived.

Well most of the creatures that did survive we're simple like sharks crocodiles dung beetles cockroaches etc
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Dachande on Jul 10, 2008, 10:33:22 PM
The Majority of Mammals survived, with only a few going extinct, which would mean, there is still a large food source available, and even if there was a lack of food, that wouldnt explain why the Herbivores and Omnivores went extinct.

Without any dinosaur DNA, we have no idea why they went extinct, whether it was something that was effected within their genes, we have no way of knowing, and to be honest, i prefer it that way, it still preserves the mystery around them.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on Jul 10, 2008, 10:38:09 PM
Quote from: Master Chief on Jul 10, 2008, 03:39:18 PM
The Triceratops is still my favorite from when I was a kid.  The three horns, size and look are what do it for me.  I've always wondered how the famous battle between it and the T-Rex would've played out.

Download the documentary The Truth About Killer Dinosaurs and you'll find out ;) It's an awesome watch!!

Quote from: Dachande on Jul 10, 2008, 10:33:22 PM
The Majority of Mammals survived, with only a few going extinct, which would mean, there is still a large food source available, and even if there was a lack of food, that wouldnt explain why the Herbivores and Omnivores went extinct.

Without any dinosaur DNA, we have no idea why they went extinct, whether it was something that was effected within their genes, we have no way of knowing, and to be honest, i prefer it that way, it still preserves the mystery around them.

Mammals were able to adapt which allowed them to survive; dinosaurs couldn't.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Dachande on Jul 10, 2008, 11:11:13 PM
Quote from: DoomRulz on Jul 10, 2008, 10:38:09 PM
Quote from: Dachande on Jul 10, 2008, 10:33:22 PM
The Majority of Mammals survived, with only a few going extinct, which would mean, there is still a large food source available, and even if there was a lack of food, that wouldnt explain why the Herbivores and Omnivores went extinct.

Without any dinosaur DNA, we have no idea why they went extinct, whether it was something that was effected within their genes, we have no way of knowing, and to be honest, i prefer it that way, it still preserves the mystery around them.

Mammals were able to adapt which allowed them to survive; dinosaurs couldn't.

Except the Dinosaurs could adapt, considering they were around for 160 million years, and went through an extinction period between the Triassic and Jurassic periods, they came out unscathed, Meteor impacts would of only had an effect for around 10 years, and the fossil record shows that at the dates of major impacts, dinosaurs were around after the 10 years.

I'm not disputing that the Meteors didnt have an effect, its clear that they did, however with the species that did survive, such as the mammals and fish, crocodiles and sharks, i just have to question whether it was a fact of them being 'unable to adapt'. If you look at a the dinosaurs that could fly, the small ones, they would have essentially the same diet as birds, eating small lizards, bugs, etc. Yet they went extinct and a number of modern day birds that were alive in that period didnt. Even with the big dinosaurs, plenty of fish survived, yet the fish eaters similar to Baronyx, and Spinosaurus (Although these were extinct at the beginning of the cretaceous) they died out, so its clearly not the food source, for some, and the effects of Impact would be minimal, for a large area outside the crater.

TBH, im just blabbering now, although there is no clear reason why the Dinosaurs did go extinct :P
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: maledoro on Jul 11, 2008, 12:47:54 AM
Some of my faves are the Tiktaalik (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tiktaalik), the Thrinaxodon (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thrinaxodon), and the Archaeopteryx (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Archaeopteryx).
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Huol on Jul 11, 2008, 12:59:57 AM
Quote from: maledoro on Jul 11, 2008, 12:47:54 AM
Some of my faves are the Tiktaalik (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tiktaalik), the Archaeopteryx (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Archaeopteryx).


You silly twat.
Those aren't dinosaurs.  ;D
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: maledoro on Jul 11, 2008, 01:04:26 AM
I was seeing if anyone would actually click on the links...
;)
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Huol on Jul 11, 2008, 01:31:02 AM
I only had to for two of them.

Everyone and their mums knows Archaeopteryx.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: maledoro on Jul 11, 2008, 01:56:50 AM
Quote from: Huol on Jul 11, 2008, 01:31:02 AM
Everyone and their mums knows Archaeopteryx.
1. Not everyone knows about that one. There are some people out there who aren't familiar with the concept of transitional fossils.

2. Wouldn't "everyone" include mothers as well?
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on Jul 11, 2008, 02:48:29 AM
Quote from: Dachande on Jul 10, 2008, 11:11:13 PM
Quote from: DoomRulz on Jul 10, 2008, 10:38:09 PM
Quote from: Dachande on Jul 10, 2008, 10:33:22 PM
The Majority of Mammals survived, with only a few going extinct, which would mean, there is still a large food source available, and even if there was a lack of food, that wouldnt explain why the Herbivores and Omnivores went extinct.

Without any dinosaur DNA, we have no idea why they went extinct, whether it was something that was effected within their genes, we have no way of knowing, and to be honest, i prefer it that way, it still preserves the mystery around them.

Mammals were able to adapt which allowed them to survive; dinosaurs couldn't.

Except the Dinosaurs could adapt, considering they were around for 160 million years, and went through an extinction period between the Triassic and Jurassic periods, they came out unscathed, Meteor impacts would of only had an effect for around 10 years, and the fossil record shows that at the dates of major impacts, dinosaurs were around after the 10 years.

I'm not disputing that the Meteors didnt have an effect, its clear that they did, however with the species that did survive, such as the mammals and fish, crocodiles and sharks, i just have to question whether it was a fact of them being 'unable to adapt'. If you look at a the dinosaurs that could fly, the small ones, they would have essentially the same diet as birds, eating small lizards, bugs, etc. Yet they went extinct and a number of modern day birds that were alive in that period didnt. Even with the big dinosaurs, plenty of fish survived, yet the fish eaters similar to Baronyx, and Spinosaurus (Although these were extinct at the beginning of the cretaceous) they died out, so its clearly not the food source, for some, and the effects of Impact would be minimal, for a large area outside the crater.

TBH, im just blabbering now, although there is no clear reason why the Dinosaurs did go extinct :P

Well it wasn't just a meteor. The meteor was just the straw that broke the camel's back. Towards the end of the Cretaceous period 65 million years ago, the Earth was undergoing massive geological upheaval and as such, caused a huge surge in volcanic activity. This poisoned the atmosphere, which in turned prevented dinosaur eggshells from forming properly. As such, young were not being born, but the tiny mammals that were around at that time were able to get by by eating those remains. As such they survived and took over the planet.

The reason the marine reptiles died out is b/c as the continents moved to form their modern shapes, the bodies of water around at that time dried out and shrank (I'm guessing anyway). So naturally there was nothing left for marine reptiles.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: WisePredator on Jul 11, 2008, 10:51:11 AM
Ever heard of "Dead Clades Walking (http://chronicle.uchicago.edu/020815/extinction.shtml)"?
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Dark Passenger on Jul 11, 2008, 11:06:51 AM
Quote from: DoomRulz on Jul 11, 2008, 02:48:29 AM
Quote from: Dachande on Jul 10, 2008, 11:11:13 PM
Quote from: DoomRulz on Jul 10, 2008, 10:38:09 PM
Quote from: Dachande on Jul 10, 2008, 10:33:22 PM
The Majority of Mammals survived, with only a few going extinct, which would mean, there is still a large food source available, and even if there was a lack of food, that wouldnt explain why the Herbivores and Omnivores went extinct.

Without any dinosaur DNA, we have no idea why they went extinct, whether it was something that was effected within their genes, we have no way of knowing, and to be honest, i prefer it that way, it still preserves the mystery around them.

Mammals were able to adapt which allowed them to survive; dinosaurs couldn't.

Except the Dinosaurs could adapt, considering they were around for 160 million years, and went through an extinction period between the Triassic and Jurassic periods, they came out unscathed, Meteor impacts would of only had an effect for around 10 years, and the fossil record shows that at the dates of major impacts, dinosaurs were around after the 10 years.

I'm not disputing that the Meteors didnt have an effect, its clear that they did, however with the species that did survive, such as the mammals and fish, crocodiles and sharks, i just have to question whether it was a fact of them being 'unable to adapt'. If you look at a the dinosaurs that could fly, the small ones, they would have essentially the same diet as birds, eating small lizards, bugs, etc. Yet they went extinct and a number of modern day birds that were alive in that period didnt. Even with the big dinosaurs, plenty of fish survived, yet the fish eaters similar to Baronyx, and Spinosaurus (Although these were extinct at the beginning of the cretaceous) they died out, so its clearly not the food source, for some, and the effects of Impact would be minimal, for a large area outside the crater.

TBH, im just blabbering now, although there is no clear reason why the Dinosaurs did go extinct :P

Well it wasn't just a meteor. The meteor was just the straw that broke the camel's back. Towards the end of the Cretaceous period 65 million years ago, the Earth was undergoing massive geological upheaval and as such, caused a huge surge in volcanic activity. This poisoned the atmosphere, which in turned prevented dinosaur eggshells from forming properly. As such, young were not being born, but the tiny mammals that were around at that time were able to get by by eating those remains. As such they survived and took over the planet.

The reason the marine reptiles died out is b/c as the continents moved to form their modern shapes, the bodies of water around at that time dried out and shrank (I'm guessing anyway). So naturally there was nothing left for marine reptiles.

did you come up with that from walking with dinosaurs...ps Great show
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: WisePredator on Jul 11, 2008, 11:19:01 AM
Walking with Dinosaurs and it's sequal/prequal/spinoffs are half truths.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Dark Passenger on Jul 11, 2008, 11:21:27 AM
Quote from: WisePredator on Jul 11, 2008, 11:19:01 AM
Walking with Dinosaurs and it's sequal/prequal/spinoffs are half truths.

that may be...but they are certainly entertaining..,
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: WisePredator on Jul 11, 2008, 11:25:17 AM
Quote from: Silver Surfer on Jul 11, 2008, 11:21:27 AM
Quote from: WisePredator on Jul 11, 2008, 11:19:01 AM
Walking with Dinosaurs and it's sequal/prequal/spinoffs are half truths.

that may be...but they are certainly entertaining..,
Indeed they are.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: maledoro on Jul 11, 2008, 11:54:53 AM
Quote from: WisePredator on Jul 11, 2008, 11:19:01 AM
Walking with Dinosaurs and it's sequal/prequal/spinoffs are half truths.
I haven't seen any of them yet. Where do they get the science wrong?
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: WisePredator on Jul 11, 2008, 01:10:35 PM
An example is in Walking with Monsters with the Euparkeria, it is said to be the direct descendant of the dinosaurs, even though they are either a part of the sister group of Archosaurs or a part of the lineage leading to the dinosaurs. It is not definet that they (the Euparkeria) are directly linked to the dinosaurs.

http://www.ucmp.berkeley.edu/diapsids/euparkeria.html
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on Jul 11, 2008, 07:10:39 PM
Quote from: WisePredator on Jul 11, 2008, 11:19:01 AM
Walking with Dinosaurs and it's sequal/prequal/spinoffs are half truths.

They're aren't totally inaccurate. They do entertain, but I'd say at least 60% of what is discussed is true.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: WisePredator on Jul 11, 2008, 07:17:28 PM
Yes, but if the time comes it is best not to be used in paleontological debates.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Ghost Rider on Jul 11, 2008, 09:00:31 PM
T-rex all the way. 8)
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on Jul 11, 2008, 09:07:41 PM
Quote from: WisePredator on Jul 11, 2008, 07:17:28 PM
Yes, but if the time comes it is best not to be used in paleontological debates.

Agreed.

I give the show credit though b/c to the best of my knowledge, many of their guesses about animal behaviour in the Walking With series are based on modern-day creatures. We'll never know if they're correct or not, but it's still really well-done.

Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Ghost Rider on Jul 11, 2008, 09:09:56 PM
Quote from: DoomRulz on Jul 11, 2008, 09:07:41 PM
Quote from: WisePredator on Jul 11, 2008, 07:17:28 PM
Yes, but if the time comes it is best not to be used in paleontological debates.

Agreed.

I give the show credit though b/c to the best of my knowledge, many of their guesses about animal behaviour in the Walking With series are based on modern-day creatures. We'll never know if they're correct or not, but it's still really well-done.



I had the whole series at one time.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: maledoro on Jul 12, 2008, 02:12:41 AM
Thanks for your input, WisePredator and DoomRulz!
:)
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: CanadianHero67 on Jul 12, 2008, 03:22:06 AM
(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fdinosaurfanfiction.com%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2008%2F03%2Fraptor-jesus.jpg&hash=4a7637a0eb2af7ad808bbcfe53147908aceb38cc)



EDIT: My real favourite dinos are the Rex, Utah Raptor, and Megalodon.

Megalodon is a shark that is the size of a battleship.
(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Famerindien.a.m.pic.centerblog.net%2Fmuq10bmo.jpg&hash=0c0e91b7cd4ebacad6bcad1098ce3802cbc7ad66)
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Dark Passenger on Jul 12, 2008, 11:07:39 AM
^ i didnt know megalodon was a dinosaur...
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: CanadianHero67 on Jul 12, 2008, 02:38:02 PM
I'm not 100% sure but they are millions of years old.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on Jul 12, 2008, 02:56:57 PM
Megalodon is a shark...
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: CanadianHero67 on Jul 12, 2008, 03:10:03 PM
Fine its a shark. :)
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Huol on Jul 12, 2008, 11:00:58 PM
Can I get something across?

Only land reptiles where called Dinosaurs.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: CanadianHero67 on Jul 12, 2008, 11:31:10 PM
I know, I just wanted to show it off. ;)
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Dachande on Jul 13, 2008, 12:06:07 AM
Quote from: Huol on Jul 12, 2008, 11:00:58 PM


Only land Dinosaurs were called Dinosaurs.

>_> technically dinosaurs are neither lizard, nor anything else, they're just dinosaurs

Mainly considering some were warmblooded and some werent
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: WisePredator on Jul 13, 2008, 12:34:41 PM
Dinosaurs where just dinosaurs...

...That led to birds.

(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.websmileys.com%2Fsm%2Fhappy%2F962.gif&hash=9b2778f47d055d08096d4e7434204d2f0bb0e307)
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Dark Passenger on Jul 13, 2008, 01:36:22 PM
Quote from: WisePredator on Jul 13, 2008, 12:34:41 PM
Dinosaurs where just dinosaurs...

...That led to birds.

(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.websmileys.com%2Fsm%2Fhappy%2F962.gif&hash=9b2778f47d055d08096d4e7434204d2f0bb0e307)

oh yes...you are truly wise...
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: WisePredator on Jul 13, 2008, 02:31:27 PM
Quote from: Silver Surfer on Jul 13, 2008, 01:36:22 PM
Quote from: WisePredator on Jul 13, 2008, 12:34:41 PM
Dinosaurs where just dinosaurs...

...That led to birds.

(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.websmileys.com%2Fsm%2Fhappy%2F962.gif&hash=9b2778f47d055d08096d4e7434204d2f0bb0e307)

oh yes...you are truly wise...
I <3 sarcasm.

I find it amazing how T-Rex's closest living relative is a chicken. :P
Evolution is amazing.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Huol on Jul 13, 2008, 03:21:58 PM
Quote from: Dachande on Jul 13, 2008, 12:06:07 AM
Quote from: Huol on Jul 12, 2008, 11:00:58 PM


Only land Dinosaurs were called Dinosaurs.

>_> technically dinosaurs are neither lizard, nor anything else, they're just dinosaurs

Mainly considering some were warmblooded and some werent

Have I missed something? Is that factual?
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: WisePredator on Jul 13, 2008, 03:41:28 PM
I thought they were all warm blooded.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Sgt. Johnson on Jul 13, 2008, 03:58:52 PM
JP said that raptors were like birds because of the bone structure. Raptors are my favorite because They are the perfect hunters. If you see one infront of you, your screwed. the attack will come from the side and the will rip out your internal organs like wu in JP. and eat them. It would suck really bad if you were alive while being eaten
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: WisePredator on Jul 13, 2008, 04:01:56 PM
Quote from: WolfvsChet on Jul 13, 2008, 03:58:52 PM
JP said that raptors were like birds because of the bone structure. Raptors are my favorite because They are the perfect hunters. If you see one infront of you, your screwed. the attack will come from the side and the will rip out your internal organs like wu in JP. and eat them. It would suck really bad if you were alive while being eaten
JP said a lot of things.

But all dinosaurs are linked to birds.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on Jul 13, 2008, 04:08:43 PM
Quote from: Dachande on Jul 13, 2008, 12:06:07 AM
Quote from: Huol on Jul 12, 2008, 11:00:58 PM


Only land Dinosaurs were called Dinosaurs.

>_> technically dinosaurs are neither lizard, nor anything else, they're just dinosaurs

Mainly considering some were warmblooded and some werent

In the purest sense, dinosaurs were reptiles. That's how they're classified. Small carnivorous dinosaurs however, despite being reptiles, evolved into the birds we see today.

Quote from: WisePredator on Jul 13, 2008, 02:31:27 PM
I find it amazing how T-Rex's closest living relative is a chicken. :P
Evolution is amazing.

You ain't kiddin'. http://www.livescience.com/animals/070412_dino_tissues.html
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Wolfpred on Jul 13, 2008, 04:24:25 PM
okay..... my favorite dino is the gojirasaurus (or godzillasaurus)
it was named after godzilla

(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi267.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fii288%2FAVPgojirafreak%2Forig3042.jpg&hash=0f59287b36e0e63cad26ebb944368988357f81af)
18-21 feet long, lived in the Triassic Period, and was discovered Revuelto Creek, Quay County, New Mexico in 1997
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: WisePredator on Jul 13, 2008, 04:38:57 PM
Hold on... They actually named a dinosaur after Godzilla?
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on Jul 13, 2008, 05:41:59 PM
There's a sea monster (reptile) named Godzilla so it wouldn't surprise me.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Ghost Rider on Jul 13, 2008, 06:16:23 PM
Quote from: DoomRulz on Jul 13, 2008, 04:08:43 PM
Quote from: Dachande on Jul 13, 2008, 12:06:07 AM
Quote from: Huol on Jul 12, 2008, 11:00:58 PM


Only land Dinosaurs were called Dinosaurs.

>_> technically dinosaurs are neither lizard, nor anything else, they're just dinosaurs

Mainly considering some were warmblooded and some werent

In the purest sense, dinosaurs were reptiles. That's how they're classified. Small carnivorous dinosaurs however, despite being reptiles, evolved into the birds we see today.

Quote from: WisePredator on Jul 13, 2008, 02:31:27 PM
I find it amazing how T-Rex's closest living relative is a chicken. :P
Evolution is amazing.

You ain't kiddin'. http://www.livescience.com/animals/070412_dino_tissues.html

Evolution? Bah!
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Iron Hide on Jul 13, 2008, 07:21:43 PM
Quote from: Wolfpred on Jul 13, 2008, 04:24:25 PM
okay..... my favorite dino is the gojirasaurus (or godzillasaurus)
it was named after godzilla

(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi267.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fii288%2FAVPgojirafreak%2Forig3042.jpg&hash=0f59287b36e0e63cad26ebb944368988357f81af)
18-21 feet long, lived in the Triassic Period, and was discovered Revuelto Creek, Quay County, New Mexico in 1997

The real Gojirasaurus.



(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww005.upp.so-net.ne.jp%2FJurassicGallery%2FGojirasaurus.jpg&hash=4b7285ef883a6acf47ccec60b2e331124c7d8af5)
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Wolfpred on Jul 13, 2008, 09:57:21 PM
Quote from: Iron Hide on Jul 13, 2008, 07:21:43 PM
Quote from: Wolfpred on Jul 13, 2008, 04:24:25 PM
okay..... my favorite dino is the gojirasaurus (or godzillasaurus)
it was named after godzilla

(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi267.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fii288%2FAVPgojirafreak%2Forig3042.jpg&hash=0f59287b36e0e63cad26ebb944368988357f81af)
18-21 feet long, lived in the Triassic Period, and was discovered Revuelto Creek, Quay County, New Mexico in 1997

The real Gojirasaurus.



(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww005.upp.so-net.ne.jp%2FJurassicGallery%2FGojirasaurus.jpg&hash=4b7285ef883a6acf47ccec60b2e331124c7d8af5)

there are different ways people thought it looked like, the pic i posted i posted because some gojirasauruses have been recovered have some sort of "fins" alone it's back
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on Jul 13, 2008, 11:04:48 PM
Here's the real Godzilla: http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2005/11/1110_051110_godzilla.html
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Wolfpred on Jul 14, 2008, 02:12:25 AM
Quote from: DoomRulz on Jul 13, 2008, 11:04:48 PM
Here's the real Godzilla: http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2005/11/1110_051110_godzilla.html

shit, what if the 50 meter-tall-firebreathing-japanese-godzilla was real!!! man that would suck!
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Sgt. Johnson on Jul 14, 2008, 02:26:02 AM
I can't tell if he's a good thing or bad. There's like 50 movies and sometimes he is a good monster but sometimes he's bad. better than megalodon
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on Jul 14, 2008, 03:11:00 AM
This Gojirasaurus is most interesting. I wonder how its discoverers came up with the name.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Wolfpred on Jul 14, 2008, 05:47:13 PM
Quote from: DoomRulz on Jul 14, 2008, 03:11:00 AM
This Gojirasaurus is most interesting. I wonder how its discoverers came up with the name.

hmm..... it was discovered in 1997....... maybe it was named in memory of Godzilla...... In the 1995 film, Godzilla vs Destroyah, Godzilla and his kid died.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Huol on Jul 14, 2008, 05:49:03 PM
Quote from: ghost rider on Jul 13, 2008, 06:16:23 PM
Quote from: DoomRulz on Jul 13, 2008, 04:08:43 PM
Quote from: Dachande on Jul 13, 2008, 12:06:07 AM
Quote from: Huol on Jul 12, 2008, 11:00:58 PM


Only land Dinosaurs were called Dinosaurs.

>_> technically dinosaurs are neither lizard, nor anything else, they're just dinosaurs

Mainly considering some were warmblooded and some werent

In the purest sense, dinosaurs were reptiles. That's how they're classified. Small carnivorous dinosaurs however, despite being reptiles, evolved into the birds we see today.

Quote from: WisePredator on Jul 13, 2008, 02:31:27 PM
I find it amazing how T-Rex's closest living relative is a chicken. :P
Evolution is amazing.

You ain't kiddin'. http://www.livescience.com/animals/070412_dino_tissues.html

Evolution? Bah!

Yes because animals being zapped into being is much more plausible.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: WisePredator on Jul 14, 2008, 06:03:18 PM
Exactly!

(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.clicksmilies.com%2Fs1106%2Faktion%2Faction-smiley-003.gif&hash=9dea0a085bbeda4f55ba5024f4593f6a40ff1305)
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: SiL on Jul 17, 2008, 08:54:18 AM
Quote from: DoomRulz on Jul 14, 2008, 03:11:00 AM
This Gojirasaurus is most interesting. I wonder how its discoverers came up with the name.
"Sweet, a new dinosaur."
"Bitchin'! What do we name it?
"Hey, remember that Godzilla movie that was on TV the other week that showed what Godzilla was before he was mutated by radiation? We should call it that."
"You mean Gojirasaurus?"
"Yeah, that one."
"We should totally use that."
"Indeed."

I imagine there were more monacles and top hats and less use of the words "sweet", "bitchin'" and "totally", however.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on Jul 17, 2008, 11:33:18 PM
I doubt it was named b/c of its resemblance to an iguana.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: B-Rad G on Jul 17, 2008, 11:57:02 PM
The T-Rex.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Master Chief on Jul 25, 2008, 04:02:09 PM
Jurassic Fight Club (http://www.history.com/minisites/jurassic-fight-club).  Series premiere Tuesday July 29th.  I've waiting for this for a while now.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on Jul 25, 2008, 11:24:10 PM
No kidding, that looks really sweet. Thx for that Chief!
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Master Chief on Jul 28, 2008, 05:28:58 PM
No problem Doom, now we can see how the T-Rex vs. Triceratops battle really went down.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Mr.X on Jul 28, 2008, 06:51:22 PM
T-Rex
Quote from: Master Chief on Jul 25, 2008, 04:02:09 PM
Jurassic Fight Club (http://www.history.com/minisites/jurassic-fight-club).  Series premiere Tuesday July 29th.  I've waiting for this for a while now.
What channel is it on?
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Sgt. Johnson on Jul 28, 2008, 11:47:37 PM
Quote from: Mr.X on Jul 28, 2008, 06:51:22 PM
T-Rex
Quote from: Master Chief on Jul 25, 2008, 04:02:09 PM
Jurassic Fight Club (http://www.history.com/minisites/jurassic-fight-club).  Series premiere Tuesday July 29th.  I've waiting for this for a while now.
What channel is it on?
history channel
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on Jul 30, 2008, 12:00:54 AM
Quote from: Master Chief on Jul 28, 2008, 05:28:58 PM
No problem Doom, now we can see how the T-Rex vs. Triceratops battle really went down.

You can already do that with The Truth About Killer Dinosaurs ;) That was another 2-part documentary released by the BBC. Download it if you can find it. The science in it is amazing. It proves T.Rex was a hunter.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Predboy on Jul 30, 2008, 12:57:58 AM
That program is about to go on right now. ;D

You wouldn't happen to know where to find it do you Doom. One thing Ive always been interested in is whether tyrannosaurus was a predator or scavenger.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on Jul 30, 2008, 01:15:56 AM
Quote from: Predboy on Jul 30, 2008, 12:57:58 AM
That program is about to go on right now. ;D

NNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO THE SHOW ISN'T ON HERE!!!!!!!! :'( :'( :'( :'( IT'S SOME DUMB SHOW ABOUT HITLER AND THE OCCULT!!!

Quote from: Predboy on Jul 30, 2008, 12:57:58 AMYou wouldn't happen to know where to find it do you Doom. One thing Ive always been interested in is whether tyrannosaurus was a predator or scavenger.

BitChe is your friend ;)

Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Predboy on Jul 30, 2008, 01:19:24 AM
Are you sure you got the right channel, cuz Im watching it right now as we type.

Quote from: DoomRulz on Jul 30, 2008, 01:15:56 AM
BitChe is your friend ;)

Ummm.....I dont know what that is. :-\
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on Jul 30, 2008, 01:20:53 AM
Quote from: Predboy on Jul 30, 2008, 01:19:24 AM
Are you sure you got the right channel, cuz Im watching it right now as we type.

Ya. History Channel, 9:00 PM EST. It's Hitler :-\ :'(

Quote from: Predboy on Jul 30, 2008, 01:19:24 AM
Ummm.....I dont know what that is. :-\

It's a Torrent search engine. D/l it for free then search for The Truth About Killer Dinosaurs. Or just google the title then add torrent next to it.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Predboy on Jul 30, 2008, 01:36:24 AM
Oh, alright. :)

Are you sure thats the history channel? Because mines is showing it right now. Im lookin at t.rex walking around, and...I dont think I would want to f**k with something like that. :-[ Well, do you live in the eastern US? If not, thats probably a reason.

Oh no wait, I see you just put eastern there in your post. :P Well, I dont really know why its not showing, sorry dude.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Mr.X on Jul 30, 2008, 01:52:10 AM
That was just sad what happened to the baby :'(
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Predboy on Jul 30, 2008, 01:54:29 AM
Did you see how it smashed the poor thing's head on that tree....priceless. ;D
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on Jul 30, 2008, 03:48:41 AM
Quote from: Predboy on Jul 30, 2008, 01:36:24 AM
Oh, alright. :)

Are you sure thats the history channel? Because mines is showing it right now. Im lookin at t.rex walking around, and...I dont think I would want to f**k with something like that. :-[ Well, do you live in the eastern US? If not, thats probably a reason.

Oh no wait, I see you just put eastern there in your post. :P Well, I dont really know why its not showing, sorry dude.

Ya it's messed up. I'm in Toronto, ON watching on ExpressVu. Though it seems like this series is on DVD, so I'll see if I can download it.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Predboy on Jul 30, 2008, 04:13:00 AM
You gotta dowload it, I swear that shit was good as hell. They explain a lot about the dinosaurs and the CGI battles are freakin crazy. It makes you think if that was really how dinos fought.  :o
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Master Chief on Jul 30, 2008, 06:05:31 PM
I loved how they put the story together.  The Male was just looking to spread his genes but instead lost a liver...Next week is going to be good.  T-REX vs. Nanotyrannus, The T-Rex hunter.

I was just browsing the episode guides and they are going to have some great battles during this series
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Iron Hide on Jul 30, 2008, 06:40:36 PM
^ I caught a little bit of that show myself. I loved how she broke his spinal column and ate him alive...


"FINISH HIM!*


(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fskepticalcommunity.com%2Fphpbb2%2Fuploads%2Ffatality.jpg&hash=557b3f44ed75950d4641cef2d33b5eb0c49a086e)


XD
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Predboy on Jul 30, 2008, 06:59:03 PM
Um, actually I was just screwing with him. I didn't think it was all that big a deal but if you guys liked it a lot, he might then. :D
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Master Chief on Jul 30, 2008, 07:35:50 PM
^ spreken ze english, haha...

Quote from: Iron Hide on Jul 30, 2008, 06:40:36 PM
^ I a little bit of that show myself. I loved the how she broke his spinal column and ate him alive...


"FINISH HIM!*
XD

haha! That was good.  Yeah, she was ruthless.  She was like baby are you dead, *Chomp!  Me still hungry...pretty graphic.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on Jul 30, 2008, 11:31:28 PM
I hate you all... :'(
































;)
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Mr.X on Jul 31, 2008, 09:31:14 PM
Any bets who's gonna win next weeks match up.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Master Chief on Jul 31, 2008, 09:41:29 PM
No bets, but I think it'll play out like this.  The Nanotyrannus is going to kill a juvenile T-Rex and mommy or daddy T-Rex is going to show up and kill the Nanotyrannus.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Predboy on Jul 31, 2008, 09:43:44 PM
I think they told you who was going to win when they showed what was going to be next, if they did....now what was the point of that then, giving away the whole end like that. >_>
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Mr.X on Jul 31, 2008, 10:13:03 PM
Quote from: Master Chief on Jul 31, 2008, 09:41:29 PM
No bets, but I think it'll play out like this.  The Nanotyrannus is going to kill a juvenile T-Rex and mommy or daddy T-Rex is going to show up and kill the Nanotyrannus.
you forgot the parent eating the juvinile.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Huol on Jul 31, 2008, 10:24:34 PM
I watched something on youtube about this.

I was gonna look for actual episodes until one guy ( a cgi artist I guess) said "To me their monsters. They're violent monsters and that's what I set out to portray.) That's just bollocks.

This looks like a poor man's walking with dinosaurs set out to appeal to brainless violence-addicts.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Master Chief on Jul 31, 2008, 10:25:38 PM
The Nanotyrannus ate the juvenile.

Quote from: Predboy on Jul 31, 2008, 09:43:44 PM
I think they told you who was going to win when they showed what was going to be next, if they did....now what was the point of that then, giving away the whole end like that. >_>

They said that there were juvenile T-rex bones found in it, not a full-grown.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Mr.X on Jul 31, 2008, 10:28:53 PM
I didn't hear that part thanks for pointing it out.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on Aug 01, 2008, 12:18:03 AM
Quote from: Huol on Jul 31, 2008, 10:24:34 PM
I watched something on youtube about this.

I was gonna look for actual episodes until one guy ( a cgi artist I guess) said "To me their monsters. They're violent monsters and that's what I set out to portray.) That's just bollocks.

This looks like a poor man's walking with dinosaurs set out to appeal to brainless violence-addicts.

Sounds more to me like the person who said that is an ignorant ass.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Iron Hide on Aug 01, 2008, 12:49:49 AM
The Lineup.


1.Cannibal Dinosaur (Majungasaurus vs Majungasaurus)Outcome: Female Won
2.T. Rex Hunter (Nanotyrannus vs Tyrannosaurus)
3.Gang Killers (Deinonychus vs Tenontosaurus)
4.Bloodiest Battle (Allosaurus vs Ceratosaurus vs Stegosaurus & Camarasaurus)
5.Ice Aged Monsters (Arctodus vs Panthera)
6.Hunter Becomes Hunted (Allosaurus vs Ceratosaurus)
7.Deep Sea Killers (Megalodon vs Brygmophyseter)
8.Largest Killers (compares various theropods to see which was the "deadliest")
9.Raptors' Last Stand (Utahraptor vs Gastonia)
10.River Of Death (Albertosaurus vs Pachyrhinosaurus)
11.Raptor Vs T. Rex (Tyrannosaurus vs Dromaeosaurus vs Edmontosaurus)
12.Armageddon (investigates the extinction of dinosaurs)
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on Aug 01, 2008, 02:48:09 AM
Man, wtf, I'm so bitter lol. I can't find this damn torrent!!
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Master Chief on Aug 01, 2008, 03:54:58 PM
Don't worry man, just keep coming back to this thread and you can find out what you've been missing. 8)
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Predboy on Aug 01, 2008, 04:28:32 PM
Dont worry, we'll be sure to give you the details on how good, gruesome, the fights are and how anyone who misses it is so lucked out. ;)
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Sgt. Johnson on Aug 01, 2008, 05:40:59 PM
when does this come on.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Master Chief on Aug 01, 2008, 05:51:58 PM
Every Tuesday at 9/8 Central on the History Channel. If you're in Canada, you're SOL.  ;)
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Mr.X on Aug 01, 2008, 08:32:15 PM
Deep sea killers looks intersing
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on Aug 04, 2008, 12:57:04 AM
I finally saw EP 1. I'll let you guys know what I thought of it soon 8)
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Predboy on Aug 04, 2008, 01:12:12 AM
Nice, and it only took you one week...just playin. ;) Im looking forward to the t.rex fight, if for some odd reason, it doesn't show up on your tv, Ill be sure to let you know on what you missed out on. ;)
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on Aug 04, 2008, 01:19:30 AM
Quote from: Predboy on Aug 04, 2008, 01:12:12 AM
Nice, and it only took you one week...just playin. ;) Im looking forward to the t.rex fight, if for some odd reason, it doesn't show up on your tv, Ill be sure to let you know on what you missed out on. ;)

*Secretly cusses out Predboy and his taunting..."






























;)
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on Aug 04, 2008, 03:42:03 AM
Ep 1 was f**kIN A!!!! ;D

A lot of it was repetition for me though TBH. In the beginning, when they were discussing the dinosaur's senses I have heard this countless times before. I really like the bit about inbreeding though. It makes sense b/c like they said, the island was so small.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Undeadite on Aug 04, 2008, 03:44:23 AM
Lol I saw a minute when channel surfing and almost pissed myself laughing.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Predboy on Aug 04, 2008, 03:50:54 AM
They just finished showing the episode again on my TV. ;D I stil cant help but feel sorry for the male, getting eaten alive, thats gotta be the worse way to go.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on Aug 04, 2008, 03:51:08 AM
Quote from: Undeadite on Aug 04, 2008, 03:44:23 AM
Lol I saw a minute when channel surfing and almost pissed myself laughing.

What, why?
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Private Hudson on Aug 04, 2008, 07:57:35 AM
Inbreeding?......
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Master Chief on Aug 06, 2008, 02:44:58 PM
Did anyone else catch the episode last night?  I called it!  Also, I didn't know that the juvenile Rex had a bite packed with bacteria.

I can't believe the "Nano" tried to get passed mommy.  And that devastating bite the T-Rex gave it...NICE!  and to make things worse, she ripped it apart and left for others to see.  She got medieval on his ass!
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DarkBladeClan Wolf on Aug 06, 2008, 02:51:02 PM
my favorite was always the Raptors cause they are smarter than f>k in Jurrassic park
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Bone Crusher on Aug 06, 2008, 03:31:24 PM
For me it's the Gigantosaurus THE largest land carnivore, it even kicked a T rex's ass in Dino Crisis 2 the game and then ate it. :o

(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg227.imageshack.us%2Fimg227%2F5916%2F800pxgiganotosaurusscalvc1.png&hash=562f80b39f00626976c5e0ab899c6dcd9cc8e301)

(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg98.imageshack.us%2Fimg98%2F3963%2Ftrexgiganot20fullafu1.jpg&hash=5eb388e75201ea36416368239194283b91ff0a81)

Gigantosaurus is the left one as if you couldn't tell ::)


Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Johnny Handsome on Aug 06, 2008, 03:41:21 PM
f**k Gigantosaurus, or Spinosaurus or assholesaurus, T-Rex will always be the star.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Bone Crusher on Aug 06, 2008, 04:06:02 PM
Yeah he will no matter how big a dinosaur is T Rex also a fav of mine will be a star.
Tyranosaurus Rex=Tryrant lizard king.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Mr.X on Aug 06, 2008, 09:37:54 PM
Nano should've ran when mommy came.  He was ripped to mother f**kin pieces!
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on Aug 07, 2008, 12:03:30 AM
Quote from: Bone Crusher on Aug 06, 2008, 03:31:24 PM
For me it's the Gigantosaurus THE largest land carnivore, it even kicked a T rex's ass in Dino Crisis 2 the game and then ate it. :o

(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg227.imageshack.us%2Fimg227%2F5916%2F800pxgiganotosaurusscalvc1.png&hash=562f80b39f00626976c5e0ab899c6dcd9cc8e301)

(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg98.imageshack.us%2Fimg98%2F3963%2Ftrexgiganot20fullafu1.jpg&hash=5eb388e75201ea36416368239194283b91ff0a81)

Gigantosaurus is the left one as if you couldn't tell ::)




That's a game; hardly reputable. And I'm quite confident T.Rex could kick a Giganotosaurus' ass if it really wanted to.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on Aug 10, 2008, 01:52:00 AM
Quote from: Master Chief on Aug 06, 2008, 02:44:58 PM
Did anyone else catch the episode last night?  I called it!  Also, I didn't know that the juvenile Rex had a bite packed with bacteria.

I can't believe the "Nano" tried to get passed mommy.  And that devastating bite the T-Rex gave it...NICE!  and to make things worse, she ripped it apart and left for others to see.  She got medieval on his ass!


The septic bite tactic wasn't anything new to me. I'd heard about it previously and had thought it was possible. I'm not the least bit surprised!!

Ya, when Dino George said "the Nano now has two options" I went :| this thing is really going to consider his options??! rofl

Though I dispute that scare tactic bit. For all we know, that might have been put in there for shock value.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Mr.X on Aug 10, 2008, 02:52:52 AM
Well it did a damn good job.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: SiL on Aug 10, 2008, 11:34:20 AM
Y'know, I love T-Rex as much as the next guy, but people's opinion of it really gets screwed over by advertising.

It's like what happened to the Great White. It looks mean, and can deal a shitload of pain, but it rarely attacks people and isn't really deserving of the level of fear that people have of it. Respect, yes; fear, not so much.

But thanks to Jaws everyone's like Oh shit, great white! RUN!

Yeah, Rexy is awesome. But people's opinions are largely based on its portrayal in popular culture, not the scientific community.

Which is fine and all, but really unfair.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on Aug 10, 2008, 01:47:27 PM
Quote from: SiL on Aug 10, 2008, 11:34:20 AM
Yeah, Rexy is awesome. But people's opinions are largely based on its portrayal in popular culture, not the scientific community.

Well go figure, that's all most people know. Like you said, there's nothing inherently wrong with that, but it's just the way it is. And plus, that's nothing new. When T.Rex was first discovered in 1902 and described in 1904, the hype surrounding it was immense.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cultural_depictions_of_Tyrannosaurus

The first paragraph describes it pretty well.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Craig on Aug 10, 2008, 01:52:14 PM
Didn't "scientists" say the T-Rex was a scavenger and slow, or something like that? Anyway, it was awesome in Jurassic Park.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on Aug 10, 2008, 03:27:49 PM
No, Jack Horner did. The majority of the scientific community seems to agree that T.Rex was in the middle ground. An active hunter, but also a scavenger.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Russian_Predator on Aug 10, 2008, 03:31:52 PM
I like biology from wiki.  :o

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spinosaurus ^^


from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dinosaur
QuoteThe largest known carnivorous dinosaur was Spinosaurus, reaching a length of 16 to 18 meters (50 to 60 ft), and weighing in at 8,150 kilograms (18,000 lb). Other large meat-eaters included Giganotosaurus, Mapusaurus, Tyrannosaurus rex and Carcharodontosaurus.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: XanltheCSG on Aug 10, 2008, 09:10:23 PM
Quote from: CELTICPRED on Jul 10, 2008, 12:42:31 AM
Tyrannosaurus Reich is my fav:

(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fv481%2Fsuncrush%2FTReich1.jpg&hash=4775ace3ac6bb9f643d594b90b0a8859b6352167)

;D It's funny cause I was reading a book and one of the terms was, "Someone always had to be the nazi dinosaurs".
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: xLV-426x on Aug 14, 2008, 08:59:29 PM
Raptors were always my favourite. They do remind me of Aliens...That's probably where my interest in Aliens (from the Alien Series) kicked in.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on Aug 14, 2008, 09:49:09 PM
Raptors seem more intelligent. Aliens tend to just charge at things.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Private Hudson on Aug 14, 2008, 10:05:00 PM
You mean AVP and AVPR aliens, aliens in Alien through A:R were smart and took their time.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on Aug 14, 2008, 10:14:37 PM
Aliens warriors. The smartest we've ever seen IMO was Kane's Son.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Private Hudson on Aug 14, 2008, 10:17:03 PM
What about Ox/dog alien or Ressurection aliens?
IMO the warriors in Aliens were smart too, but thats just my opinion.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on Aug 14, 2008, 10:17:32 PM
Haven't seen Alien3 and A:R...ok fine.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Private Hudson on Aug 14, 2008, 10:20:01 PM
 :o You really should.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: darkbladepred on Aug 14, 2008, 10:42:10 PM
Quote from: DoomRulz on Aug 14, 2008, 09:49:09 PM
Aliens tend to just charge at things.

Not even in aliens. They set ambushes, waited for the right time to swarm in, knocked out the power. I'd go as far as to say the Aliens warriors were smarter than Kane's son. Kane's son didn't really face a situation where he had to adapt.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Mr.X on Aug 14, 2008, 11:46:19 PM
Quote from: DoomRulz on Aug 14, 2008, 10:17:32 PM
Haven't seen Alien3 and A:R...ok fine.

You have no idea what you've missed.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Rafael S. on Aug 15, 2008, 01:59:13 AM
Quote from: Mr.X on Aug 14, 2008, 11:46:19 PM
Quote from: DoomRulz on Aug 14, 2008, 10:17:32 PM
Haven't seen Alien3 and A:R...ok fine.

You have no idea what you've missed.

He doesn't miss anything from A:R but yes from Alien3.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Predboy on Aug 15, 2008, 06:56:49 PM
I missed the raptor episode. Oh well, Ill just watch the re-run whenever it pops up on the guide menu.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on Aug 16, 2008, 07:17:23 PM
I'll watch it soon. This should be interesting.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Yihdore on Aug 18, 2008, 11:17:54 PM
My favorite is the Raptor and Triceratops
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on Aug 19, 2008, 02:01:56 AM
Quote from: Yihdore on Aug 18, 2008, 11:17:54 PM
Triceratops

"This guy was my #1 favourite when I was a kid". Love that scene from JP. I gather most people's fascination with dinosaurs really took off when Jurassic Park first came out.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: NintendoMan on Aug 19, 2008, 11:32:11 AM
Quote from: DoomRulz on Aug 19, 2008, 02:01:56 AM
Quote from: Yihdore on Aug 18, 2008, 11:17:54 PM
Triceratops

I gather most people's fascination with dinosaurs really took off when Jurassic Park first came out.

Bingo.

It opened up a whole new world for me when I was a small kid.
Such a fantastic movie...
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Master Chief on Aug 19, 2008, 02:35:08 PM
Imagine how us "old schoolers" felt when we finally seen the movie.  Our love for them developed years before the movie came out and to see them come to life turned our imagination to reality. 

JP is the only movie I've seen more than once in the theater.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Predboy on Aug 19, 2008, 09:28:56 PM
Quote from: Master Chief on Aug 19, 2008, 02:35:08 PM
Imagine how us "old schoolers" felt when we finally seen the movie.  Our love for them developed years before the movie came out and to see them come to life turned our imagination to reality. 

JP is the only movie I've seen more than once in the theater.

Ah yes, I remember the first time I fell in love with Dinosaurs. It was sunny outside, and my parents had just bought the first land before time movie. They popped it in for me, and Ive been hooked on Dinos since. :)

I even remember when I first saw JP....I remember screwing up the Cassette because of how many times I rewinded it to watch the movie again. :D
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on Aug 19, 2008, 09:32:07 PM
HAHAHAH TLBT for you as well huh?? That's where my obsession began as well :D I actually ended up biting a few kids at school b/c I thought I was Sharptooth :D
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Private Hudson on Aug 19, 2008, 10:04:50 PM
I think the first movie I ever watched was JP in theaters. Came out the year after I was born I think.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Predboy on Aug 19, 2008, 10:10:45 PM
Quote from: DoomRulz on Aug 19, 2008, 09:32:07 PM
HAHAHAH TLBT for you as well huh?? That's where my obsession began as well :D I actually ended up biting a few kids at school b/c I thought I was Sharptooth :D

:D

Well, I never actually 'bit' another person, but when we would be playing, like little kids always do, I used to sometimes act like a dino, and they would laugh because of how stpid I was.

Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on Aug 19, 2008, 10:45:33 PM
Psh. At least you had an imagination!
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on Aug 31, 2008, 06:23:20 PM
Ep. 5 of JFC was sweeeet. I would SO want to see a killer sperm whale and shark go at it in the water ;D
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Predboy on Sep 01, 2008, 05:57:51 PM
The fact that megalodon may still be out there...*shivers* My god, that would be crazy. :o Im still waiting for the raptor episode to run again. Christ, why did I have to fall asleep at that episode. I knew I should've drank coffee. >_>
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on Sep 01, 2008, 06:00:09 PM
I'm sure you can find it online. And I doubt Megalodon still exists. The amount of food it would need would is too much.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Predboy on Sep 01, 2008, 06:08:32 PM
Yeah I guess.....but you never know. ;)
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on Sep 01, 2008, 06:17:30 PM
Well ya...I'm just being a cynic :P :D

Be sure to watch the raptor episode. It's pretty cool.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Predboy on Sep 03, 2008, 02:56:41 AM
I just missed tonights episode....AGAIN. My god. >_>
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on Sep 03, 2008, 03:10:24 AM
I wrote a letter to Dino George asking him about predator bite strength after watching Episode 5. It made me hypothesize that a predator's bite strength is relative to the prey around at the time. I got an enthusiastic "Your theory is excellent!!!" Certainly made my day ;D
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: CanadianHero67 on Feb 16, 2009, 06:45:37 PM
My favourite dinosaur is Albertosaurus.

(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fbr.geocities.com%2Fmatheuspestana%2FAlbertosaurus.jpg&hash=826f8022c5a86f92c85af0621e45d26f96fa1a65)

(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fupload.wikimedia.org%2Fwikipedia%2Fcommons%2Fe%2Fed%2FAlbertosaurus.png&hash=1d8dc8465fd234b868b177a7377dd7ef384b6f12)

Info: http://www.cbv.ns.ca/marigold/history/dinosaurs/datafiles/albertosaurus.html

Video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eQFPhQ2zaDE
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on Feb 16, 2009, 06:47:24 PM
Naturally, you're a patriot ;)
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: CanadianHero67 on Feb 16, 2009, 06:54:56 PM
Not just that. They were similar to T.Rex but were faster and hunted in packs which I think is awesome. ;D
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Hellspawn28 on Feb 16, 2009, 07:48:22 PM
I love Dinosaurs when I was little and I was the biggest Dino nut that you would ever know. I own a book that had every Dino listed down and it twice bigger then the Bible it self.

I still like dinos but not as much then I used too.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: CanadianHero67 on Feb 16, 2009, 07:51:17 PM
I have liked dinosaurs all my life. I loved "Jurassic Park" ever since I was two years old. :)
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on Feb 16, 2009, 08:01:26 PM
Ditto. Saw it when I was 6 in theatres and raptor attacking Ellie=me ducking for cover behind the seats :D
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Hellspawn28 on Feb 16, 2009, 08:39:03 PM
Lost World and JPIII are the only ones I seen in theatres but I watch the first movie many times on VHS as a kid. The first movie was on FX like a few days ago, which reminds me to get all the movies on DVD soon (I had the collection pack but someone stole it).
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: maledoro on Feb 17, 2009, 01:11:58 PM
I just saw the first two JP movies at the cinema. The second one sucked so bad that I didn't bother even renting the third one.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: ShadowPred on Feb 17, 2009, 01:20:25 PM
Don't even watch the third one for free. Even if you're bored...you're better off watching Ghost Rider or....Fantastic Four (and sequel)
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: maledoro on Feb 17, 2009, 01:28:06 PM
Quote from: ShadowPred on Feb 17, 2009, 01:20:25 PM
Don't even watch the third one for free.
Seeing the second film kept me from wanting to see the third. Reading the outline and summary of III sealed its fate.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on Feb 17, 2009, 05:10:01 PM
III had its moments, but it certainly wasn't as bad as Ghost Rider or the FF sequel.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Hellspawn28 on Feb 17, 2009, 07:45:54 PM
I love the second movie. It was not as great as the first movie but it did had a great story and good amount of actions, and more dino scenes too. To me it was like Aliens was (Everything that the first movie had but with more).
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Predboy on Feb 17, 2009, 08:00:26 PM
Quote from: maledoro on Feb 17, 2009, 01:11:58 PM
The second one sucked so bad that I didn't bother even renting the third one.

The second one was good as hell. The third one was kinda gay though.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on Feb 17, 2009, 08:21:12 PM
The second was fun, but it lacked the depth of the first. The only thing it had on the first movie was the improved CG.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: maledoro on Feb 18, 2009, 11:48:51 AM
Quote from: Kaworu on Feb 17, 2009, 07:45:54 PM
To me it was like Aliens was.
Right down to having a Noot.

Quote from: Predboy on Feb 17, 2009, 08:00:26 PM
The second one was good as hell.
Last time I checked, Hell wasn't good.

Quote from: DoomRulz on Feb 17, 2009, 08:21:12 PM
The second was fun, but it lacked the depth of the first. The only thing it had on the first movie was the improved CG.
Which made it a masterpiece. Most people today won't see a movie unless it has special effects.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Dachande on Feb 18, 2009, 11:52:42 AM
Quote from: maledoro on Feb 18, 2009, 11:48:51 AM
Quote from: Kaworu on Feb 17, 2009, 07:45:54 PM
To me it was like Aliens was.
Right down to having a Noot.

Quote from: Predboy on Feb 17, 2009, 08:00:26 PM
The second one was good as hell.
Last time I checked, Hell wasn't good.

Quote from: DoomRulz on Feb 17, 2009, 08:21:12 PM
The second was fun, but it lacked the depth of the first. The only thing it had on the first movie was the improved CG.
Which made it a masterpiece. Most people today won't see a movie unless it has special effects.

Oh Mal! You take everything too literally!
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: maledoro on Feb 18, 2009, 12:58:33 PM
Quote from: Dachande on Feb 18, 2009, 11:52:42 AM
Oh Mal! You take everything too literally!
No, I'm "keepin' it real".
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Alien³ on Feb 18, 2009, 03:36:03 PM
The first has the best C.G.I to date from any movie. The second has brilliant C.G.I but the first still wins it looks so flawless. The third film was okay but it was nothing special. I saw all three at the cinema.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on Feb 18, 2009, 04:49:25 PM
Ironically, the first film, IMO, still has the mot realistic-looking dinosaurs we've ever seen in a movie or TV show. Yes they're jerky with their movements, but all the dinosaurs I've seen since then are blatant CG creations. The makers don't even try for realism anymore.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Alien³ on Feb 18, 2009, 04:54:54 PM
Quote from: DoomRulz on Feb 18, 2009, 04:49:25 PM
Ironically, the first film, IMO, still has the mot realistic-looking dinosaurs we've ever seen in a movie or TV show. Yes they're jerky with their movements, but all the dinosaurs I've seen since then are blatant CG creations. The makers don't even try for realism anymore.

Since when were they jerky? Look > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4CzxCKPZbO0&feature=related
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on Feb 18, 2009, 05:00:18 PM
@: 0.45, 2.02, and 2.40. Maybe jerky isn't the best word to use, but they certainly weren't always fluid movements.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Alien³ on Feb 18, 2009, 05:28:50 PM
Quote from: DoomRulz on Feb 18, 2009, 05:00:18 PM
@: 0.45, 2.02, and 2.40. Maybe jerky isn't the best word to use, but they certainly weren't always fluid movements.

Ahh I get ya. The dinosaurs in JP looked solid to me they cool so flawless. Wereas any CG in a film today dinosaur or not looks CG instantly its so shit.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Undeadite on Feb 18, 2009, 05:35:35 PM
Every time I see the scene where the Brachiosaurus (or is it Brontosaurus?) stands up on its hind legs to get the leaves at the top of the tree my eyes water a little bit out of pure glee. I think where JP1 really succeeded is that they didnt try to make monsters, they tried to make animals.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on Feb 18, 2009, 08:06:58 PM
Brachiosaurus, you got it ;) That scene was listed somewhere as one of cinema's great movie magic moments. The intro was amazing, Spielberg nailed it.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Hellspawn28 on Feb 18, 2009, 08:16:56 PM
Well a 4th movie won't happen anytime soon but the series was great for it time. Not to many dinosaurs movies anymore like in the 50's, 60's and 70's with movies like Land of Lost, Gwangi and The Last Dinosaur.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: chupacabras acheronsis on Feb 19, 2009, 10:17:57 PM
i loved raptors since the first time i saw JP.

almost as much as i love aliens.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: WarMachine on Mar 09, 2009, 12:47:11 AM
I always thought Baryonyx was a bad-ass. picture Spinosaurus without the spine and with a huge raptor claw on each hand. He was one of the ones in the third JP movie that Grant's apprentice suggested might have been the Spinosaurus.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on Mar 09, 2009, 12:52:37 AM
He was a fish-eater; couldn't have been that badass unless he was gutting them first lol
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: TITANOSAUR on May 15, 2010, 10:58:29 PM
what is your favorite Dinosaur? you can have more then one ofcourse. here are mine...

Giganotosaurus

Ankylosaurus

Stegosaurus

Dienonychus

Tyrannosaurus Rex

Postasuchus

Giganotosaurus is my Personal Favorite.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Puks on May 15, 2010, 11:01:06 PM
QuotePostosuchus

Not a dinosaur.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: TITANOSAUR on May 15, 2010, 11:03:21 PM
Quote from: Puks on May 15, 2010, 11:01:06 PM
QuotePostosuchus

Not a dinosaur.

I know, but its still pretty cool beastie. gotta love the Non dinosaur reptiles.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Xhan on May 15, 2010, 11:08:24 PM
Stenonychasaurus

Troodon

Ankylosaur

T Rex

Utah Raptor
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: TITANOSAUR on May 15, 2010, 11:10:05 PM
Stenonychasaurus

not familiar with that one.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Puks on May 15, 2010, 11:16:48 PM
It's a junior synonym of Troodon, thus not used anymore and irrelevant.

Yes, I am a dino nerd.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: SiL on May 15, 2010, 11:18:27 PM
All dromaeosaurids, T-Rex, stegosaurus, triceratops.

(Also dudes, if you don't know a dino ... you're on the internet. Finding dino info is like shooting babies in a barrel.)
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Puks on May 15, 2010, 11:22:10 PM
I don't need to look for info. I know it all. Srsly.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Huol on May 15, 2010, 11:29:09 PM
brachiosaurus
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: TITANOSAUR on May 15, 2010, 11:34:49 PM
well I kinda figured somebody on the site would tell me by the time I would have looked it up on Wikipedia.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: SiL on May 16, 2010, 12:30:10 AM
Quote from: Puks on May 15, 2010, 11:22:10 PM
I don't need to look for info. I know it all. Srsly.
Then I wasn't talking to you.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Noir-Gojira on May 16, 2010, 12:52:54 AM
Quote from: Puks on May 15, 2010, 11:22:10 PM
I don't need to look for info. I know it all. Srsly.
People who say that need it most of all.

Quote from: TITANOSAUR on May 15, 2010, 11:10:05 PM
Stenonychasaurus

not familiar with that one.
I know its been answered already, but for a better/worse example, think, "the annoying Jar Jar Binks dinosaur from the Dinotopia movie"

*now initiating the countdown until this degenerates into a "T. rex vs. Giga vs Spino" argument*
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Hive Tyrant on May 16, 2010, 01:00:03 AM
Carnotaurus. It's a f**king bull, man.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: MadassAlex on May 16, 2010, 05:00:53 AM
T.rex has all the cred.

My favourite is the composite velociraptor/deinonychus (I am not a paleontologist. I may have spelled these incorrectly) creature that was considered to just be 'velociraptor' before real science ruined JP.

f**k you, real science.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: ANYTIME 420 on May 16, 2010, 05:08:37 AM
Tyrannosaurus Rex,Velociraptor,dilophosaurus,brachiosaurus.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Yautja117 on May 16, 2010, 07:33:14 AM
T-rex, damnit. May have something to do with watching JP a billion times as a kid.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Omegamorph on May 16, 2010, 10:23:45 AM
You ask that to me?
In a completely random order... mine are
Suchomimus Tenerensis, Irritator Challengeri, Spinosaurus Aegyptiacus, Ceratosaurus Nasicornis, Tyrannosaurs Rex, Tarbosaurus Bataar, Albertosaurus Sarcophagus, Alioramus Remotus, Siamotyrannus Isanensis, Acrocanthosaurus Atokensis, Neovenator Salerii, Afrovenator Abakensis Giganotosaurus Carolinii, Carnotaurus Sastrei, Tarascosaurus Sallovicus, Abelisaurus Comuahensis, Majungatholus Crenatissimus (also known as Majungasaurus), Allosaurus Fragilis, Saurophaganax Maximus (probably a larger synonim of the former but whatever), Carcharodontosaurus Saharicus, Dilophosaurus Wetherilli, Utahraptor Ostrommaysi, Deinonychus Antirrhopus, Velociraptor Mongoliensis, Troodon Formosus, Gojirasaurus Quayi, Rajasaurus Narmandensis, Aucasaurus Garridoi, Gasosaurus Constructus, Stegosaurus Armatus, Pachycephalosaurus Wyomingensis, Stygimoloch Spinifer, Dracorex Hogwartsia (latter two may be a synonim of the first thoug), Styracosaurus Albertensis, Triceratops Horridus, Brachiosaurus Altithorax, Stegosaurus Armatus, Therizinosaurus Cheloniformis, Gastonia Burgei, Psittacosaurus Mongoliensis and others...
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: scarhunter92 on May 16, 2010, 11:48:49 AM
Too many to be listed. I used to be a dinosaur freak back when I was a child. Still remember most of them though.
Anyway, this thread would be way better if it had pics!
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: The PredBen on May 16, 2010, 02:25:56 PM
All of the were awesome. When I was little all I was into was Cavemen & Prehistoric ( including Dinos) shows and books.

I'd say 'ol Triceratops wins this ...  Now on to talk about my current favorite subjects AVP and Robert Fischer.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Keg on May 16, 2010, 02:51:26 PM
Quote from: OmegaZilla on May 16, 2010, 10:23:45 AM
You ask that to me?
In a completely random order... mine are
Suchomimus Tenerensis, Irritator Challengeri, Spinosaurus Aegyptiacus, Ceratosaurus Nasicornis, Tyrannosaurs Rex, Tarbosaurus Bataar, Albertosaurus Sarcophagus, Alioramus Remotus, Siamotyrannus Isanensis, Acrocanthosaurus Atokensis, Neovenator Salerii, Afrovenator Abakensis Giganotosaurus Carolinii, Carnotaurus Sastrei, Tarascosaurus Sallovicus, Abelisaurus Comuahensis, Majungatholus Crenatissimus (also known as Majungasaurus), Allosaurus Fragilis, Saurophaganax Maximus (probably a larger synonim of the former but whatever), Carcharodontosaurus Saharicus, Dilophosaurus Wetherilli, Utahraptor Ostrommaysi, Deinonychus Antirrhopus, Velociraptor Mongoliensis, Troodon Formosus, Gojirasaurus Quayi, Rajasaurus Narmandensis, Aucasaurus Garridoi, Gasosaurus Constructus, Stegosaurus Armatus, Pachycephalosaurus Wyomingensis, Stygimoloch Spinifer, Dracorex Hogwartsia (latter two may be a synonim of the first thoug), Styracosaurus Albertensis, Triceratops Horridus, Brachiosaurus Altithorax, Stegosaurus Armatus, Therizinosaurus Cheloniformis, Gastonia Burgei, Psittacosaurus Mongoliensis and others...

you sad, sad, sad little man  ;) haha
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: MadassAlex on May 16, 2010, 02:54:34 PM
QuoteAfrovenator Abakensis Giganotosaurus Carolinii

I am changing my name to this.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Omegamorph on May 16, 2010, 04:03:15 PM
Quote from: Keg on May 16, 2010, 02:51:26 PM
you sad, sad, sad little man  ;) haha
Always loved Dinosaurs and Reptiles! ;D

Quote from: MadassAlex on May 16, 2010, 02:54:34 PM
QuoteAfrovenator Abakensis Giganotosaurus Carolinii

I am changing my name to this.
Ya ;) Afrovenator is one cool guy:
(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww005.upp.so-net.ne.jp%2FJurassicGallery%2FAfrovenator.jpg&hash=8c45b2d9efeff60bc00a8bbc42e6fc267814ee3f)
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Master Chief on May 16, 2010, 04:13:39 PM
Triceratops for me.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Nightmare Asylum on May 16, 2010, 04:32:32 PM
Protoceratops, Triceratops, Brontosaurus (I still like this name better), Velociraptor, T-Rex, Spinosaurus, and even more that I didn't write.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Puks on May 16, 2010, 07:27:17 PM
Quote from: Noir-Gojira on May 16, 2010, 12:52:54 AM
Quote from: Puks on May 15, 2010, 11:22:10 PM
I don't need to look for info. I know it all. Srsly.
People who say that need it most of all.

You.. you dare question mah authoritah?!
Spoiler
(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.lolcat.net%2Fd%2F967-3%2Fauthoritah.gif&hash=ab0cebb738816abe67a4696233f2961ccf9f4e17)
[close]

@ OmegaZilla: A minor technical issue - species names are not written with a capital letter.

As for my fav, Dromaeosauridae, especially the smaller, feathered ones, like Microraptor and Rahonavis.



Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: TheMonolith on May 17, 2010, 02:47:58 AM
Deinonychus.
How can you not love this one? So intimidating that they missidentified it is Jurassic Park just because the cast and crew could not utter its name without requiring medical attention.

I also have a soft spot for Oviraptor, a predator native to Mongolia that is often found near nests, which turned out to be its own nests.

My favorite superpredator is Carcharadontosaurus. To be named after the great white is something no Dino should take lightly.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Richard.H on May 17, 2010, 02:53:31 AM
Albertosaurus. Like T-Rex only a bit smaller and a lot faster. Plus they moved in packs . Some as much as 30 -50!

(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fthedinosaurboy.files.wordpress.com%2F2010%2F02%2Fal2.jpg&hash=13e54723dcde6a8dcc50727e28120c9ae22b739e)
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Noir-Gojira on May 17, 2010, 02:56:18 AM
Quote from: Puks on May 16, 2010, 07:27:17 PM
A minor technical issue - species names are not written with a capital letter.

As for my fav, Dromaeosauridae, especially the smaller, feathered ones, like Microraptor and Rahonavis.

A minor technical issue- genera and species-specific names are to be italicized, lol
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Yautjaboy on May 17, 2010, 03:07:55 AM
As a Kid I always liked the Velociraptor and T-Rex.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Puks on May 17, 2010, 03:26:08 AM
Quote from: Noir-Gojira on May 17, 2010, 02:56:18 AM
Quote from: Puks on May 16, 2010, 07:27:17 PM
A minor technical issue - species names are not written with a capital letter.

As for my fav, Dromaeosauridae, especially the smaller, feathered ones, like Microraptor and Rahonavis.

A minor technical issue- genera and species-specific names are to be italicized, lol

That, too. But it's time-consuming and rarely used outside the science community, so I didn't mind and didn't use it myself.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Alien³ on May 17, 2010, 06:36:27 PM
The Tyrannosaurus Rex.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Skinner on May 17, 2010, 08:31:09 PM
-Spinosaurus
-Dilophosaurus
-Utahraptor
-Triceratops
-Parasaurolophus
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: chupacabras acheronsis on May 17, 2010, 11:59:13 PM
i love all Dromeodasaurids(raptors) and some T-rexes. never liked any herbivore.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: TJ Doc on May 18, 2010, 12:05:39 AM
Littlefoot.  :'(
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: SM on May 18, 2010, 12:43:34 AM
Iguanadon
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: TheMonolith on May 18, 2010, 12:47:51 AM
Quote from: TJ Doc on May 18, 2010, 12:05:39 AM
Littlefoot.  :'(

ME TOO!  :'(
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Shobidoo on May 19, 2010, 02:15:34 AM
denionicyus will rape ur face for eternity!!!!
Quote from: TJ Doc on May 18, 2010, 12:05:39 AM
Littlefoot.  :'(
Spike is 10x better then littlefoot
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: PredalienXenomorph on May 19, 2010, 04:48:55 AM
Herrerasaurus (spelling may be off) is my fav. Also the T-Rex and Cacaradontosaurus (More than likely wrong spelling) were also great big carnivores that I liked. (Herrerasaurus was smaller)
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Xhan on May 20, 2010, 08:08:54 AM
Quote from: Puks on May 15, 2010, 11:16:48 PM
It's a junior synonym of Troodon, thus not used anymore and irrelevant.

Yes, I am a dino nerd.

Umm no.

It's a forebearer and located in a more southernly area.

What's mounted in the state museum is not a Troodon.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Aeus on May 20, 2010, 12:20:31 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JxNhLFJz6iM

That is one sinister f**king dinosaur.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Omegamorph on May 20, 2010, 12:27:06 PM
Sinister and highly speculative may I add. :D
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Shasvre on May 20, 2010, 12:28:56 PM
I like the Stegosaurus and the Deinonychus. Not a big fan of the whole bird look of the later though, I liked them better when they looked like the raptors from Jurassic Park.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: AvatarIII on May 20, 2010, 01:03:10 PM
(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fstreethawker.files.wordpress.com%2F2009%2F06%2Fearl_01.jpg&hash=58c04cc6c0d424b0b3b8f067de7536ead2e404cf)
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Shasvre on May 20, 2010, 01:16:03 PM
That looks familiar, where's that from?

Edit: Nevermind, found it. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dinosaurs_(TV_series)
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: AvatarIII on May 20, 2010, 01:28:36 PM
Quote from: Shasvre on May 20, 2010, 01:16:03 PM
That looks familiar, where's that from?

Edit: Nevermind, found it. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dinosaurs_(TV_series)

bingo!
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Tangakkai on May 20, 2010, 01:31:14 PM
Mine is the one and only T-Rex and Spino Owner ever:

Carcharadontosaurus

(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Ffarm4.static.flickr.com%2F3179%2F3043311363_b18f1a4ab4.jpg&hash=78652c62e94f31d0590f3c3598550040922d7c6e)
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Lost Predator on May 20, 2010, 02:10:43 PM
Tyrannosaurs Rex
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: King Rathalos on May 21, 2010, 09:26:50 PM
T-rex (especially sharptooth, scared me shitless as a kid)

Spinosaurus (i hate how they made him all powerful and shit in JP 3 but he was really cool anyways)

Dilophosaurus (especially the spitters from JP)

Charcaradontosaurus

Albertasaurus

Baryonyx (forgot how to spell its name)

Allosaurus

Liopleurodon (i know but he was so awesome in walking with dinosaurs!)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=08J0xz9PfTk nuff said....

Any Raptor (c'mon raptors make everything cooler)  8)

(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fnobodyputsbabyinahorner.files.wordpress.com%2F2010%2F01%2Ftwilight-velociraptor.jpg&hash=375063a908e1d5892e3e278946bc34c7116da264)
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: TheMonolith on May 21, 2010, 09:35:48 PM
YOUR SPARKLY SKIN WON'T SAVE YOU NOW!  ;D ;D
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Omegamorph on May 23, 2010, 03:50:46 PM
"So you know Edward... try to show a little respect."
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on May 23, 2010, 04:09:02 PM
Tyrannosaurus Rex, has been since I saw TLBT when I was 3.

But I hold a general interest in them all for different reasons. I find hadrosaurs exciting because it's interesting to learn about how they socialized in herds and small predatory dinosaurs because they evolved into birds.

At the risk of self-promotion, I started a similar thread a while back: http://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/index.php?topic=19454.msg369148#msg369148
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Deathbearer on May 23, 2010, 04:09:54 PM
Raptors

T-Rex

Pterodactyl
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on May 23, 2010, 04:12:22 PM
Pterodactyl is not a dinosaur ;)
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: TheMonolith on May 23, 2010, 04:48:41 PM
Quote from: OmegaZilla on May 23, 2010, 03:50:46 PM
"So you know Edward... try to show a little respect."

My God. It's full of own.
(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi625.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Ftt338%2Fnostalgiaaddict88%2F2001StarGate.jpg&hash=d170b732ed5075d35eae82867e7285b415c358cf)
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Thanatos on May 23, 2010, 05:51:09 PM
spinosaurus ftw
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Tangakkai on May 23, 2010, 06:54:48 PM
Spino is cool, loved him Jurassic Park.

Although he made the T-Rex obsolete :-\
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Basher917 on May 23, 2010, 07:30:36 PM
allosaurus FTW
(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi49.tinypic.com%2F351e4hf.png&hash=85d885dc58f82dbbe2fdf24d71bad895d15b2fad)
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on May 23, 2010, 08:14:48 PM
Epanterias amplexus? Never heard of it. Is it the largest Allosaurus specimen on record?
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Puks on May 23, 2010, 08:46:32 PM
Yep. But it's uncertain whether it's a new species or not.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Aeus on May 24, 2010, 12:29:58 AM
(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fthebsreport.files.wordpress.com%2F2009%2F03%2Fbarney-tv-06.jpg&hash=bd103bb3f2eb77638bcbe1254e4138dde0a540ae)
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: SM on May 24, 2010, 12:44:03 AM
Quote from: Basher917 on May 23, 2010, 07:30:36 PM
allosaurus FTW
(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi49.tinypic.com%2F351e4hf.png&hash=85d885dc58f82dbbe2fdf24d71bad895d15b2fad)


GOOD GOD, MAN!!!  DON'T STAND THERE WAVING!!!  FLEE FOR YOUR LIFE!!!!
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Skinner on May 24, 2010, 12:48:35 AM
Quote from: Basher917 on May 23, 2010, 07:30:36 PM
allosaurus FTW
(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi49.tinypic.com%2F351e4hf.png&hash=85d885dc58f82dbbe2fdf24d71bad895d15b2fad)
I thought "Big Al" was bigger than that.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on May 24, 2010, 05:03:59 AM
Big Al wasn't fully grown. He died as a sub-adult.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Omegamorph on May 24, 2010, 11:51:53 AM
Quote from: SM on May 24, 2010, 12:44:03 AM
GOOD GOD, MAN!!!  DON'T STAND THERE WAVING!!!  FLEE FOR YOUR LIFE!!!!
:D

Also Saurophaganax FTW!!
(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.statesymbolsusa.org%2FIMAGES%2FOklahoma%2FfossilSmaximusWeb.jpg&hash=e39c5f407a5d23a6e83870f52926b587fe0f2137)

Check out Todd Marshall's Gallery (http://www.marshalls-art.com/pages/ppaleo/paleo25.htm), some kickass drawings in there! :)
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Tangakkai on May 24, 2010, 12:10:36 PM
Thanks for the gallery Omegazilla, there's some beautiful stuff there  :o
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on May 24, 2010, 01:30:33 PM
His work is pretty good, but it's not my favourite. Some of his illustrations look a bit OTT for me. Especially his Spinosaurus.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Omegamorph on May 24, 2010, 01:36:06 PM
OTT?
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: AvatarIII on May 24, 2010, 02:16:49 PM
Quote from: OmegaZilla on May 24, 2010, 01:36:06 PM
OTT?

over the top.... excessive.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Omegamorph on May 24, 2010, 02:22:46 PM
Thanks. :)
BTW How are Marshall's drawings over the top?
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Raptor on May 24, 2010, 03:31:38 PM
<---------   

;D
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on May 24, 2010, 05:13:20 PM
Quote from: OmegaZilla on May 24, 2010, 02:22:46 PM
Thanks. :)
BTW How are Marshall's drawings over the top?

Too fanciful for me. Way too colourful for the most part.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Omegamorph on May 24, 2010, 06:10:36 PM
Well, Dinosaurs are mostly related to Reptiles and Birds, and those are notable for their variety on ornaments and color schemes...
Marshall manages to get on every drawing of his a pulsing and living creature, his colors are vivid and somewhat alive. Plus his dinosaurs are majestic. That's why I love his work!
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on May 24, 2010, 06:56:37 PM
I'm not big on most modern paleo-artists because they really go so far out with the way they draw their dinosaurs. I prefer more traditional stuff done by artists like James Gurney or John Sibbick. The best paleo-artists of all time though are the old schools folks like Charles R. Knight, the Zallinger brothers, or even Zdeněk Burian.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: maledoro on May 24, 2010, 07:06:59 PM
The Was Bros. were my favorite "dinosaur artists".

"Open the door, get on the floor!
Everybody walk the dinosaur!"
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on May 24, 2010, 07:48:40 PM
The who?
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Master Chief on May 24, 2010, 07:53:59 PM
"The Who" are different artists. "The Was Bros" had everyone walk the Dino.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Omegamorph on May 24, 2010, 07:54:40 PM
^
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gyef-BItce8
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: MrSpaceJockey on May 25, 2010, 02:18:06 AM
I've always been fond of Masiakasaurus. (https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.nationalgeographic.com.tr%2Fngm%2F0712%2Fimages%2Fmercek%2Fmercek.1.6.jpg&hash=eab5fdb15d271a0c5103898d0b8c380ec80f7caa)
Crylophosaurus, Dilophosaurus, and basically all dromaeosaurs are also in my list.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: PredalienXenomorph on May 25, 2010, 02:19:58 AM
Quote from: MrSpaceJockey on May 25, 2010, 02:18:06 AM
I've always been fond of Masiakasaurus. (https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.nationalgeographic.com.tr%2Fngm%2F0712%2Fimages%2Fmercek%2Fmercek.1.6.jpg&hash=eab5fdb15d271a0c5103898d0b8c380ec80f7caa)
Crylophosaurus, Dilophosaurus, and basically all dromaeosaurs are also in my list.
Nice teeth there.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: SM on May 25, 2010, 02:20:21 AM
Quote from: Master Chief on May 24, 2010, 07:53:59 PM
"The Who" are different artists. "The Was Bros" had everyone walk the Dino.

Though The Who could be classified as dinosaurs.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: TITANOSAUR on May 25, 2010, 03:20:06 AM
anybody familar with Gojirasaurus? its a real dinosaur! some dude named it after Godzilla. if I can find a picture, I'll show ya'll.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Huol on May 25, 2010, 04:32:33 AM
(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww005.upp.so-net.ne.jp%2FJurassicGallery%2FGojirasaurus.jpg&hash=4b7285ef883a6acf47ccec60b2e331124c7d8af5) ?

doesnt exactly scream godzilla to me...
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: SM on May 25, 2010, 04:36:21 AM
Godzookysaurus more like...

(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.internationalhero.co.uk%2Fg%2Fgodzooky.jpg&hash=12821bcc1465ca1fb91a4eb0256824be261744bc)
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on May 25, 2010, 04:39:31 AM
Speaking of dinosaurs, I'm attending a lecture tomorrow led by Jack Horner about his theory on combining dinosaur embryo and the DNA within with chicken DNA and the possibility of hatching a dinosaur egg. Should be good!
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: SM on May 25, 2010, 04:41:27 AM
Thought you hated Jack Horner?
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on May 25, 2010, 04:47:14 AM
I disagree with his theories on T.Rex's behaviour, and I think he's a dick in general, but this lecture sounds too good to pass up on.

Take a look. (http://www.rom.on.ca/programs/lectures/index.php?cat_id=1&ref=showinfo&prev_ref=showlisting&program_id=5736)
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: SM on May 25, 2010, 05:06:40 AM
$28 for a dick...


Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on May 25, 2010, 05:21:32 AM
It is an interesting topic, nonetheless. Besides, I don't want to limit myself simply because I disagree with him most of the time. Doesn't mean I can appreciate some of his ideas. And I'm paying $25.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: SM on May 25, 2010, 05:23:59 AM
Disagreeing with him on theory is one thing - but I can't imagine ever spending any money on listening to someone who I think is a dick.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on May 25, 2010, 05:29:04 AM
Here's the thing: this sort of thing doesn't come by very often, and the topic interests me enough that I'm willing to listen.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: SM on May 25, 2010, 05:30:55 AM
I have vague wistful memories of disposable income.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on May 25, 2010, 05:39:04 AM
Meaning you wouldn't have spent the money anyway?
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: SM on May 25, 2010, 05:45:23 AM
No, meaning that once upon a time I had money to piss away on such things.

Although if say Richard Dawkins was coming to town I wouldn't pay $25 to go see him even if I could afford it.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Noir-Gojira on May 25, 2010, 06:22:03 AM
Quote from: OmegaZilla on May 20, 2010, 12:27:06 PM
Sinister and highly speculative may I add. :D

Says the guy with GINO for an avatar XD
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Omegamorph on May 25, 2010, 02:10:40 PM
Quote from: Noir-Gojira on May 25, 2010, 06:22:03 AM
Says the guy with GINO for an avatar XD
Can't find any links with what I said.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on May 25, 2010, 04:52:50 PM
Quote from: SM on May 25, 2010, 05:45:23 AM
No, meaning that once upon a time I had money to piss away on such things.

Although if say Richard Dawkins was coming to town I wouldn't pay $25 to go see him even if I could afford it.

I don't consider this "pissing away money", but to each their own I guess.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: SM on May 25, 2010, 10:59:23 PM
Quite.  Just don't see any logic.  Paying money to listen to a guy you don't like.  Like paying money to go to a Nickelback concert.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: maledoro on May 25, 2010, 11:02:23 PM
Quote from: SM on May 25, 2010, 10:59:23 PM
Like paying money to go to a Nickelback concert.
They're not worth the nickel you won't get back.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: ShadowPred on May 25, 2010, 11:03:09 PM
Why would you go pay for a Nickelback concert anyway?
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: SM on May 25, 2010, 11:05:44 PM
QuoteThey're not worth the nickel you won't get back.

First I...
(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fchzhappychairishappy.files.wordpress.com%2F2010%2F05%2F129189464212412293.jpg&hash=1c43cdeec779d16c0cdf7007e50bd4ea543d2e3a)

Then I
(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fchzhappychairishappy.files.wordpress.com%2F2010%2F05%2F129189464208667613.jpg&hash=ceadcd5e76e9be39a25852b74875b4c1adec2cb2)
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: maledoro on May 25, 2010, 11:08:04 PM
The pizza box looks like a happy doggy! Awww!
:)
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Puks on May 25, 2010, 11:44:17 PM
SM's post just killed me.  :D
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: TITANOSAUR on May 25, 2010, 11:54:31 PM
back on topic,

I personaly think T-Rex was both a predator and a scavanger (it would only scavange if it realy needs too). I don't get why horner is saying it was only a scavanger. something about its small arms and the femur being longer then the tibia, or somthing like that. but my argument is that the Metatarsals would compensate for the short tibia. (if you can get used to standing on your toes then your complete foot, you'll notice you can go a little faster then usual) I mean, until we can either clone a purely genetic copy of a Tyrannosaurus or we build a time machine to find out for ourselfs when we get chased by it, I'm gonna stick by with it being Both a hunter, and a scavanger.

btw, isn't a chicken the closest reletive to a T-Rex? or was that proven wrong?
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Puks on May 26, 2010, 12:38:59 AM
They are rather distant relatives, T-Rex wasn't even a maniraptoran. Not to mention the 65 million year gap.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Noir-Gojira on May 26, 2010, 01:48:48 AM
The chicken is considered the closest living relative by sheer virtue of there being no other candidates. 
Quote from: OmegaZilla on May 25, 2010, 02:10:40 PM
Quote from: Noir-Gojira on May 25, 2010, 06:22:03 AM
Says the guy with GINO for an avatar XD
Can't find any links with what I said.
You're looking too hard.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Basher917 on May 26, 2010, 01:51:08 AM
Quote from: Noir-Gojira on May 26, 2010, 01:48:48 AM
The chicken is considered the closest living relative by sheer virtue of there being no other candidates. 
Quote

yes, yes, true, very true, too true
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on May 26, 2010, 01:52:57 AM
Quote from: Noir-Gojira on May 26, 2010, 01:48:48 AM
The chicken is considered the closest living relative by sheer virtue of there being no other candidates. 

That's what Horner touched on in his lecture. Discussion here (http://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/index.php?topic=19454.msg369148#msg369148).
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Huol on May 26, 2010, 01:56:00 AM
Jack Horner killed my childhood.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: SM on May 26, 2010, 02:02:24 AM
(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.telegraph.co.uk%2Ftelegraph%2Fmultimedia%2Farchive%2F01393%2Fboogienights_1393891c.jpg&hash=118a89dc34797da895ff260ca3b133c19c40b010)
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: TheMonolith on May 26, 2010, 02:04:45 AM
Quote from: SM on May 26, 2010, 02:02:24 AM
(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.telegraph.co.uk%2Ftelegraph%2Fmultimedia%2Farchive%2F01393%2Fboogienights_1393891c.jpg&hash=118a89dc34797da895ff260ca3b133c19c40b010)
:o
(Heavenly chorus)
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on May 26, 2010, 02:06:12 AM
Horner's lecture at the museum tonight was extremely fascinating. He was talking about first, actually eliminating at least 1/3 of known dinosaurs on record by looking more closely at the bones themselves. Instead of naming new dinosaurs every time scientists discover something new, they should be looking more closely at what species they really have. He showed us examples of Edmontosaurus and Anatotitan, Pachycephalosaurus, Dracorex, and Stygimoloch, Triceratops and Torosaurus, and T.Rex and Nanotyrannus. On examining the bones via CAT scans, the fossils of the supposed smaller dinosaur is in fact just a younger version of the fully grown dinosaur (Nanot is just a young T.Rex, Edmontosaurus a young Anatotitan, etc...) He was literally cancelling out these other dinosaurs, it was nuts.

And the second half of the lecture was about hatching a chickenosaurus, if you will, from a chicken egg. By stopping the genes at the stages of chicken's embryonic development which allow for the growth of wings and instead letting them grow into arms, and stopping the gene which allows for tail reabsorption, let the tail grow much longer. In essence, you'd hatch out a chicken that looks more like an actual dromaeosaurid. Oh, and it would have teeth as well because chickens have teeth.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on May 26, 2010, 02:07:21 AM
Quote from: Huol on May 26, 2010, 01:56:00 AM
Jack Horner killed my childhood.

He's a really nice guy actually. Yes, my opinion of him has changed. Very well-spoken, obviously well-knowledged, and a big guy too at that. He's at least 6'3".
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: SM on May 26, 2010, 02:07:31 AM
Is he still a "dick"?
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on May 26, 2010, 02:08:41 AM
Nah. I met him personally and he's a real stand up guy. Very nice, easy to speak to, and well-versed in his discipline. No word on JP 4 though lol; I asked him if he'd be working on it and he said he's busy with Terranova.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Huol on May 26, 2010, 02:20:23 AM
Quote from: DoomRulz on May 26, 2010, 02:07:21 AM
Quote from: Huol on May 26, 2010, 01:56:00 AM
Jack Horner killed my childhood.

He's a really nice guy actually. Yes, my opinion of him has changed. Very well-spoken, obviously well-knowledged, and a big guy too at that. He's at least 6'3".

But he killed my childhood. >:l
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on May 26, 2010, 02:30:19 AM
I'm sure you mentioned before why, but refresh my memory.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: SM on May 26, 2010, 02:30:48 AM
Careful.  He's Doom's best bud now.  ;D
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on May 26, 2010, 02:31:10 AM
Wise guy.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Huol on May 26, 2010, 02:32:00 AM
He turned the unstoppable killing machine of my dreams into a wet scavenger.

f**k science.

The moment they realised the dinosaurs might have feathers they shoulda just said "ok lets just back the f**k away from this"

Now we really did have 6ft turkeys wandering around...
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: ShadowPred on May 26, 2010, 02:34:40 AM
I just ignore all that shit. I go watch Jurassic Park and leave it at that.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on May 26, 2010, 02:35:53 AM
Quote from: Huol on May 26, 2010, 02:32:00 AM
He turned the unstoppable killing machine of my dreams into a wet scavenger.

f**k science.

The moment they realised the dinosaurs might have feathers they shoulda just said "ok lets just back the f**k away from this"

Now we really did have 6ft turkeys wandering around...

Science has proven T.Rex was a predator, so don't worry. And large carnivorous dinosaurs aren't depicted with feathers.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: SM on May 26, 2010, 02:36:42 AM
Quote from: DoomRulz on May 26, 2010, 02:31:10 AM
Wise guy.

:D

I think it's commendable you actually shelled out to go listen to the dude and were willing to have your mind changed.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on May 26, 2010, 02:38:04 AM
Well like I said, it was the topic that drew me in. If this was Michael Moore, I wouldn't have given it second thought because I don't care much for politics.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: TITANOSAUR on May 26, 2010, 02:46:13 AM
Anybody here like to see Giganotosaurus fight T-Rex and Spinosaurus? it'll be kick Ass! and why haven't Giganotosaurus appear in any JP films? I know it was discovered during the mid-late 1990s, but you'd think it'll appear in some movies or something.

"You DO get to play and fight one in Carnivores Cityscape."
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on May 26, 2010, 02:48:42 AM
Giga, to the audience, will look like a gigantic T.Rex. The Spinosaurus was not only bigger, but has a very unique, what with the sail.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: TITANOSAUR on May 26, 2010, 02:54:00 AM
yeah its bigger, but the fight would never have realy happened in real life. T-Rex and Spino (as well as Gigs) lived on diffrent continants as well they lived millions of years apart.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Noir-Gojira on May 26, 2010, 09:03:33 AM
Quote from: Noir-Gojira on May 16, 2010, 12:52:54 AM
*now initiating the countdown until this degenerates into a "T. rex vs. Giga vs Spino" argument*

G'night everybody!
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Noir-Gojira on May 26, 2010, 09:34:01 AM
Quote from: DoomRulz on May 26, 2010, 02:06:12 AM
Horner's lecture at the museum tonight was extremely fascinating.
Spoiler
He was talking about first, actually eliminating at least 1/3 of known dinosaurs on record by looking more closely at the bones themselves. Instead of naming new dinosaurs every time scientists discover something new, they should be looking more closely at what species they really have. He showed us examples of Edmontosaurus and Anatotitan, Pachycephalosaurus, Dracorex, and Stygimoloch, Triceratops and Torosaurus, and T.Rex and Nanotyrannus. On examining the bones via CAT scans, the fossils of the supposed smaller dinosaur is in fact just a younger version of the fully grown dinosaur (Nanot is just a young T.Rex, Edmontosaurus a young Anatotitan, etc...) He was literally cancelling out these other dinosaurs, it was nuts.

And the second half of the lecture was about hatching a chickenosaurus, if you will, from a chicken egg. By stopping the genes at the stages of chicken's embryonic development which allow for the growth of wings and instead letting them grow into arms, and stopping the gene which allows for tail reabsorption, let the tail grow much longer. In essence, you'd hatch out a chicken that looks more like an actual dromaeosaurid. Oh, and it would have teeth as well because chickens have teeth.
[close]

It sounds like a good time just to hear him in person, but I really wish he had some newer things to share.

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/10/091031002314.htm

The reduction of dinosaur species and genera has been going on for some months now.  A lot of us actually came to the same conclusion about chickenosaurus before reading his "How to Build a Dinosaur" a while back.  Goes to show how a degree in paleontology can affect your credibility as a mad scientist.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Puks on May 26, 2010, 09:41:13 AM
QuoteHe was talking about first, actually eliminating at least 1/3 of known dinosaurs on record by looking more closely at the bones themselves. Instead of naming new dinosaurs every time scientists discover something new, they should be looking more closely at what species they really have.

Nothing new, really. Nevertheless, would love to hear it from a famous paleontologist.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on May 26, 2010, 09:19:57 PM
First I'd hear about it, so to me it was pretty exciting.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Basher917 on May 26, 2010, 10:11:05 PM
you've guys already heard that alot of scientists are suggeting that the T-Rex is a scavenger right?
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Noir-Gojira on May 27, 2010, 01:38:47 AM
To the point where anyone who brings it up now sounds borderline retarded.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Puks on May 27, 2010, 01:42:10 AM
 :D
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: chupacabras acheronsis on May 27, 2010, 01:44:18 AM
FLAWLESS. VICTORY.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: urban_predator83 on May 27, 2010, 01:46:02 AM
Why are predators (real predators aka carnovors) always protrayed as being evil in hollywood? Predators are an important part of the eco-system and food chain.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on May 27, 2010, 02:09:33 AM
Depends on the film. In The Land Before Time, the idea was to sympathise with Little Foot because his mother was dead and by having the herbivores speak, it's a sort of "p-correctness" because the speaking ability shows them as being noble. The carnivores however, are evil because they exist only to wreak havoc and f**k everyone's day up.

Quote from: Noir-Gojira on May 27, 2010, 01:38:47 AM
To the point where anyone who brings it up now sounds borderline retarded.

Pretty much. It's been proven T.Rex was primarily a hunter. Someone asked Horner that very question, and he said he believes the T.Rex was an opportunistic eater, which makes sense. His view is that based on the censuses he's taken of all Cretaceous dinosaurs he's discovered, T.Rex is 2nd most common, in between Trike at 1 and Anatotitan at 3rd. In Africa, hyenas which are primarily scavengers, are the seocnd most common animal, while the actual predators like lions aren't as common. His feeling is, with T.Rex fossils being that common in the rock formations, he feels they were more scavenging creatures.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Puks on May 27, 2010, 02:14:35 AM
All large terrestrial predators are both hunters and scavengers, the same can be applied to predatory dinos.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on May 27, 2010, 02:26:18 AM
T.Rex would already win. It's going to eventually come down to who has the strongest jaw power, combined with the keenest senses.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on May 27, 2010, 02:29:19 AM
Absolutely it can. Any top predator must be ready to both, and do them well, in order to survive. Lions and hyenas both actively hunt and scavenge.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Puks on May 27, 2010, 02:31:33 AM
Precisely.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Noir-Gojira on May 30, 2010, 09:18:39 PM
What a weekend it's been . . . two brand new horn-heads.
Medusaceratops lokii (http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2010/05/100528113914.htm)
and

Coahuilaceratops magnacuerna (http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2010/05/100528124513.htm)
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Puks on May 30, 2010, 09:21:02 PM
Fascinating, thanks for the heads-up!

Also nice to see Greek and Norse mythology in dinosaur nomenclature.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Noir-Gojira on May 30, 2010, 09:36:23 PM
Given the gratuitous deviant sex in both mythologies, you'd expect a dinosaur like that to pop out.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on May 30, 2010, 10:10:28 PM
Medusaceratops...what a name. And what a skull, there's no way they'll be able to mount that thing.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: maledoro on May 30, 2010, 11:49:21 PM
Quote from: DoomRulz on May 30, 2010, 10:10:28 PM
Medusaceratops...what a name. And what a skull, there's no way they'll be able to mount that thing.
Not even Glen Quagmire would try...
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on May 31, 2010, 02:16:31 AM
Oh I don't know. Maybe if he was hammered enough.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Omegamorph on May 31, 2010, 12:12:47 PM
T.rex Jaws =/= Foolproof weapons.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: chupacabras acheronsis on May 31, 2010, 01:52:24 PM
T. Rex Jaws = FoolProof weapons
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Omegamorph on May 31, 2010, 03:26:09 PM
Quote from: chupacabras acheronsis on May 31, 2010, 01:52:24 PM
T. Rex Jaws = FoolProof weapons
*Slashes "=" with a Katana*

Quote from: chupacabras acheronsis on May 31, 2010, 01:52:24 PM
T. Rex Jaws =/= FoolProof weapons

That better.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on May 31, 2010, 04:21:44 PM
Quote from: OmegaZilla on May 31, 2010, 12:12:47 PM
T.rex Jaws =/= Foolproof weapons.

0_0 jaws were how they finished off their prey. What are you talking about?
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: chupacabras acheronsis on May 31, 2010, 04:22:06 PM
Quote from: OmegaZilla on May 31, 2010, 03:26:09 PM

Katana

(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi49.tinypic.com%2Fhwmt77.gif&hash=c6f43f5d3089b55e65a1a7725ce0f2e2d01505db)


Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Noir-Gojira on May 31, 2010, 08:17:22 PM
Quote from: OmegaZilla on May 31, 2010, 12:12:47 PM
T.rex Jaws =/= Foolproof weapons.
Because no weapon is foolproof, but jaws are the most successful weapon in the fossil record
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Huol on May 31, 2010, 10:37:54 PM
Quote from: OmegaZilla on May 31, 2010, 03:26:09 PM
Katana

(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi48.tinypic.com%2F2wh2jnl.gif&hash=ec9d23564c3da8f913fc66c436b2b417827fd078)
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: TJ Doc on May 31, 2010, 10:54:35 PM
I dunt getz it.  ???
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: chupacabras acheronsis on Jun 01, 2010, 01:33:37 AM
Katanas are overrated, useless weapons, which have no use in real combat, were used mostly to kill unarmed peasants for fun by asshole samurais, and are terrible swords in general.

if you are well educated in weapons, you'll hate the living shit out of it.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on Jun 01, 2010, 04:05:37 AM
Before anyone responds: stay on topic.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: LarJaThwei on Jun 01, 2010, 04:27:40 AM
Godzillasaurus of course!

Dinosaurs that actually existed? T-Rex, no doubt. :D
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Noir-Gojira on Jun 01, 2010, 05:51:01 AM
Technically, Gojirasaurus quayi may have existed, depending on your school of thought.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Omegamorph on Jun 01, 2010, 07:29:05 PM
Quote from: DoomRulz on May 31, 2010, 04:21:44 PM
Quote from: OmegaZilla on May 31, 2010, 12:12:47 PM
T.rex Jaws =/= Foolproof weapons.

0_0 jaws were how they finished off their prey. What are you talking about?
But they didn't do it successfully 100% of the times or am I missing something? ;)

Quote from: chupacabras acheronsis on Jun 01, 2010, 01:33:37 AM
Katanas are overrated, useless weapons, which have no use in real combat, were used mostly to kill unarmed peasants for fun by asshole samurais, and are terrible swords in general.

if you are well educated in weapons, you'll hate the living shit out of it.
Yet still they cut a lot.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on Jun 01, 2010, 08:05:10 PM
Quote from: OmegaZilla on Jun 01, 2010, 07:29:05 PM
Quote from: DoomRulz on May 31, 2010, 04:21:44 PM
Quote from: OmegaZilla on May 31, 2010, 12:12:47 PM
T.rex Jaws =/= Foolproof weapons.

0_0 jaws were how they finished off their prey. What are you talking about?
But they didn't do it successfully 100% of the times or am I missing something? ;)

What?
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: EEV2650 on Jun 01, 2010, 08:07:15 PM
utah raptor and t rex
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Omegamorph on Jun 01, 2010, 08:08:44 PM
Quote from: DoomRulz on Jun 01, 2010, 08:05:10 PM
What?
T.Rex couldn't kill every thing it comes in contact with, you know, those jaws can fail. Not foolproof by any means. Don't get me wrong, I love Mr. T but it is truth.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Tangakkai on Jun 01, 2010, 08:22:00 PM
QuoteT.Rex couldn't kill every thing it comes in contact with

T-Rex Fail:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sr4n7nnu7q8
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: xxxBIOHAZARDxxx on Jun 01, 2010, 08:25:12 PM
Tyrannosaurus Rex, hands down. No other theropod was as powerful.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Omegamorph on Jun 01, 2010, 08:26:03 PM
Quote from: Tangakkai on Jun 01, 2010, 08:22:00 PM
QuoteT.Rex couldn't kill every thing it comes in contact with

T-Rex Fail:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sr4n7nnu7q8
That proves my point! ;) :)
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Puks on Jun 01, 2010, 08:28:47 PM
No surprise, Ankylosaurus was a ten-meters-long living tank.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: xxxBIOHAZARDxxx on Jun 01, 2010, 08:33:45 PM
TYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYRRRRRRRRRAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAANNNNNNNNNNNNNNNOOOOOOOOOOSSSSSSSSSSSAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAUUUUUUUUUUUURRRRRRRRRRUUUUUUUUUUSSSSSSSSSSS RRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRREEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on Jun 02, 2010, 01:01:37 AM
Quote from: Tangakkai on Jun 01, 2010, 08:22:00 PM
QuoteT.Rex couldn't kill every thing it comes in contact with

T-Rex Fail:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sr4n7nnu7q8

That T.Rex made a fatal mistake. You don't attack something like by coming head-on. You ambush it, turn it over onto its back, and take a chunk of its stomach.

Not to mention in that video, she doesn't want to attack the Ankylosaur but drive it away.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Basher917 on Jun 02, 2010, 01:08:46 AM
Quote from: xxxBIOHAZARDxxx on Jun 01, 2010, 08:25:12 PM
Tyrannosaurus Rex, hands down. No other theropod was as powerful.

ever heard power in numbers? there is was a good chance a group of raptors could easily take one down
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: LarJaThwei on Jun 02, 2010, 01:20:02 AM
Quote from: Basher917 on Jun 02, 2010, 01:08:46 AM
Quote from: xxxBIOHAZARDxxx on Jun 01, 2010, 08:25:12 PM
Tyrannosaurus Rex, hands down. No other theropod was as powerful.

ever heard power in numbers? there is was a good chance a group of raptors could easily take one down

From what I've seen on the Discovery channel, don't Tyrannosauruses always travel with at least one other of it's kind?
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Basher917 on Jun 02, 2010, 01:22:32 AM
Quote from: LarJaThwei on Jun 02, 2010, 01:20:02 AM
Quote from: Basher917 on Jun 02, 2010, 01:08:46 AM
Quote from: xxxBIOHAZARDxxx on Jun 01, 2010, 08:25:12 PM
Tyrannosaurus Rex, hands down. No other theropod was as powerful.

ever heard power in numbers? there is was a good chance a group of raptors could easily take one down

From what I've seen on the Discovery channel, don't Tyrannosauruses always travel with at least one other of it's kind?

depends if it has mated yet, i think
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on Jun 02, 2010, 01:34:01 AM
Quote from: Basher917 on Jun 02, 2010, 01:08:46 AM
Quote from: xxxBIOHAZARDxxx on Jun 01, 2010, 08:25:12 PM
Tyrannosaurus Rex, hands down. No other theropod was as powerful.

ever heard power in numbers? there is was a good chance a group of raptors could easily take one down

I think a group of raptors would shit themselves and run in the opposite direction.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Basher917 on Jun 02, 2010, 01:38:08 AM
Quote from: DoomRulz on Jun 02, 2010, 01:34:01 AM
Quote from: Basher917 on Jun 02, 2010, 01:08:46 AM
Quote from: xxxBIOHAZARDxxx on Jun 01, 2010, 08:25:12 PM
Tyrannosaurus Rex, hands down. No other theropod was as powerful.

ever heard power in numbers? there is was a good chance a group of raptors could easily take one down

I think a group of raptors would shit themselves and run in the opposite direction.

well in a large enough group no matter how menacing the t-rex would look they would stilll at least try to take it down
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Basher917 on Jun 02, 2010, 01:44:55 AM
Quote from: John Conner84 on May 27, 2010, 01:46:02 AM
Why are predators (real predators aka carnovors) always protrayed as being evil in hollywood? Predators are an important part of the eco-system and food chain.

the movies usally are on the prey's point of view
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on Jun 02, 2010, 01:47:37 AM
No they wouldn't. Why would they attack a larger predator? The laws of nature dictate the stronger predator survives. If a T.Rex decides to chase away a pack of Dromaeosaurs from a kill, they will run for the hills because they're no match for the strength and power of a T.Rex.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Crabface on Jun 02, 2010, 04:01:35 AM
T-Rex
Triceratops
Deinonychus (AKA: The Velociraptor from Jurassic park; although a Velociraptor would be so much shorter.)
Ankylosaurus (just incredible)
Brachiosaurus. (I dislike how the other long necks steal its spotlight.)
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Noir-Gojira on Jun 02, 2010, 04:09:07 AM
Yeah, about seventeen years ago.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Noir-Gojira on Jun 02, 2010, 04:22:42 AM
Quote from: Basher917 on Jun 02, 2010, 01:38:08 AM
Quote from: DoomRulz on Jun 02, 2010, 01:34:01 AM
Quote from: Basher917 on Jun 02, 2010, 01:08:46 AM
Quote from: xxxBIOHAZARDxxx on Jun 01, 2010, 08:25:12 PM
Tyrannosaurus Rex, hands down. No other theropod was as powerful.

ever heard power in numbers? there is was a good chance a group of raptors could easily take one down

I think a group of raptors would shit themselves and run in the opposite direction.

well in a large enough group no matter how menacing the t-rex would look they would stilll at least try to take it down
Except that Tyrannosaurs are also believed to have hunted in groups.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Huol on Jun 02, 2010, 05:49:55 AM
I really don't think the turkeys could take down something with that much raw power behind it.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on Jun 02, 2010, 07:05:46 AM
Crabface: watch that 2x posting, please.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Noir-Gojira on Jun 02, 2010, 07:32:09 AM
Someone merged the two dino topics, so it isn't his fault . . . although he is guilty of being out of touch with his dinosauria.  Flog him!
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Puks on Jun 02, 2010, 10:39:16 AM
Raptors attacking a T-Rex? Srsly, w00t?  :D

Not even a pack of Utahraptors would mess with one, let alone a pack of turkey-sized Velociraptors or Dromaeosaurs.

Quote from: Crabface on Jun 02, 2010, 03:58:03 AM
(Nut topic) I have a LIFE SIZE Dinosaur Book. (Yes the caps is how its written on the book) anyway did anyone hear about a dino found in Antarctica?

Use plural.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Omegamorph on Jun 02, 2010, 10:41:07 AM
About Raptors Vs. T.rex, the guys at ModdingGenesis made a patch for JPOG in which the Raptors can attack the Rex as in the famous JP finale :D
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Puks on Jun 02, 2010, 10:42:16 AM
Ah, JPOG.. I am sooo tempted to install it right now!  :)
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Hive Tyrant on Jun 02, 2010, 11:32:09 AM
I have a couple of 3-year-old JP:OG videos on my YouTube channel. Y'should be able to find them if you search for 'Jurassic Documentary'. Ah, the memories...
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on Jun 02, 2010, 02:04:03 PM
I could never get into that game for some reason. I want to hunt my dinosaurs, not breed them.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: TITANOSAUR on Jun 02, 2010, 04:06:53 PM
who here thinks they should update JP:OG and make it better, with better graphics, dialog and better game play?

I got the game installed, but I barely play it.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: chupacabras acheronsis on Jun 02, 2010, 04:09:50 PM
i played OG for a while too, really good game, but it got boring after a while. its just too limited and unfinished.

Quote from: TITANOSAUR on Jun 02, 2010, 04:06:53 PM
who here thinks they should update JP:OG and make it better, with better graphics, dialog and better game play?

I got the game installed, but I barely play it.

not gonna happen. the source tools were never released, and the studio dissapeared.

any of you played Tresspaser?
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Keg on Jun 02, 2010, 04:33:01 PM
My favourite dinosaur is a Tricekloplodicus Rex  :P
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Crabface on Jun 03, 2010, 12:16:30 AM
Quote from: DoomRulz on Jun 02, 2010, 07:05:46 AM
Crabface: watch that 2x posting, please.
Whoops that was weird the topic said Dino facts. Anyway fixed.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on Jun 03, 2010, 12:55:09 AM
The problem wasn't you going off-topic. It was the 2x posting, like I said.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Crabface on Jun 03, 2010, 05:12:46 AM
Quote from: DoomRulz on Jun 03, 2010, 12:55:09 AM
The problem wasn't you going off-topic. It was the 2x posting, like I said.
Yes but it meant to go somewhere else. Anyway fixed.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on Jun 03, 2010, 06:03:02 AM
So we're cool then!
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Omegamorph on Jun 03, 2010, 12:34:08 PM
Quote from: DoomRulz on Jun 02, 2010, 02:04:03 PM
I could never get into that game for some reason. I want to hunt my dinosaurs, not breed them.
Complete opposite for me lol. :P
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Puks on Jun 03, 2010, 12:47:30 PM
Agreed. There are tons of games in which you kill dinosaurs (innocent animals, btw), but only one JPOG.  :(
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Omegamorph on Jun 03, 2010, 12:49:14 PM
There are also the countless Zoo Tycoon 2 Mods.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on Jun 03, 2010, 03:18:02 PM
Quote from: Puks on Jun 03, 2010, 12:47:30 PM
Agreed. There are tons of games in which you kill dinosaurs (innocent animals, btw), but only one JPOG.  :(

Innocence don't mean much when it wants to bite your head off.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Omegamorph on Jun 03, 2010, 04:12:48 PM
See, in videogames like those, Dinosaurs are incredibly monsterized to be part of the plot and be challenging.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Hive Tyrant on Jun 03, 2010, 04:14:33 PM
Quote from: TITANOSAUR on Jun 02, 2010, 04:06:53 PM
who here thinks they should update JP:OG and make it better, with better graphics, dialog and better game play?

I got the game installed, but I barely play it.

There's a team of modders working on that.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Omegamorph on Jun 03, 2010, 04:44:23 PM
May God Bless ModdingGenesis... :D
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Puks on Jun 03, 2010, 05:17:07 PM
Quote from: DoomRulz on Jun 03, 2010, 03:18:02 PM
Quote from: Puks on Jun 03, 2010, 12:47:30 PM
Agreed. There are tons of games in which you kill dinosaurs (innocent animals, btw), but only one JPOG.  :(

Innocence don't mean much when it wants to bite your head off.

I got wolves and bears roaming the forests, doesn't stop me from enjoying my long walks in them.
It ain't that dramatic cause animals don't kill for shits & giggles.

Edit: And Nigel Marven is also proof you can survive a Jurassic environment if you're careful.  ;D
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on Jun 03, 2010, 05:42:35 PM
The odds of you running into a bear or wolf are one in a million. I can also learn about their behavioural patterns because they're real. Not to mention, a carnosaur or tyrannosaruid is about a hundred times bigger than a wolf or bear, so I'd rather not take my chances.

As for Nigel...he's a naturalist, I ain't :P
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Puks on Jun 03, 2010, 06:32:50 PM
But I iz.  8) ;D
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on Jun 03, 2010, 06:59:54 PM
When was the last time a bear charged you down?
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Puks on Jun 03, 2010, 07:12:41 PM
Never. Hence the  ;D

But I'm not afraid of going into their habitat, or to any other wilderness, for that matter.

People scare me much more.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on Jun 03, 2010, 07:34:57 PM
Oh hey, neither am I. I'm just saying, a T.Rex would a hundred times scarier.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Puks on Jun 03, 2010, 07:37:12 PM
Not to mention a lot slower and clumsier than a bear.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: TJ Doc on Jun 03, 2010, 07:48:17 PM
Quote from: chupacabras acheronsis on Jun 01, 2010, 01:33:37 AM
Katanas are overrated, useless weapons, which have no use in real combat, were used mostly to kill unarmed peasants for fun by asshole samurais, and are terrible swords in general.

if you are well educated in weapons, you'll hate the living shit out of it.

Ah, 'kay. Gotcha.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on Jun 03, 2010, 08:15:07 PM
Quote from: Puks on Jun 03, 2010, 07:37:12 PM
Not to mention a lot slower and clumsier than a bear.

How fast can a bear run?
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Puks on Jun 03, 2010, 08:18:43 PM
Believe it or not, a Brown Bear does 30 miles per hour easily.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Noir-Gojira on Jun 03, 2010, 08:22:39 PM
Quote from: DoomRulz on Jun 03, 2010, 06:59:54 PM
When was the last time a bear charged you down?

When I was eight.  It sucked.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on Jun 03, 2010, 08:37:44 PM
Quote from: Puks on Jun 03, 2010, 08:18:43 PM
Believe it or not, a Brown Bear does 30 miles per hour easily.

Damn, that sucks for the prey. And it can climb trees! But I think the Rex would still scare me more because they hunted in groups at times and are still larger.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Noir-Gojira on Jun 03, 2010, 08:51:48 PM
Only black bears and young browns can climb.  Adult brown bears are too large and are more likely to knock the tree over :P

Nutritionally speaking, going after a humans isn't worth the calories for a rex, let alone several who are trying to split a kill.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on Jun 03, 2010, 09:06:28 PM
It would make sense on paper, but when a predator is hungry, he's f**king hungry. He isn't thinking about how much food he's going to get from your body.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Noir-Gojira on Jun 03, 2010, 09:24:19 PM
Unless you are not a part of its natural diet; then it's a matter of how hungry they are.  Still, if you need a reason to be afraid, a rex could always step on you.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on Jun 04, 2010, 02:23:10 AM
If they're anything like a great white sure, but remember, there are some sharks that eat humans. Dinosaurs and sharks are two completely different types of animals, but I see no reason why a dinosaur would behave the same way.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: xxxBIOHAZARDxxx on Jun 04, 2010, 02:27:05 AM
Dinosaurs are cool...
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Noir-Gojira on Jun 04, 2010, 03:43:52 AM
Quote from: DoomRulz on Jun 04, 2010, 02:23:10 AM
If they're anything like a great white sure, but remember, there are some sharks that eat humans. Dinosaurs and sharks are two completely different types of animals, but I see no reason why a dinosaur would behave the same way.
Who said anything about sharks?  It's been this way for many apex predators.  Look at wolves and bears.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Noir-Gojira on Jun 15, 2010, 09:28:59 AM
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2010/06/100614093341.htm

It's pretty much official now that the marine reptiles were warm-blooded. 

Should we still even be considering them reptiles at this point? :P
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Puks on Jun 15, 2010, 10:25:37 AM
Yes, just like we consider birds reptiles.

Nice read, btw.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Omegamorph on Jun 15, 2010, 10:34:03 AM
Does that also include Mosasaurs?
To what I know they were related to Snakes, so they technically could be considered reptiles.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Puks on Jun 15, 2010, 10:39:52 AM
What? Why wouldn't they be considered reptiles? If something evolves from a sauropsid reptile, it stays a reptile.

Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Omegamorph on Jun 15, 2010, 10:42:16 AM
I'm confused now... ???
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Puks on Jun 15, 2010, 10:52:21 AM
I'm confused myself..

Systematically speaking, you and me are still part of clade Sarcopterygia, lobe-finned fish, even if we evolved much further and don't resemble fish now at all.

The same applies to birds, even if they are miles away from "classic" reptiles, the clade Aves is part of Reptilia/Sauropsida, and further part of  Amniota, Tetrapoda, Sarcopterygia, Vertebrata, etc.

All sauropsids and their descendants are reptiles and some reptiles are birds.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: huntin8-t0n on Jun 15, 2010, 12:48:06 PM
My fav is the goddam sexual Tyrannosaur
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: chupacabras acheronsis on Jun 15, 2010, 02:35:50 PM
speaking off, Dicovery channel is showing "Jurassic Sex" on Fathers' day.

im watching it. :P
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: xxxBIOHAZARDxxx on Jun 15, 2010, 06:42:23 PM
Dinosaurs are cool....
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Asian Assassin on Jun 15, 2010, 06:46:33 PM
my favorite is the T-rex or the velicipraptor
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Noir-Gojira on Jun 15, 2010, 07:35:28 PM
Quote from: Puks on Jun 15, 2010, 10:52:21 AM
I'm confused myself..

Systematically speaking, you and me are still part of clade Sarcopterygia, lobe-finned fish, even if we evolved much further and don't resemble fish now at all.

The same applies to birds, even if they are miles away from "classic" reptiles, the clade Aves is part of Reptilia/Sauropsida, and further part of  Amniota, Tetrapoda, Sarcopterygia, Vertebrata, etc.

All sauropsids and their descendants are reptiles and some reptiles are birds.
This is what happens when you let bureaucracy get in the way of common sense :P.  There are many who don't agree with the reclassification of aves and would rather restructure the entire dinosaur superorder.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on Jun 15, 2010, 08:16:08 PM
That wouldn't make sense, because not all dinosaurs evolved into birds. Only the theropods did. What happens to the herbivores?
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Puks on Jun 15, 2010, 08:20:55 PM
Quote from: Noir-Gojira on Jun 15, 2010, 07:35:28 PM
Quote from: Puks on Jun 15, 2010, 10:52:21 AM
I'm confused myself..

Systematically speaking, you and me are still part of clade Sarcopterygia, lobe-finned fish, even if we evolved much further and don't resemble fish now at all.

The same applies to birds, even if they are miles away from "classic" reptiles, the clade Aves is part of Reptilia/Sauropsida, and further part of  Amniota, Tetrapoda, Sarcopterygia, Vertebrata, etc.

All sauropsids and their descendants are reptiles and some reptiles are birds.
This is what happens when you let bureaucracy get in the way of common sense :P.  There are many who don't agree with the reclassification of aves and would rather restructure the entire dinosaur superorder.

It is common sense, I'm just confused about Zilla's confusion.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on Jun 15, 2010, 08:33:24 PM
I can believe it Puks. Our oldest ancestor was a fish.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Noir-Gojira on Jun 15, 2010, 08:35:33 PM
Except that we are no longer classified as fish.  Or reptiles, from which we also evolved.  Unlike aves, mammals retain their own class for little better reason than because our girls have boobs :P

Quote from: DoomRulz on Jun 15, 2010, 08:16:08 PM
That wouldn't make sense, because not all dinosaurs evolved into birds. Only the theropods did. What happens to the herbivores?
Exactly.  The term 'dinosaur' may no longer even apply to all of them.  Like I said, science can take categorizing too far.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Puks on Jun 15, 2010, 09:00:50 PM
QuoteExcept that we are no longer classified as fish.  Or reptiles, from which we also evolved.  Unlike aves, mammals retain their own class for little better reason than because our girls have boobs :P

We're not part of "fish" sensu lato, but Sarcopterygia, yes.

We haven't evolved from reptiles. Mammals and their ancestors - Synapsida and true reptlies - Sauropsida are sister clades in the higher clade Amniota. Aves are rightfully considered reptlies because they're sauropsids. Big difference.

QuoteExactly.  The term 'dinosaur' may no longer even apply to all of them.  Like I said, science can take categorizing too far.

Dunno about you guys, but when I think of the term "dinosaur", both Ornithischia and Saurischia including birds come to my mind.


Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: SiL on Jun 16, 2010, 09:17:00 AM
When I think dinosaurs I think Jurassic Park.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Omegamorph on Jun 16, 2010, 09:58:21 AM
Quote from: Puks on Jun 15, 2010, 08:20:55 PM
I'm just confused about Zilla's confusion.
I'm confused about your confusion about my confusion now. ??? :D

Quote from: SiL on Jun 16, 2010, 09:17:00 AM
When I think dinosaurs I think Jurassic Park.
Those are Monster-a-saurs with Frog DNA. ;) ;D
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Tangakkai on Jun 16, 2010, 12:45:39 PM
When I think of Dinosaurs I pretty much think of the "Walking with dinosaurs" series. The CGI was not so good but for a documentary they did a decent and realistic job.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on Jun 16, 2010, 09:04:42 PM
Quote from: Puks on Jun 15, 2010, 09:00:50 PM
QuoteExactly.  The term 'dinosaur' may no longer even apply to all of them.  Like I said, science can take categorizing too far.

Dunno about you guys, but when I think of the term "dinosaur", both Ornithischia and Saurischia including birds come to my mind.

As do I, but you're not going to hear someone like Bakker or Currie argue that birds evolved from Triceratops or Sauroposeidon :P
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Puks on Jun 16, 2010, 09:09:53 PM
Perhaps I missed the point?  ???
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on Jun 16, 2010, 09:17:26 PM
I just mean that, when discussing the evolution of birds, we only talk about the theropod dinosaurs so re-classifying the entire species would be pointless. Ironic though, when you consider that Ornithiscia means "bird-hipped" yet only the herbivores are classified as such.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: xxxBIOHAZARDxxx on Jun 17, 2010, 12:44:48 AM
Dinosaurs are cool...
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Necrokult on Sep 04, 2010, 06:20:23 PM
Whats is your favorite pre-historic dinosaur and why? give a comment

For me the Velociraptor cause they were fast, deadly and more smarter than primates, they worked together and hunt together. they are awesome. (https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Finfo.abril.com.br%2Faberto%2Finfonews%2Ffotos%2Fvelociraptor-20090911171406.jpg&hash=fb359baa01da4b6115042da332fb898475f85bc5)
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Meathead320 on Sep 04, 2010, 06:44:01 PM
That would be GODZILLA.

;D

He is 500ft tall, and cleanly beat the raptor at Badassery.

(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fa.imageshack.us%2Fimg64%2F4338%2Frofjan20417.jpg&hash=c9c5dd59f638ac622e0bf6f5ebcd90645b1d34bf)

(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fa.imageshack.us%2Fimg820%2F3883%2Frofjan20420.jpg&hash=6ae3b706d846ec919315661e8b5f9a343d5700b2)
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Necrokult on Sep 04, 2010, 06:46:42 PM
dont forget Godzilla is a myth :P and look at that godzilla ahahhahaha
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Meathead320 on Sep 04, 2010, 06:50:42 PM
Quote from: Necrokult on Sep 04, 2010, 06:46:42 PM
dont forget Godzilla is a myth :P and look at that godzilla ahahhahaha

Just like the Velociraptor that was smart as a chimp.  ;)

Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Omegamorph on Sep 04, 2010, 06:56:05 PM
Also we don't know; if it was like it was depicted in films, or like a chimp. We definitely don't.

One thing is for sure: Deynonychus/Velociraptor existed. Godzilla didn't, doesn't and likely will never do.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Necrokult on Sep 04, 2010, 07:01:38 PM
Ian malcom was right from JP "... God destroys dinosaurs... God creates man... Man destroys God... Man creates dinosaurs..."
and Dr.Settler "Dinosaurs eat Man....Woman inherits the Earth"


Is this right? :o:o it could be possible LOL
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Anto of the Sand on Sep 04, 2010, 07:05:19 PM
Deinonychus will always be my fave.

(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2F3.bp.blogspot.com%2F_MK42IQ_Hnu4%2FSxQHpjcas_I%2FAAAAAAAAAf8%2FQsOAdBCP9FY%2Fs1600%2FDKMMNature-Dinosaur-Deinonychus.gif&hash=9b9fc26e76f0e293ddff5ce17cf0330cf0cc724b)
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Necrokult on Sep 04, 2010, 11:13:47 PM
they are awesome, but i know loads of trex fans bah
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Skinner on Sep 04, 2010, 11:19:13 PM
My favorites would be Dilophosaurus, Ceratosaurus, Tarbosaurus, Spinosaurus, Pachyrhinosaurus, and Pyroraptor.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: m41guy on Sep 04, 2010, 11:21:51 PM
Quote from: Anto of the Sand on Sep 04, 2010, 07:05:19 PM
Deinonychus will always be my fave.

(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2F3.bp.blogspot.com%2F_MK42IQ_Hnu4%2FSxQHpjcas_I%2FAAAAAAAAAf8%2FQsOAdBCP9FY%2Fs1600%2FDKMMNature-Dinosaur-Deinonychus.gif&hash=9b9fc26e76f0e293ddff5ce17cf0330cf0cc724b)


This.  Plus didn't wasnt' the real velociraptor about the size of a chicken and had feathers too?  Guess the name sounded more deadly when the book was written.  I remember getting into an arguement with a friend after JP came out about them lol.

Quote from: Skinner on Sep 04, 2010, 11:19:13 PM
My favorites would be Dilophosaurus, Ceratosaurus, Tarbosaurus, Spinosaurus, Pachyrhinosaurus, and Pyroraptor.

Pretty much also the good guy cast from "Dinosaucers"  lol...
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Necrokult on Sep 04, 2010, 11:23:32 PM
Quote from: Skinner on Sep 04, 2010, 11:19:13 PM
My favorites would be Dilophosaurus, Ceratosaurus, Tarbosaurus, Spinosaurus, Pachyrhinosaurus, and Pyroraptor.

dilophosaurus, they spit the venom right to the eyes of the preys, awesome predator ;)
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Lie on Sep 04, 2010, 11:29:16 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9eNbU5eXZwY

Because all you have to do is lock one door to escape it.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Skinner on Sep 04, 2010, 11:31:45 PM
I forgot Dromaeosaurus.
(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg441.imageshack.us%2Fimg441%2F4840%2F434c86ce8c43587265o2.jpg&hash=d9d9082f2851268e1a8ca552513b165b3fb4cec3)
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Necrokult on Sep 04, 2010, 11:33:24 PM
the cell phone was inside or outside from spinosaurus? LOL
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Lie on Sep 04, 2010, 11:36:35 PM
It ate someone that had the phone on them.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Anto of the Sand on Sep 04, 2010, 11:40:30 PM
Highly paid writers are awesome.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Cap. Fitzgerald on Sep 04, 2010, 11:42:28 PM
^ The phone was also able to survive being digested and was still usable when the Spino umm let it out.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Necrokult on Sep 04, 2010, 11:44:28 PM
ahahhaahah, omg,  and it will be cellphoneassburster  :D
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Lie on Sep 04, 2010, 11:45:43 PM
Quote from: Cap. Fitzgerald on Sep 04, 2010, 11:42:28 PM
^ The phone was also able to survive being digested and was still usable when the Spino umm let it out.

(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimages.eonline.com%2Feol_images%2FWatch_with_Kristin%2F20080711%2Fspoiler_alert_300_w.jpg&hash=53a9468ace16acd79a20b7ea189111c09066ad2c)
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Cap. Fitzgerald on Sep 04, 2010, 11:46:33 PM
^ Yet I have not mentioned how they use it or why.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Lie on Sep 04, 2010, 11:47:06 PM
^ Good man!  :D

Now that's what I call bending the rules not breaking them.  ;)
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Huol on Sep 04, 2010, 11:55:45 PM
The movie came out like 10 years ago man.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Meathead320 on Sep 04, 2010, 11:59:53 PM
Quote from: Necrokult on Sep 04, 2010, 11:23:32 PM

dilophosaurus, they spit the venom right to the eyes of the preys, awesome predator ;)

Again, about as real as Godzilla.

There is no fossil evidence that Dilophosaurus could do such, same as the raptor chimp IQ thing.

We DO know that the Velociraptor brain case was certainly SMALLER than that of the chimp.

It is likely that the raptor was smart, for a dinosaur.

The chimp level of thought however is something entirely made up for Jurassic Park, just like the spitting venom by the Dilophosaurus.

Granted, both species DID actually exist, but what the movie portrays them as has done some exaggerating in terms of what even CAN be known about them.

My actual favorite would be T.Rex and we do know it has the greatest estimated bite force for any land animal that has ever lived.

Which oddly is NOT what the book Jurassic Park had to say about it, claiming it would shake things to death. The most recent theories are 2,


1. Strong Preference for scavenging. More due to the large size than the small arms.

Even if it did make a kill, like all predators would attack the weakest target possible, an elderly or sick animal that falls behind the herd, then like a Komodo Dragon, take one bite and quickly get away allow the bleeding and infection to do the killing. Not really a fight.

2. Proufoundly strong bite. This thing was a bone crushing bite, with thick teeth that could easily go through the largest of bones. This would also allow it to be a dump truck cleanup crew. Eating the entire Carcass, even the bones.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Lie on Sep 05, 2010, 12:05:34 AM
Quote from: Huol on Sep 04, 2010, 11:55:45 PM
The movie came out like 10 years ago man.

Quote from: Necrokult on Sep 04, 2010, 11:33:24 PM
the cell phone was inside or outside from spinosaurus? LOL

Someone that has seen the wouldn't ask that question.

You never know.  :D
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Anto of the Sand on Sep 05, 2010, 12:06:43 AM
They also exaggerated the size. T-Rex wasn't all that huge.
Also, the Pachycephalosaurus wasn't under three foot tall, it was ten feet tall.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Cap. Fitzgerald on Sep 05, 2010, 12:10:53 AM
Quote from: Lie on Sep 04, 2010, 11:47:06 PM
^ Good man!  :D

Now that's what I call bending the rules not breaking them.  ;)
its what you did :)
(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi253.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fhh48%2FEpicFailGuy44%2FFunny%2520Stuff%2FMotivational%2520Posters%2FImmortalHighFiving.jpg&hash=193d57dffcaf8bc347e6af54b6de57a59df4ed92)
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: randy4321 on Sep 05, 2010, 12:46:47 AM
I sure did love the velociraptors from jurassic park, dont care what any of you have to say about them =P also the dilophosaurus and t-rex.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: urban_predator83 on Sep 05, 2010, 04:25:22 AM
Spinosaurus
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Omegamorph on Sep 05, 2010, 05:17:10 AM
Quote from: Meathead320 on Sep 04, 2010, 11:59:53 PM
We DO know that the Velociraptor brain case was certainly SMALLER than that of the chimp.
Yessir, and? It doesn't matter how big your brain is - it matters how much of it you use.

Quote from: Meathead320 on Sep 04, 2010, 11:59:53 PM
Granted, both species DID actually exist, but what the movie portrays them as has done some exaggerating in terms of what even CAN be known about them.
Agreed, but it's not like it is impossible. Unlikely, but not impossible.

Quote from: Anto of the Sand on Sep 05, 2010, 12:06:43 AM
They also exaggerated the size. T-Rex wasn't all that huge.
10-13 meters. I recall the T.rex in all JPs is perfectly proportioned and has only some slight inaccuracies like the degree of the wrists, but that's minor.

Quote from: Anto of the Sand on Sep 05, 2010, 12:06:43 AM
Also, the Pachycephalosaurus wasn't under three foot tall, it was ten feet tall.
Young one it was.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Anto of the Sand on Sep 05, 2010, 02:33:01 PM
Quote from: OmegaZilla on Sep 05, 2010, 05:17:10 AM
10-13 meters. I recall the T.rex in all JPs is perfectly proportioned and has only some slight inaccuracies like the degree of the wrists, but that's minor.
The one at the end of Lost World seemed too big to me.
QuoteYoung one it was.
There was multiple ones. All the same size.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Meathead320 on Sep 05, 2010, 02:56:55 PM
Quote from: OmegaZilla on Sep 05, 2010, 05:17:10 AM
Quote from: Meathead320 on Sep 04, 2010, 11:59:53 PM
We DO know that the Velociraptor brain case was certainly SMALLER than that of the chimp.
Yessir, and? It doesn't matter how big your brain is - it matters how much of it you use.

Where do you draw the line? I could use the same argument that a Stegosaurus was just as smart.

Quote from: OmegaZilla on Sep 05, 2010, 05:17:10 AM
Quote from: Meathead320 on Sep 04, 2010, 11:59:53 PM
Granted, both species DID actually exist, but what the movie portrays them as has done some exaggerating in terms of what even CAN be known about them.
Agreed, but it's not like it is impossible. Unlikely, but not impossible.


Same thing about drawing the line with Scientific History vs. Wishtory.




Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Eidotemit on Sep 05, 2010, 06:16:20 PM
Quote from: OmegaZilla on Sep 05, 2010, 05:17:10 AM
Quote from: Meathead320 on Sep 04, 2010, 11:59:53 PM
We DO know that the Velociraptor brain case was certainly SMALLER than that of the chimp.
Yessir, and? It doesn't matter how big your brain is - it matters how much of it you use.

It matters what parts of your brain are big. With most dinosaurs I believe the sensory areas of the bread accounted for most of the size.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Omegamorph on Sep 05, 2010, 07:36:59 PM
Quote from: Anto of the Sand on Sep 05, 2010, 02:33:01 PM
The one at the end of Lost World seemed too big to me.
In what scene exactly? It is always proportioned correctly as far as I can tell.

Quote from: Anto of the Sand on Sep 05, 2010, 02:33:01 PM
There was multiple ones. All the same size.
I remember only one shown... but it is possible it was a group of young individuals. Not much farfetched.

Quote from: Meathead320 on Sep 05, 2010, 02:56:55 PM
Where do you draw the line? I could use the same argument that a Stegosaurus was just as smart.
Sperm Whales have the biggest brain out of the current (including extinct genera) animal kingdom. Does that mean it is more intelligent than a human? No. Because it doesn't use its brain as much as a human does.
Stegosaurus had no reason to be smart. Small Carnivores like Velociraptor & Deynonychus did instead.

Quote from: Meathead320 on Sep 05, 2010, 02:56:55 PM
Same thing about drawing the line with Scientific History vs. Wishtory.
The theories shown in films like JPs are certainly done for entertainment factor, but we have not much proof they couldn't have been.

Quote from: Eidotemit on Sep 05, 2010, 06:16:20 PM
It matters what parts of your brain are big. With most dinosaurs I believe the sensory areas of the bread accounted for most of the size.
Um.. was this processed fro the Dromeosaurids too? I recall only large Carnivores like Tyrannosaurus and Giganotosaurus.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Anto of the Sand on Sep 05, 2010, 07:45:31 PM
Quote from: OmegaZilla on Sep 05, 2010, 07:36:59 PM
In what scene exactly? It is always proportioned correctly as far as I can tell.
When it was stepping into someone's back garden. Maybe I'm wrong, but it looked too towering to me.

QuoteI remember only one shown... but it is possible it was a group of young individuals. Not much farfetched.
I doubt that. Seems a poor thing to do from a directive standpoint. I know there's a relative of the Pachycephalosaurus that's about that height. I think they (purposely or otherwise) switched them. Like they did with Raptors and Deinonychus'.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Omegamorph on Sep 05, 2010, 07:47:01 PM
I should rewatch the film, but I still remember only one.

As for the T.Rex, it may have been the angle of the shots. You mean when it drinks from the pool?
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Anto of the Sand on Sep 05, 2010, 08:09:57 PM
That general scene, yes. Preferrebly when it steps by the house to get into the garden.
And I though I saw a few Pachys running along the game trail. (panning shot)
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Omegamorph on Sep 05, 2010, 08:21:00 PM
Maybe in the panoramic shots... but I still remember only one. There were Parasaurolophuses and Gallimimuses though. Anyone so kind to post a shot?
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Necrokult on Sep 05, 2010, 10:16:33 PM
Parasaurolophus

(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.lakepowell.net%2Fsciencecenter%2FParasaurolophus.jpg&hash=26ea5741f5a1fd78bec8dfc074d0ec9b4f2677bd)


And the Gallimimus

(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2F2.bp.blogspot.com%2F_6KX_t-0wP-A%2FSXIeCtTPIPI%2FAAAAAAAAAcM%2F8atN52KF__M%2Fs400%2Fgallimimus1.jpg&hash=108e2d61e6d70b8cfecfa6e2b625fc3d6a54c891)
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Anto of the Sand on Sep 05, 2010, 11:09:51 PM
I think he meant the film, sweetheart.  :)
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: maledoro on Sep 06, 2010, 12:33:49 AM
Hands down, Tyrannosaurus rex for two reasons. First, it had a kickass band named after it. Secondly, some scientists believe that it had evolved into the modern chicken, and chicken goes great with beer!
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: MadassAlex on Sep 06, 2010, 12:51:03 AM
Quote from: maledoro on Sep 06, 2010, 12:33:49 AM
Hands down, Tyrannosaurus rex for two reasons. First, it had a kickass band named after it.

Hate to break it you ya, but that band sucks balls.  :-[
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: maledoro on Sep 06, 2010, 01:13:07 AM
Quote from: MadassAlex on Sep 06, 2010, 12:51:03 AM
Hate to break it you ya, but that band sucks balls.  :-[
Hate to break it to ya, but just because you don't like something, it doesn't mean that it sucks.
(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fv338%2Fmaledoro%2FAngry%2520Smilies%2F0f13460f.gif&hash=948d142f7624d3abaa3868492545a2bd9d0ba1b9)
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on Sep 06, 2010, 01:17:14 AM
Quote from: Anto of the Sand on Sep 05, 2010, 02:33:01 PM
Quote from: OmegaZilla on Sep 05, 2010, 05:17:10 AM
10-13 meters. I recall the T.rex in all JPs is perfectly proportioned and has only some slight inaccuracies like the degree of the wrists, but that's minor.
The one at the end of Lost World seemed too big to me.
QuoteYoung one it was.
There was multiple ones. All the same size.

The T.Rex in JP was too big in a lot of shots. The opening scene where it first crashes out of the fence, followed by the view from the jeep, and the scene where it consumes the lawyer are all great examples. It's too tall, head is too big, and the arms are too big.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: MadassAlex on Sep 06, 2010, 01:18:06 AM
^^ You know, when you listen to a band with a name like that, there are certain expectations.

Jus' sayin', they don't live up to their namesake.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on Sep 06, 2010, 01:18:55 AM
I also think that, along with my favourite dinosaur, this thread should be merged. (http://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/index.php?topic=19454.0)
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Meathead320 on Sep 06, 2010, 01:22:48 AM
Quote from: maledoro on Sep 06, 2010, 12:33:49 AM
Hands down, Tyrannosaurus rex for two reasons. First, it had a kickass band named after it. Secondly, some scientists believe that it had evolved into the modern chicken, and chicken goes great with beer!


AHAH AHAH AHA HA HA.

No really?

Birds had already evolved FAR before T.Rex ever showed up. T.Rex was late to the party in the amount of time Dinosaurs were around so to speak.

ONLY One species of Dinosaur evolved into birds. ALL the rest went extinct. That one was certainly not T.Rex.

The chicken you could say is descended from a distant cousin of T.Rex, but not directly.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: maledoro on Sep 06, 2010, 01:38:16 AM
Quote from: MadassAlex on Sep 06, 2010, 01:18:06 AM
You know, when you listen to a band with a name like that, there are certain expectations.
It would be your own damned fault for having those expectations.

Quote from: Meathead320 on Sep 06, 2010, 01:22:48 AM
The chicken you could say is descended from a distant cousin of T.Rex, but not directly.
But not too distant... (http://www.usatoday.com/tech/science/discoveries/2007-04-12-trex-protein_N.htm)
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on Sep 06, 2010, 01:47:39 AM
Quote from: Meathead320 on Sep 06, 2010, 01:22:48 AM
Quote from: maledoro on Sep 06, 2010, 12:33:49 AM
Hands down, Tyrannosaurus rex for two reasons. First, it had a kickass band named after it. Secondly, some scientists believe that it had evolved into the modern chicken, and chicken goes great with beer!


AHAH AHAH AHA HA HA.

No really?

Birds had already evolved FAR before T.Rex ever showed up. T.Rex was late to the party in the amount of time Dinosaurs were around so to speak.

ONLY One species of Dinosaur evolved into birds. ALL the rest went extinct. That one was certainly not T.Rex.

The chicken you could say is descended from a distant cousin of T.Rex, but not directly.

Your point being?

Birds are the direct descendants of dinosaurs. They first started to appear in the Cretaceous, but at the end of the day, that doesn't make a difference.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: MadassAlex on Sep 06, 2010, 01:58:52 AM
Quote from: maledoro on Sep 06, 2010, 01:38:16 AM
It would be your own damned fault for having those expectations.

Any band knows that it's name is a part of its overall presentation. It's a part of the way they advertise themselves and appeal to a target audience; if a band has an ass-kicking name, it's normal to presume that they play ass-kicking music.

Not that they're the only band to do this, but they're lame and used up a perfectly good band name in the process so nyeh.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: maledoro on Sep 06, 2010, 02:21:14 AM
Quote from: MadassAlex on Sep 06, 2010, 01:58:52 AM
Quote from: maledoro on Sep 06, 2010, 01:38:16 AM
It would be your own damned fault for having those expectations.

Any band knows that it's name is a part of its overall presentation. It's a part of the way they advertise themselves and appeal to a target audience; if a band has an ass-kicking name, it's normal to presume that they play ass-kicking music.

Not that they're the only band to do this, but they're lame and used up a perfectly good band name in the process so nyeh.
They've sold more than a modest amount of records, gathered lots of critical acclaim and had influenced many other musicians since. They're more of a T. rex than you'll ever know.

Again, just because you don't like them...
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Meathead320 on Sep 06, 2010, 02:40:25 AM
Quote from: DoomRulz on Sep 06, 2010, 01:47:39 AM
Quote from: Meathead320 on Sep 06, 2010, 01:22:48 AM
Quote from: maledoro on Sep 06, 2010, 12:33:49 AM
Hands down, Tyrannosaurus rex for two reasons. First, it had a kickass band named after it. Secondly, some scientists believe that it had evolved into the modern chicken, and chicken goes great with beer!


AHAH AHAH AHA HA HA.

No really?

Birds had already evolved FAR before T.Rex ever showed up. T.Rex was late to the party in the amount of time Dinosaurs were around so to speak.

ONLY One species of Dinosaur evolved into birds. ALL the rest went extinct. That one was certainly not T.Rex.

The chicken you could say is descended from a distant cousin of T.Rex, but not directly.

Your point being?

Birds are the direct descendants of dinosaurs. They first started to appear in the Cretaceous, but at the end of the day, that doesn't make a difference.

My point is that T.Rex did not evolve into any bird at all.

They first started to appear in the late Triassic actually, and were well established already by the Cretaceous.


Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on Sep 06, 2010, 02:46:36 AM
Not directly, but they are related.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: SM on Sep 06, 2010, 02:48:32 AM
They didn't evolve cos Marc Bolan died.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on Sep 06, 2010, 02:59:07 AM
You and your pop culture references...
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: MadassAlex on Sep 06, 2010, 03:18:21 AM
Quote from: maledoro on Sep 06, 2010, 02:21:14 AM
They've sold more than a modest amount of records

So has Soulja Boy. Dude's the laughing stop of rap and hip-hop communities everywhere.

Quote from: maledoro on Sep 06, 2010, 02:21:14 AMgathered lots of critical acclaim

Define 'critical acclaim' and give me a reason why those sources should be considered authoritative.

Quote from: maledoro on Sep 06, 2010, 02:21:14 AMand had influenced many other musicians since

So did punk rock and now passive-aggressive irony is the cool thing in music. Doesn't say a thing.

T.rex is on the better end of mediocrity, but they're one of the thousands upon thousands of artists that took what other bands did well and watered it down to a ridiculous degree. Good PR, though. Like KISS in that respect. Still doesn't make the music particularly interesting, even in the context of their contemporaries. As cliched as it sounds to reference Led Zeppelin, I have to 'cause it's always sounded to me like T.rex were trying to be them. 'Cept Led Zep had the balls to go nuts, as did other rock bands. T.rex are a boring footnote in comparison to many of those bands 'cause they were entirely happy being boring.

Usually, musical movements that end up dead are that way for a reason. Glam rock (and hair metal) had nothing to contribute, consumers got savvy and the movements died. T.rex was a bland, boring, trend-following band in a bland, boring, trend-following genre. No news there.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: SM on Sep 06, 2010, 04:18:02 AM
Children of the Revolution is sweet.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Omegamorph on Sep 06, 2010, 05:59:41 AM
Quote from: DoomRulz on Sep 06, 2010, 01:17:14 AM
The T.Rex in JP was too big in a lot of shots. The opening scene where it first crashes out of the fence, followed by the view from the jeep, and the scene where it consumes the lawyer are all great examples. It's too tall, head is too big, and the arms are too big.
Yes, the arms are 2, 3 centimetres longer than they were in reality I think. The head isn't that big. It exceeds of some centimetres maybe, but not too big. Same for the height.
Spoiler
(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.mcgill.ca%2Ffiles%2Fredpath%2FTyrannosaurusScaleSmall2.png&hash=acde0c72329fbfd04c482927aaaa3bff4668d3d3)
(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.freewebs.com%2Fjurassicpark101%2Frex%2520eats%2520man.png&hash=5e1c87011bd80cb9dd6a381a367b55be212a7bd5)
Gennaro was on the wc so it's not full height.
(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.unfilteredsmoke.com%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2009%2F10%2Ft-rex-jurassic-park.jpg&hash=b72dc7729ab7570469680d73f1e2f3da39a75122)
[close]
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on Sep 06, 2010, 07:53:42 AM
The head was too big in most shots. Way too big. If you've ever seen an actual T.Rex skull, it's no more than 5 ft long, 5.2 tops. There's no way an average sized man will fit in his entirety in the mouth.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Omegamorph on Sep 06, 2010, 07:58:42 AM
In fact it didn't.
The legs were left out until it probably either swallowed him whole or torn some shreds. I remember a line "This may be Gennaro..."
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on Sep 06, 2010, 08:01:25 AM
his feet were out of the Rex's mouth as I recall when she picked him up in the air.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Omegamorph on Sep 06, 2010, 08:03:02 AM
Quote from: DoomRulz on Sep 06, 2010, 08:01:25 AM
his feet were out of the Rex's mouth as I recall when she picked him up in the air.
Whole legs (and butt) were left out. Here's an extract from the film:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VMzfrod7hcE
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: maledoro on Sep 06, 2010, 11:28:03 AM
Quote from: Meathead320 on Sep 06, 2010, 02:40:25 AM
My point is that T.Rex did not evolve into any bird at all.
Your "point" is supported by ignoring that science article I had posted.

Quote from: MadassAlex on Sep 06, 2010, 03:18:21 AM
So has Soulja Boy.
Two different concepts. Nice try. There's not enough deodorant to cover your argument.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Omegamorph on Sep 06, 2010, 11:41:11 AM
Yeah, Tyrannosaurus and Chicken are related because the direct ancestors of Chicken (Aves in general) are in fact Maniraptora Theropods. But Tyrannosaurus ultimately took a different evolutional direction. On the other hand this (http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn14427-t-rex-tissue-may-just-be-bacterial-scum.html?feedId=online-news_rss20) article which debates the soft tissues being just bacterial biofilms. Which one do we want to trust? That is the question..
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on Sep 06, 2010, 03:16:17 PM
Quote from: OmegaZilla on Sep 06, 2010, 08:03:02 AM
Quote from: DoomRulz on Sep 06, 2010, 08:01:25 AM
his feet were out of the Rex's mouth as I recall when she picked him up in the air.
Whole legs (and butt) were left out. Here's an extract from the film:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VMzfrod7hcE

True. Then that was one shot where they got it right. In the first scene I mentioned, it still looked too big.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Shobidoo on Sep 06, 2010, 03:59:20 PM
Goldblumasouras-rex.  ;D That and Denonyncus. Totally screwed up the name!
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Alienhunter15 on Sep 06, 2010, 11:28:20 PM
Quote from: War Wager on Jul 10, 2008, 01:39:49 AM
:D

Next to the T-Rex and the Raptor, I loved the Spino when I was wee:

(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.marshalls-art.com%2Fimages%2Fipaleo%2Fpaleopg16%2FSpino_v4.jpg&hash=aa38347da7fc0d0570829c99924b8a18267bb84d)

They are also my favorites (raptor, t-rex and spino)

-alienhunter14
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on Sep 06, 2010, 11:42:34 PM
Although people say Jurassic Park is the reason dinosaurs are popular nowadays, I disagree heavily. JP was awesome, yes, but it really cemented in people's brains the idea that dinosaurs are only about T.Rex, raptor, and revolves around kids. Most folks don't realize how much science there is here.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DrGediman on Sep 07, 2010, 12:09:25 AM
Jurassic Park did not introduce me to dinos.  I liked dinosaurs before Jurassic Park.  Of course, I love the T-Rex, every kid knew about the T-Rex.  I had no idea what the f**k a velociraptor was until Jurassic Park. 

But my other fav dinos were the Stegosaurus and that one that had a hard shell on it's back and a club-like tail.  They were badass for being non-meateaters. 

EDIT:  just googled - Ankylosaurus is it's name:

(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fdinozaury.wartowiedziec.pl%2Ffckfiles%2FImage%2FAnkylosaurus1.jpg&hash=5c96ed49965229278bdd38d2abe55c645f740eed)
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: SM on Sep 07, 2010, 12:11:17 AM
Most kids get into dinosaurs at some point, usually without the help of Spielberg,.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Some Mothers Do Have Em! on Sep 07, 2010, 12:19:39 AM
(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.hecklerspray.com%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2008%2F05%2Fsir-david-attenborough.jpg&hash=6dafd705620b93442daec3d80b6bc7b633f51abe)

Wrong type of Dinosaur?
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: SM on Sep 07, 2010, 12:20:28 AM
Long may he reign!!!
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Some Mothers Do Have Em! on Sep 07, 2010, 12:26:42 AM
Life on Earth ruled. First doco's I can remember.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: SM on Sep 07, 2010, 12:29:12 AM
Me too.  Been a fan ever since.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Some Mothers Do Have Em! on Sep 07, 2010, 12:31:30 AM
We got a DA thread on here? We need one. I could talk about it all day :)
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Meathead320 on Sep 07, 2010, 01:02:42 AM
Quote from: maledoro on Sep 06, 2010, 11:28:03 AM

Your "point" is supported by ignoring that science article I had posted.



Sure it is. ::)

Were does our holy "science article" claim that T.Rex was the direct ancestor of the "chicken"?

I do not recall it having said that. If it did I would take a look at who wrote the article and find out which paleontologist they miss-quoted.

I only buy that they were related.

About as close as you and a rodent, but sure you're related. That is about the relation of a chicken and a T.Rex.

Both are in the bird/dinosaur family, but birds had already branched off FAR before T.Rex existed. They share some anatomy too, but so do all mammals with other mammals.

Keep in mind we share 67% of our DNA with a fruit fly.

Meh. I'll buy that Rex was a lot closer related to the Chicken than it was to us, or any mammal, and perhaps and existing reptile, because the bird line branched off from dinosaurs more recently than dinosaurs branched off from reptiles.

So Obviously all birds would share a common relation to dinosaurs. Only ONE type of dinosaur "became" a bird however. The rest just shared things in common (being related this is expected).


Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on Sep 07, 2010, 02:32:46 AM
Quote from: SM on Sep 07, 2010, 12:11:17 AM
Most kids get into dinosaurs at some point, usually without the help of Spielberg,.

Of course they do. That's what happened to me. But when I tell older people about the interest, or even other people my age, they go right to Jurassic Park.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: SM on Sep 07, 2010, 02:35:06 AM
Interwebs = pop culture.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on Sep 07, 2010, 02:37:54 AM
Unfortunately. I'm grateful for shows though like Walking With... or Jurassic Fight Club. JFC was great though because not only did it focus on a different form of dino-science, but the host of the show is very active on Facebook and communicates regularly with fans like myself. He always has new things to contribute to the science in general.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: SM on Sep 07, 2010, 02:46:38 AM
Walking With... has it's fair share of detractors too.  Personally I love it bitses.  Has en epic feel about it helped immensely by Branagh.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Anto of the Sand on Sep 07, 2010, 02:49:12 AM
Agreed.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: maledoro on Sep 07, 2010, 03:00:28 AM
Quote from: Meathead320 on Sep 07, 2010, 01:02:42 AM
Were does our holy "science article" claim that T.Rex was the direct ancestor of the "chicken"?

I do not recall it having said that.
Either you're one of those who can't grasp context and need to have things spelled out to you in careful steps, or you're nit-picking for the sake of an argument. Since I had mentioned beer, I had made my statement in jest. That said, I believe that you were the former and had evolved into the latter.

(p.s. In my original statement, I said that some scientists believed it.)
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: urban_predator83 on Sep 07, 2010, 04:06:39 AM
So do you guys think dinosaurs can be brought back to life in the real world. Do you think we should?

I think that we have the technology to bring them back but I think we shouldn't
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Omegamorph on Sep 07, 2010, 07:44:54 AM
Quote from: DrGediman on Sep 07, 2010, 12:09:25 AM
Jurassic Park did not introduce me to dinos.  I liked dinosaurs before Jurassic Park.  Of course, I love the T-Rex, every kid knew about the T-Rex.
You and me both.
I had lotsa books back in the time. And every night, mother had to read them. Oh the memories...

Quote from: urban_predator83 on Sep 07, 2010, 04:06:39 AM
So do you guys think dinosaurs can be brought back to life in the real world.
As for now, no.
We'd have to pulverize tons of bones of one species to obtain part of the DNA of it (not even whole).

Quote from: urban_predator83 on Sep 07, 2010, 04:06:39 AM
Do you think we should?
Yes and no. Yes, because we'd have the chance to study them and learn more about them. No, because 1. Their environment disappeared with them 2. they have no place in all the current ecosystems and 3. their eventual "resurrection" would cause criticize all over the world.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: maledoro on Sep 07, 2010, 11:03:29 AM
Quote from: urban_predator83 on Sep 07, 2010, 04:06:39 AM
So do you guys think dinosaurs can be brought back to life in the real world.
No. We have a difficult enough time keeping cloned sheep alive.

Quote from: urban_predator83 on Sep 07, 2010, 04:06:39 AM
Do you think we should?
No.

Quote from: urban_predator83 on Sep 07, 2010, 04:06:39 AM
I think that we have the technology to bring them back but I think we shouldn't
Rest assured, we don't.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Meathead320 on Sep 07, 2010, 06:11:32 PM
Quote from: maledoro on Sep 07, 2010, 03:00:28 AM
Quote from: Meathead320 on Sep 07, 2010, 01:02:42 AM
Were does our holy "science article" claim that T.Rex was the direct ancestor of the "chicken"?

I do not recall it having said that.
Either you're one of those who can't grasp context and need to have things spelled out to you in careful steps, or you're nit-picking for the sake of an argument. Since I had mentioned beer, I had made my statement in jest. That said, I believe that you were the former and had evolved into the latter.

(p.s. In my original statement, I said that some scientists believed it.)

I'm SORRY.

You must be right.

Since some scientist think T.Rex was the anscestor of the chicken, you maledoro must be right.

:P


Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on Sep 07, 2010, 08:03:29 PM
Quote from: OmegaZilla on Sep 07, 2010, 07:44:54 AM
Yes and no. Yes, because we'd have the chance to study them and learn more about them. No, because 1. Their environment disappeared with them 2. they have no place in all the current ecosystems and 3. their eventual "resurrection" would cause criticize all over the world.

Not to mention, what few dinosaurs we could manage to clone and turn loose (if we did) would be poached before they knew what hit them.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: maledoro on Sep 07, 2010, 10:29:26 PM
Quote from: Meathead320 on Sep 07, 2010, 06:11:32 PM
You must be right. Since some scientist think T.Rex was the anscestor of the chicken, you maledoro must be right.
I'm right in saying that some scientists believe that.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on Sep 07, 2010, 11:30:35 PM
Quote from: SM on Sep 07, 2010, 02:46:38 AM
Walking With... has it's fair share of detractors too.  Personally I love it bitses.  Has en epic feel about it helped immensely by Branagh.

Detractors...people who just dislike it you mean?
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: SM on Sep 07, 2010, 11:37:39 PM
People who questioned it's accuracy.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Sharp Sticks on Sep 08, 2010, 01:24:58 AM
I love the Atrociraptor simply on the basis of its name.

Atrociraptor.

Hell yeah.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: galaxys ultimate hunter on Sep 08, 2010, 01:40:38 AM
Tyrannosaurus Rex
The tyrant dinosaur King!
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on Sep 08, 2010, 03:20:50 AM
Quote from: SM on Sep 07, 2010, 11:37:39 PM
People who questioned it's accuracy.

It had its fair share, though IIRC, the most glaring was the extraordinary claim that Liopleurodon was 150 tons. Even I thought that was a bit extreme.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: SpaceMarines on Sep 08, 2010, 03:38:57 AM
Favourite? Tough call...
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: SM on Sep 08, 2010, 03:57:59 AM
Quote from: DoomRulz on Sep 08, 2010, 03:20:50 AM
Quote from: SM on Sep 07, 2010, 11:37:39 PM
People who questioned it's accuracy.

It had its fair share, though IIRC, the most glaring was the extraordinary claim that Liopleurodon was 150 tons. Even I thought that was a bit extreme.

After watching the Making Of... I was satisfied they'd done a stack of research and the only real unknown was the colour of the creatures.

But then I'm not a nitpicking dino-nazi.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Omegamorph on Sep 08, 2010, 12:59:37 PM
Quote from: SM on Sep 08, 2010, 03:57:59 AM
But then I'm not a nitpicking dino-nazi.
(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Ffotos.sapo.pt%2F2TtVuqqCr2uKNkGwwK3E%2F&hash=5406afc61e5510d348df7110b67cfafeb1f0fcb9)
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on Sep 08, 2010, 09:30:01 PM
Quote from: SM on Sep 08, 2010, 03:57:59 AM
Quote from: DoomRulz on Sep 08, 2010, 03:20:50 AM
Quote from: SM on Sep 07, 2010, 11:37:39 PM
People who questioned it's accuracy.

It had its fair share, though IIRC, the most glaring was the extraordinary claim that Liopleurodon was 150 tons. Even I thought that was a bit extreme.

After watching the Making Of... I was satisfied they'd done a stack of research and the only real unknown was the colour of the creatures.

But then I'm not a nitpicking dino-nazi.

I hear you. I guess people detract from it because it's more a docu-action show. One can learn from it, but they really put effort into the effect work and making it exciting. Yes it was nice...but you'll learn m,ore from a show like The Truth About Killer Dinosaurs because it interviews people as opposed to being effects-only.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: chupacabras acheronsis on Sep 08, 2010, 11:17:18 PM
Quote from: OmegaZilla on Sep 08, 2010, 12:59:37 PM
Quote from: SM on Sep 08, 2010, 03:57:59 AM
But then I'm not a nitpicking dino-nazi.
(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Ffotos.sapo.pt%2F2TtVuqqCr2uKNkGwwK3E%2F&hash=5406afc61e5510d348df7110b67cfafeb1f0fcb9)

The Tyrannosaurus Reich!

(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fnewsimg.ngfiles.com%2F1000%2F1988_1183405446599.jpg&hash=1c49bbd0ebabfdf3497b13b398061c43f37b04a4)
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: SM on Sep 09, 2010, 12:46:50 AM
Reich-teous!!
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Cap. Fitzgerald on Sep 09, 2010, 05:50:37 AM
Quote from: chupacabras acheronsis on Sep 08, 2010, 11:17:18 PM
Quote from: OmegaZilla on Sep 08, 2010, 12:59:37 PM
Quote from: SM on Sep 08, 2010, 03:57:59 AM
But then I'm not a nitpicking dino-nazi.
(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Ffotos.sapo.pt%2F2TtVuqqCr2uKNkGwwK3E%2F&hash=5406afc61e5510d348df7110b67cfafeb1f0fcb9)

The Tyrannosaurus Reich!

(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fnewsimg.ngfiles.com%2F1000%2F1988_1183405446599.jpg&hash=1c49bbd0ebabfdf3497b13b398061c43f37b04a4)
:D
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Meathead320 on Sep 09, 2010, 06:33:31 PM
Quote from: OmegaZilla on Sep 08, 2010, 12:59:37 PM
Quote from: SM on Sep 08, 2010, 03:57:59 AM
But then I'm not a nitpicking dino-nazi.
(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Ffotos.sapo.pt%2F2TtVuqqCr2uKNkGwwK3E%2F&hash=5406afc61e5510d348df7110b67cfafeb1f0fcb9)


You know, credit where it is due, Dino-Nazis look pretty badass.

Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Cap. Fitzgerald on Sep 09, 2010, 10:40:11 PM
^ I agree
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: SpaceMarines on Sep 09, 2010, 11:55:27 PM
I wonder if there's a Hitlersaurus Rex.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on Sep 10, 2010, 02:21:07 AM
Since we're on the subject

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PNjIWeDnz4E
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: jhsnake999 on Sep 14, 2010, 12:06:34 PM
Velociraptors, Deinonychus, Utahraptors, Dromeosaurs. Anything in the Raptor family. I always loved pterosaurs like Quetzocoatlus, Pterodactyl and Ornithocherius. I also love the land predators like Tyrannosaurus, Allosaurus, Eustreptospondylus and Spinosaurus. Not forgetting the herbivores, Triceratops, Stegosaurus, Diplodicus and Parasauralophus...   
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Dromaeosaur25 on Mar 03, 2011, 07:40:17 AM
Well, let's see...
Of course, dromaeosaurids have always been my favorites. XD
I also find therizinosaurs interesting(Does anyone know when or why scientists stopped calling them segnosaurs?) and I'm waiting for the day they find more Deinocheirus bits than just the arms, lol.
Also, has anyone here heard about the recent suggestion that Torosaurus was an adult Triceratops?
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: maledoro on Mar 03, 2011, 03:00:26 PM
I thought this thread was extinct. Why would someone go back almost half a year to dig up a thread like this?
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Sharp Sticks on Mar 03, 2011, 03:03:07 PM
Quote from: maledoro on Mar 03, 2011, 03:00:26 PM
Why would someone go back almost half a year to dig up a thread like this?
For science.

Anyway.

Spoiler
(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi1201.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fbb349%2FSharpSticks%2Fmofugga.jpg&hash=52064939c099b3ac692d960daeb93a6ad28e8ee7)
[close]
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: maledoro on Mar 03, 2011, 03:05:31 PM
True, about the spoiler. But this forum needs less Oldthreadasaurus.
(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fv338%2Fmaledoro%2Folddead%2F93dbaf99.gif&hash=16a0c85c61aa4edd4bd19b9e11c987e7f406bc53)
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: scarhunter92 on Mar 03, 2011, 04:03:53 PM
Quote from: maledoro on Mar 03, 2011, 03:05:31 PM
True, about the spoiler. But this forum needs less Oldthreadasaurus.
(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fv338%2Fmaledoro%2Folddead%2F93dbaf99.gif&hash=16a0c85c61aa4edd4bd19b9e11c987e7f406bc53)

What's the big deal? It's a fun thread that doesn't get old. It's not like it was about some old news.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Ghost Rider on Mar 03, 2011, 04:17:11 PM
Quote from: Dromaeosaur25 on Mar 03, 2011, 07:40:17 AM
Well, let's see...
Of course, dromaeosaurids have always been my favorites. XD
I also find therizinosaurs interesting(Does anyone know when or why scientists stopped calling them segnosaurs?) and I'm waiting for the day they find more Deinocheirus bits than just the arms, lol.
Also, has anyone here heard about the recent suggestion that Torosaurus was an adult Triceratops?

Yeah I did. I remember Jack Horner saying that because of this development, about a third of the Dinosaurs that we know about wouldn't actually be dinosaurs. They would be older or younger versions of a specific Dino.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Omegamorph on Mar 03, 2011, 04:57:48 PM
Oh you know, I'm still in doubt in that regards. Seems too... I don't know, unpractical? Look at Dracorex and then at Pachycephalosaurus for example; they say former is younger latter, but why would Dracorex suddenly... y'now, shrink its horns?
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Ghost Rider on Mar 03, 2011, 05:00:50 PM
Quote from: OmegaZilla on Mar 03, 2011, 04:57:48 PM
Oh you know, I'm still in doubt in that regards. Seems too... I don't know, unpractical? Look at Dracorex and then at Pachycephalosaurus for example; they say former is younger latter, but why would Dracorex suddenly... y'now, shrink its horns?

I wonder that as well. I'm just stating the latest theory. :P
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: maledoro on Mar 03, 2011, 06:37:47 PM
Quote from: scarhunter92 on Mar 03, 2011, 04:03:53 PM
What's the big deal? It's a fun thread that doesn't get old. It's not like it was about some old news.
It doesn't get old because it already is old. As for old news, somebody just posted something that was already covered.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Ghost Rider on Mar 03, 2011, 07:20:11 PM
Quote from: maledoro on Mar 03, 2011, 06:37:47 PM
Quote from: scarhunter92 on Mar 03, 2011, 04:03:53 PM
What's the big deal? It's a fun thread that doesn't get old. It's not like it was about some old news.
It doesn't get old because it already is old. As for old news, somebody just posted something that was already covered.

My bad. It was for Dromeasaur25. Doom found this topic for him.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Predator Queen on Mar 03, 2011, 07:27:28 PM
It was always the T Rex, big powerful and f^cking vicious, whenever I was a lot younger me and my small group of friends used to play Jurassic Park and I was always the T Rex, and when my voice was more shrill I could partially roar like a dinosaur but I stopped doing that at 10...
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Ghost Rider on Mar 03, 2011, 07:29:09 PM
Quote from: Predator Queen on Mar 03, 2011, 07:27:28 PM
It was always the T Rex, big powerful and f^cking vicious, whenever I was a lot younger me and my small group of friends used to play Jurassic Park and I was always the T Rex, and when my voice was more shrill I could partially roar like a dinosaur but I stopped doing that at 10...
:laugh:

T-Rex is King. Just because there are some new Carnivores that are bigger, the T-Rex will always be King. :D
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: maledoro on Mar 03, 2011, 10:47:07 PM
Quote from: Predator Queen on Mar 03, 2011, 07:27:28 PM
It was always the T Rex, big powerful and f^cking vicious
And now it's (possibly) the chicken; the animal archetype of cowards everywhere. (But we had mentioned this before...)
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on Mar 03, 2011, 11:31:53 PM
Quote from: OmegaZilla on Mar 03, 2011, 04:57:48 PM
Oh you know, I'm still in doubt in that regards. Seems too... I don't know, unpractical? Look at Dracorex and then at Pachycephalosaurus for example; they say former is younger latter, but why would Dracorex suddenly... y'now, shrink its horns?

Probably didn't need them as it grew older. They may have been a type of defense mechanism.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: scarhunter92 on Mar 03, 2011, 11:49:05 PM
Quote from: maledoro on Mar 03, 2011, 10:47:07 PM
Quote from: Predator Queen on Mar 03, 2011, 07:27:28 PM
It was always the T Rex, big powerful and f^cking vicious
And now it's (possibly) the chicken; the animal archetype of cowards everywhere. (But we had mentioned this before...)

f**king science better stop ruining my childhood. :(
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: maledoro on Mar 04, 2011, 12:03:18 AM
Quote from: scarhunter92 on Mar 03, 2011, 11:49:05 PM
f**king science better stop ruining my childhood. :(
Yeah, funny thing about science: it benefits all but the delusional.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Ghost Rider on Mar 04, 2011, 12:54:55 AM
Quote from: DoomRulz on Mar 03, 2011, 11:31:53 PM
Quote from: OmegaZilla on Mar 03, 2011, 04:57:48 PM
Oh you know, I'm still in doubt in that regards. Seems too... I don't know, unpractical? Look at Dracorex and then at Pachycephalosaurus for example; they say former is younger latter, but why would Dracorex suddenly... y'now, shrink its horns?

Probably didn't need them as it grew older. They may have been a type of defense mechanism.

Most likely.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Predator Queen on Mar 04, 2011, 01:00:27 AM
Quote from: maledoro on Mar 03, 2011, 10:47:07 PM
Quote from: Predator Queen on Mar 03, 2011, 07:27:28 PM
It was always the T Rex, big powerful and f^cking vicious
And now it's (possibly) the chicken; the animal archetype of cowards everywhere. (But we had mentioned this before...)
Don't ruin things for me please
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Ghost Rider on Mar 04, 2011, 01:01:06 AM
Quote from: Predator Queen on Mar 04, 2011, 01:00:27 AM
Quote from: maledoro on Mar 03, 2011, 10:47:07 PM
Quote from: Predator Queen on Mar 03, 2011, 07:27:28 PM
It was always the T Rex, big powerful and f^cking vicious
And now it's (possibly) the chicken; the animal archetype of cowards everywhere. (But we had mentioned this before...)
Don't ruin things for me please
Agreed.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on Mar 04, 2011, 02:21:08 AM
Quote from: Predator Queen on Mar 04, 2011, 01:00:27 AM
Quote from: maledoro on Mar 03, 2011, 10:47:07 PM
Quote from: Predator Queen on Mar 03, 2011, 07:27:28 PM
It was always the T Rex, big powerful and f^cking vicious
And now it's (possibly) the chicken; the animal archetype of cowards everywhere. (But we had mentioned this before...)
Don't ruin things for me please

He hasn't ruined anything. A chicken may be its direct descendant, but a T.Rex is still a T.Rex.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: maledoro on Mar 04, 2011, 02:23:01 AM
Quote from: Predator Queen on Mar 04, 2011, 01:00:27 AM
Don't ruin things for me please

Quote from: Ghost Rider on Mar 04, 2011, 01:01:06 AM
Agreed.
Yeah, learning just takes the fun out of things.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: maledoro on Mar 04, 2011, 02:25:34 AM
Quote from: Predator Queen on Mar 04, 2011, 01:00:27 AM
Don't ruin things for me please

Quote from: Ghost Rider on Mar 04, 2011, 01:01:06 AM
Agreed.
Yeah, learning just takes the fun out of things.

Quote from: DoomRulz on Mar 04, 2011, 02:21:08 AMHe hasn't ruined anything. A chicken may be its direct descendant, but a T.Rex is still a T.Rex.
When someone asks what you had to eat at KFC, you can tell them you got yourself some T.Rex. That'll put hair on your asses.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: chupacabras acheronsis on Mar 04, 2011, 02:27:31 AM
Excuse ME sir, Body hair is no joke.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: maledoro on Mar 04, 2011, 02:33:41 AM
Quote from: chupacabras acheronsis on Mar 04, 2011, 02:27:31 AM
Excuse ME sir, Body hair is no joke.
Of course not! I've grown some serious body hair.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Ghost Rider on Mar 04, 2011, 04:08:04 AM
Quote from: maledoro on Mar 04, 2011, 02:25:34 AM
Quote from: Predator Queen on Mar 04, 2011, 01:00:27 AM
Don't ruin things for me please

Quote from: Ghost Rider on Mar 04, 2011, 01:01:06 AM
Agreed.
Yeah, learning just takes the fun out of things.

Quote from: DoomRulz on Mar 04, 2011, 02:21:08 AMHe hasn't ruined anything. A chicken may be its direct descendant, but a T.Rex is still a T.Rex.
When someone asks what you had to eat at KFC, you can tell them you got yourself some T.Rex. That'll put hair on your asses.

I really don't know what to say. :-\
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Omegamorph on Mar 04, 2011, 07:52:01 PM
Quote from: maledoro on Mar 03, 2011, 10:47:07 PM
(But we had mentioned this before...)
Yes, and I already mentioned that the stuff in the famous 'B-Rex' specimen (and other ones) may be nothing more than Bacterial Biofilm (http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn14427-t-rex-tissue-may-just-be-bacterial-scum.html?feedId=online-news_rss20). Argument's very disputed.

Quote from: DoomRulz on Mar 03, 2011, 11:31:53 PM
Probably didn't need them as it grew older. They may have been a type of defense mechanism.
That suddenly becomes useless in adult age...?
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on Mar 04, 2011, 10:23:57 PM
Well what's your theory then?
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Omegamorph on Mar 04, 2011, 10:27:16 PM
...They're not really the same species, if you ask me. Same with the Torosaurus/Triceratops thing.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Ghost Rider on Mar 04, 2011, 10:28:07 PM
Quote from: OmegaZilla on Mar 04, 2011, 10:27:16 PM
...They're not really the same species, if you ask me. Same with the Torosaurus/Triceratops thing.

I see what you mean, but try to convince Jack Horner.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on Mar 04, 2011, 10:35:12 PM
Quote from: OmegaZilla on Mar 04, 2011, 10:27:16 PM
...They're not really the same species, if you ask me. Same with the Torosaurus/Triceratops thing.

I think there's some truth to what the man says. I attended a lecture on this very topic that he hosted and he really made me think about the fact that (in the above example) we have plenty of old Triceratops fossils, yet no young Torosaurus.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Ghost Rider on Mar 04, 2011, 10:36:12 PM
Quote from: DoomRulz on Mar 04, 2011, 10:35:12 PM
Quote from: OmegaZilla on Mar 04, 2011, 10:27:16 PM
...They're not really the same species, if you ask me. Same with the Torosaurus/Triceratops thing.

I think there's some truth to what the man says. I attended a lecture on this very topic that he hosted and he really made me think about the fact that (in the above example) we have plenty of old Triceratops fossils, yet no young Torosaurus.

How long ago was it? I'm just trying to remember when this theory was announced.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Omegamorph on Mar 04, 2011, 10:42:10 PM
Quote from: DoomRulz on Mar 04, 2011, 10:35:12 PM
we have plenty of old Triceratops fossils, yet no young Torosaurus.
What if in 300 million years, Humanity is extinct and the only fossils the Cthulhu Spawn (or insert civilization here) will find, are of a child's, and then they find only adult Gorillas' skeletons? Will they think that the human babies' skeletons are the young of the Gorillas' skeletons?
We've got a f**kload of species that did not fossilize. And the ones that did fossilize are very, very rare. Fact that we've found only adults of the Triceratops specimen doesn't demonstrate a lot.
It's for this very reason that I doubt the 'T.Rex max. life span = 30 years' thing as well.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on Mar 04, 2011, 11:34:08 PM
Quote from: Ghost Rider on Mar 04, 2011, 10:36:12 PM
Quote from: DoomRulz on Mar 04, 2011, 10:35:12 PM
Quote from: OmegaZilla on Mar 04, 2011, 10:27:16 PM
...They're not really the same species, if you ask me. Same with the Torosaurus/Triceratops thing.

I think there's some truth to what the man says. I attended a lecture on this very topic that he hosted and he really made me think about the fact that (in the above example) we have plenty of old Triceratops fossils, yet no young Torosaurus.

How long ago was it? I'm just trying to remember when this theory was announced.

Last summer.

Quote from: OmegaZilla on Mar 04, 2011, 10:42:10 PM
Quote from: DoomRulz on Mar 04, 2011, 10:35:12 PM
we have plenty of old Triceratops fossils, yet no young Torosaurus.
What if in 300 million years, Humanity is extinct and the only fossils the Cthulhu Spawn (or insert civilization here) will find, are of a child's, and then they find only adult Gorillas' skeletons? Will they think that the human babies' skeletons are the young of the Gorillas' skeletons?
We've got a f**kload of species that did not fossilize. And the ones that did fossilize are very, very rare. Fact that we've found only adults of the Triceratops specimen doesn't demonstrate a lot.
It's for this very reason that I doubt the 'T.Rex max. life span = 30 years' thing as well.

The difference between a human and a gorilla skeleton are pretty striking...
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Sharp Sticks on Mar 04, 2011, 11:38:33 PM
Quote from: DoomRulz on Mar 04, 2011, 11:34:08 PM
Quote from: OmegaZilla on Mar 04, 2011, 10:42:10 PM
What if in 300 million years, Humanity is extinct and the only fossils the Cthulhu Spawn (or insert civilization here) will find, are of a child's, and then they find only adult Gorillas' skeletons? Will they think that the human babies' skeletons are the young of the Gorillas' skeletons?
We've got a f**kload of species that did not fossilize. And the ones that did fossilize are very, very rare. Fact that we've found only adults of the Triceratops specimen doesn't demonstrate a lot.
It's for this very reason that I doubt the 'T.Rex max. life span = 30 years' thing as well.

The difference between a human and a gorilla skeleton are pretty striking...

In Omega's defense, it's harder to tell when you've got compound eyes and navigate via antennae.

Plesiosaurus had a short head and a long tail once upon a time.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on Mar 05, 2011, 12:02:03 AM
Navigate via antennae? When did Omega become an insect?
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Sharp Sticks on Mar 05, 2011, 01:22:29 AM
He was talking about futuristic extraterrestial paleontologists digging up human remains.

But that's beside the point. Yes, he's a bug.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: ShadowPred on Mar 05, 2011, 01:24:12 AM
Quote from: maledoro on Mar 04, 2011, 02:25:34 AM
Quote from: Predator Queen on Mar 04, 2011, 01:00:27 AM
Don't ruin things for me please

Quote from: Ghost Rider on Mar 04, 2011, 01:01:06 AM
Agreed.
Yeah, learning just takes the fun out of things.

Quote from: DoomRulz on Mar 04, 2011, 02:21:08 AMHe hasn't ruined anything. A chicken may be its direct descendant, but a T.Rex is still a T.Rex.
When someone asks what you had to eat at KFC, you can tell them you got yourself some T.Rex. That'll put hair on your asses.



*cries*
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Sharp Sticks on Mar 05, 2011, 01:28:10 AM
No, Shadowpred! Don't cry! He can smell weakness, like a lioness culling a herd of gazelle.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: ShadowPred on Mar 05, 2011, 01:30:55 AM
(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Ffc04.deviantart.net%2Ffs70%2Ff%2F2010%2F146%2F9%2Fe%2FMega_T_Rex_Chicken_by_doomsdaydevice9000.jpg&hash=5a675f6512f74bc1dd6e075d9396dede2bff8c1b)



(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi124.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fp30%2FShadowPred%2Ftumblr_leb9pz7NqS1qci8qj.gif&hash=a145b6b1be18036fd69c576e10ac92d4936ee29a)
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: King Rathalos on Mar 05, 2011, 01:41:10 AM
Quote from: ShadowPred on Mar 05, 2011, 01:30:55 AM
(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Ffc04.deviantart.net%2Ffs70%2Ff%2F2010%2F146%2F9%2Fe%2FMega_T_Rex_Chicken_by_doomsdaydevice9000.jpg&hash=5a675f6512f74bc1dd6e075d9396dede2bff8c1b)



(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.myconfinedspace.com%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2Ftdomf%2F63398%2Fmariowtf.jpg&hash=b8cfa9f7c9c44f199988afa188235eaefa83c807)
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: maledoro on Mar 05, 2011, 02:11:49 AM
Quote from: OmegaZilla on Mar 04, 2011, 07:52:01 PM
Quote from: maledoro on Mar 03, 2011, 10:47:07 PM
(But we had mentioned this before...)
Yes, and I already mentioned that the stuff in the famous 'B-Rex' specimen (and other ones) may be nothing more than Bacterial Biofilm (http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn14427-t-rex-tissue-may-just-be-bacterial-scum.html?feedId=online-news_rss20). Argument's very disputed.
The point is that we had already discussed it, not what is right, wrong or dubious.

Quote from: Sharp Sticks on Mar 05, 2011, 01:28:10 AM
No, Shadowpred! Don't cry! He can smell weakness, like a lioness culling a herd of gazelle.
Lion.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Sharp Sticks on Mar 05, 2011, 02:12:52 AM
I knew you were going to say exactly that.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Predator Queen on Mar 05, 2011, 05:56:54 AM
Quote from: ShadowPred on Mar 05, 2011, 01:24:12 AM
Quote from: maledoro on Mar 04, 2011, 02:25:34 AM
Quote from: Predator Queen on Mar 04, 2011, 01:00:27 AM
Don't ruin things for me please

Quote from: Ghost Rider on Mar 04, 2011, 01:01:06 AM
Agreed.
Yeah, learning just takes the fun out of things.

Quote from: DoomRulz on Mar 04, 2011, 02:21:08 AMHe hasn't ruined anything. A chicken may be its direct descendant, but a T.Rex is still a T.Rex.
When someone asks what you had to eat at KFC, you can tell them you got yourself some T.Rex. That'll put hair on your asses.



*cries*
dont cry just ignore him {Pats your back}
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: maledoro on Mar 05, 2011, 12:18:36 PM
Quote from: Predator Queen on Mar 05, 2011, 05:56:54 AM
dont cry just ignore him
Ignore who?
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Omegamorph on Mar 05, 2011, 12:27:55 PM
Quote from: DoomRulz on Mar 04, 2011, 11:34:08 PM
The difference between a human and a gorilla skeleton are pretty striking...
Yeah, thought about that - let's make the reverse example.
Okey, let's assume that in 300 million years, an alien species with...  *looks at Sharp Sticks' post* ... compound eyes and antennae, discovers only baby Gorilla skeletons...
(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Ffarm1.static.flickr.com%2F114%2F306071741_a2f16c9064.jpg&hash=d94ee3a839cc0220c7bff326decf2d0f5f663ae8)
...And only adult Human skeletons.
(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.fallingpixel.com%2Fproducts%2F6521%2Fmains%2FHuman%2520Skeleton%252001.jpg&hash=052fe61ef34b2e37b08dda76e9f4efb620365a5d)
They'd assume at a point, as Paleontologists, that those two were the same thing, in different stages of life - the differences in the skull explained with aging. Same with what Horner says about the Torosaurus/Triceratops thing!
By this token, until there's not a striking, ultimate proof of Horner's theory, I'm not taking it into account. At all.

Quote from: Sharp Sticks on Mar 05, 2011, 01:22:29 AM
But that's beside the point. Yes, he's a bug.
(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.alicia-logic.com%2Fcapsimages%2Fmib_008VincentDOnofrio.jpg&hash=5213af90887909a4520033493565b42f05cd104f)
I f**king knew this skin wouldn't hide my appearence well enough!
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: maledoro on Mar 06, 2011, 01:23:12 AM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2iS3s7bahMg# (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2iS3s7bahMg#)
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: ShadowPred on Mar 06, 2011, 06:06:04 AM
Quote from: maledoro on Mar 06, 2011, 01:23:12 AM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2iS3s7bahMg# (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2iS3s7bahMg#)


lol
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Dromaeosaur25 on Mar 08, 2011, 06:24:55 PM
Yikes, sorry I haven't posted in a while despite this thread being dug up for me... Insane schedule I tell ya.
Anyway, I don't really put that much faith into Jack Horner's theories. Also, he was one of the most adamant that T. rex was a scavenger, wasn't he? I find it much more plausible that T. rex was like a lion, a hunter that simply scavenged when the opportunity presented itself. And yeah, I'm not so sure about the Torosaurus/Triceratops theory either...
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Ghost Rider on Mar 08, 2011, 06:26:29 PM
Quote from: Dromaeosaur25 on Mar 08, 2011, 06:24:55 PM
Yikes, sorry I haven't posted in a while despite this thread being dug up for me... Insane schedule I tell ya.
Anyway, I don't really put that much faith into Jack Horner's theories. Also, he was one of the most adamant that T. rex was a scavenger, wasn't he? I find it much more plausible that T. rex was like a lion, a hunter that simply scavenged when the opportunity presented itself. And yeah, I'm not so sure about the Torosaurus/Triceratops theory either...

I agree with you on that part 100%.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Dromaeosaur25 on Mar 08, 2011, 06:31:37 PM
Quote from: Ghost Rider on Mar 08, 2011, 06:26:29 PM
Quote from: Dromaeosaur25 on Mar 08, 2011, 06:24:55 PM
Yikes, sorry I haven't posted in a while despite this thread being dug up for me... Insane schedule I tell ya.
Anyway, I don't really put that much faith into Jack Horner's theories. Also, he was one of the most adamant that T. rex was a scavenger, wasn't he? I find it much more plausible that T. rex was like a lion, a hunter that simply scavenged when the opportunity presented itself. And yeah, I'm not so sure about the Torosaurus/Triceratops theory either...

I agree with you on that part 100%.

And get this: one of Jack Horner's biggest arguments supporting the theory that T. rex was a scavenger was that its arms were too small to be useful for hunting. Robert T. Bakker then argued that it didn't have much need for its arms when it already had those massive jaws, lol.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Ghost Rider on Mar 08, 2011, 06:32:37 PM
Quote from: Dromaeosaur25 on Mar 08, 2011, 06:31:37 PM
Quote from: Ghost Rider on Mar 08, 2011, 06:26:29 PM
Quote from: Dromaeosaur25 on Mar 08, 2011, 06:24:55 PM
Yikes, sorry I haven't posted in a while despite this thread being dug up for me... Insane schedule I tell ya.
Anyway, I don't really put that much faith into Jack Horner's theories. Also, he was one of the most adamant that T. rex was a scavenger, wasn't he? I find it much more plausible that T. rex was like a lion, a hunter that simply scavenged when the opportunity presented itself. And yeah, I'm not so sure about the Torosaurus/Triceratops theory either...

I agree with you on that part 100%.

And get this: one of Jack Horner's biggest arguments supporting the theory that T. rex was a scavenger was that its arms were too small to be useful for hunting. Robert T. Bakker then argued that it didn't have much need for its arms when it already had those massive jaws, lol.

True, though one has to wonder about those tiny arms.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Dromaeosaur25 on Mar 08, 2011, 06:37:09 PM
Quote from: Ghost Rider on Mar 08, 2011, 06:32:37 PM
Quote from: Dromaeosaur25 on Mar 08, 2011, 06:31:37 PM
Quote from: Ghost Rider on Mar 08, 2011, 06:26:29 PM
Quote from: Dromaeosaur25 on Mar 08, 2011, 06:24:55 PM
Yikes, sorry I haven't posted in a while despite this thread being dug up for me... Insane schedule I tell ya.
Anyway, I don't really put that much faith into Jack Horner's theories. Also, he was one of the most adamant that T. rex was a scavenger, wasn't he? I find it much more plausible that T. rex was like a lion, a hunter that simply scavenged when the opportunity presented itself. And yeah, I'm not so sure about the Torosaurus/Triceratops theory either...

I agree with you on that part 100%.

And get this: one of Jack Horner's biggest arguments supporting the theory that T. rex was a scavenger was that its arms were too small to be useful for hunting. Robert T. Bakker then argued that it didn't have much need for its arms when it already had those massive jaws, lol.

True, though one has to wonder about those tiny arms.

Yeah, though I hear that despite being so small, they were pretty heavily muscled. I imagine it just used them to get back up after laying down.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Ghost Rider on Mar 08, 2011, 11:16:13 PM
Quote from: Dromaeosaur25 on Mar 08, 2011, 06:37:09 PM
Quote from: Ghost Rider on Mar 08, 2011, 06:32:37 PM
Quote from: Dromaeosaur25 on Mar 08, 2011, 06:31:37 PM
Quote from: Ghost Rider on Mar 08, 2011, 06:26:29 PM
Quote from: Dromaeosaur25 on Mar 08, 2011, 06:24:55 PM
Yikes, sorry I haven't posted in a while despite this thread being dug up for me... Insane schedule I tell ya.
Anyway, I don't really put that much faith into Jack Horner's theories. Also, he was one of the most adamant that T. rex was a scavenger, wasn't he? I find it much more plausible that T. rex was like a lion, a hunter that simply scavenged when the opportunity presented itself. And yeah, I'm not so sure about the Torosaurus/Triceratops theory either...

I agree with you on that part 100%.

And get this: one of Jack Horner's biggest arguments supporting the theory that T. rex was a scavenger was that its arms were too small to be useful for hunting. Robert T. Bakker then argued that it didn't have much need for its arms when it already had those massive jaws, lol.

True, though one has to wonder about those tiny arms.

Yeah, though I hear that despite being so small, they were pretty heavily muscled. I imagine it just used them to get back up after laying down.

I'm not so sure.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on Mar 09, 2011, 01:07:30 AM
Quote from: Dromaeosaur25 on Mar 08, 2011, 06:31:37 PM
Quote from: Ghost Rider on Mar 08, 2011, 06:26:29 PM
Quote from: Dromaeosaur25 on Mar 08, 2011, 06:24:55 PM
Yikes, sorry I haven't posted in a while despite this thread being dug up for me... Insane schedule I tell ya.
Anyway, I don't really put that much faith into Jack Horner's theories. Also, he was one of the most adamant that T. rex was a scavenger, wasn't he? I find it much more plausible that T. rex was like a lion, a hunter that simply scavenged when the opportunity presented itself. And yeah, I'm not so sure about the Torosaurus/Triceratops theory either...

I agree with you on that part 100%.

And get this: one of Jack Horner's biggest arguments supporting the theory that T. rex was a scavenger was that its arms were too small to be useful for hunting. Robert T. Bakker then argued that it didn't have much need for its arms when it already had those massive jaws, lol.

It's been proven that T.Rex was an active hunter. Yes, proven. Triceratops' frill was once discovered with a ridge on top of it, which was caused by T.Rex teeth. The interesting thing was that the wound had eventually healed, meaning the animal was attacked while it was alive. Sounds like a hunter to me.

Not saying Rexy wasn't a scavenger as well. Any top carnivore does both; lions do.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Sharp Sticks on Mar 09, 2011, 02:44:21 AM
Of course. If it's there, eat it.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Effectz on Mar 09, 2011, 10:04:01 AM
Scientists used cat scans to create a cast of the T-Rex brain cavity

(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg146.imageshack.us%2Fimg146%2F6065%2Ftyrannosaurusbrainaus.jpg&hash=2854790e23b037145046791a83d8900db3b17155)

Most convincing of all to many scientists, analysis of Tyrannosaurus Rex skulls shows the presence of unusually large olfactory lobes, which would have been ideal for catching the scent of rotting carcasses from miles away.Its olfactory lobes are half the size of its entire brain.

It also had really small beady eyes but this does not mean it had bad vision.Its snout was sharply pinched to clear its field of vision. Its eyes faced forward to provide some overlap between visual fields from the right and left eyes, permitting stereoscopic vision.

I agree that it did hunt if the oportunity presented itself,but from the evidence,it used its amazing sense of smell alot


Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Requiem28 on Mar 09, 2011, 10:13:50 PM
(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Faspectratio.files.wordpress.com%2F2008%2F05%2Fjurassic-park-1.png&hash=8209ff1c8b4be286cc2b7fbb15aa25f2f9fb2b3a)
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Ghost Rider on Mar 09, 2011, 11:20:03 PM
Quote from: Requiem28 on Mar 09, 2011, 10:13:50 PM
(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Faspectratio.files.wordpress.com%2F2008%2F05%2Fjurassic-park-1.png&hash=8209ff1c8b4be286cc2b7fbb15aa25f2f9fb2b3a)

Case Closed.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on Mar 10, 2011, 12:39:47 AM
Quote from: Effectz on Mar 09, 2011, 10:04:01 AM
Scientists used cat scans to create a cast of the T-Rex brain cavity

(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg146.imageshack.us%2Fimg146%2F6065%2Ftyrannosaurusbrainaus.jpg&hash=2854790e23b037145046791a83d8900db3b17155)

Most convincing of all to many scientists, analysis of Tyrannosaurus Rex skulls shows the presence of unusually large olfactory lobes, which would have been ideal for catching the scent of rotting carcasses from miles away.Its olfactory lobes are half the size of its entire brain.

It also had really small beady eyes but this does not mean it had bad vision.Its snout was sharply pinched to clear its field of vision. Its eyes faced forward to provide some overlap between visual fields from the right and left eyes, permitting stereoscopic vision.

I agree that it did hunt if the oportunity presented itself,but from the evidence,it used its amazing sense of smell alot

That's the only real ammo the scavenger theorists seem to have and frankly, its bullocks. A large olfactory lobe could also help sniff out live animals. Not like its tuned to only seek out rotting corpses.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Effectz on Mar 10, 2011, 10:24:31 AM
Quote from: Ghost Rider on Mar 09, 2011, 11:20:03 PM
Quote from: Requiem28 on Mar 09, 2011, 10:13:50 PM
(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Faspectratio.files.wordpress.com%2F2008%2F05%2Fjurassic-park-1.png&hash=8209ff1c8b4be286cc2b7fbb15aa25f2f9fb2b3a)

Case Closed.

Says the movie that made the velociraptor which is 3 foot tall into a 6 foot killing machine and the part where the t rex is standing right at grant and the 2 children sniffing them,but it obviously cant sense their smell because their standing still,awesome.Oh and lets not forget the Dilophosaurs it spits flem balls and has head flaps.

(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg28.imageshack.us%2Fimg28%2F2742%2Ftrollf.png&hash=6d91597db4da52c5d447f6c19c2cd1b280a89bfb)
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on Mar 10, 2011, 01:11:15 PM
It's a movie. Hardly an example of paleontological accuracy.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Ghost Rider on Mar 10, 2011, 04:17:13 PM
Quote from: Effectz on Mar 10, 2011, 10:24:31 AM
Quote from: Ghost Rider on Mar 09, 2011, 11:20:03 PM
Quote from: Requiem28 on Mar 09, 2011, 10:13:50 PM
(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Faspectratio.files.wordpress.com%2F2008%2F05%2Fjurassic-park-1.png&hash=8209ff1c8b4be286cc2b7fbb15aa25f2f9fb2b3a)

Case Closed.

Says the movie that made the velociraptor which is 3 foot tall into a 6 foot killing machine and the part where the t rex is standing right at grant and the 2 children sniffing them,but it obviously cant sense their smell because their standing still,awesome.Oh and lets not forget the Dilophosaurs it spits flem balls and has head flaps.

(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg28.imageshack.us%2Fimg28%2F2742%2Ftrollf.png&hash=6d91597db4da52c5d447f6c19c2cd1b280a89bfb)

Apparently jokes are now extinct. :-\
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: chupacabras acheronsis on Mar 10, 2011, 04:44:52 PM
Quote from: Effectz on Mar 10, 2011, 10:24:31 AM
Quote from: Ghost Rider on Mar 09, 2011, 11:20:03 PM
Quote from: Requiem28 on Mar 09, 2011, 10:13:50 PM
(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Faspectratio.files.wordpress.com%2F2008%2F05%2Fjurassic-park-1.png&hash=8209ff1c8b4be286cc2b7fbb15aa25f2f9fb2b3a)

Case Closed.

Says the movie that made the velociraptor which is 3 foot tall into a 6 foot killing machine and the part where the t rex is standing right at grant and the 2 children sniffing them,but it obviously cant sense their smell because their standing still, awesome.

what was it gonna do? snort them up? she knew they were there, located them within inches. what's your point.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Salt The Fries on Mar 10, 2011, 05:03:11 PM
Sorry, new to the party:

a pterodactyl and a triceratops.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on Mar 10, 2011, 07:46:35 PM
Quote from: chupacabras acheronsis on Mar 10, 2011, 04:44:52 PM
Quote from: Effectz on Mar 10, 2011, 10:24:31 AM
Quote from: Ghost Rider on Mar 09, 2011, 11:20:03 PM
Quote from: Requiem28 on Mar 09, 2011, 10:13:50 PM
(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Faspectratio.files.wordpress.com%2F2008%2F05%2Fjurassic-park-1.png&hash=8209ff1c8b4be286cc2b7fbb15aa25f2f9fb2b3a)

Case Closed.

Says the movie that made the velociraptor which is 3 foot tall into a 6 foot killing machine and the part where the t rex is standing right at grant and the 2 children sniffing them,but it obviously cant sense their smell because their standing still, awesome.

what was it gonna do? snort them up? she knew they were there, located them within inches. what's your point.

She should've eaten them, that's what.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: chupacabras acheronsis on Mar 10, 2011, 09:09:28 PM
She DID try.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Sharp Sticks on Mar 10, 2011, 09:13:12 PM
I was a JP movie. Children are the most dangerous game.

http://movieclips.com/F68rh-the-lost-world-jurassic-park-movie-the-school-cut-you-from-the-team/ (http://movieclips.com/F68rh-the-lost-world-jurassic-park-movie-the-school-cut-you-from-the-team/)
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Bloodee Jacob on Mar 11, 2011, 01:58:41 AM
T-Rex has always been my favorite-
(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.dinotopia.com%2Fimages%2Fart%2Ft-rex_vs_gigantosaurus.jpg&hash=849a4868a40d54c10e24c3bf5383b15f204218ed)
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Dromaeosaur25 on Mar 11, 2011, 02:33:26 AM
Quote from: Sharp Sticks on Mar 10, 2011, 09:13:12 PM
I was a JP movie. Children are the most dangerous game.

http://movieclips.com/F68rh-the-lost-world-jurassic-park-movie-the-school-cut-you-from-the-team/ (http://movieclips.com/F68rh-the-lost-world-jurassic-park-movie-the-school-cut-you-from-the-team/)

What about the little girl at the BEGINNING of that movie, lol.

Also, I think we've established that pretty much everybody loves good ol' T. rex, lol.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Effectz on Mar 11, 2011, 03:50:00 AM
Quote from: Dromaeosaur25 on Mar 11, 2011, 02:33:26 AM
Quote from: Sharp Sticks on Mar 10, 2011, 09:13:12 PM
I was a JP movie. Children are the most dangerous game.

http://movieclips.com/F68rh-the-lost-world-jurassic-park-movie-the-school-cut-you-from-the-team/ (http://movieclips.com/F68rh-the-lost-world-jurassic-park-movie-the-school-cut-you-from-the-team/)

What about the little girl at the BEGINNING of that movie, lol.

Also, I think we've established that pretty much everybody loves good ol' T. rex, lol.
indeed
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on Mar 11, 2011, 02:38:44 PM
Quote from: DarkenedWolf on Mar 11, 2011, 01:58:41 AM
T-Rex has always been my favorite-
(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.dinotopia.com%2Fimages%2Fart%2Ft-rex_vs_gigantosaurus.jpg&hash=849a4868a40d54c10e24c3bf5383b15f204218ed)

I love Gurney's art but this pic is so misleading. You'd think T.Rex were a midget next to Giganotosaurus which isn't the case.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Space_Dementia on Mar 16, 2011, 06:25:05 PM
The Velociraptor definatly, scared be as a child, just think its a pretty neat killing machine.

(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fblogs.sundaymercury.net%2Fweirdscience%2Fvelociraptor.jpg&hash=200d6888a334a30c7b0fde879be1e584ce10ec6f)
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: maledoro on Mar 17, 2011, 01:10:08 AM
(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fv338%2Fmaledoro%2Fraptor%2520jesus%2Ff686ec87.jpg&hash=3c8b24ccc2fdd792e2d9df339b52a7efb2e7377f)
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: SM on Mar 17, 2011, 01:19:50 AM
Quote from: DoomRulz on Mar 11, 2011, 02:38:44 PM
Quote from: DarkenedWolf on Mar 11, 2011, 01:58:41 AM
T-Rex has always been my favorite-
(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.dinotopia.com%2Fimages%2Fart%2Ft-rex_vs_gigantosaurus.jpg&hash=849a4868a40d54c10e24c3bf5383b15f204218ed)

I love Gurney's art but this pic is so misleading. You'd think T.Rex were a midget next to Giganotosaurus which isn't the case.

Just looks like rex is standing further back than the other to me.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on Mar 17, 2011, 02:50:48 AM
Well in that book, describing that picture, it says the T.Rex is cowering in submission. But the Rex doesn't even look like he's bending his knees that much, nor does Big G look like his legs are particularly straightened either.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Greedo on Aug 19, 2013, 04:12:34 PM
What is your Favourite Dinosaur ?
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: aliens13 on Aug 19, 2013, 04:49:57 PM
Megaraptor

(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimages4.wikia.nocookie.net%2F__cb20110807232849%2Fdinoargentino%2Fes%2Fimages%2F6%2F62%2FMegaraptor-1-.jpg&hash=b549698a3505ae3b5cd26d943a31cbf3b22f5bd2)
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: nostalgicalgorithms on Aug 19, 2013, 06:02:43 PM
I always liked this guy.
(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2F2.bp.blogspot.com%2F-4hjoQTV4V9c%2FUEmxdtTqW_I%2FAAAAAAAAACE%2FCMjOJN7N41w%2Fs1600%2FKrulos.jpg&hash=cfd41e853ede326cc36cc0e5472998e278f8d193)
(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fpaulhastings.me%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2011%2F08%2FDino-Riders-T-Rex.png&hash=cd6509cc522ff84bde7e4aa38ea3033d0a11a11e)

Which leads me to this question... How the heck did a cartoon about augmented Dinosaurs with lasers not become a massive success? DINOSAURS WITH LASERS. LASERS AND DINOSAURS. LASER ROBO-DINOS. You can say it anyway you like and its always awesome! If anything deserves a reboot its Dino Riders.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: whiterabbit on Aug 19, 2013, 11:48:09 PM
Brontosaurs burgers!!! So that would be an apatosaurus I think...

(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fupload.wikimedia.org%2Fwikipedia%2Fcommons%2F8%2F82%2FApatosaurus33.jpg&hash=42dd57fca70fd0ad53bd293b2b0499dace7ba2c7)

Yum, looking delicious already.  :laugh:
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Gilfryd on Aug 19, 2013, 11:53:35 PM
Spoiler
(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimages3.wikia.nocookie.net%2F__cb20120817192035%2Fgodzilla%2Fimages%2Fa%2Fae%2F05dvd_1_650.jpg&hash=637a5827ce14709c65f0ff6b937189a3b8c747a8)
[close]
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: AliceApocalypse on Aug 20, 2013, 01:37:21 AM
The T Rex

My favorite toy growing up was a model T Rex that I put together.  He was a little over a foot tall, and his name was Roscoe.  He enjoyed eating my friends barbies  ;D
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: maledoro on Aug 20, 2013, 01:48:57 AM
Mick Jagger.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Amaterasu on Aug 22, 2013, 04:10:05 AM
Allosaurus

That motherf**ker's jaws. Mmmhmmm.

(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.abc.net.au%2Fdinosaurs%2Ffact_files%2Fscrub%2Fimages%2Fallosaurus_z1.jpg&hash=fa256ed405bfcffaa917c5275517703371d95e49)
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: PVTDukeMorrison on Aug 22, 2013, 05:47:47 AM
Spinosaurus

(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi1228.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fee450%2Fpoisonstrudel%2Fspinosaurus_zps0414c3b6.jpg&hash=73bf0a229a37c1c99744b72f6bd23bfa017944bf)
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Amaterasu on Aug 22, 2013, 05:49:37 AM
Quote from: PVTDukeMorrison on Aug 22, 2013, 05:47:47 AM
Spinosaurus

(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi1228.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fee450%2Fpoisonstrudel%2Fspinosaurus_zps0414c3b6.jpg&hash=73bf0a229a37c1c99744b72f6bd23bfa017944bf)

Why do I find this motherf**ker adorable?
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: PVTDukeMorrison on Aug 22, 2013, 05:55:39 AM
Quote from: Amaterasu on Aug 22, 2013, 05:49:37 AM
Quote from: PVTDukeMorrison on Aug 22, 2013, 05:47:47 AM
Spinosaurus

(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi1228.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fee450%2Fpoisonstrudel%2Fspinosaurus_zps0414c3b6.jpg&hash=73bf0a229a37c1c99744b72f6bd23bfa017944bf)

Why do I find this motherf**ker adorable?
Because he's awesome
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Amaterasu on Aug 22, 2013, 06:03:52 AM
Quote from: PVTDukeMorrison on Aug 22, 2013, 05:55:39 AM
Quote from: Amaterasu on Aug 22, 2013, 05:49:37 AM
Quote from: PVTDukeMorrison on Aug 22, 2013, 05:47:47 AM
Spinosaurus

(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi1228.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fee450%2Fpoisonstrudel%2Fspinosaurus_zps0414c3b6.jpg&hash=73bf0a229a37c1c99744b72f6bd23bfa017944bf)

Why do I find this motherf**ker adorable?
Because he's awesome

I KNOW.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Nightmare Asylum on Aug 22, 2013, 07:28:28 PM
I went through some phases as a child...T-Rex, Spinosaurus, etc. But for reasons unknown even to myself I ultimately settled on this little guy :D I proudly present Protoceratops:

(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fupload.wikimedia.org%2Fwikipedia%2Fcommons%2Ff%2Ffc%2FProtoceratops_BW.jpg&hash=bf52b18697f32dbc2c1acd1e8989d17527642b4c)
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: shadowedge on Aug 23, 2013, 12:01:45 AM
NSFW language ahead

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=il85E-ms-44# (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=il85E-ms-44#)

Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Amaterasu on Aug 23, 2013, 02:00:26 AM
NSFW? Puh-lease.  :laugh:
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: SiL on Aug 23, 2013, 05:34:47 AM
Someone clearly doesn't have a job ...

Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Galli on Aug 23, 2013, 06:14:33 AM
Quote from: Amaterasu on Aug 22, 2013, 05:49:37 AM
Quote from: PVTDukeMorrison on Aug 22, 2013, 05:47:47 AM
Spinosaurus

(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi1228.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fee450%2Fpoisonstrudel%2Fspinosaurus_zps0414c3b6.jpg&hash=73bf0a229a37c1c99744b72f6bd23bfa017944bf)

Why do I find this motherf**ker adorable?

Maybe because it looks like a special needs child? God that thing is hideous. That... monster doesn't even look like a true Spinosaurus Aegypticus.

For my favorite... Either Triceratops, Ceratosaurus, Carcharadontosaurus, or Guanlong.


I'm leaning torwards Guanlong.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Sol on Aug 23, 2013, 02:16:31 PM
Hatzegopteryx and other large Pterosaurs, and Deinonychus.

(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg51.imageshack.us%2Fimg51%2F47%2Fqdhp.jpg&hash=036b9b6f93a97d73f9607c47cba3c98b416b0862)
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: ChrisPachi on Aug 23, 2013, 02:56:58 PM
Velociraptor!

(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fupload.wikimedia.org%2Fwikipedia%2Fcommons%2Fthumb%2Fa%2Fa6%2FVraptor-scale.png%2F220px-Vraptor-scale.png&hash=36429d586a75483e338fd35edb256355c1440210)

...f**k you science.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on Aug 23, 2013, 02:57:25 PM
Keras, I merged your topic with mine. We like to avoid double threads is all :)
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Sol on Aug 23, 2013, 03:06:05 PM
Quote from: ChrisPachi on Aug 23, 2013, 02:56:58 PM
Velociraptor!

(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fupload.wikimedia.org%2Fwikipedia%2Fcommons%2Fthumb%2Fa%2Fa6%2FVraptor-scale.png%2F220px-Vraptor-scale.png&hash=36429d586a75483e338fd35edb256355c1440210)

...f**k you science.

lol yea, he was my favorite prior to me learning it's actual size, thus why I chose the one I did.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: ChrisPachi on Aug 23, 2013, 03:58:28 PM
I guess Deinonychus just didn't have the same ring to it. :)
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Bat Chain Puller on Aug 23, 2013, 04:12:56 PM
Tyrannosaurs by way of his glorification as the (once perceived) largest predator to ever walk the earth. Books, television, and film had him on everyone's mind as this unstoppable titan of terror. Larger than life ... like Godzilla.

Sad to think we've probably only discovered a mere fraction of the different dinosaur species that ever existed. Would be nice to have a complete catalog to properly judge a favorite.

It would be like another species of intelligent animal digging up our remains in 65 million years and only finding under a 1000 different species out of the million or so that exist in our current sliver or time ... not the 200+million year window we have to look for dinosaur bones.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on Aug 23, 2013, 05:13:59 PM
It's also possible that some of the discovered species are in fact, younger or older fossil variants of dinosaurs we already know. Jack Horner is a believer of that.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Omegamorph on Aug 23, 2013, 06:53:27 PM
Or they could be different.

Many animal species are differentiated by literally minimal details.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: TheMonolith on Aug 23, 2013, 07:42:20 PM
Quote from: ChrisPachi on Aug 23, 2013, 03:58:28 PM
I guess Deinonychus just didn't have the same ring to it. :)
You kidding?
Velociraptor means "Swift Plunderer"
Deinonychus means "Terrible Claw"
Option B sounds awesome. I wish JP just called them Deinonychus (since that is totally what they are) and killed all the confusion.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Eva on Aug 23, 2013, 08:54:49 PM
SizzyBubbles! :D
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: SiL on Aug 24, 2013, 12:11:43 AM
Quote from: TheMonolith on Aug 23, 2013, 07:42:20 PM
I wish JP just called them Deinonychus (since that is totally what they are) and killed all the confusion.
They're too big even for that. They're closer to Utahraptors or Achillobators.

(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fupload.wikimedia.org%2Fwikipedia%2Fcommons%2Ff%2Ff9%2FDromie_scale.png&hash=5081c7ee9823395100f3ad89d9718d6b0c44452a)

My favourite dinosaur is, and always will be, Velociraptor, regardless of his actual size. What he lacks in imposing bulk he more than made up for in leaving the bitchingest damn skeleton ever (http://www.eos.ubc.ca/courses/Dist-Ed/EOSC116/images/moduleE-lesson19/FightVelo-pht-l.jpg).
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Space Sweeper on Aug 24, 2013, 12:25:39 AM
To give a less typical choice than T-rex (which it would be, otherwise), Yangchuanosaurus.

(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww005.upp.so-net.ne.jp%2FJurassicGallery%2FYsaurus2007.jpg&hash=9a3c2313ef867191e968dbb5e0ad02a9ae2f681d)

(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.wikidino.com%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2FYangchuanosaurusHenry-Gee.jpg&hash=9b4aba22625f3281883f6a3da2195dd6a4f6799c)
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Bat Chain Puller on Aug 24, 2013, 12:48:22 AM
Quote from: Space Sweeper on Aug 24, 2013, 12:25:39 AM
To give a less typical choice than T-rex (which it would be, otherwise), Yangchuanosaurus.

(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww005.upp.so-net.ne.jp%2FJurassicGallery%2FYsaurus2007.jpg&hash=9a3c2313ef867191e968dbb5e0ad02a9ae2f681d)

(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.wikidino.com%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2FYangchuanosaurusHenry-Gee.jpg&hash=9b4aba22625f3281883f6a3da2195dd6a4f6799c)

Cool. Inspired by this line of thinking I'd say I am also very partial to Albertosaurus.

(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2F%5Burl%3Dhttp%3A%2F%2Ffc08.deviantart.net%2Ffs70%2Fi%2F2012%2F211%2Fe%2Fd%2Falbertosaurus_sarcophagus_by_teratophoneus-d594g14.jpg%255Dhttp%3A%2F%2Ffc08.deviantart.net%2Ffs70%2Fi%2F2012%2F211%2Fe%2Fd%2Falbertosaurus_sarcophagus_by_teratophoneus-d594g14.jpg%255B%2Furl%255D&hash=554af803d9339772e6a2ec615b0e28b8c31b6359)

(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.havensstudio.com%2FThe_Havens_Studio_%26amp%3B_Gallery%2FAlbertosaurus%2C_Creataceous_Alaska_files%2FAlbertosaurus%2520web-filtered.jpg&hash=8462a1ef4116c2db4449f7e7a50e10d187ff8a4c)

(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2F31.media.tumblr.com%2F776b5fa609fa0bba0d3a99c7d6466ae3%2Ftumblr_mphdfv6dni1qjetwyo1_500.jpg&hash=ce3b3e6cce443f3631551fe920b8811a7732fd6d)
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: underbound on Aug 24, 2013, 07:10:19 AM
My favorite is yourmom-asaurus. Just kidding
My fav is probably the utahraptor or spinosaurus. Who heard the thing where the T-rex is actually a scavenger and not much for hunting?
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: nostalgicalgorithms on Aug 24, 2013, 09:57:46 AM
Some scientists have been saying that for years. Considering the size of a T-rex it would not have been a great hunter and tangling with other dinosaurs even herbivores of equal size could result in a severe injury. I watched a neat CGI show about it once, basically a small group of carnivores like a T-rex would follow their prey closely. They would try to scare them so one would break its leg, or simply go after the weakest one in the heard. If you ever fell behind within the heard you were dead.

I have no doubt a large pack of raptors if they wanted to could take down a T-rex. It was a big, mean, but slow creature and not the ultimate bad ass as we would expect.

Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Omegamorph on Aug 24, 2013, 10:02:16 AM
Suchomimus motherf**kers


(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fth07.deviantart.net%2Ffs70%2FPRE%2Fi%2F2013%2F053%2Ff%2Fd%2Fsuchomimus_by_uenom-d5vsy2m.jpg&hash=d26593e1182fb7aefa7b2d91ccb11e0b9f27b1f1)
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: TheMonolith on Aug 24, 2013, 02:21:40 PM
Quote from: SiL on Aug 24, 2013, 12:11:43 AM
Quote from: TheMonolith on Aug 23, 2013, 07:42:20 PM
I wish JP just called them Deinonychus (since that is totally what they are) and killed all the confusion.
They're too big even for that. They're closer to Utahraptors or Achillobators.

(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fupload.wikimedia.org%2Fwikipedia%2Fcommons%2Ff%2Ff9%2FDromie_scale.png&hash=5081c7ee9823395100f3ad89d9718d6b0c44452a)
Funny. All the materials I looked at had them be about the same size.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: War Wager on Aug 24, 2013, 03:12:21 PM
Always been drawn to Dilophosaurus:

(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg.amiami.jp%2Fimages%2Fproduct%2Freview%2F124%2FFIG-KAI-4635_01.jpg&hash=ecbe054f5e81a2e324b318fccc455bb874b2f809)

Quote from: underbound on Aug 24, 2013, 07:10:19 AM
Who heard the thing where the T-rex is actually a scavenger and not much for hunting?
I've heard that from Jack Horner; load of baloney I say. I doubt a Rex would pass up carrion, but the hyena of the Cretaceous? I'm not buying it.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Omegamorph on Aug 24, 2013, 03:23:07 PM
Healed wounds from T.Rex teeth found in duck-billed dinosaur specimens (forgot which species) prove that the thing hunted and, like every predator, sometimes failed at it.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Greedo on Aug 24, 2013, 07:38:09 PM
Quote from: War Wager on Aug 24, 2013, 03:12:21 PM
Always been drawn to Dilophosaurus:

(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg.amiami.jp%2Fimages%2Fproduct%2Freview%2F124%2FFIG-KAI-4635_01.jpg&hash=ecbe054f5e81a2e324b318fccc455bb874b2f809)

Quote from: underbound on Aug 24, 2013, 07:10:19 AM
Who heard the thing where the T-rex is actually a scavenger and not much for hunting?
I've heard that from Jack Horner; load of baloney I say. I doubt a Rex would pass up carrion, but the hyena of the Cretaceous? I'm not buying it.

Always liked them, they are a awesome species.

(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fstream1.gifsoup.com%2Fview3%2F1158000%2Fdilophosaurus-o.gif&hash=a59298518e5bd049aeee4909b9c6cc5a2f6a7d7e)
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on Aug 25, 2013, 02:23:14 PM
Quote from: Omegazilla on Aug 24, 2013, 03:23:07 PM
Healed wounds from T.Rex teeth found in duck-billed dinosaur specimens (forgot which species) prove that the thing hunted and, like every predator, sometimes failed at it.

And a healed Triceratops frill as well. The specimen you're thinking of Edmontosaurus.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Omegamorph on Aug 25, 2013, 03:35:35 PM
Yeah, precisely. Thanks.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on Aug 25, 2013, 04:01:12 PM
(https://fbcdn-sphotos-g-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-prn2/226663_10201924820268173_919515812_n.jpg)
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Greedo on Aug 27, 2013, 08:05:59 AM
Raptor is my all time favourite.

(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fstream1.gifsoup.com%2Fview%2F27015%2Fraptor-stare2-o.gif&hash=84be5a6829459df572032eef749ce3c9207b079a)

Also like the Compsognathus lol as seen from jurassic Park.

(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2F31.media.tumblr.com%2Ftumblr_lhxjjkkDB51qciujko1_500.gif&hash=3e9205a6787c973dc0f1595c15e53c76458e6a44)
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Terx2 on Aug 27, 2013, 01:00:54 PM
T-Rex of course. Followed by the Dilophosaurus.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on Aug 27, 2013, 01:03:24 PM
Quote from: Commander Keras on Aug 27, 2013, 08:05:59 AM
(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2F31.media.tumblr.com%2Ftumblr_lhxjjkkDB51qciujko1_500.gif&hash=3e9205a6787c973dc0f1595c15e53c76458e6a44)

I've heard of love bites, but that's a bit much.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Terx2 on Aug 27, 2013, 01:05:21 PM
Quote from: DoomRulz on Aug 27, 2013, 01:03:24 PM
Quote from: Commander Keras on Aug 27, 2013, 08:05:59 AM
(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2F31.media.tumblr.com%2Ftumblr_lhxjjkkDB51qciujko1_500.gif&hash=3e9205a6787c973dc0f1595c15e53c76458e6a44)

I've heard of love bites, but that's a bit much.

I take you've heard of bleeding love right.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: WinterActual on Aug 27, 2013, 01:17:06 PM
The Raptors. I think the T-Rex is overrated. Its big and heavy - it can't chase its prey in tight places and if it fall down it will fall harder because its heavy. If the battleground was one big flat space its overpowered but lets say in the jungle for instance or a forest - it will get "stuck" pretty easy  :laugh:
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on Aug 27, 2013, 01:24:34 PM
Quote from: Terx2 on Aug 27, 2013, 01:05:21 PM
Quote from: DoomRulz on Aug 27, 2013, 01:03:24 PM
Quote from: Commander Keras on Aug 27, 2013, 08:05:59 AM
(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2F31.media.tumblr.com%2Ftumblr_lhxjjkkDB51qciujko1_500.gif&hash=3e9205a6787c973dc0f1595c15e53c76458e6a44)

I've heard of love bites, but that's a bit much.

I take you've heard of bleeding love right.

In which case, he'll really be a bleeding heart.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Greedo on Aug 27, 2013, 04:48:05 PM
I wonder how small Compsognathus's eggs are ? lol
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Trunks on Aug 28, 2013, 04:12:55 AM
Dilophosaurus.  ;D
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on Aug 28, 2013, 11:27:37 AM
Get a load of this :D

(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2F3.bp.blogspot.com%2F-BYAmtCNjEwQ%2FUhxWS2sg8gI%2FAAAAAAAAC-o%2FbpKC3IGlcwQ%2Fs1600%2Fdennonychus.blogspot%2Bcomic.png&hash=3e88c7853e4efbdb689c29b03550f78d7feac955)
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Requiem28 on Aug 28, 2013, 02:26:27 PM
T
Y
R
A
N
N
O
S
A
U
R
U
S

R
E
X

B
E
E
O
T
C
H
H
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: King Rathalos on Aug 28, 2013, 07:30:25 PM
Quote from: Requiem28 on Aug 28, 2013, 02:26:27 PM
T
Y
R
A
N
N
O
S
A
U
R
U
S

R
E
X

B
E
E
O
T
C
H
H

Dis guys knows what's up.

However...this thread needs more Allof**kinsaurus.

(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimages.wikia.com%2Fwalkingwith%2Fimages%2Fc%2Fc3%2FAllosaurus.jpg&hash=81610b01c1c0f576efffe52e8c6093d7d032b998)
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: TheMonolith on Aug 28, 2013, 10:50:27 PM
f**k that
Carcharodontosaurus all the way.
(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.myjurassicpark.com%2Fcarcharodontosaurus.scene.jpg&hash=ee9813552d9e71894e1822cbade94c6d40335b7d)
"Yeah. I'm so badass, a clear blue sky was just not enough."
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on Aug 29, 2013, 12:00:13 PM
Spinosaurus be f**king dat shit up.

(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.scenicreflections.com%2Ffiles%2FCarcharodontosaurus_and_Spinosaurus_Wallpaper_xng80.jpg&hash=c018078e9c1e9b61d4e501e06ca69dbc27d1d583)
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Effectz on Aug 29, 2013, 02:05:27 PM
Eustreptospondylus.

(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2F0.tqn.com%2Fd%2Fdinosaurs%2F1%2F0%2FR%2FQ%2F-%2F-%2Feustreptospondylus.jpg&hash=c33404288611e8b12652d4357f361507ba0c3377)
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Master Chief on Aug 29, 2013, 02:11:39 PM
I <3 Dinosaurs

Anyone have any good pictures of the Utahraptor?
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on Aug 29, 2013, 04:04:16 PM
http://instagram.com/p/YbMiDSFElr/ (http://instagram.com/p/YbMiDSFElr/)

There you are.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Master Chief on Aug 29, 2013, 05:21:20 PM
Haha thanks.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Amaterasu on Aug 29, 2013, 05:38:22 PM
Quote from: King Rathalos on Aug 28, 2013, 07:30:25 PM
Quote from: Requiem28 on Aug 28, 2013, 02:26:27 PM
T
Y
R
A
N
N
O
S
A
U
R
U
S

R
E
X

B
E
E
O
T
C
H
H

Dis guys knows what's up.

However...this thread needs more Allof**kinsaurus.

(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimages.wikia.com%2Fwalkingwith%2Fimages%2Fc%2Fc3%2FAllosaurus.jpg&hash=81610b01c1c0f576efffe52e8c6093d7d032b998)

YEEEEEAAAHHH.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Gilfryd on Aug 29, 2013, 10:14:00 PM
Didn't that show get their allosaur and tyrannosaur models COMPLETELY wrong?
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: TheMonolith on Aug 30, 2013, 02:25:36 AM
Not sure about that, but the liopleurodon and the tropeognathus were depicted as far too large.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Vertigo on Aug 30, 2013, 10:09:25 AM
They also showed Utahraptor on the wrong continent, if I remember rightly. Not a big fan of that series.

On topic, it's hard not to be fascinated by Tyrannosaurus as there are so many curious factoids associated with it. We think of it as the archetypal large theropod, yet it's actually a very unusual creature, even compared with its relatives. Stocky and steroidally muscular, battery of senses that's rarely (if ever) been bettered in a terrestrial animal, bite powerful enough to crush bone like mild cheddar, may have been highly social, comparatively large brain, underwent vast physiological changes over the course of its adolescence, and monopolised predatory niches across its ecosystem right from childhood. Represents the apex of an evolutionary arms race of heavily armed leviathans that occurred in North America at the end of the Cretaceous.

It's a dinosaur known from a good catalogue of evidence, we even have skin impressions and biological material. And then you have the various controversies that've sprung up over the years, such as the scavenging bullshit. And of course the memorable representations in popular culture, which makes you (or me, at least) wonder what they'd be like in the modern world. If anything, Tyrannosaurus was more deadly than portrayed in Jurassic Park. Imagine five great white sharks rolled into one, on dry land...

(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fluisvrey.files.wordpress.com%2F2012%2F06%2Ft-rex-offspringb.jpg%3Fw%3D640&hash=793c903cbf6268311454d6bf10b1eeead0535c42)
(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fjamesgurney.com%2Fimages%2FT-rex-at-watering-Hole-.jpg&hash=8f2fb8d9db8927db38117f226792a66f5d7af51e)


Also very interested in early theropods, from the earliest known example of decent size, Herrerasaurus, through to Coelophysis which formed archetypal shape for the late Triassic, and to Dilophosaurus, which I believe is still the largest known predatory dinosaur up to that point (and whose taxonomy is widely debated - I like to think of it as one of the last coelophysoids, but it may be closer related to Ceratosaurus).

(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fblog.press.princeton.edu%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2010%2F09%2F134.jpg&hash=3b960d2bd1f54d976fba24e7a9b2dbdb296be398)
(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Farchosaurmusings.files.wordpress.com%2F2011%2F10%2Fcoelophysis-logs.jpg%3Fw%3D750%26amp%3Bh%3D975&hash=acc87516e96ed155efee7563db8b8ab7d230d677)
(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FQuqNUqH.jpg&hash=7e107d055929293ba899fd3023e553aa550a68c7)


Aesthetically though, I love diplodocids. Very evocative.

(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.lavozdelsandinismo.com%2Fimg%2Finfo%2Fsauropodos-2011-03-18-27060.jpg&hash=d948588700dc99eb9b1cf3673db4fdb739d68a04)

...Though any kind of sauropod will do.

(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg156.imageshack.us%2Fimg156%2F303%2Fbrachiosaurus3mg.gif&hash=495d87cf2f0b6cf69d73d557c26b354950b33b87)
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on Aug 30, 2013, 11:24:29 AM
Quote from: Gilfryd on Aug 29, 2013, 10:14:00 PM
Didn't that show get their allosaur and tyrannosaur models COMPLETELY wrong?

Hm, skull designs more than anything else were wrong. The show was ground-breaking in terms of its presentation even if it did get a few things wrong. It's still one of the better dino-docus out there. The best one hands-down is Planet Dinosaur. And yes, they did depict Utahraptor living in Europe...not really sure why.

I wouldn't say Dilophosaurus is related to Ceratosaurus. Dilophosaurus was larger but more slender and had totally different skeletal features (namely the crested head). I too consider it a large coelophysoid.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Sabby on Aug 31, 2013, 11:30:20 AM
Spinosaurus. No one can take it.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: TheMonolith on Aug 31, 2013, 11:58:49 AM
Cept my boy Carcharodontosaurus.
I saw him beat Spino once during Operation Genesis. Because as everyone knows, the choice of computer AI is a scientifically valid way to see how animals behaved millions of years ago.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Sabby on Aug 31, 2013, 12:08:41 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wv6hEuODrLg#ws (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wv6hEuODrLg#ws)

My boy can punch yours in the face. Punch it. In the face. How many dinosaurs could punch anything at all? This one can. It can punch you. It can punch you right in the face.

And it can look damn sexy while it's punching you in the face :3
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: King Rathalos on Aug 31, 2013, 02:11:30 PM
If we want to talk punching dinosaurs I'd include Brachydios from Monster Hunter.

But it's not a real dinosaur. :P

Spoiler
:'(
[close]
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Sabby on Sep 01, 2013, 02:20:32 AM
Quote from: King Rathalos on Aug 31, 2013, 02:11:30 PM
But it's not a real dinosaur. :P

This is a real dinosaur :3 And it can punch you. It can punch you in the face.

Actually, I'd like to take back my answer. I've looked and looked but I can't find the name of this dinosaur anywhere. The only time I ever heard about it was on a documentary, and I can't remember the name.

It was a small raptor that hunted small mammals in overgrown wooded/swampy areas, where larger dinosaurs couldn't go. It had large, forward facing eyes that allowed it to judge depth, a gigantic brain (for it's size) and hands with thumbs. In other words, it was the ape of the reptiles. If that comet hadn't wiped the slate clean, we'd be tracing our lineage back to it.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: viendammage on Sep 01, 2013, 02:34:06 AM
My favorite dinosaur growing up was Stegosaurus!
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: King Rathalos on Sep 01, 2013, 04:34:46 AM
Quote from: Sabby on Sep 01, 2013, 02:20:32 AM
Quote from: King Rathalos on Aug 31, 2013, 02:11:30 PM
But it's not a real dinosaur. :P

This is a real dinosaur :3 And it can punch you. It can punch you in the face.

I think you may have misread my post.

You posted the clip mentioning Spinosaurus can punch, so I responded by mentioning Brachydios from Monster Hunter since it's basically a dinosaur that punches shit.
(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2F25.media.tumblr.com%2Ftumblr_mbr1v7eKN01rsc0d3o1_500.gif&hash=5867e6150f4a8f808613b3fff7230aff263fcc01)

Since it's from a video game it's why I said it wasn't real. :P

Unless I misread your response and now I'm feeling like a moron.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Sabby on Sep 01, 2013, 04:36:42 AM
Quote from: King Rathalos on Sep 01, 2013, 04:34:46 AM
Unless I misread your response and now I'm feeling like a moron.

(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fstatic.fjcdn.com%2Fpictures%2FThe_6b4c9c_733861.jpg&hash=3dba58c6f35d0b55d7cc9732eeffc9d753cf157f)


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S33fp05Mgg8# (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S33fp05Mgg8#)

Awww yeah, Quantumsaurus Rex!


I found it! It's Troodon.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Vertigo on Sep 01, 2013, 01:56:35 PM
Quote from: Sabby on Sep 01, 2013, 02:20:32 AMActually, I'd like to take back my answer. I've looked and looked but I can't find the name of this dinosaur anywhere. The only time I ever heard about it was on a documentary, and I can't remember the name.

It was a small raptor that hunted small mammals in overgrown wooded/swampy areas, where larger dinosaurs couldn't go. It had large, forward facing eyes that allowed it to judge depth, a gigantic brain (for it's size) and hands with thumbs. In other words, it was the ape of the reptiles. If that comet hadn't wiped the slate clean, we'd be tracing our lineage back to it.

Sounds like you're talking about Bambiraptor (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bambiraptor).

The large brain relative-to-body-size doesn't necessarily mean it was smarter than other dinosaurs though. Dinosaur brains changed a great deal over time, regulating their increasingly heightened metabolisms and co-ordination; theropods from the avian side of the tree developed bird-like brains which could handle the complexities of flight. Other dinosaur brains are very reptile-like. Bambiraptor's closely related to birds, and consequently has a brain that's very different to the great majority of other dinosaurs.
None of this has to mean an increase in intelligence - crocodiles are surprisingly smart animals, able to solve puzzles, respond to communicative stimuli and have good memories, yet their brains are relatively tiny compared to those of birds. It's worth bearing in mind that every predatory dinosaur has a larger brain relative-to-body-size than a crocodile.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Sabby on Sep 01, 2013, 02:04:08 PM
I actually did find the documentary I was thinking about, Paleoworld, and I'm saddened to find out it's most likely inaccurate D= It was called Troodon (troo-ah-don), and Paleoworld claimed it was reptilian, when more recent data suggests it was more avian in biology. It also went on to make a lot of assertions about the 'Dinosauroid' that it would eventually evolve into without actually going into any details about the hows and whys.

Basically described 'it's a people but is lizard, naturally'.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Vertigo on Sep 01, 2013, 05:16:19 PM
Oh dear, the notorious Dinosauroid. That model darkened pretty much every piece of dinosaur literature in the early-to-mid '90s.

Troodon was an exceptional animal, though. Does indeed have one of the very largest brains-for-body-size known among dinosaurs (though, again, it's closely related to birds), and it was unusual among dinosaurs as it was adapted for a nocturnal lifestyle. Superb nightvision, and in northern regions with long periods of darkness, they grew a bit larger and became the dominant predator.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Dovahkiin on Sep 01, 2013, 05:56:55 PM
Tyrannosaurus Rex. All day every day.

Hail to the king, baby.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Omegamorph on Sep 01, 2013, 06:41:51 PM
mfw Vertigo in this thread

(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2F3.bp.blogspot.com%2F-tkgWAdHVqjo%2FTxMBrkKJIkI%2FAAAAAAAABDk%2Ft7HA5uA0uHI%2Fs1600%2FSam%2BNeill.jpg&hash=030841222529b0a40a27ee61fdf2a80b33b7002a)
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Nightmare Asylum on Sep 01, 2013, 07:12:13 PM
(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2F24.media.tumblr.com%2Fa7ece05d3da398af0fe5e8934077e61f%2Ftumblr_ml3tf1alGA1re4omao1_500.jpg&hash=cfc0e3c0e3f1da036896df30cb29e84acbbba9f9)
(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fkindertrauma.com%2Fimages%2Fkill%2Fendjc6.jpg&hash=ed31bc441a9234b11ea3d0c276ea3779a20a0de5)
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Greedo on Sep 01, 2013, 10:45:04 PM
(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.siliconrepublic.com%2Ffs%2Fimg%2FClever-Girl-Gif.gif&hash=bd34ba88ae1d0c9577b40e02f631eea77a3e5072)
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on Sep 02, 2013, 11:26:18 AM
Quote from: Sabby on Sep 01, 2013, 02:04:08 PM
I actually did find the documentary I was thinking about, Paleoworld, and I'm saddened to find out it's most likely inaccurate D= It was called Troodon (troo-ah-don), and Paleoworld claimed it was reptilian, when more recent data suggests it was more avian in biology. It also went on to make a lot of assertions about the 'Dinosauroid' that it would eventually evolve into without actually going into any details about the hows and whys.

Basically described 'it's a people but is lizard, naturally'.

You have to consider it in context. PaleoWorld was a product of 1990s paleontology. It's inaccurate by today's standards but it's still worth watching if only for nostalgic purposes.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Vertigo on Sep 02, 2013, 12:54:30 PM
Quote from: Omegazilla on Sep 01, 2013, 06:41:51 PM
mfw Vertigo in this thread

(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2F3.bp.blogspot.com%2F-tkgWAdHVqjo%2FTxMBrkKJIkI%2FAAAAAAAABDk%2Ft7HA5uA0uHI%2Fs1600%2FSam%2BNeill.jpg&hash=030841222529b0a40a27ee61fdf2a80b33b7002a)

(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fstatic.tumblr.com%2Fj8o1nx2%2FVYYlxqcji%2Fbabydoll_aww_shucks_thanks.gif&hash=857785220d450ba872944091b57b197639c71eef)
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Effectz on Sep 02, 2013, 05:25:41 PM
Really good watch,Horizon documentary.They found cells and soft tissue inside the fossilized remains of A T-Rex.

www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=uzF9VyKcd34 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uzF9VyKcd34#)
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: King Rathalos on Sep 02, 2013, 08:49:50 PM
Quote from: Nightmare Asylum on Sep 01, 2013, 07:12:13 PM
(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2F24.media.tumblr.com%2Fa7ece05d3da398af0fe5e8934077e61f%2Ftumblr_ml3tf1alGA1re4omao1_500.jpg&hash=cfc0e3c0e3f1da036896df30cb29e84acbbba9f9)

I never noticed it was grabbing onto the chair.

omg this scene just became even shittier and went straight up into the shitosphere of shit. :laugh:

Spoiler
:'(
[close]
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Greedo on Sep 03, 2013, 09:59:54 AM
Quote from: Effectz on Sep 02, 2013, 05:25:41 PM
Really good watch,Horizon documentary.They found cells and soft tissue inside the fossilized remains of A T-Rex.

www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=uzF9VyKcd34 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uzF9VyKcd34#)

Yeah I watched this too the other day , very interesting.

The Women wanted to try and revive the T-Rex with the DNA the mad banana.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on Sep 03, 2013, 11:49:47 AM
Quote from: King Rathalos on Sep 02, 2013, 08:49:50 PM
Quote from: Nightmare Asylum on Sep 01, 2013, 07:12:13 PM
(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2F24.media.tumblr.com%2Fa7ece05d3da398af0fe5e8934077e61f%2Ftumblr_ml3tf1alGA1re4omao1_500.jpg&hash=cfc0e3c0e3f1da036896df30cb29e84acbbba9f9)

I never noticed it was grabbing onto the chair.

omg this scene just became even shittier and went straight up into the shitosphere of shit. :laugh:

Spoiler
:'(
[close]

Hey, even raptors need to worry about turbulence. Even the acid-induced ones!
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Greedo on Sep 03, 2013, 01:31:37 PM
Anyone prefer the Dinos to be...

1.CGI?

2.Animatronic?

3.Suits?

Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: King Rathalos on Sep 03, 2013, 02:05:59 PM
Quote from: Commander Keras on Sep 03, 2013, 01:31:37 PM
Anyone prefer the Dinos to be...

1.CGI?

2.Animatronic?

3.Suits?

None.

I want my cloned robot raptors with plasma cannons already.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Greedo on Sep 03, 2013, 03:00:43 PM
I got to say the Compsognathus   is one of my all time favourites...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hyfy8rrfOkM#ws (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hyfy8rrfOkM#ws)


Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Sabby on Sep 05, 2013, 11:57:20 AM
Barring some gigantic leap in rendering technology, physical special effects will always trump computer generated. Even bad practical effects look better then good CGI.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Omegamorph on Sep 05, 2013, 01:05:21 PM
Quote from: Sabby on Sep 05, 2013, 11:57:20 AM
Even bad practical effects look better then good CGI.
lolno
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Sabby on Sep 05, 2013, 01:10:49 PM
Watch any Godzilla movie, even the black and white ones, any old episode of Power Rangers, and tell me those cardboard buildings being blown up with fireworks looks 'less real' then Transformers 3.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Omegamorph on Sep 05, 2013, 01:18:29 PM
I've seen every single Godzilla film. And yes, I'll tell you that this

(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fhome.comcast.net%2F%7Eflickhead%2Fzil02.jpg&hash=e8cfc8b4b72a8e0445f85cd8e50105f2f1fd434d)

in no way looks better than this, just as an example.

(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimages3.wikia.nocookie.net%2F__cb20080309131257%2Fpirates%2Fimages%2F8%2F8e%2FDavy_Jones.jpg&hash=176dfa2b6c50ad2959adeb0974483c88165a95f4)

But let's be 'fair' and let's put in some CGI that's actually older than that.

(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Felvenesse.net%2Fblog%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2013%2F01%2Fbalrog_Gandalf.jpg&hash=7af2d7670e0a0017719256e6cba411f051fb8b31)

(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fanimal.memozee.com%2FArchOLD-6%2F1187274150.jpg&hash=589757c6415d16802645d28d5199e973fee4c5e9)

(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.dbcovers.com%2Fimagenes%2Fbackdrops%2Fgrandes%2Ftitanic_1997%2F%2Ftitanic_1997_3.jpg&hash=1fc0e0f2bece875d46e4000bbdcfefb61a573287)
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Sabby on Sep 05, 2013, 01:26:46 PM
The problem with CGI can't be expressed through pictures, since it's the motion. Bad practical effects still appear real to your brain, so you perceive it as something that's actually happening, where as CGI moves too smoothly to get that genuine reaction from your senses.

(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fsocialcomotion.com%2FBlog%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2013%2F06%2Fzombies.gif&hash=5ac71e03c4f723549797a066154b8090a745c511)


When you look at that, do you look at it as a fictional thing or a real event? Like, is it something conjured up or something based in reality? As advanced as rendering technology is, it lacks the roughness of reality.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Omegamorph on Sep 05, 2013, 01:35:23 PM
To help your argument, rightfully, you posted some of the most mediocre theatrical CGI that has come in recent years. In the films I posted there is so far better rendering it's not even a contest.

Bad practical effects are real objects -- but if they are bad, they look like what they are: bad effects. Which is the point here. There is no illusion in a bad rubber suit, or in a bad miniature, as there is not in a badly animated digital character or a badly rendered digital city.

I am a practical effects guy. I f**king love practical effects and would take them over CGI anyday. But good CGI (and I mean good -- not something like that bulk of crap) is by no means worse than a bad practical effect.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Sabby on Sep 05, 2013, 01:44:19 PM
Hmmm, I see where your coming from, and I think the issue is we're coming from different angles here in what we value in effects. I find it very hard to be immersed without a sense of reality, and I can't perceive generated images as real images. I assume that's not a problem for you though, and I can respect that. Sorry if I misunderstood ya there.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: King Rathalos on Sep 05, 2013, 02:01:13 PM
Quote from: Sabby on Sep 05, 2013, 01:26:46 PM
(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fsocialcomotion.com%2FBlog%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2013%2F06%2Fzombies.gif&hash=5ac71e03c4f723549797a066154b8090a745c511)

why must you poison dis thread? :'(
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Omegamorph on Sep 05, 2013, 02:07:13 PM
You see that's not good kind of cgi. That's I-want-to-puke-on-innocent-bystanders kind of cgi.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: King Rathalos on Sep 05, 2013, 02:12:17 PM
Would that happen to be face melting acidic puke?

I swear it looks like concept art made on photoshop that was turned into a moving image...
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Sabby on Sep 05, 2013, 02:14:30 PM
(https://lh5.googleusercontent.com/-8TFPAHN4qf4/Ts-gQ71-oMI/AAAAAAAAeq0/x-3dXFg0hfc/w506-h406/Dinosaur%2Bvs%2BCaveman%2BStory.gif)

There. A computer generated dinosaur :3 Is this repentance?
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Omegamorph on Sep 05, 2013, 02:18:12 PM
Quote from: King Rathalos on Sep 05, 2013, 02:12:17 PM
Would that happen to be face melting acidic puke?
Remember what happened when I watched Starship Troopers 2?

Like that. Not as destructive, though.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: King Rathalos on Sep 05, 2013, 02:19:09 PM
Quote from: Sabby on Sep 05, 2013, 02:14:30 PM
(https://lh5.googleusercontent.com/-8TFPAHN4qf4/Ts-gQ71-oMI/AAAAAAAAeq0/x-3dXFg0hfc/w506-h406/Dinosaur%2Bvs%2BCaveman%2BStory.gif)

There. A computer generated dinosaur :3 Is this repentance?

NO!

HOW ABOUT A MOTHERf**kIN' T-REX BITCH

(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2F24.media.tumblr.com%2Ftumblr_lpp56bPIX91qgeh4eo1_500.gif&hash=01c41da149955ab85e47d7447d9800ef1c31779f)

Quote from: Omegazilla on Sep 05, 2013, 02:18:12 PM
Quote from: King Rathalos on Sep 05, 2013, 02:12:17 PM
Would that happen to be face melting acidic puke?
Remember what happened when I watched Starship Troopers 2?

Like that. Not as destructive, though.

Oh.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Omegamorph on Sep 05, 2013, 02:29:18 PM
(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2F31.media.tumblr.com%2Ftumblr_m9030jn6GN1qbshgko1_500.gif&hash=c3225ed01561e5b15bd4bfb5f63c81f1694d46df)

(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2F25.media.tumblr.com%2Ftumblr_m40wxuPF9k1rsz3ugo1_500.gif&hash=8d8ba54765bf586bd74d9d39b6df4e30784a61a4)
(I still cannot tell whether it's CGI or an animatronic with a perfectly erased rig and wires)

(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2F31.media.tumblr.com%2Fc18185f9d60be6932301120d799db093%2Ftumblr_mkrg9yZDoW1sntcr0o1_500.gif&hash=435becb0f681d7e88ccf8c025ea6c3568a758252)
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: King Rathalos on Sep 05, 2013, 02:32:08 PM
Quote from: Omegazilla on Sep 05, 2013, 02:29:18 PM


(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2F31.media.tumblr.com%2Fc18185f9d60be6932301120d799db093%2Ftumblr_mkrg9yZDoW1sntcr0o1_500.gif&hash=435becb0f681d7e88ccf8c025ea6c3568a758252)

That is the best part of the movie and it's only a 1 second shot... :'(

Dat light reflecting on the Raptors scales though...f**k that is awesome. :o
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Omegamorph on Sep 05, 2013, 02:39:24 PM
Quote from: King Rathalos on Sep 05, 2013, 02:32:08 PM
Dat light reflecting on the Raptors scales though...f**k that is awesome. :o
Yeah broman. I love that.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Vertigo on Sep 05, 2013, 04:00:55 PM
I think the usual problem with CGI is the way the scenes are directed, rather than the effect itself. There's a tendency to show CG entities making ridiculous moves in-frame, such as moving from a distance to inches from the camera at great speed - no real entity would ever be filmed in such a way and it creates an instant disconnect.

When you look at Jurassic Park's CG, which is still considered a benchmark despite being an early example, the creatures are almost always seen at a reasonable distance. On the rare occasions they're filmed up close, they're moving at a naturalistic rate in relation to the camera. You still have the sense that they're filming something real, because it's done in the way that you would film something real.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Sabby on Sep 05, 2013, 04:10:09 PM
Quote from: Vertigo on Sep 05, 2013, 04:00:55 PM
I think the usual problem with CGI is the way the scenes are directed, rather than the effect itself. There's a tendency to show CG entities making ridiculous moves in-frame, such as moving from a distance to inches from the camera at great speed - no real entity would ever be filmed in such a way and it creates an instant disconnect.

When you look at Jurassic Park's CG, which is still considered a benchmark despite being an early example, the creatures are almost always seen at a reasonable distance. On the rare occasions they're filmed up close, they're moving at a naturalistic rate in relation to the camera. You still have the sense that they're filming something real, because it's done in the way that you would film something real.

I tried for about an hour to type up why Jurassic Parks CGI looks real to me when almost every other example doesn't, and I think you've done a better job then I could have. Totally agree.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on Sep 05, 2013, 06:08:25 PM
Quote from: Vertigo on Sep 05, 2013, 04:00:55 PM
I think the usual problem with CGI is the way the scenes are directed, rather than the effect itself. There's a tendency to show CG entities making ridiculous moves in-frame, such as moving from a distance to inches from the camera at great speed - no real entity would ever be filmed in such a way and it creates an instant disconnect.

When you look at Jurassic Park's CG, which is still considered a benchmark despite being an early example, the creatures are almost always seen at a reasonable distance. On the rare occasions they're filmed up close, they're moving at a naturalistic rate in relation to the camera. You still have the sense that they're filming something real, because it's done in the way that you would film something real.

I think it's also worth mentioning, since you said that and someone posted the GIF from World War Z, the zombies in that film look way better than that image gives them credit for. In the scene in the disease freezer when Brad Pitt is confronted by a zombie, it actually looked quite real.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Greedo on Sep 05, 2013, 06:26:15 PM
We all just got to admitt that both CGI and Animatronics work best in different ways.

But on the other hand people might argue Animatronics look better in close ups than they do in CGI.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Gilfryd on Sep 06, 2013, 06:53:01 AM
I'll be the tokusatsu geek and say some of those movies and shows don't strive towards realism. They're not hiding anything exactly. Sometimes Eiji Tsuburaya would use a model or miniature when it wasn't necessary because he thought it would be more fun. I think that's lost on most Western viewers.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on Sep 06, 2013, 11:00:46 AM
Meh, the heck with just CGI or just practical effects. I miss good old-fashioned stop-motion.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Greedo on Sep 06, 2013, 04:45:43 PM
I have always apprecied A L I E N because there was no CGI done with the Xeno an for some reason it made me feel like it was like for REAL.

CGI on the other hand though, does not.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Omegamorph on Sep 07, 2013, 09:27:12 AM
Quote from: DoomRulz on Sep 06, 2013, 11:00:46 AM
Meh, the heck with just CGI or just practical effects. I miss good old-fashioned stop-motion.
Which is a practical effect.  ;D
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Sabby on Sep 07, 2013, 09:58:12 AM
Using real objects. The Thing, for instance (not that f**king remake) used puppets and props.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Greedo on Sep 07, 2013, 12:32:42 PM
My Dilophosaurus for future project.

Also animated the head, check it out !

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O3ExDEo_w8E# (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O3ExDEo_w8E#)
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Vertigo on Sep 08, 2013, 12:18:22 PM
Thought I'd share a piece of work from one of my favourite palaeoartists, John Conway (coincidence that he's three surname letters away from John Connor? I think not). This is Giraffatitan, the larger version of Brachiosaurus, enjoying a muddy rub-down.
I love seeing mundane behaviour represented in palaeoart - predation is ridiculously overdone, and usually portrayed very badly even by great artists and animators.

(To clarify: We don't know Giraffatitan had any form of headcrest, or any particularly vast swathe of neckwattle, but they're certainly very possible. Stranger ornamentation has been discovered on sauropods.)

(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fjohnconway.co%2Fimages.large%2Fgiraffatitan_mudbath.jpeg&hash=ad24c7de7c2e496abaf2f2a39fd982c25908d3ca)

Further genius here (http://jconway.deviantart.com/gallery/) and here (http://johnconway.co/).
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Sabby on Sep 08, 2013, 12:42:44 PM
It looks so derpy xD

Where as this is f**king terrifying.

(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi0.wp.com%2Flistverse.com%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2010%2F03%2Fdn13996-1_567-tm.jpg%3Fresize%3D550%252C418&hash=2b8c8f357b85462511ff275a32d335cedf7b6a38)
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Vertigo on Sep 08, 2013, 12:50:05 PM
Yeah, Quetzalcoatlus has gotten a hell of a lot scarier since I was a kid. You wouldn't get many Dinotopians riding their current incarnation.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: King Rathalos on Sep 08, 2013, 02:27:17 PM
This thread needs moar Hatzegopteryx

(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fhasanfirat.files.wordpress.com%2F2012%2F10%2Fhatzegopteryx.jpg&hash=ae12d446f06211e3fa7646a8b00c9083ba4e6ab0)
(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2F25.media.tumblr.com%2Ftumblr_m0439a3JJB1r38ji3o1_500.jpg&hash=d08e9ea9378ad5195495771f90dc960a98e54727)

Basically the almighty "f**k you" to anything that doesn't fly.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Greedo on Sep 08, 2013, 02:38:11 PM
Spinosaurus.

What a beast , one of the very little Dinos which could actually stand up against a T-Rex.

(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimages4.wikia.nocookie.net%2F__cb20111127193542%2Fvillains%2Fimages%2F4%2F4d%2FSpinosaurus-dinosaur-picture.jpg&hash=ae69385e8f63eefc82fab6902623deb977542bb6)
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Vertigo on Sep 08, 2013, 03:48:44 PM
Quote from: King Rathalos on Sep 08, 2013, 02:27:17 PMBasically the almighty "f**k you" to anything that doesn't fly.

;D
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Omegamorph on Sep 08, 2013, 03:57:35 PM
These big Pterosaurs remind me so much of the Marabou Stork... I imagine they occupied a similar niche.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Gilfryd on Sep 09, 2013, 04:02:40 AM
Quote from: Vertigo on Sep 08, 2013, 12:18:22 PM
Thought I'd share a piece of work from one of my favourite palaeoartists, John Conway (coincidence that he's three surname letters away from John Connor? I think not). This is Giraffatitan, the larger version of Brachiosaurus, enjoying a muddy rub-down.
I love seeing mundane behaviour represented in palaeoart - predation is ridiculously overdone, and usually portrayed very badly even by great artists and animators.

(To clarify: We don't know Giraffatitan had any form of headcrest, or any particularly vast swathe of neckwattle, but they're certainly very possible. Stranger ornamentation has been discovered on sauropods.)

(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fjohnconway.co%2Fimages.large%2Fgiraffatitan_mudbath.jpeg&hash=ad24c7de7c2e496abaf2f2a39fd982c25908d3ca)

Further genius here (http://jconway.deviantart.com/gallery/) and here (http://johnconway.co/).

Good stuff.

Anyone know the best sites for up to date or accurate as possible dinosaur art?
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on Sep 09, 2013, 03:31:53 PM
http://www.search4dinosaurs.com/ (http://www.search4dinosaurs.com/)

That's a site I used to frequent. I don't know how up-to-date it is, but it's still pretty good. deviantART is your best bet.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Sabby on Sep 10, 2013, 08:39:35 PM
This thread made me curious, so I looked up Primeval and Terra Nova.

So far, enjoying Primeval much more, since it seems more eager to throw around it's dinosaur knowledge by throwing around lesser known species, where as so far Terra Nova is just trying to emulate the feel of Jurassic Park.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DC on Sep 11, 2013, 04:47:41 AM
Velociraptor

(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.shindigz.com%2Fimages%2Fitm_img%2F11SZSUPVEL.jpg&hash=8566e87e2667c7773b8989f0fd14c863e881b2c3)
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Greedo on Sep 11, 2013, 09:00:52 AM
Quote from: DC on Sep 11, 2013, 04:47:41 AM
Velociraptor

(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.shindigz.com%2Fimages%2Fitm_img%2F11SZSUPVEL.jpg&hash=8566e87e2667c7773b8989f0fd14c863e881b2c3)

Ah , straight into evolution...

Not long now till its a bird.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on Sep 11, 2013, 11:43:34 AM
Quote from: Sabby on Sep 10, 2013, 08:39:35 PM
This thread made me curious, so I looked up Primeval and Terra Nova.

So far, enjoying Primeval much more, since it seems more eager to throw around it's dinosaur knowledge by throwing around lesser known species, where as so far Terra Nova is just trying to emulate the feel of Jurassic Park.

That's because Terra Nova isn't about the dinosaurs or the other creatures in the show. It's about humanity's efforts to rebuild themselves.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DC on Sep 11, 2013, 12:00:35 PM
QuoteAh , straight into evolution...

Not long now till its a bird.

Well dinosaurs are more closely related to modern day birds than they are reptiles.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on Sep 11, 2013, 12:17:48 PM
Get a load of this dinosaur:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drinker (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drinker)
Yup, its name is Drinker.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Vertigo on Sep 11, 2013, 12:23:55 PM
Quote from: ディロフォサウルス on Sep 11, 2013, 09:00:52 AM
Quote from: DC on Sep 11, 2013, 04:47:41 AM
Velociraptor

(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.shindigz.com%2Fimages%2Fitm_img%2F11SZSUPVEL.jpg&hash=8566e87e2667c7773b8989f0fd14c863e881b2c3)

Ah , straight into evolution...

Not long now till its a bird.

There's actually a theory that dromaeosaurids like Velociraptor are descended from early birds like Archaeopteryx, or the gliders that preceded them.


:edit: That's a bad picture though. Still looks too reptiley, and they couldn't hold their hands that way - they were angled sideways and slightly backwards.
Here's something more accurate, though of larger relative Deinonychus.

(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Ffc03.deviantart.net%2Ffs71%2Fi%2F2011%2F346%2Ff%2Fb%2Fdeinonychus_antirrhopus_by_pheaston-d4iyxad.jpg&hash=bdecc3bb5dfd7f75b275ab633c4e6eb82dafe9e9)

Just so we're all clear, though the exact evolutionary link is still debated, birds are dinosaurs. They're a part of Coelurosauria, which also includes Velociraptor, Troodon, Oviraptor, Alvarezsaurus, Therizinosaurus, Ornitholestes, Gallimimus, Compsognathus, Tyrannosaurus and their closest relatives.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Omegamorph on Sep 11, 2013, 04:12:49 PM
If you follow cladistics, birds are nothing more than feathered reptiles... :)
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Requiem28 on Sep 11, 2013, 05:07:21 PM
Quote from: Gilfryd on Sep 09, 2013, 04:02:40 AM
Quote from: Vertigo on Sep 08, 2013, 12:18:22 PM
Thought I'd share a piece of work from one of my favourite palaeoartists, John Conway (coincidence that he's three surname letters away from John Connor? I think not). This is Giraffatitan, the larger version of Brachiosaurus, enjoying a muddy rub-down.
I love seeing mundane behaviour represented in palaeoart - predation is ridiculously overdone, and usually portrayed very badly even by great artists and animators.

(To clarify: We don't know Giraffatitan had any form of headcrest, or any particularly vast swathe of neckwattle, but they're certainly very possible. Stranger ornamentation has been discovered on sauropods.)

(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fjohnconway.co%2Fimages.large%2Fgiraffatitan_mudbath.jpeg&hash=ad24c7de7c2e496abaf2f2a39fd982c25908d3ca)

Further genius here (http://jconway.deviantart.com/gallery/) and here (http://johnconway.co/).

Good stuff.

Anyone know the best sites for up to date or accurate as possible dinosaur art?

Interesting, but how can those tiny legs possibly suppory that massive body?
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DC on Sep 11, 2013, 08:30:54 PM
That is possibly the funniest looking animal I have ever seen.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on Sep 12, 2013, 05:30:17 PM
Quote from: Requiem28 on Sep 11, 2013, 05:07:21 PM
Quote from: Gilfryd on Sep 09, 2013, 04:02:40 AM
Quote from: Vertigo on Sep 08, 2013, 12:18:22 PM
Thought I'd share a piece of work from one of my favourite palaeoartists, John Conway (coincidence that he's three surname letters away from John Connor? I think not). This is Giraffatitan, the larger version of Brachiosaurus, enjoying a muddy rub-down.
I love seeing mundane behaviour represented in palaeoart - predation is ridiculously overdone, and usually portrayed very badly even by great artists and animators.

(To clarify: We don't know Giraffatitan had any form of headcrest, or any particularly vast swathe of neckwattle, but they're certainly very possible. Stranger ornamentation has been discovered on sauropods.)

(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fjohnconway.co%2Fimages.large%2Fgiraffatitan_mudbath.jpeg&hash=ad24c7de7c2e496abaf2f2a39fd982c25908d3ca)

Further genius here (http://jconway.deviantart.com/gallery/) and here (http://johnconway.co/).

Good stuff.

Anyone know the best sites for up to date or accurate as possible dinosaur art?

Interesting, but how can those tiny legs possibly suppory that massive body?

The way they're sitting suggests their legs collapsed :P
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: jeffchow on Sep 15, 2013, 03:46:11 AM
it was the triceratops til last week  thanks science you prick or is it paleontology who ever it was f**k you
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DJ Pu$$yface on Sep 15, 2013, 03:51:44 AM
Quote from: ディロフォサウルス on Sep 08, 2013, 02:38:11 PM
Spinosaurus.

What a beast , one of the very little Dinos which could actually stand up against a T-Rex.

(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimages4.wikia.nocookie.net%2F__cb20111127193542%2Fvillains%2Fimages%2F4%2F4d%2FSpinosaurus-dinosaur-picture.jpg&hash=ae69385e8f63eefc82fab6902623deb977542bb6)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5Fyar4wJ3-Y# (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5Fyar4wJ3-Y#)

And on that note, nothing trumps the almighty Tyrannosaurs Rex for me.

(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fl2.yimg.com%2Fbt%2Fapi%2Fres%2F1.2%2FLiMTnWZ..kZNfEstanM7.w--%2FYXBwaWQ9eW5ld3M7cT04NTt3PTYzMA--%2Fhttp%3A%2F%2Fmedia.zenfs.com%2Fen%2Fblogs%2Fsptusgolfexperts%2Fc1213dino.jpg&hash=f1a3fff1c67d3686feaa8fc2baa90361b315548d)

Thank you Clive Palmer.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Sabby on Sep 15, 2013, 05:06:52 AM
I believe there's a video in the thread of a Spinosaurus pretty easily wrecking a T-Rexs shit.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on Sep 15, 2013, 05:40:08 AM
If you're referring to that abomination of a fight from JP 3...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5Fyar4wJ3-Y# (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5Fyar4wJ3-Y#)
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Sabby on Sep 15, 2013, 05:44:10 AM
Nah, it was a documentary. I'm not going to seriously point to a movie where a raptor breaks someones neck as a source :P
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on Sep 15, 2013, 05:57:05 AM
Then it was something else. The only other fight video I've seen of Spinosaurus was from Planet Dinosaur when it went toe-to-toe with a Carcharodontosaurus.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Sabby on Sep 15, 2013, 05:59:27 AM
Bah, your right D= I was mistaken.


AWWW yeah. Terra Nova has just improved significantly.

Spoiler
My boy Spinosaurus has joined the cast!
[close]
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Vertigo on Oct 13, 2013, 10:53:22 PM
Stemming from this post (http://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/index.php?topic=49257.msg1794062#msg1794062), it looks like it might be a good idea to start a thread dedicated to general discussion of dinosaurs and the various other forms of life who wouldn't fit on Noah's ark a few thousand years ago, or were planted in the ground by Santa to fuel atheism and SUVs.
Pretty much every thread with a prehistory-y topic turns into one of these anyway, so seems like the right move to centralise it a bit.

If anyone's got any questions on this subject, go for it. Doesn't matter how Alan Grantian or six-foot-turkey-kiddian it is.

So, to kick things off in as Discovery Channelly a way as I can think of right now, who do you think would win in a fight between Utahraptor and an equivalently sized young tyrannosaurid? Not that they ever met in real life.

(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Ffc02.deviantart.net%2Ffs70%2Ff%2F2011%2F248%2Ff%2F6%2Futahraptor_v2_by_steveoc86-d48ytii.jpg&hash=a13ef474f9e78e4bc2718d04f6e169c5447c05fa)

(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.thefastertimes.com%2Fdinosaurs%2Ffiles%2F2009%2F10%2Ftarbobaby.jpg&hash=f0d43311a9c6256d80b51b32313333766a54a8fe)
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Omegamorph on Oct 14, 2013, 11:51:09 AM
This thread is diamonds.

I'd put the money on the Utah if only because it's an adult. Experienced hunter and stuff.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Greedo on Oct 14, 2013, 12:07:21 PM
Now I am liking this thread!


Look up Bernissartia....
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Vertigo on Oct 14, 2013, 05:56:42 PM
Quote from: Omegazilla on Oct 14, 2013, 11:51:09 AM
This thread is diamonds.

I'd put the money on the Utah if only because it's an adult. Experienced hunter and stuff.

Well, keep in mind that a tyrannosaurid would be closing on ten years old by the time they reached Utahraptor's size, and they'd likely have been capable hunters by that point; they certainly had the tools for it.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Omegamorph on Oct 14, 2013, 06:07:16 PM
Well yes. Unfortunately we have no idea of how these things approached that kind of situation, nor what their 'style' would be.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Xenodog on Oct 14, 2013, 08:32:30 PM
Quote from: Vertigo on Oct 14, 2013, 05:56:42 PM
Quote from: Omegazilla on Oct 14, 2013, 11:51:09 AM
This thread is diamonds.

I'd put the money on the Utah if only because it's an adult. Experienced hunter and stuff.

Well, keep in mind that a tyrannosaurid would be closing on ten years old by the time they reached Utahraptor's size, and they'd likely have been capable hunters by that point; they certainly had the tools for it.

I don't think we know enough - or will ever - of dinosaur behaviour to answer that.
But being so small in an enviroment with other bigger rexes doesn't seem like a great plan. What would they hunt also? Young herbivores would likely have adults defending them and scavenging is a dangerous hobby unless you have the jaws and balls to get into a fight over a carcass - something a juvenile probably wouldn't to a larger of it's kind. (T.Rex doesn't seem to have many competitors in it's range.)

I would also suggest a Utahraptor is more agile and dexterous than a young T.Rex.
A equivalent-weight Utahraptor would be longer and so appear bigger than a tyrannosaur and so in turn may have intimidation on it's side too though.

Just some of my two cents though!
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Vertigo on Oct 15, 2013, 06:42:01 PM
Quote from: Xenodog on Oct 14, 2013, 08:32:30 PM
I don't think we know enough - or will ever - of dinosaur behaviour to answer that.
But being so small in an enviroment with other bigger rexes doesn't seem like a great plan. What would they hunt also? Young herbivores would likely have adults defending them and scavenging is a dangerous hobby unless you have the jaws and balls to get into a fight over a carcass - something a juvenile probably wouldn't to a larger of it's kind. (T.Rex doesn't seem to have many competitors in it's range.)

I would also suggest a Utahraptor is more agile and dexterous than a young T.Rex.
A equivalent-weight Utahraptor would be longer and so appear bigger than a tyrannosaur and so in turn may have intimidation on it's side too though.

Just some of my two cents though!

Regarding what a young tyrannosaurid could hunt, there were definitely opportunities.
For starters, childrearing habits of dinosaurs are difficult to ascertain; even in the nestbuilding species it's unclear how long the parents paid close attention to their young. Sauropod youngsters were very likely left to their own devices immediately after hatching, and in any case it'd be very difficult for a whale-sized animal to defend tiny herdmates from fast, bear-sized juvenile tyrannosaurs. Finally, it's worth noting that modern predators frequently kill the offspring of animals that greatly outmatch them - cheetahs take baby wildebeest, lions take baby elephants.
There were also adult prey items that fit the bill. Ornithomimosaurs like Gallimimus were particular candidates, which might seem bizarre when you look at a lumpy Tyrannosaurus adult, but the youngsters were very different, which I'll get back to...

What's very notable with Tyrannosaurus rex in particular is that there were barely any other predators throughout its range, as you say. The largest I can think of was Dromaeosaurus, which was the weight of a smallish dog (and we only have tooth evidence of even that being around in the same time and place). This leaves a huge gap in the ecosystem, no adult predators between 15 and 5000 kilos... and one that's conveniently plugged if you assume the young rexes were hunting.

Anyway. Tyrannosaurus had one of the most peculiar life histories of any dinosaur we know. Particularly if feathers were involved, you might not even recognise a young rex and an adult as the same species (this even applies to the bones, 'Nanotyrannus' is very likely a young rex). While the adult was built for sheer overwhelming power, ridiculously muscled and equipped even for an apex theropod, the juveniles were long-legged and lithe. Particularly, they were some of the fastest sprinters among predatory dinosaurs - we can tell this from the leg configuration, as the tibia is significantly longer than the femur, and the feet extend this trait even further. They were also lightly built, with a compact centre of gravity.
To put this in perspective, we don't see these features exaggerated to such a degree even in most dromaeosaurids, particularly the big ones like Utahraptor. To get back to my earlier point, young rexes may have been very well matched with ornithomimosaurs.

I do agree with you that Utahraptor would've been more imposing though, for the reasons you state. Wouldn't surprise me if they had some form of feather display to deter rivals either. And their short 'wings' may have provided a boost to their balance, aiding agility.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Xenodog on Oct 15, 2013, 09:11:23 PM
Like I said discussing such things is always hard due to so little behavioural evidence actually existing.

You're totally right with modern predators and many often take larger prey than themselves. However in extreme cases like lion and elephant it is often animals or groups of animals that have become specialised over time, like certain prides in Botswana and Zimbabwe. Youngsters would likely never succede with such an act, but may indeed try.
With rex's sympatric herbivorous dinosaurs it's likely hadrosaurs exhibited parental care, but where the age / size cutoff point was I don't think we'll ever be able to tell. With ceratopsians they may or may not have done, but with such an ostensibly dangerous prey item would a youngster want to go anywhere near that?
You're right on both Ornithomimus like dinosaurs and the speed of young rex and the really interesting age-dimorphism, I think I read somewhere that out of all large theropods T.Rex was one of the best built for speed, but don't quote me on that!
I also agree re: Nanotyrannus just being a young Rex individual.

However, I think a good argument for small, at least bear sized, rexes sticking with parents until yay high is older rexes. Cannabalism is prevalent in many reptiles and carnivores today, and unlike baby Komodo Dragons who can escape into trees as one example, I doubt subadult rexes had such a way of escape, or would be ecologically seperated enough from older rexes to escape fatal attention.
Of course, speed may have been key to them escaping older rexes, but then we'd need to consider what size / weight they bulked up and resembled adults. Maybe this happened before leaving their parents?
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Vertigo on Oct 15, 2013, 11:52:30 PM
This is going to be a short one, as I'm using my terrible phone and am about to go offline for a week.. then again, it's probably a *good* thing I won't be able to waffle on interminably for once....

Great post, just a couple of points I wanted to bring up before I head off.
Adult Tyrannosaurus rex was built for power and its athletic abilities are hotly debated (personally I think their enormous muscles suited them for very short but massively powerful charges). You may heard about a potentially high turn of speed in smaller tyrannosaurid genera such as Albertasaurus, which I think I'd agree with. Though I don't have a skeletal diagram to hand right now...

Albertasaurus is a great example for the subject of how tyrannosaurids raised their young, too. Convenient! Your suggestion that young rexes hung around their parents for extended periods is one I very much agree with, and is borne out in the fossil record (arguably, because as we know, behaviour doesn't generally fossilise...), for this species at least. We have a bonebed consisting of a number of 'berties of various ages. My opinion is that this represents a family group. No other species were preserved, so it's unlikely to be random accumulation.
My opinion is that they may have been like great whites, which are communally social but hunt alone, with the group often converging on a kill site to form a pecking order. Tyrannosaurids took a very long time to reach reproductive age, so it makes sense for the parents to protect their investment over a long period (I'd imagine, like lions, interloping males would kill rivals' offspring to assure genetic supremacy - we do know the adults occasionally fought each other ferociously.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Xenodog on Oct 16, 2013, 08:02:15 AM
Hah.  :laugh:

And yeah, there have been quite a few headlines on popular science articles with vary extimates for T.Rex's speed. And yeah, thinking about it was probably tyrannosaurids and not specifically T.Rex alone that was built for speed comparatively.

I agree on the bone beds too, and that Albertosaurus and likely other tyrannosaurids exhibited parental behaviour.  I also don't think that with Albertosaurus, unlike Deinonychus bonebeds, there was np evidence of cannabalism and so it was likely a family and not just a carcass congregation like Komodo Dragons or crocodiles.
The white sharks analogy seems a good one.

Also commited  a bit of wikipedia theft and found this :
(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fupload.wikimedia.org%2Fwikipedia%2Fcommons%2F6%2F63%2FTyrantgraph.png&hash=85c07a9e3bce02dd492cd57e4363eff055c745e9)
Based on Erickson et al 2004.
Seems T.Rex in particular had a very fast growth rate, possibly for the greater safety size brough with it from it's own kind and for a wider range or prey?
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on Oct 18, 2013, 01:18:51 PM
We already have a dinosaur topic I started a while back so I'm going to merge the two threads.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Matriarch on Oct 20, 2013, 06:01:19 AM
My favorite is either the spineasours thing and the brontosaures
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Sabby on Oct 20, 2013, 09:10:37 AM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TyGCHwn-kVE# (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TyGCHwn-kVE#)
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Xenodog on Oct 23, 2013, 03:01:41 PM
No one else?...

In that case, favourite dinosaur & prehistoric mammal and why, anyone?
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: King Rathalos on Oct 23, 2013, 03:06:54 PM
For dinosaur, T-Rex cause it's the motherf**king T-Rex, in all seriousness though it's big, looks cool, and has a lot of sharp teeth. :laugh:

As for prehistoric mammal, it's a tie between a Cave Bear and Basilosaurus. Both are bigger and more badass versions of animals that still exist, and Cave Bears are basically giant bears, that's f**king awesome no matter how you put it.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Xenodog on Oct 24, 2013, 02:03:39 PM
Quote from: King Rathalos on Oct 23, 2013, 03:06:54 PM
For dinosaur, T-Rex cause it's the motherf**king T-Rex, in all seriousness though it's big, looks cool, and has a lot of sharp teeth. :laugh:

As for prehistoric mammal, it's a tie between a Cave Bear and Basilosaurus. Both are bigger and more badass versions of animals that still exist, and Cave Bears are basically giant bears, that's f**king awesome no matter how you put it.

If you like Cave Bears, are you aware of the giant Short Faced Bear?  :)
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on Oct 25, 2013, 12:27:45 PM
Quote from: Xenodog on Oct 23, 2013, 03:01:41 PM
No one else?...

In that case, favourite dinosaur & prehistoric mammal and why, anyone?

T.Rex, always. I grew up with it as the ultimate carnivore and that has stuck with me since I was a kid. Mammal...it's a tie between a mammoth and Basilosaurus. I grew up knowing about mammoths and that term has become synonymous with anything large in life, plus I love whales so that's why I took to Basilosaurus.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Gilfryd on Oct 26, 2013, 02:21:44 AM
Pterosaur myths busted
http://pterosauria.tumblr.com/post/64864790579/image-pteranodon-by-larry-felder-pterosaur (http://pterosauria.tumblr.com/post/64864790579/image-pteranodon-by-larry-felder-pterosaur)
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: King Rathalos on Oct 26, 2013, 03:10:05 AM
Quote from: Xenodog on Oct 24, 2013, 02:03:39 PM
Quote from: King Rathalos on Oct 23, 2013, 03:06:54 PM
For dinosaur, T-Rex cause it's the motherf**king T-Rex, in all seriousness though it's big, looks cool, and has a lot of sharp teeth. :laugh:

As for prehistoric mammal, it's a tie between a Cave Bear and Basilosaurus. Both are bigger and more badass versions of animals that still exist, and Cave Bears are basically giant bears, that's f**king awesome no matter how you put it.

If you like Cave Bears, are you aware of the giant Short Faced Bear?  :)

Absolutely.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Vertigo on Oct 26, 2013, 08:52:18 AM
Quote from: Gilfryd on Oct 26, 2013, 02:21:44 AM
Pterosaur myths busted
http://pterosauria.tumblr.com/post/64864790579/image-pteranodon-by-larry-felder-pterosaur (http://pterosauria.tumblr.com/post/64864790579/image-pteranodon-by-larry-felder-pterosaur)

I've been reading through Mark Witton's book on pterosaurs (http://www.amazon.co.uk/Pterosaurs-Natural-History-Evolution-Anatomy/dp/0691150613) while on holiday, I'd strongly recommend it to anyone here. It's obviously written by a scientist rather than an author, as he frequently gets bogged down in details and research trivia. So it doesn't exactly bring pterosaurs to life, but it's extremely comprehensive and shows you the complete picture, detailing the competing theories and strength of evidence for each major issue.
It's pretty academic, but as Witton explains most of the terminology, it's rarely a difficult read. I think any adult with an interest in the subject will be able to enjoy it.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Vertigo on Oct 28, 2013, 10:35:57 PM
Just answering these posts from the Crynosaurs thread (http://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/index.php?topic=47635.0) in somewhere more on-topic.


Quote from: Gate on Oct 27, 2013, 04:08:37 PM
A bit off topic, but what do you think about the scientific thought that dinosaurs were literally so far from reptiles that modern birds are now considered survivors of the Dinosaur era?

It's pretty much unanimously accepted at this point that birds are dinosaurs. They evolved from coelurosaur theropods during the late Jurassic. They're a bit deeper into the group than Compsognathus and Tyrannosaurus, putting them in the subdivision Maniraptora along with the closely-related therizinosaurs, alvarezsaurs, oviraptorosaurs, dromaeosaurs (inc. Velociraptor) and troodontids. Birds are most closely related to the latter two.

The most compelling evidence of this comes from recent fossil discoveries in China, with creatures like Epidexipteryx and Anchiornis which are unmistakably dinosaurs yet are evolving traits that appear in 'first bird' Archaeopteryx. They blur the line to such a degree that it's hard to decide whether they should be classed as a bird or a dinosaur.

We've also discovered tiny amounts of dinosaur biological material, and they've proven to be closer to birds than anything else alive today.
Finally, we see bird traits in many dinosaur groups, such as feathery insulation, calcified eggs and skeletal air sacs. Not to mention, as alluded to in Jurassic Park, the similarities are striking even if you just look at the skeletons - scientists suggested the connection as long ago as the 19th century.


Anyway, that 'reptile' name. 'Reptilia' isn't actually a cladistic term, it's more of a descriptor - anything cold-blooded, scaly, sprawling and laying squishy eggs. It's a term used for thoroughly unrelated creatures - lizards (along with snakes, plesiosaurs etc), crocodiles and our ancestors the synapsids are all referred to as 'reptiles' yet each is separated by vast gulfs of time and evolution.
However. It's almost certain that no dinosaur was strictly cold-blooded (though some early species may have required additional thermoregulation from their environment). Many theropods were feathery rather than scaly, and there's a chance that every small or cold-weather dinosaur may have had some form of bristly insulation. Every dinosaur had an upright, active stance like birds and mammals do. And every dinosaur egg we've ever found has been a hard structure similar to a bird's.
Even if you discount the birds, there isn't really any 'reptile' feature that applies to every dinosaur group. Though if you take the Wikipedia definition of Reptilia as "any amniote that isn't a mammal or bird" then maybe I'm being unnecessarily pedantic.


Quote from: xeno-kaname on Oct 28, 2013, 04:41:34 AM
I believe it. Most people think about T-Rexes shrinking down because of evolution, though. That's probably the wrong way to look at it. The big dinos are the ones that probably died out, and the small ones evolved and started to develop feathers and wings at some point.

Tyrannosaurs kept getting bigger as time went on! Rexy itself was the apex of the family - the largest by a considerable margin, and the last one before the mass-extinction event. This is a trend that happened in several other dinosaur groups immediately before the extinction, particularly in North America, and we're not sure why. It was terrible timing, as on land only small animals survived the apocalypse.

The birds had actually evolved a hundred million years before the extinction, though most of the bird groups were annihilated at the end of the Cretaceous too. Their ancestors were indeed all small dinosaurs, as you suggest - they did shrink on the way to becoming birds, but not by an order of magnitude.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: xeno-kaname on Oct 28, 2013, 11:24:25 PM
Quote from: Vertigo on Oct 28, 2013, 10:35:57 PM
Just answering these posts from the Crynosaurs thread (http://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/index.php?topic=47635.0) in somewhere more on-topic.

Quote from: xeno-kaname on Oct 28, 2013, 04:41:34 AM
I believe it. Most people think about T-Rexes shrinking down because of evolution, though. That's probably the wrong way to look at it. The big dinos are the ones that probably died out, and the small ones evolved and started to develop feathers and wings at some point.

Tyrannosaurs kept getting bigger as time went on! Rexy itself was the apex of the family - the largest by a considerable margin, and the last one before the mass-extinction event. This is a trend that happened in several other dinosaur groups immediately before the extinction, particularly in North America, and we're not sure why. It was terrible timing, as on land only small animals survived the apocalypse.

The birds had actually evolved a hundred million years before the extinction, though most of the bird groups were annihilated at the end of the Cretaceous too. Their ancestors were indeed all small dinosaurs, as you suggest - they did shrink on the way to becoming birds, but not by an order of magnitude.

Ah, I'm glad I seem to be right on that one, at lest to some degree  :) I was mentioning how people scoff at this particular theory because of that misconception. They're imagining huge dinosaurs shrinking down to the birds we see today. I guess it's not impossible, but improbable. It's just that when the theory is usually talked about in articles or publications, they rarely specify which dinosaurs evolved. So we get skeptics (mostly overly religious ones, in my experience) mocking the thought of Rexes shrinking down to modern day birds  ::) Once I mention small dinosaurs, it gets easier to imagine.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on Oct 31, 2013, 12:48:34 PM
Quote from: Vertigo on Oct 28, 2013, 10:35:57 PMEvery dinosaur had an upright, active stance like birds and mammals do.

I'm not sure the quadrupedal herbivores would fit that description.

Quote from: Vertigo on Oct 28, 2013, 10:35:57 PM
Quote from: xeno-kaname on Oct 28, 2013, 04:41:34 AM
I believe it. Most people think about T-Rexes shrinking down because of evolution, though. That's probably the wrong way to look at it. The big dinos are the ones that probably died out, and the small ones evolved and started to develop feathers and wings at some point.

Tyrannosaurs kept getting bigger as time went on! Rexy itself was the apex of the family - the largest by a considerable margin, and the last one before the mass-extinction event. This is a trend that happened in several other dinosaur groups immediately before the extinction, particularly in North America, and we're not sure why. It was terrible timing, as on land only small animals survived the apocalypse.

I think T.Rex in particular had to grow as large as it did in response to the prey items of the day. When you're going after creatures like Triceratops, Ankylosaurus, Alamosaurus, and Edmontosaurus, size will come in handy.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Xenodog on Oct 31, 2013, 02:15:27 PM
Quote from: DoomRulz on Oct 31, 2013, 12:48:34 PM
Quote from: Vertigo on Oct 28, 2013, 10:35:57 PMEvery dinosaur had an upright, active stance like birds and mammals do.

I'm not sure the quadrupedal herbivores would fit that description.

Quote from: Vertigo on Oct 28, 2013, 10:35:57 PM
Quote from: xeno-kaname on Oct 28, 2013, 04:41:34 AM
I believe it. Most people think about T-Rexes shrinking down because of evolution, though. That's probably the wrong way to look at it. The big dinos are the ones that probably died out, and the small ones evolved and started to develop feathers and wings at some point.

Tyrannosaurs kept getting bigger as time went on! Rexy itself was the apex of the family - the largest by a considerable margin, and the last one before the mass-extinction event. This is a trend that happened in several other dinosaur groups immediately before the extinction, particularly in North America, and we're not sure why. It was terrible timing, as on land only small animals survived the apocalypse.

I think T.Rex in particular had to grow as large as it did in response to the prey items of the day. When you're going after creatures like Triceratops, Ankylosaurus, Alamosaurus, and Edmontosaurus, size will come in handy.
Ankylosaurus predation sounds pretty ambitious!
I think ankylosaur ecology is pretty interesting in regards to predation though. If Ankylosaurus lived at low densities (suggested by the fossil record compared to Triceratops and Edmontosaurus) this would presumably keep oppurtunistic rex predation very low solely due to abundance. But if they layed egg clutches then maybe the species had a high infant mortality - I think I read somewhere it had been suggested ankylosaur armour was softer and more spongey in early life?
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on Oct 31, 2013, 03:06:17 PM
I think that T.Rex would have avoided Ankylosaurus as it's a prey item that is more trouble than it's worth but in times of desperation would go for it.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Xenodog on Oct 31, 2013, 05:05:19 PM
Yeah that's most likely I.M.O. I also wonder if certain individual dinosaurs in a species, despite their more primitive brains, had the ability to specialise in certain prey items that were unusual or dangerous like some modern predators.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Greedo on Oct 31, 2013, 05:13:47 PM
Anyone image what Dinosaurs could have done if they had camo ? *__*
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on Nov 01, 2013, 11:56:16 AM
Quote from: Xenodog on Oct 31, 2013, 05:05:19 PM
Yeah that's most likely I.M.O. I also wonder if certain individual dinosaurs in a species, despite their more primitive brains, had the ability to specialise in certain prey items that were unusual or dangerous like some modern predators.

Yes, I would say so but I couldn't comment on their mental capacity in this case. From a physical perspective however, I say it's a definitive yes. I think the reason T.Rex grew the super-strong jaws it had was because it was going after large, bulky prey like ceratopsians and hardosaurids and such raw power would have helped tremendously. I also think the same of carnosaurs like Allosaurus or Mapusaurus. They had longer arms, one extra claw (three vs. two), and serrated teeth designed for slicing because if you're tackling large sauropods, you aren't going to stand your ground and fight tooth and nail. It's easier to take nips here and there and wait for it to bleed out.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Requiem28 on Nov 01, 2013, 03:44:22 PM
Quote from: DoomRulz on Oct 31, 2013, 03:06:17 PM
I think that T.Rex would have avoided Ankylosaurus as it's a prey item that is more trouble than it's worth but in times of desperation would go for it.

Once it got him on his back, though......game over for Ank.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Vertigo on Nov 02, 2013, 10:18:52 AM
Quote from: DoomRulz on Oct 31, 2013, 12:48:34 PM
Quote from: Vertigo on Oct 28, 2013, 10:35:57 PMEvery dinosaur had an upright, active stance like birds and mammals do.

I'm not sure the quadrupedal herbivores would fit that description.

By 'upright' I mean they held their legs directly beneath their bodies in a pillar-like manner, rather than the side-sprawled manner of reptiles. I was trying to avoid saying 'erect' as this makes me imagine them walking along on a set of giant penises.
The advantage of a sprawled posture is that it allows an animal to go from sitting to running almost immediately, essential for a cold-blooded animal that spends most of its time resting.
The downsides are that it's a drain on energy as it uses more muscle power to move quickly, and as the locomotion compresses the torso, it limits (or even negates) their ability to breathe while running. Warm-blooded animals gain far more of their energy from breathing than cold-blooded ones do, so they need an upright posture to achieve peak performance.

All dinosaurs had this upright leg configuration, and aside from my point about this differentiating them from the classic definition of 'reptile', it marks them out as a very active group of animals. You can pick out an outdated piece of palaeo-art very easily, as they often depicted the quadrupeds with a sprawled leg posture to match the sluggish, cold-blooded lifestyle they were assumed to lead at the time.


Quote from: DoomRulz on Oct 31, 2013, 12:48:34 PM
Spoiler
Quote from: Vertigo on Oct 28, 2013, 10:35:57 PM
Quote from: xeno-kaname on Oct 28, 2013, 04:41:34 AM
I believe it. Most people think about T-Rexes shrinking down because of evolution, though. That's probably the wrong way to look at it. The big dinos are the ones that probably died out, and the small ones evolved and started to develop feathers and wings at some point.

Tyrannosaurs kept getting bigger as time went on! Rexy itself was the apex of the family - the largest by a considerable margin, and the last one before the mass-extinction event. This is a trend that happened in several other dinosaur groups immediately before the extinction, particularly in North America, and we're not sure why. It was terrible timing, as on land only small animals survived the apocalypse.
[close]

I think T.Rex in particular had to grow as large as it did in response to the prey items of the day. When you're going after creatures like Triceratops, Ankylosaurus, Alamosaurus, and Edmontosaurus, size will come in handy.

Certainly true, predators tend to evolve in response to their prey (herbivores are less tied to their predators' evolution, as generally the percentage taken by predation isn't large. Then again, most herbivores in history haven't had to contend with Tyrannosaurus rex...). The question is why the herbivores needed to grow so huge, and why many smaller animals became marginalised or extinct in the last age of the Cretaceous (the Maastrichtian).
My guess is that it had something to do with their diet. I know certain types of grasses appeared at some point in the Cretaceous, but am not sure exactly when. A larger stomach aids digestion, so if the Maastrichtian herbivores were needing to cope with a wider variety of food, or just tougher stuff, then it might explain the growth spurt.


Quote from: Xenodog on Oct 31, 2013, 05:05:19 PM
Yeah that's most likely I.M.O. I also wonder if certain individual dinosaurs in a species, despite their more primitive brains, had the ability to specialise in certain prey items that were unusual or dangerous like some modern predators.

Dinosaur intelligence is an incredibly tricky subject, I ranted about it a little while ago. Probably fair to assume that any dinosaur with a lower EQ than a crocodile wasn't terribly bright, and many of the groups may be comparable to each other, but other than that, the only accurate assumption is that we don't really have a clear impression of what they could do. My two-minute bout of googling suggests that avian intelligence is governed by a region of the brain called the nidopallium caudolaterale, and I've never seen a study of this in dinosaurs.
But no dinosaur brain is entirely comparable to that of a bird, and they probably aren't comparable to crocodiles either, so until we put a Compsognathus through a maze to find some cheese, I wouldn't put faith in any assessment of dinosaur intelligence.

Intelligence aside though, it's true that the modern avian brain structure was constantly developing throughout Coelurosauria and well into the early birds, so the 'primitive' label is indeed accurate as a comparator to their descendants. I seem to have lost my notes, but I dimly remember that a tyrannosaur brain is around 5% of the way from reptile brain structure to bird.
It's important to make the distinction that this doesn't necessarily have anything to do with intelligence though, some reptiles can be surprisingly smart. I remember reading a study in which a heated-up tortoise was put around the same maze as a rat, and it solved it more efficiently - whereas it fared poorly in rooms below its peak operating temperature, the state that all previous reptillian studies had been performed.

Anyway. Specialisation is a result of learned behaviour, so I suppose a lot of it depends on how long theropods were raised by their parents. Aside from this resulting in parental teaching of hunting techniques, animals with extended rearing periods tend to have more flexible behaviour, less programmed by instinct (this is just me speculating based on animals I'm familiar with, so feel free to call bullshit on that one). But I see learned specialisation in animals as disparate as great white sharks, lions, orcas and harris hawks, so it wouldn't surprise me to see it in dinosaurs.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Xenodog on Nov 02, 2013, 12:08:48 PM
More good posts Vertigo!
On their intelligence I remember in the 'Science and Making of' of BBC The Ballad of Big Al documentary (if you're in the US you may have seen it under the title of just 'Allosaurus' or something?) they had a brain scan of a theropod dinosaur and I think it resembled a crocodile brain more than a bird's. But both this and my memory of it are dated  - the programme over 10 years old.
That's also very interesting, though I guess when you think about it not that surprising, on how warmth may affect reptile performance in tests. Monitor lizards too are very intelligent with some capable of counting.

I agree with a lot of your speculation. Considering the prey most theropods had to deal with may have been large, dangerous or hard to catch learning behaviour from parents would be hugely beneficial and also present in practically all mammalian and avian predators today.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Omegamorph on Nov 02, 2013, 12:33:06 PM
This thread is better than diamonds.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Greedo on Nov 02, 2013, 04:34:31 PM
Old news but just found it and its incredible :)

http://m.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-china-17687174 (http://m.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-china-17687174)
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Bat Chain Puller on Nov 02, 2013, 05:08:22 PM
I wish they'd find something preserved that doesn't so much resemble something we already see plenty of at this point in time on earth. Because that just looks like a baby elephant. A Giant Sloth, howbout? Suckers were like 20 feet tall with massive claws.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: UFO-Man on Nov 02, 2013, 05:24:38 PM
QuoteThere is another option. Rather than producing mammoth DNA from scratch, you could tweak DNA from an African elephant. The genomes of the two species differ by just 0.6 percent, half the difference between us and chimpanzees. By identifying and swapping the different sequences, you could potentially rewrite an elephant genome so that it reads like a mammoth one.

Palaeontologist Jack Horner is trying something similar by rolling back a chicken's genes into a state more like its extinct dinosaur ancestors, and scientists like Harvard University's George Church are developing techniques that can rewrite vast swathes of DNA at once. But even if the technology catches up with the ambition, Schuster says: "That's not making a mammoth. It's 'mammothifying' an elephant." The resulting creature may be a more mammoth-like version of today's pachyderms, but it won't be the real deal.

I think mammothifying an elephant would be cool, Yes I know it would not be a Woolly Mammoth.

http://phenomena.nationalgeographic.com/2013/03/12/mammoth-deextinction/ (http://phenomena.nationalgeographic.com/2013/03/12/mammoth-deextinction/)

Anyone atleast want a Mammoth-ish Elephant.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Bat Chain Puller on Nov 02, 2013, 05:49:38 PM
Rolling back life forms on a genetic level to earlier incarnations seems like 'a way' to achieve what cloning can not at the moment. It's more like reverse engineering. But it will never be the same as producing something that once lived from ancient materials.

Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: UFO-Man on Nov 02, 2013, 05:59:42 PM
The woolly mammoth genome has been mapped, looks like a complete strand of DNA may be synthesised in the future.

May be a little outdated for this picture on the genome..

Spoiler
(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fphenomena.nationalgeographic.com%2Ffiles%2F2013%2F03%2Fmammoth-cloning.jpg&hash=711a4e215b0c15cfbc93583f31cde19acb472578)
[close]

QuoteDuring his session, George Church confidently stated that enough of the mammoth genome is now known that biologists could sufficiently alter living elephants into mammoth hybrids capable of living in the Arctic. That's easy enough to say offhand, but later the same day Beth Shapiro laid out how little we actually know about mammoth genetics and the hurdles involved in using DNA scraps to reinvent a mammoth.

QuoteBut let's say that researchers really are able to create a shaggy elephant they present to the world as a cloned woolly mammoth. Based on last Friday's presentations, that creature is going to be a hybrid created by tweaking Asian elephant biology into mammoth form, and that undoubtedly adorable baby will not have any true mammoth role models from which to learn how to be a mammoth. And if such an animal was introduced to the wild, its habitat would most likely be a proxy of Ice Age ecology not quite like what it used to be.

http://phenomena.nationalgeographic.com/2013/03/19/reinventing-the-mammoth/ (http://phenomena.nationalgeographic.com/2013/03/19/reinventing-the-mammoth/)

Want the new update.

http://www.sunad.com/index.php?tier=1&article_id=29012 (http://www.sunad.com/index.php?tier=1&article_id=29012)

So what's your view on this.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Vertigo on Nov 02, 2013, 09:36:58 PM
Quote from: Xenodog on Nov 02, 2013, 12:08:48 PM
More good posts Vertigo!
On their intelligence I remember in the 'Science and Making of' of BBC The Ballad of Big Al documentary (if you're in the US you may have seen it under the title of just 'Allosaurus' or something?) they had a brain scan of a theropod dinosaur and I think it resembled a crocodile brain more than a bird's. But both this and my memory of it are dated  - the programme over 10 years old.

Why thank you!

I'm English, so yup, it's Big Al to me too. I'm not particularly fond of Walking With Dinosaurs but I remember loving that special.
It's funny how ten years is now enough to form an era gap in palaeontology, when the science is two centuries old. The rate of discovery over the past few decades has been increasingly scorching. But that research still sounds right - most dinosaur brains were reptilian in structure, and even maniraptoran brains were a bit closer to those of crocs than of birds (if memory serves, they reached about 30% of the way to the latter). Allosaurus is just outside of Coelurosauria, so it'd be at around 1%.


Quote from: DoomRulz on Nov 01, 2013, 11:56:16 AMI also think the same of carnosaurs like Allosaurus or Mapusaurus. They had longer arms, one extra claw (three vs. two), and serrated teeth designed for slicing because if you're tackling large sauropods, you aren't going to stand your ground and fight tooth and nail. It's easier to take nips here and there and wait for it to bleed out.

I'd just like to add, I like this theory. Also adds reason for the allosaurs to team up (regardless of whether they were mobbing or organised), as it would take forever for a single predator to bleed out a sauropod - and the more bites it took, the greater the risk of injury to the attacker.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Xenodog on Nov 02, 2013, 11:35:30 PM
Oh really, how come you didn't like it? 4 year old me certainly did.  :laugh:

And yeah that's really interesting too. It's also cool just how fast ideas come and go and how the evolve. When paleontologists first discovered these animals who'd have thought they could be nimble and bird-like?
That and other cool chunks of the history of this science like 'The Bone Wars', feather discoveries and the debate of whether large theropods just scavenged or not.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: maledoro on Nov 03, 2013, 12:56:27 AM
This should be part of the prehistoric creatures thread.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Hellspawn28 on Nov 03, 2013, 03:44:38 AM
Any love for the Gojirasaurus? I always like the design of the dino and that's he is named after Godzilla.

(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fupload.wikimedia.org%2Fwikipedia%2Fcommons%2Ff%2Ff4%2FGojirasaurus_BW.jpg&hash=52795a16e5fb9896e0f4b1f38950292a7fb089e0)
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Greedo on Nov 03, 2013, 08:37:58 AM
So they have got the DNA , there going to revive those things.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: WinterActual on Nov 03, 2013, 08:55:05 AM
Quote from: ディロフォサウルス on Nov 02, 2013, 04:34:31 PM
Old news but just found it and its incredible :)

http://m.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-china-17687174 (http://m.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-china-17687174)

I can't believe how human like this thing is. Its like I am looking at real human being.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Hellspawn28 on Nov 03, 2013, 09:04:03 PM
How do we know it's a normal elephant?
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on Nov 04, 2013, 01:12:14 PM
Quote from: Vertigo on Nov 02, 2013, 10:18:52 AM
Certainly true, predators tend to evolve in response to their prey (herbivores are less tied to their predators' evolution, as generally the percentage taken by predation isn't large. Then again, most herbivores in history haven't had to contend with Tyrannosaurus rex...). The question is why the herbivores needed to grow so huge, and why many smaller animals became marginalised or extinct in the last age of the Cretaceous (the Maastrichtian).
My guess is that it had something to do with their diet. I know certain types of grasses appeared at some point in the Cretaceous, but am not sure exactly when. A larger stomach aids digestion, so if the Maastrichtian herbivores were needing to cope with a wider variety of food, or just tougher stuff, then it might explain the growth spurt.

I think you answered your question of need when you said, "most herbivores in history haven't had to contend with Tyrannosaurus Rex". Large carnivores dictate that prey need to evolve to defend themselves on equal footing, even though carnivores do need to be ahead in that arms race. I think diet combined with an incessant appetite is what fueled their growth. If you all do for a 12-hour period (perhaps more) is eat nutrient-rich food, you'll grow enormous.

Quote from: Vertigo on Nov 02, 2013, 10:18:52 AM
Dinosaur intelligence is an incredibly tricky subject, I ranted about it a little while ago. Probably fair to assume that any dinosaur with a lower EQ than a crocodile wasn't terribly bright, and many of the groups may be comparable to each other, but other than that, the only accurate assumption is that we don't really have a clear impression of what they could do. My two-minute bout of googling suggests that avian intelligence is governed by a region of the brain called the nidopallium caudolaterale, and I've never seen a study of this in dinosaurs.
But no dinosaur brain is entirely comparable to that of a bird, and they probably aren't comparable to crocodiles either, so until we put a Compsognathus through a maze to find some cheese, I wouldn't put faith in any assessment of dinosaur intelligence.

Intelligence aside though, it's true that the modern avian brain structure was constantly developing throughout Coelurosauria and well into the early birds, so the 'primitive' label is indeed accurate as a comparator to their descendants. I seem to have lost my notes, but I dimly remember that a tyrannosaur brain is around 5% of the way from reptile brain structure to bird.
It's important to make the distinction that this doesn't necessarily have anything to do with intelligence though, some reptiles can be surprisingly smart. I remember reading a study in which a heated-up tortoise was put around the same maze as a rat, and it solved it more efficiently - whereas it fared poorly in rooms below its peak operating temperature, the state that all previous reptillian studies had been performed.

Anyway. Specialisation is a result of learned behaviour, so I suppose a lot of it depends on how long theropods were raised by their parents. Aside from this resulting in parental teaching of hunting techniques, animals with extended rearing periods tend to have more flexible behaviour, less programmed by instinct (this is just me speculating based on animals I'm familiar with, so feel free to call bullshit on that one). But I see learned specialisation in animals as disparate as great white sharks, lions, orcas and harris hawks, so it wouldn't surprise me to see it in dinosaurs.

The bottom line is that any predator needs to be just smarter than the prey it's going after. I don't imagine dinosaurs were particularly cunning in the way they would bring down prey but I do believe that on some level, they might have had basic reasoning to know when something is working and when something isn't. Of course, I don't have any facts to back this up but I imagine a tyrannosaurid facing down a ceratopsian head-on knows that it likely won't eating that night.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Vertigo on Nov 06, 2013, 09:32:08 AM
Well, it's finally happened: we've discovered more of Deinocheirus.
That's the giant pair of arms dug up from Mongolia nearly fifty years ago -
(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2F31.media.tumblr.com%2F6dab1b37032a06bd12a55bcacec77cf7%2Ftumblr_mubjq9oOpz1qckhr6o1_400.jpg&hash=71f2c897bbc35cc05c94a03bf157165a26870e35)

Aside from a few ribs and vertebrae at the same site, no other evidence of it had been discovered during all that time, so it's been rather mysterious. The arms have been attributed to all kinds of creatures over the years, but for the last decade or two the consensus has been that they were attached to a gargantuan ornithomimosaur, the same family as Gallimimus.

Well, the discovery's just been announced of two new, nearly complete skeletons. Apparently the consensus was fairly accurate - it's an ornithomimosaur, though a survivor from a more basal family line than the ones we see the most of in pop culture.
And huge - 11 metres long, 5 metres tall. Unfortunately we're still missing their skulls, but there's one really weird and unexpected feature: they had some form of sail or hump above their pelvis, indicated by the presence of tall neural spines on the vertebrae. We don't see evidence of this in any other coelurosaur, so even disregarding the fact that it's vastly larger than any of its close relatives, it's a very unique animal.

(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2F2.bp.blogspot.com%2F-56e8mO6_r3M%2FUnlKmI1-N0I%2FAAAAAAAAAUk%2FD-5AjHuulgA%2Fs1600%2Fdeinocheirus_by_stygimolochspinifer-d6syow4.png&hash=6f6aa96f8d69960a0043ed9e0d393e90c22d59b9)

The three images present appearances for whether it was scaly, partially or wholly feathered. Given its giantism, it wouldn't have needed much in the way of insulation, so I'd imagine it'd be somewhere between the first two.


More info:
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2013/11/131104-dinosaur-hands-arms-body-mongolia/ (http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2013/11/131104-dinosaur-hands-arms-body-mongolia/)
http://chasmosaurs.blogspot.co.uk/2013/11/svp-dispatches-body-of-deinocheirus.html (http://chasmosaurs.blogspot.co.uk/2013/11/svp-dispatches-body-of-deinocheirus.html)
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Omegamorph on Nov 06, 2013, 11:03:25 AM
That's absolutely fantastic.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Greedo on Nov 06, 2013, 11:19:15 AM
OMG ! thats fantastic indeed :)
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: King Rathalos on Nov 06, 2013, 01:57:04 PM
Quote from: Vertigo on Nov 06, 2013, 09:32:08 AM
Well, it's finally happened: we've discovered more of Deinocheirus.
That's the giant pair of arms dug up from Mongolia nearly fifty years ago -
(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2F31.media.tumblr.com%2F6dab1b37032a06bd12a55bcacec77cf7%2Ftumblr_mubjq9oOpz1qckhr6o1_400.jpg&hash=71f2c897bbc35cc05c94a03bf157165a26870e35)

Aside from a few ribs and vertebrae at the same site, no other evidence of it had been discovered during all that time, so it's been rather mysterious. The arms have been attributed to all kinds of creatures over the years, but for the last decade or two the consensus has been that they were attached to a gargantuan ornithomimosaur, the same family as Gallimimus.

Well, the discovery's just been announced of two new, nearly complete skeletons. Apparently the consensus was fairly accurate - it's an ornithomimosaur, though a survivor from a more basal family line than the ones we see the most of in pop culture.
And huge - 11 metres long, 5 metres tall. Unfortunately we're still missing their skulls, but there's one really weird and unexpected feature: they had some form of sail or hump above their pelvis, indicated by the presence of tall neural spines on the vertebrae. We don't see evidence of this in any other coelurosaur, so even disregarding the fact that it's vastly larger than any of its close relatives, it's a very unique animal.

(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2F2.bp.blogspot.com%2F-56e8mO6_r3M%2FUnlKmI1-N0I%2FAAAAAAAAAUk%2FD-5AjHuulgA%2Fs1600%2Fdeinocheirus_by_stygimolochspinifer-d6syow4.png&hash=6f6aa96f8d69960a0043ed9e0d393e90c22d59b9)

The three images present appearances for whether it was scaly, partially or wholly feathered. Given its giantism, it wouldn't have needed much in the way of insulation, so I'd imagine it'd be somewhere between the first two.


More info:
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2013/11/131104-dinosaur-hands-arms-body-mongolia/ (http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2013/11/131104-dinosaur-hands-arms-body-mongolia/)
http://chasmosaurs.blogspot.co.uk/2013/11/svp-dispatches-body-of-deinocheirus.html (http://chasmosaurs.blogspot.co.uk/2013/11/svp-dispatches-body-of-deinocheirus.html)

So goddamn cool.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on Nov 06, 2013, 03:21:41 PM
Quote from: Vertigo on Nov 06, 2013, 09:32:08 AM
Well, it's finally happened: we've discovered more of Deinocheirus.
That's the giant pair of arms dug up from Mongolia nearly fifty years ago -
(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2F31.media.tumblr.com%2F6dab1b37032a06bd12a55bcacec77cf7%2Ftumblr_mubjq9oOpz1qckhr6o1_400.jpg&hash=71f2c897bbc35cc05c94a03bf157165a26870e35)

Aside from a few ribs and vertebrae at the same site, no other evidence of it had been discovered during all that time, so it's been rather mysterious. The arms have been attributed to all kinds of creatures over the years, but for the last decade or two the consensus has been that they were attached to a gargantuan ornithomimosaur, the same family as Gallimimus.

Well, the discovery's just been announced of two new, nearly complete skeletons. Apparently the consensus was fairly accurate - it's an ornithomimosaur, though a survivor from a more basal family line than the ones we see the most of in pop culture.
And huge - 11 metres long, 5 metres tall. Unfortunately we're still missing their skulls, but there's one really weird and unexpected feature: they had some form of sail or hump above their pelvis, indicated by the presence of tall neural spines on the vertebrae. We don't see evidence of this in any other coelurosaur, so even disregarding the fact that it's vastly larger than any of its close relatives, it's a very unique animal.

(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2F2.bp.blogspot.com%2F-56e8mO6_r3M%2FUnlKmI1-N0I%2FAAAAAAAAAUk%2FD-5AjHuulgA%2Fs1600%2Fdeinocheirus_by_stygimolochspinifer-d6syow4.png&hash=6f6aa96f8d69960a0043ed9e0d393e90c22d59b9)

The three images present appearances for whether it was scaly, partially or wholly feathered. Given its giantism, it wouldn't have needed much in the way of insulation, so I'd imagine it'd be somewhere between the first two.


More info:
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2013/11/131104-dinosaur-hands-arms-body-mongolia/ (http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2013/11/131104-dinosaur-hands-arms-body-mongolia/)
http://chasmosaurs.blogspot.co.uk/2013/11/svp-dispatches-body-of-deinocheirus.html (http://chasmosaurs.blogspot.co.uk/2013/11/svp-dispatches-body-of-deinocheirus.html)

Well it's about damn time. I was thinking Deinocheirus was the forgotten dinosaur. 33 feet long, and 18 feet tall, f**k me. It's big enough to rival the larger theropods like T.Rex and Giganotosaurus.

I'm surprised it's being described as a more basal type of ornithomimid. Given that it's a Late Cretaceous theropod, I would think it's place in the Mesozoic timeline would dictate it's a more evolved form of one.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Hellspawn28 on Nov 06, 2013, 05:10:06 PM
Any love for the Permian period? I love all of the weird animals that exist back then and seeing what life was like before the Dinosaurs.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Xenodog on Nov 06, 2013, 05:20:29 PM
Quote from: Hellspawn28 on Nov 06, 2013, 05:10:06 PM
Any love for the  Permian period? I love all of the weird animals that exist back then and seeing what life was like before the Dinosaurs.

Gorgonopsids are pretty cool.

And that Deinocheirus find is so awesome.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on Nov 06, 2013, 09:33:28 PM
Quote from: Hellspawn28 on Nov 06, 2013, 05:10:06 PM
Any love for the Permian period? I love all of the weird animals that exist back then and seeing what life was like before the Dinosaurs.

Always; Dimetrodon, man <3
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Hellspawn28 on Nov 07, 2013, 02:43:31 AM
I never like how Dimetrodon is always mistaken for a Dinosaur. As a kid, I keep on telling people that and they never listen.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Blacklabel on Nov 07, 2013, 02:51:21 AM
!!! Finally! :) Remember reading about Deinocheirus when i was a kid and wondering what he really looked lilke. :P
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: King Rathalos on Nov 07, 2013, 03:05:30 AM
http://bit.ly/1c085Je (http://bit.ly/1c085Je)

T-Rex's oldest know relative Lythronax argestes (king of gore).
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Xenodog on Nov 07, 2013, 04:24:47 PM
Quote from: King Rathalos on Nov 07, 2013, 03:05:30 AM
http://bit.ly/1c085Je (http://bit.ly/1c085Je)

T-Rex's oldest know relative Lythronax argestes (king of gore).

So cool, but what an odd name.
Awesome discovery.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on Nov 22, 2013, 03:11:05 PM
http://www.wired.com/wiredscience/2013/11/new-dinosaur-siats/ (http://www.wired.com/wiredscience/2013/11/new-dinosaur-siats/)

So it seems the legendary T.Rex has yet another rival. A juvenile weighing four tons is a scary prospect though I imagine a juvy T.Rex wasn't that far removed in terms of weight.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Xenodog on Nov 22, 2013, 05:49:57 PM
Quote from: DoomRulz on Nov 22, 2013, 03:11:05 PM
http://www.wired.com/wiredscience/2013/11/new-dinosaur-siats/ (http://www.wired.com/wiredscience/2013/11/new-dinosaur-siats/)

So it seems the legendary T.Rex has yet another rival. A juvenile weighing four tons is a scary prospect though I imagine a juvy T.Rex wasn't that far removed in terms of weight.

Awesome discovery - seems they're making a lot of theropod discoveries!
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Vertigo on Nov 22, 2013, 06:35:23 PM
Interesting. In the Nature Communications study, the researchers place it in the poorly-known Neovenatorid group - making it the first of its kind to be found in North America. They've been found pretty much everywhere else, except Africa (I expect they'll be found there eventually too, the dates of known fossils and land bridges suggest they could have emigrated there).
Unfortunately, it looks like the remains of Siats are highly fragmentary - part of the hip, a few vertebrae, a handful of hindlimb bones. I can't access the main body of the study, but apparently the authors posit that adult Siats would grow to around the size of Acrocanthosaurus.

Anyway, a 4-ton Tyrannosaurus would be close to the end of its growth period - they spent the first half of their lifespan attaining sizeable length on a fairly light frame, then suddenly put on the majority of their adult weight at a phenomenal rate during their teens.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on Nov 22, 2013, 07:09:17 PM
Quote from: Vertigo on Nov 22, 2013, 06:35:23 PM
Interesting. In the Nature Communications study, the researchers place it in the poorly-known Neovenatorid group - making it the first of its kind to be found in North America. They've been found pretty much everywhere else, except Africa (I expect they'll be found there eventually too, the dates of known fossils and land bridges suggest they could have emigrated there).

What about Afrovenator?
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Vertigo on Nov 22, 2013, 07:23:51 PM
That one's a megalosaurid, despite the name. It's also from a hell of a long time before the neovenatorids, which appeared around the earliest Cretaceous.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: judge death on Nov 23, 2013, 09:06:35 PM
Hi everyone, I´m thinking about buying this book:
Prehistoric Life: The Definitive Visual History of Life on Earth
Is very much into prehistoric life and all the way to when us humans came but there is one thing I can find out if this book has it or not:
Does it contain info about the terror birds and more importantly: About the thylacines/Tasmanian tiger which I want to learn more about so if I end up buying the book and it dont have any info about it, then it would be a disaster xD
Anyone here who have readed it and can confirm if the book has info about these animals and if it is a good one?
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Vertigo on Nov 23, 2013, 11:25:03 PM
Actually I have that book, and it's a good one - gives you a great sense of the whole picture of an ecosystem at any given time, and how the different groups evolved together. It's also a decent starting point for learning the evolutionary tree. Unfortunately most of the art is ugly CGI and some of the reconstructions are outdated, but I'd definitely recommend it.
It's a huge book, by the way, over 500 pages. All of them lavishly presented.

Anyway, regarding terror birds and thylacines. The book has a very broad remit, and delivers a brief passage and illustration for significant members of most major groups of lifeforms (including plants and invertebrates) going all the way back. So... terror birds aren't covered, but moas and elephant birds are; Tasmanian tigers aren't (along with most Cenozoic marsupials and monotremes, for some reason) but Thylacosmilus is.
Generally speaking, if you're looking for detailed information on any specific animal, this is not the book for you. It's more of a general history of life on Earth, and in that respect it's pretty damn thorough.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Xenodog on Nov 26, 2013, 09:33:39 PM
http://www.iflscience.com/plants-and-animals/new-baby-dinosaur-fossil-reveals-cause-death (http://www.iflscience.com/plants-and-animals/new-baby-dinosaur-fossil-reveals-cause-death)

Very cool find - well preserved Chasmosaurus juvenile.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on Nov 27, 2013, 12:36:36 PM
That's incredible. I'm in awe of how well preserved the skeleton is and wouldn't be surprised if it was nearly 100% intact. I love the comment at the bottom of Cera's last moments :D
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Greedo on Nov 27, 2013, 11:38:18 PM
WOW thats  incredible indeed! , any chance of getting DNA from  that thing and cloning it ? :P
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: MrSpaceJockey on Nov 27, 2013, 11:57:04 PM
Accomplish it as fast as you can, and before you even know what you have - patent it, package it, and slap it on a plastic lunchbox, and now
- BAM
you're selling it.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on Nov 28, 2013, 12:21:43 AM
Quote from: ディロフォサウルス on Nov 27, 2013, 11:38:18 PM
WOW thats  incredible indeed! , any chance of getting DNA from  that thing and cloning it ? :P

Doubt it, I only see bones lol.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Greedo on Nov 28, 2013, 10:20:26 AM
Diplodocus dinosaur 'Misty' sold at auction for £400,000

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-25128666 (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-25128666)
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on Nov 28, 2013, 01:07:30 PM
Quote from: ディロフォサウルス on Nov 28, 2013, 10:20:26 AM
Diplodocus dinosaur 'Misty' sold at auction for £400,000

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-25128666 (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-25128666)

This saddens me. Dinosaur skeletons and fossils belong in a museum, not a private collection. Heck, any ancient artifact does.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Omegamorph on Nov 28, 2013, 01:33:31 PM
Quote from: MrSpaceJockey on Nov 27, 2013, 11:57:04 PM
Accomplish it as fast as you can, and before you even know what you have - patent it, package it, and slap it on a plastic lunchbox, and now
- BAM
you're selling it.
:laugh:
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Greedo on Dec 08, 2013, 07:38:04 PM
(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fupload.wikimedia.org%2Fwikipedia%2Fcommons%2Fthumb%2Fa%2Fa4%2FDeinocheirusbcn.JPG%2F250px-Deinocheirusbcn.JPG&hash=3ef7485f63dc9df6fc98628400594a42640010fe)

Imagine what Deinocheirus could do with those arms though *___*
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Omegamorph on Dec 08, 2013, 08:09:40 PM
You don't wanna know.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on Dec 09, 2013, 01:17:40 PM
Quote from: ディロフォサウルス on Dec 08, 2013, 07:38:04 PM
(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fupload.wikimedia.org%2Fwikipedia%2Fcommons%2Fthumb%2Fa%2Fa4%2FDeinocheirusbcn.JPG%2F250px-Deinocheirusbcn.JPG&hash=3ef7485f63dc9df6fc98628400594a42640010fe)

Imagine what Deinocheirus could do with those arms though *___*

He'd never have an itch he couldn't scratch.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Nightmare Asylum on Dec 09, 2013, 10:08:07 PM
Quote from: Omegazilla on Dec 08, 2013, 08:09:40 PM
You don't wanna know.

(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimages4.wikia.nocookie.net%2F__cb20090430165421%2Fjurassicpark%2Fimages%2Fthumb%2Fc%2Fc1%2FJP-VolunteerBoy.jpg%2F830px-JP-VolunteerBoy.jpg&hash=d522609d15c6bb3e75b87c8f81c906622a73f62c)
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Requiem28 on Dec 09, 2013, 10:20:12 PM
Quote from: ディロフォサウルス on Dec 08, 2013, 07:38:04 PM
(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fupload.wikimedia.org%2Fwikipedia%2Fcommons%2Fthumb%2Fa%2Fa4%2FDeinocheirusbcn.JPG%2F250px-Deinocheirusbcn.JPG&hash=3ef7485f63dc9df6fc98628400594a42640010fe)

Imagine what Deinocheirus could do with those arms though *___*

Can you imagine a Utah raptor in the Jurassic Park franchise?
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Omegamorph on Dec 10, 2013, 06:37:22 AM
Quote from: Nightmare Asylum on Dec 09, 2013, 10:08:07 PM
Quote from: Omegazilla on Dec 08, 2013, 08:09:40 PM
You don't wanna know.

(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimages4.wikia.nocookie.net%2F__cb20090430165421%2Fjurassicpark%2Fimages%2Fthumb%2Fc%2Fc1%2FJP-VolunteerBoy.jpg%2F830px-JP-VolunteerBoy.jpg&hash=d522609d15c6bb3e75b87c8f81c906622a73f62c)

Spoiler
(https://scontent-a-mxp.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-frc3/1480646_10151777308031681_1239255353_n.jpg)
[close]
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Space Sweeper on Dec 10, 2013, 06:44:11 AM
Spoiler
........you've bred faptors?
[close]
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Omegamorph on Dec 10, 2013, 06:51:26 AM
Spoiler
(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimages3.wikia.nocookie.net%2F__cb20111125051818%2Fjurassicpark%2Fimages%2F8%2F89%2FJP-HenryWu.jpg&hash=90964b5a48bbb0c347befabab7129bcc48ecf8d3)
[close]
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: SiL on Dec 10, 2013, 10:33:39 AM
Quote from: Requiem28 on Dec 09, 2013, 10:20:12 PM
Can you imagine a Utah raptor in the Jurassic Park franchise?
That's basically what they are in the movies.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on Dec 10, 2013, 02:31:44 PM
Quote from: Space Sweeper on Dec 10, 2013, 06:44:11 AM
Spoiler
........you've bred faptors?
[close]
Quote from: Omegazilla on Dec 10, 2013, 06:51:26 AM
Spoiler
(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimages3.wikia.nocookie.net%2F__cb20111125051818%2Fjurassicpark%2Fimages%2F8%2F89%2FJP-HenryWu.jpg&hash=90964b5a48bbb0c347befabab7129bcc48ecf8d3)
[close]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MxWmC31jdos# (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MxWmC31jdos#)

Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Vertigo on Dec 10, 2013, 02:49:16 PM
Lmao. I'd always just assumed the squeak was a sound effect for the Barbasol can.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Omegamorph on Dec 10, 2013, 04:20:57 PM
If you slow it down, it sounds like a Raptor.

I still don't know how it is humanly possible to produce that sound.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on Dec 10, 2013, 04:35:58 PM
Fat folks are great singers, didn't you know?
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Omegamorph on Dec 10, 2013, 04:41:34 PM
Yes but... there's something visceral and ancestral about that sound.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Nightmare Asylum on Dec 10, 2013, 05:07:28 PM
Quote from: Omegazilla on Dec 10, 2013, 04:41:34 PM
Yes but... there's something visceral and ancestral about that sound.

It would have been a perfect lead-in to the human/dino hybrids in JP4.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Xenodog on Dec 10, 2013, 08:17:58 PM
Quote from: Omegazilla on Dec 10, 2013, 04:20:57 PM
If you slow it down, it sounds like a Raptor.

I noticed that too.  :laugh:
Foreshadowing of his demise...(sort of)
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on Dec 11, 2013, 12:29:09 AM
Quote from: Xenodog on Dec 10, 2013, 08:17:58 PM
Quote from: Omegazilla on Dec 10, 2013, 04:20:57 PM
If you slow it down, it sounds like a Raptor.

I noticed that too.  :laugh:
Foreshadowing of his demise...(sort of)

At the speed it's currently at, it reminds of a Dilo, honestly.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Greedo on Dec 13, 2013, 08:20:31 AM
Quote from: DoomRulz on Dec 10, 2013, 02:31:44 PM
Quote from: Space Sweeper on Dec 10, 2013, 06:44:11 AM
Spoiler
........you've bred faptors?
[close]
Quote from: Omegazilla on Dec 10, 2013, 06:51:26 AM
Spoiler
(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimages3.wikia.nocookie.net%2F__cb20111125051818%2Fjurassicpark%2Fimages%2F8%2F89%2FJP-HenryWu.jpg&hash=90964b5a48bbb0c347befabab7129bcc48ecf8d3)
[close]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MxWmC31jdos# (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MxWmC31jdos#)

HAHA! even sounds like a Dilo , it was fate :)


Dinosaur mummy's fleshy head crest

"Rooster like head crest"

More evidence linking Dinos with birds.

(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fnews.bbcimg.co.uk%2Fmedia%2Fimages%2F71702000%2Fjpg%2F_71702144_65756crop.jpg&hash=37ef09989eaa0323092c0b18b0e95b8826af3240)

http://www.bbc.co.uk/nature/25260312 (http://www.bbc.co.uk/nature/25260312)
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Vertigo on Dec 13, 2013, 08:50:58 AM
A large number of pterosaurs have been indicated to have extravagant fleshy headcrests which barely ever fossilise at all, it wouldn't surprise me if many more dinosaurs had them than we realise. Seems to run in the family.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on Dec 16, 2013, 03:27:45 PM
I'm surprised this wasn't discovered sooner. Hadrosaurs are known for having crests as it's part of what makes them so distinctive. You'd think that previous Edmontosaur discoveries would have had small nooks or something like that on the skull indicating a crest would fit in.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Greedo on Dec 23, 2013, 09:55:22 AM
So it begins...

http://news.cnet.com/8301-17852_3-57616224-71/birds-could-turned-back-into-dinosaurs-says-biochemist/ (http://news.cnet.com/8301-17852_3-57616224-71/birds-could-turned-back-into-dinosaurs-says-biochemist/)

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/technology-science/science/real-life-jurassic-park-dinosaurs-could-2954054 (http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/technology-science/science/real-life-jurassic-park-dinosaurs-could-2954054)
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on Dec 23, 2013, 12:34:24 PM
A biochemist commenting on dinosaur evolution is about as credible as a Tumblr feminist talking about rape.

Leave this one for the paleontologists, please and thank you.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Gilfryd on Dec 27, 2013, 03:37:52 AM
I would totally buy one
(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Ffc05.deviantart.net%2Ffs71%2Fi%2F2010%2F309%2F3%2Ff%2Fchicken_without_feathers_by_cheungchungtat-d327xme.jpg&hash=079e6654d70a32e9972c29211105bcc57df6db31)

Spoiler
AND EAT IT
[close]
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Hellspawn28 on Dec 29, 2013, 07:06:26 PM
Dinosaurs can't live in this world these days. Africa would be the closet thing that they could live in, but other people will just hunt them down.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Vertigo on Dec 29, 2013, 07:21:24 PM
I've often wondered if sauropods would thrive in today's northern Asia, where there's virtually endless uninhabited pine forest. They had the stomach to cope with the very toughest foods, so I guess it's a matter of thermoregulation; the infants would need massive amounts of insulation. There are sauropods known from polar regions, so it's not implausible.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Xenodog on Dec 29, 2013, 07:44:49 PM
Quote from: Vertigo on Dec 29, 2013, 07:21:24 PM
I've often wondered if sauropods would thrive in today's northern Asia, where there's virtually endless uninhabited pine forest. They had the stomach to cope with the very toughest foods, so I guess it's a matter of thermoregulation; the infants would need massive amounts of insulation. There are sauropods known from polar regions, so it's not implausible.

Though, bear in mind a Mesozoic polar region would be very different from today's ones!
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Predator Queen on Dec 29, 2013, 09:32:13 PM
(https://24.media.tumblr.com/dd7d8be82f0f639ffe0e4534a0696200/tumblr_mxw101xdAX1qjnhqgo1_1280.jpg)

I contributed.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Vertigo on Dec 29, 2013, 11:34:45 PM
Quote from: Xenodog on Dec 29, 2013, 07:44:49 PM
Quote from: Vertigo on Dec 29, 2013, 07:21:24 PM
I've often wondered if sauropods would thrive in today's northern Asia, where there's virtually endless uninhabited pine forest. They had the stomach to cope with the very toughest foods, so I guess it's a matter of thermoregulation; the infants would need massive amounts of insulation. There are sauropods known from polar regions, so it's not implausible.

Though, bear in mind a Mesozoic polar region would be very different from today's ones!

Yup, but they had permafrost even at that point. Average temperature in the Cretaceous Antarctic is estimated between 0 and 10 degrees centigrade (probably sticking around the low end given the existence of permafrost) which is also the rough annual average for most parts of today's Russia.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: King Rathalos on Dec 30, 2013, 02:03:30 AM
Quote from: Predator Queen on Dec 29, 2013, 09:32:13 PM
(https://24.media.tumblr.com/dd7d8be82f0f639ffe0e4534a0696200/tumblr_mxw101xdAX1qjnhqgo1_1280.jpg)

I contributed.

This is beautiful.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Omegamorph on Dec 30, 2013, 11:01:19 AM
So that's where Tatopoulos got the idea for the flying things in Pitch Black.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on Dec 30, 2013, 12:55:44 PM
Quote from: Vertigo on Dec 29, 2013, 07:21:24 PM
I've often wondered if sauropods would thrive in today's northern Asia, where there's virtually endless uninhabited pine forest. They had the stomach to cope with the very toughest foods, so I guess it's a matter of thermoregulation; the infants would need massive amounts of insulation. There are sauropods known from polar regions, so it's not implausible.

I doubt it. Part of the reason sauropods grew so large was because there was a higher amount of CO2 in the atmosphere. They'd likely asphyxiate before they realized what they were eating. There's also the issue of actually eating the food. Were their teeth designed to consume pine needles? How much nutrition would they get from it? Is there enough forestry to support a large herd of giant animals?
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Vertigo on Dec 30, 2013, 04:19:11 PM
Sigh. I'll address that in a few days when I'm back home. You just love disagreeing with me, don't you. :P
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on Dec 30, 2013, 06:41:10 PM
I love you darling ;)
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Greedo on Jan 02, 2014, 10:50:16 AM
What do we think about gigantoraptor ?

(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fupload.wikimedia.org%2Fwikipedia%2Fcommons%2Fd%2Fd8%2FGigantoraptor_BW.jpg&hash=059812a21d89c6bfb216b8595cfc24af8e3107c2)
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on Jan 02, 2014, 12:10:16 PM
I think it's history biggest f**king turkey.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Omegamorph on Jan 02, 2014, 01:21:53 PM
Quote from: DoomRulz on Jan 02, 2014, 12:10:16 PM
I think it's history biggest f**king turkey.
26 foot turkey.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Greedo on Jan 02, 2014, 08:00:39 PM
Would have done brilliantly for Christmas dinner :(
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Vertigo on Jan 05, 2014, 12:14:10 AM
Alrighty.

Quote from: DoomRulz on Dec 30, 2013, 12:55:44 PM
Quote from: Vertigo on Dec 29, 2013, 07:21:24 PM
I've often wondered if sauropods would thrive in today's northern Asia, where there's virtually endless uninhabited pine forest. They had the stomach to cope with the very toughest foods, so I guess it's a matter of thermoregulation; the infants would need massive amounts of insulation. There are sauropods known from polar regions, so it's not implausible.

I doubt it. Part of the reason sauropods grew so large was because there was a higher amount of CO2 in the atmosphere. They'd likely asphyxiate before they realized what they were eating. There's also the issue of actually eating the food. Were their teeth designed to consume pine needles? How much nutrition would they get from it? Is there enough forestry to support a large herd of giant animals?

Personally I think sauropods grew so large to facilitate the development of a gigantic, all-conquering digestive tract that could extract maximum nutrition from pretty much anything they stumbled across, evidenced by many species living in distinctly unlush environments. Also allowed support for the universally long neck, though it's still unclear what role this played in sauropod life. I'm not familiar with the theory that atmospheric carbon dioxide supported their giantism, is there a source I could take a look at?
I'm not sure why they'd asphyxiate, either. By many estimates, there's a higher concentration of oxygen today than through most of the Mesozoic (others think it's mildly lower. That's palaeontology for you).

Many sauropods would get on just fine eating pine. Pine trees actually evolved during the Cretaceous (along with many other exceptionally hard-to-eat plants - presumably a reaction to grazing from the greatest eating machines in the history of the planet). Similar conifers proliferated, and were widely chomped upon, throughout the Mesozoic.
As for forestry, yes - boreal forests form the world's largest contiguous ecosystems on land, and many vast tracts (such as northern Asia as mentioned earlier) are virtually uninhabited.

Quote from: DoomRulz on Dec 30, 2013, 06:41:10 PM
I love you darling ;)

I think we need to see a counselor...
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on Jan 05, 2014, 11:00:35 PM
Quote from: Vertigo on Jan 05, 2014, 12:14:10 AM
Alrighty.

Quote from: DoomRulz on Dec 30, 2013, 12:55:44 PM
Quote from: Vertigo on Dec 29, 2013, 07:21:24 PM
I've often wondered if sauropods would thrive in today's northern Asia, where there's virtually endless uninhabited pine forest. They had the stomach to cope with the very toughest foods, so I guess it's a matter of thermoregulation; the infants would need massive amounts of insulation. There are sauropods known from polar regions, so it's not implausible.

I doubt it. Part of the reason sauropods grew so large was because there was a higher amount of CO2 in the atmosphere. They'd likely asphyxiate before they realized what they were eating. There's also the issue of actually eating the food. Were their teeth designed to consume pine needles? How much nutrition would they get from it? Is there enough forestry to support a large herd of giant animals?

Personally I think sauropods grew so large to facilitate the development of a gigantic, all-conquering digestive tract that could extract maximum nutrition from pretty much anything they stumbled across, evidenced by many species living in distinctly unlush environments. Also allowed support for the universally long neck, though it's still unclear what role this played in sauropod life. I'm not familiar with the theory that atmospheric carbon dioxide supported their giantism, is there a source I could take a look at?
I'm not sure why they'd asphyxiate, either. By many estimates, there's a higher concentration of oxygen today than through most of the Mesozoic (others think it's mildly lower. That's palaeontology for you).

Many sauropods would get on just fine eating pine. Pine trees actually evolved during the Cretaceous (along with many other exceptionally hard-to-eat plants - presumably a reaction to grazing from the greatest eating machines in the history of the planet). Similar conifers proliferated, and were widely chomped upon, throughout the Mesozoic.
As for forestry, yes - boreal forests form the world's largest contiguous ecosystems on land, and many vast tracts (such as northern Asia as mentioned earlier) are virtually uninhabited.


Why would they need to be large to extract maximum nutrition? I think that would rely solely on how effective the animal's digestive system, which would lead to a larger size. It's not just because they're large. At least, that's how I see it.

About the CO2, I first heard it discussed in Jurassic Fight Club. Fossil analysis of Jurassic plant life showed higher levels. Also,

http://www.biocab.org/carbon_dioxide_geological_timescale.html (http://www.biocab.org/carbon_dioxide_geological_timescale.html)
http://www.skepticalscience.com/co2-higher-in-past.htm (http://www.skepticalscience.com/co2-higher-in-past.htm)
http://caos.iisc.ernet.in/faculty/pghosh/content/Publications/19.pdf (http://caos.iisc.ernet.in/faculty/pghosh/content/Publications/19.pdf)

Not just oxygen levels. I'm talking about CO2. Since CO2 levels were higher, then they probably needed it to maintain their size and mobility, ergo, they lived off of it. Without it, they would die.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Vertigo on Jan 05, 2014, 11:54:51 PM
More gut means more bacteria (essential for breaking down vegetation in particular), more gastric juices, broader stomach and intestinal walls, and higher capacity allowing foodstuffs to process for longer. That's a generalisation of course, digestive systems work differently in different animals - an elephant's stomach is used primarily for storage, for example, and they digest very little of what they eat.
Still, sticking with elephants, there is apparently research that shows larger elephants have increased capability to process difficult content from a wider variety of plants.
Bear in mind, the dominant plants in the dinosaur era tended to be horribly difficult to digest - conifers, cycads, ferns, horsetails, palms. These tend to be much rarer today.

No question CO2 was higher through most of the Mesozoic - much higher - as it's pretty unanimously agreed on. What I don't understand is why this would allow greater sizes... it's oxygen that an animal metabolises to produce energy, I have no idea what carbon dioxide deprivation would do to anything that isn't a plant.
Furthermore, during the Jurassic, worldwide CO2 levels took a massive dip, not too far from modern levels - and it's believed that this may have coincided with an ice age. But this didn't affect sauropod size or diversity as far as I'm aware (in fact it's around when the first eusauropods evolve).
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on Jan 06, 2014, 12:15:34 AM
CO2 is linked with larger physical size though. It's why insects grew to such enormous sizes during the Carboniferous period. Those animals wouldn't survive in today's environment because they'd be dead to the world. I think the same rule would apply to sauropods. I don't know what it is about more CO2 that allows this to happen. I only know that it allows for it.

Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Vertigo on Jan 06, 2014, 12:29:31 AM
Anyway, I was actually just about to hit up this thread again anyway, with a bit of news.

The latest known dromaeosaurid has been announced recently, from right at the very end of the dinosaur era. It's called Acheroraptor (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Acheroraptor) and was discovered in Montana, meaning it'd have shared a habitat with Tyrannosaurus rex among others (http://www.scn.org/~bh162/hellcreek2.html#dinosaurs).
It's described as a 'mid-sized' dromie, which I imagine means around wolf to leopard-size (it's hard to get a feel from the picture, and I haven't seen measurements). Small predators are very poorly known from the late Maastrichtian age, though tooth evidence indicates a troodontid may have been scurrying around with Acheroraptor.

(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fcdn4.sci-news.com%2Fimages%2Fenlarge%2Fimage_1630_3e-Acheroraptor.jpg&hash=daecb59e457cee64a3c8bae81d9dbf1ba60ce6b0)

(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwpmedia.news.nationalpost.com%2F2013%2F12%2Facheroraptor-temertyorum1.jpg%3Fw%3D400%26amp%3Bh%3D525&hash=c8e4d6da7a68ac5a92fad4f70821cdc9f86d59c4)


Quote from: DoomRulz on Jan 06, 2014, 12:15:34 AM
CO2 is linked with larger physical size though. It's why insects grew to such enormous sizes during the Carboniferous period. Those animals wouldn't survive in today's environment because they'd be dead to the world. I think the same rule would apply to sauropods. I don't know what it is about more CO2 that allows this to happen. I only know that it allows for it.

Ahhhh, I see what you mean now. It's a fair assumption, but the same rule doesn't apply - insects have a maximum size which I think is dictated by the quirks of their exoskeletal structure (fortunately for everything else). I've heard various explanations for exactly why this maximum size was so much greater during the Carboniferous and Permian, my current round of googling is actually coming up with increased oxygen levels as an explanation. One article (http://www.livescience.com/24122-why-insects-are-not-bigger.html)'s pulling research that insects given a higher-concentration oxygen environment can grow 20% larger in a single generation, and grow smaller if deprived of it.
I think the theory is that the breathing holes of an insect don't scale up in direct parallel to carapace size, so there is a point beyond which they'll become asphyxiated.

So anyway, with sauropods breathing through nostrils and lungs rather than spiracles and tracheoles, they don't have the same issue.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on Jan 06, 2014, 03:07:58 AM
Quote from: Vertigo on Jan 06, 2014, 12:29:31 AM
Anyway, I was actually just about to hit up this thread again anyway, with a bit of news.

The latest known dromaeosaurid has been announced recently, from right at the very end of the dinosaur era. It's called Acheroraptor (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Acheroraptor) and was discovered in Montana, meaning it'd have shared a habitat with Tyrannosaurus rex among others (http://www.scn.org/~bh162/hellcreek2.html#dinosaurs).
It's described as a 'mid-sized' dromie, which I imagine means around wolf to leopard-size (it's hard to get a feel from the picture, and I haven't seen measurements). Small predators are very poorly known from the late Maastrichtian age, though tooth evidence indicates a troodontid may have been scurrying around with Acheroraptor.

(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fcdn4.sci-news.com%2Fimages%2Fenlarge%2Fimage_1630_3e-Acheroraptor.jpg&hash=daecb59e457cee64a3c8bae81d9dbf1ba60ce6b0)

(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwpmedia.news.nationalpost.com%2F2013%2F12%2Facheroraptor-temertyorum1.jpg%3Fw%3D400%26amp%3Bh%3D525&hash=c8e4d6da7a68ac5a92fad4f70821cdc9f86d59c4)


I read that as Archeoraptor at first and I thought, "Oh Christ, that can of worms again!?", lol. If it shared the environment with T.Rex, does that means it's post-Dromaeosaurus? I'm just curious because that would dictate I think where it falls on the dromaeosauridae evolutionary family tree.

Quote from: Vertigo on Jan 06, 2014, 12:29:31 AM
Quote from: DoomRulz on Jan 06, 2014, 12:15:34 AM
CO2 is linked with larger physical size though. It's why insects grew to such enormous sizes during the Carboniferous period. Those animals wouldn't survive in today's environment because they'd be dead to the world. I think the same rule would apply to sauropods. I don't know what it is about more CO2 that allows this to happen. I only know that it allows for it.

Ahhhh, I see what you mean now. It's a fair assumption, but the same rule doesn't apply - insects have a maximum size which I think is dictated by the quirks of their exoskeletal structure (fortunately for everything else). I've heard various explanations for exactly why this maximum size was so much greater during the Carboniferous and Permian, my current round of googling is actually coming up with increased oxygen levels as an explanation. One article (http://www.livescience.com/24122-why-insects-are-not-bigger.html)'s pulling research that insects given a higher-concentration oxygen environment can grow 20% larger in a single generation, and grow smaller if deprived of it.
I think the theory is that the breathing holes of an insect don't scale up in direct parallel to carapace size, so there is a point beyond which they'll become asphyxiated.

So anyway, with sauropods breathing through nostrils and lungs rather than spiracles and tracheoles, they don't have the same issue.

OK, fair enough. I always thought it was extra CO2. I am still of the mentality that the CO2 had to mean something. It can't just be a coincidence that that was the atmosphere during the Mesozoic and it was the age of reptiles. I mean, there's a reason why we have the animals today that we do; they've evolved for this Earth.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Vertigo on Jan 06, 2014, 01:59:06 PM
I'd imagine the excess CO2 would have had some effect on the plants of the time, which (100% guesswork here) may explain the profusion of redwoods, tree ferns and giant horsetails. Obviously any effect on plantlife trickles down through the ecosystem, with herbivores adapting for specific grazing (such as stomach-propelled giantism, perhaps) and predators having to adjust to any differences that caused.
The generally higher temperatures would have had an ecological effect too (if I remember rightly the Triassic, in particular, was very arid, but this had more to do with the landmass organised into the supercontinent Pangaea). It's important to remember though that just because the temperature tended to be higher, it doesn't mean that everywhere was hot. Another point is that the temperature throughout the Mesozoic is actually roughly standard for most of the time there's been complex life on earth - the dips, such as the present one, are associated with ice ages (and we are currently in an interglacial period of an ice age).

If it's true that the Mesozoic had a significantly lower oxygen level, though, then the effect of that on animals would have been enormous. There's a theory that archosaurs and mammals gained a foothold in the late Triassic because they'd evolved more sophisticated respiratory systems, making them able to function at a high level despite the sparse oxygen. Archosaur air sacs (particularly prevalent in saurischians and pterosaurs) and mammalian thoracic diaphragms are far more efficient for respiration than any reptile system, and therefore the latter groups went into decline.
As mentioned earlier though, there's some debate about the oxygen level, whereas the CO2 is more or less a known quantity.




Anyway, Acheroraptor (funny you mention Archaeoraptor, as Philip Currie was involved in the study of both).
It did indeed come after Dromaeosaurus, and you make an excellent point because this is very important for understanding dromie evolution and distribution. The researchers have recovered Acheroraptor as a basal velociraptorine, which makes it the only one ever found outside Asia - and genetically separated from slightly earlier countrymate Dromaeosaurus by a potentially huge gulf of time.

Before we get all excited though, it's worth pointing out that dromie evidence tends to be fragmentary, and Acheroraptor is no exception. Our piecing together of the dromaeosaurid family tree is highly speculative, given that key genera don't even have well-preserved skulls associated with them (notably, the giant Utahraptor and Achillobator, which as early and middle examples of the group, are of key importance). It wouldn't surprise me if the surprise discovery of a complete skull from a little-known animal throws the whole family tree into re-alignment, and Acheroraptor may ultimately prove to be a dromaeosaurine.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on Jan 06, 2014, 02:58:58 PM
Quote from: Vertigo on Jan 06, 2014, 01:59:06 PM
I'd imagine the excess CO2 would have had some effect on the plants of the time, which (100% guesswork here) may explain the profusion of redwoods, tree ferns and giant horsetails. Obviously any effect on plantlife trickles down through the ecosystem, with herbivores adapting for specific grazing (such as stomach-propelled giantism, perhaps) and predators having to adjust to any differences that caused.
The generally higher temperatures would have had an ecological effect too (if I remember rightly the Triassic, in particular, was very arid, but this had more to do with the landmass organised into the supercontinent Pangaea). It's important to remember though that just because the temperature tended to be higher, it doesn't mean that everywhere was hot. Another point is that the temperature throughout the Mesozoic is actually roughly standard for most of the time there's been complex life on earth - the dips, such as the present one, are associated with ice ages (and we are currently in an interglacial period of an ice age).

If it's true that the Mesozoic had a significantly lower oxygen level, though, then the effect of that on animals would have been enormous. There's a theory that archosaurs and mammals gained a foothold in the late Triassic because they'd evolved more sophisticated respiratory systems, making them able to function at a high level despite the sparse oxygen. Archosaur air sacs (particularly prevalent in saurischians and pterosaurs) and mammalian thoracic diaphragms are far more efficient for respiration than any reptile system, and therefore the latter groups went into decline.
As mentioned earlier though, there's some debate about the oxygen level, whereas the CO2 is more or less a known quantity.

Global temperatures were definitely higher though than they are today. There weren't any ice caps at the poles, even though we know some dinosaurs did live in Arctic temperatures. But by today's standards, it's nothing humans would have found unbearable. On you last point about mammals going into decline, that's precisely why I think dinosaurs wouldn't survive in today's world. It's a nice fantasy but the atmosphere caters to mammals and not reptiles, hence the reversal of the latter group becoming smaller and the former growing larger.

Quote from: Vertigo on Jan 06, 2014, 01:59:06 PM
Anyway, Acheroraptor (funny you mention Archaeoraptor, as Philip Currie was involved in the study of both).
It did indeed come after Dromaeosaurus, and you make an excellent point because this is very important for understanding dromie evolution and distribution. The researchers have recovered Acheroraptor as a basal velociraptorine, which makes it the only one ever found outside Asia - and genetically separated from slightly earlier countrymate Dromaeosaurus by a potentially huge gulf of time.

Before we get all excited though, it's worth pointing out that dromie evidence tends to be fragmentary, and Acheroraptor is no exception. Our piecing together of the dromaeosaurid family tree is highly speculative, given that key genera don't even have well-preserved skulls associated with them (notably, the giant Utahraptor and Achillobator, which as early and middle examples of the group, are of key importance). It wouldn't surprise me if the surprise discovery of a complete skull from a little-known animal throws the whole family tree into re-alignment, and Acheroraptor may ultimately prove to be a dromaeosaurine.

I raised it because the general rule of evolution is that the last of a species to evolve from a certain family tree is the "most highly evolved" of that group. If Acheroraptor is the last dromie to have evolved, that would place it at the top of the family tree in that regard.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Vertigo on Jan 06, 2014, 04:37:22 PM
Quote from: DoomRulz on Jan 06, 2014, 02:58:58 PM
Quote from: Vertigo on Jan 06, 2014, 01:59:06 PMThere's a theory that archosaurs and mammals gained a foothold in the late Triassic because they'd evolved more sophisticated respiratory systems, making them able to function at a high level despite the sparse oxygen. Archosaur air sacs (particularly prevalent in saurischians and pterosaurs) and mammalian thoracic diaphragms are far more efficient for respiration than any [other] reptile system, and therefore the latter groups went into decline.

On you last point about mammals going into decline, that's precisely why I think dinosaurs wouldn't survive in today's world. It's a nice fantasy but the atmosphere caters to mammals and not reptiles, hence the reversal of the latter group becoming smaller and the former growing larger.

That's not what I said. :P
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on Jan 06, 2014, 05:32:43 PM
You didn't say mammals went into decline?
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Vertigo on Jan 06, 2014, 06:20:20 PM
Nope.

[...Okay, that is a jerky answer, I'll clarify that for de-jerkification.]

I'm saying that reptiles, without the advanced respiratory systems of mammals and advanced archosaurs, declined as they didn't have the right tools (under the aforementioned theory).

Should say for the record, if I ever mention 'reptile', I'm not talking about dinosaurs because I don't really consider them reptiles.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on Jan 06, 2014, 06:53:17 PM
Dinosaurs are both reptiles and birds. Small theropods went on to evolve into birds but we still have the distinction between avian and non-avian dinosaurs.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Omegamorph on Jan 06, 2014, 06:54:42 PM
Birds are feathered Reptiles according to cladistics anyway.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Vertigo on Jan 06, 2014, 07:33:56 PM
And us mammals are furry reptiles by the same reasoning. ;P

Anyway, as far as I'm concerned, a group of warm-blooded, pillar-legged, often feathery or bristly (potentially everything below a certain size/exterior temperature), highly active animals which gain more energy from breathing than chemical reaction, have skeletal air sacs, and in some cases wings, semi-bird-like brain structures and extensive childrearing behaviour, can't broadly be described as 'reptile'. Even the earliest dinosaurs have a sizeable number of non-reptile traits; the best you can say is that aspects of them are reptilian.
Oh dear. Pedantry levels reaching critical status. It's gonna blow, cap'n.

Anyway, you're in good company Doom. David Attenborough continually refers to dinosaurs as reptiles, and the Mesozoic as the 'age of reptiles', to the continual grinding of my teeth. And it's not wrong, 'reptile' isn't a phyletic term, it just grinds my gears. Takes me back to a time when scientists thought dinosaurs were lumbering incompetents destined for obsolescence and extinction. Don't tell any herpetologists I said that, though.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on Jan 07, 2014, 12:53:10 PM
Well technically, it was the Age of Reptiles because they were the ruling class of animals on the planet.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Born Of Cold Light on Jan 14, 2014, 01:26:43 AM
Do ancient hominids count?

Ardipithecus ramidus (possibly in the main human line, possibly not):

(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.wired.com%2Fimages_blogs%2Fwiredscience%2F2009%2F09%2Fardi1hr.jpg&hash=719e00866bcb0390cd91914e6ba3a320ad98af20)

Homo habilis (first hominid to craft stone tools):

(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.locolobo.org%2Fhabilis_op_800x776.jpg&hash=82aceb02dec7c3dc0b919967e6274b01c13ec642)

Sahelanthropus tchadensis (possibly the last species before the human and chimpanzee lines began to diverge):

(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fpublic.media.smithsonianmag.com%2Flegacy_blog%2Fpicresized_1341871654_7283201268_7eb0b27509_c1.jpg&hash=8774374a27e09ad02ca9c11d57ac2161338f4b47)


Some interesting information:
http://www.foxnews.com/science/2013/12/30/what-learned-about-human-origins-in-2013/ (http://www.foxnews.com/science/2013/12/30/what-learned-about-human-origins-in-2013/)
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on Jan 14, 2014, 01:24:27 PM
Do they count as what?
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Born Of Cold Light on Jan 14, 2014, 06:28:51 PM
Quote from: DoomRulz on Jan 14, 2014, 01:24:27 PM
Do they count as what?

Prehistoric creatures for this thread.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on Jan 14, 2014, 07:30:10 PM
Yeah, sure they do. Prehistoric is defined as anything that existed prior to recorded history.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Vertigo on Feb 11, 2014, 09:19:57 PM
A new analysis has been performed on skin tissue from an icthyosaur (196 Ma, from England) and a mosasaur (86 Ma, from America), discovering traces of melanin - the pigment which creates a black colour in many modern animals, along with UV protection.

Bear in mind that this has only been tested on these two specimens (and a leatherback turtle) so far, but the upshot is, the icthyosaur was entirely black, and the mosasaur had a black upper side. It's unclear what colour the mosasaur's underside was, as no other pigments are preserved.

Purely my own speculation here, but if marine reptiles spent long periods of time at the surface to warm up and breathe while conserving energy, the need for the 'sunscreen' effect of melanin may have caused a majority of marine reptiles to have dark backs.


Anyway, full article (http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/dinosaur-era-swimming-reptiles-had-black-skin/?utm_source=Twitter&utm_medium=Social&utm_content=link_tw20140114news-bldin2&utm_campaign=Content), or here (http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/vaop/ncurrent/full/nature12899.html#tables) if you happen to have a subscription to Nature (in which case I'll be rather jealous).
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Xenodog on Feb 11, 2014, 09:31:26 PM
Quote from: Vertigo on Feb 11, 2014, 09:19:57 PM
A new analysis has been performed on skin tissue from an icthyosaur (196 Ma, from England) and a mosasaur (86 Ma, from America), discovering traces of melanin - the pigment which creates a black colour in many modern animals, along with UV protection.

Bear in mind that this has only been tested on these two specimens (and a leatherback turtle) so far, but the upshot is, the icthyosaur was entirely black, and the mosasaur had a black upper side. It's unclear what colour the mosasaur's underside was, as no other pigments are preserved.

Purely my own speculation here, but if marine reptiles spent long periods of time at the surface to warm up and breathe while conserving energy, the need for the 'sunscreen' effect of melanin may have caused a majority of marine reptiles to have dark backs.


Anyway, full article (http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/dinosaur-era-swimming-reptiles-had-black-skin/?utm_source=Twitter&utm_medium=Social&utm_content=link_tw20140114news-bldin2&utm_campaign=Content), or here (http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/vaop/ncurrent/full/nature12899.html#tables) if you happen to have a subscription to Nature (in which case I'll be rather jealous).

Awesome find. This simple discovery can tell us so much more than 'it was just black' and lead to a lot of interesting speculation.
Very interesting that Mosasaurs may have been black on the top side - perhaps like a great white shark?
Also that Icthyosaurs were all black. That coupled with very big eyes - very deep sea or nocturnal fishing?
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Vertigo on Feb 11, 2014, 09:44:25 PM
Yup, great points there also. It's just these two particular animals for the time being though, there's no indication yet how widespread these traits were.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on Feb 12, 2014, 03:05:27 PM
Quote from: Vertigo on Feb 11, 2014, 09:19:57 PM
A new analysis has been performed on skin tissue from an icthyosaur (196 Ma, from England) and a mosasaur (86 Ma, from America), discovering traces of melanin - the pigment which creates a black colour in many modern animals, along with UV protection.

Bear in mind that this has only been tested on these two specimens (and a leatherback turtle) so far, but the upshot is, the icthyosaur was entirely black, and the mosasaur had a black upper side. It's unclear what colour the mosasaur's underside was, as no other pigments are preserved.

Purely my own speculation here, but if marine reptiles spent long periods of time at the surface to warm up and breathe while conserving energy, the need for the 'sunscreen' effect of melanin may have caused a majority of marine reptiles to have dark backs.


Anyway, full article (http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/dinosaur-era-swimming-reptiles-had-black-skin/?utm_source=Twitter&utm_medium=Social&utm_content=link_tw20140114news-bldin2&utm_campaign=Content), or here (http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/vaop/ncurrent/full/nature12899.html#tables) if you happen to have a subscription to Nature (in which case I'll be rather jealous).

I remember reading that awhile back. It kinda scares me actually. I mean, dark waters, filled with giant, carnivorous marine reptiles...in black? Yikes.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Requiem28 on Feb 13, 2014, 06:40:31 AM
Quote from: DoomRulz on Feb 12, 2014, 03:05:27 PM
Quote from: Vertigo on Feb 11, 2014, 09:19:57 PM
A new analysis has been performed on skin tissue from an icthyosaur (196 Ma, from England) and a mosasaur (86 Ma, from America), discovering traces of melanin - the pigment which creates a black colour in many modern animals, along with UV protection.

Bear in mind that this has only been tested on these two specimens (and a leatherback turtle) so far, but the upshot is, the icthyosaur was entirely black, and the mosasaur had a black upper side. It's unclear what colour the mosasaur's underside was, as no other pigments are preserved.

Purely my own speculation here, but if marine reptiles spent long periods of time at the surface to warm up and breathe while conserving energy, the need for the 'sunscreen' effect of melanin may have caused a majority of marine reptiles to have dark backs.


Anyway, full article (http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/dinosaur-era-swimming-reptiles-had-black-skin/?utm_source=Twitter&utm_medium=Social&utm_content=link_tw20140114news-bldin2&utm_campaign=Content), or here (http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/vaop/ncurrent/full/nature12899.html#tables) if you happen to have a subscription to Nature (in which case I'll be rather jealous).

I remember reading that awhile back. It kinda scares me actually. I mean, dark waters, filled with giant, carnivorous marine reptiles...in black? Yikes.

Sounds like Sperm and Orca whales.  Which are creepy.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Vertigo on Feb 13, 2014, 08:07:46 AM
If your sperm is black then you might want to see a doctor.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on Feb 13, 2014, 12:20:14 PM
What if it means giving birth to awesomely strong babies?
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Requiem28 on Feb 13, 2014, 04:17:52 PM
*Sperm whales
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: judge death on Feb 13, 2014, 04:19:32 PM
Is now looking for advice's on good dino books/prehistoric life so is looking for your help.

I prefer very detailed books with pictures whcih shows how they think dinos looked like since most books I find is from the 80s and older and is outdated. I also like size comparisons and new discoveries and facts and also from which ancestors they and animals to this day evolved from and theories about their lifes and death. But I dont want a super detailed one which is very dry to read.

So far this is the best book I have found:
http://www.pdfmagazines.org/uploads/posts/2012-05/1338495997_3.jpg (http://www.pdfmagazines.org/uploads/posts/2012-05/1338495997_3.jpg)

I also liked this book:
http://www.nhm.ac.uk/resources-rx/images/1032/great-extinctions-book-image-cover-118716-1.jpg (http://www.nhm.ac.uk/resources-rx/images/1032/great-extinctions-book-image-cover-118716-1.jpg)

Any suggestions? :)



Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on Feb 13, 2014, 04:48:34 PM
http://www.amazon.ca/Dinosaurs-Complete-Up---Date-Encyclopedia/dp/0375824197/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&qid=1392310051&sr=8-2&keywords=thomas+holtz%5C (http://www.amazon.ca/Dinosaurs-Complete-Up---Date-Encyclopedia/dp/0375824197/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&qid=1392310051&sr=8-2&keywords=thomas+holtz%5C)
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Vertigo on Feb 13, 2014, 05:14:43 PM
I've actually considered writing my own dinosaur book for my nephew, as I don't know which books out there would be at a casual level without dumbing everything down, skewing facts, spouting opinions I don't agree with, or generally being outdated (which happens in 5-10 years at the moment, the current rate of progression in the science is totally unprecedented).

Doom, I love that a few scrolls down the preview of the book you linked is an image of Scrotum humanum. ^_^
Holtz is definitely a high-grade palaeontologist though, and my understanding is that he writes at a broadly understandable level. So that'd probably be a good book to try. Luis Rey's artwork tends to be a little out-there, but generally not beyond the realm of possibility.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on Feb 13, 2014, 05:54:49 PM
Your own book, really? Damn. Are you a palaeontologist as well?
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Vertigo on Feb 13, 2014, 06:49:40 PM
Nope, just spent a ton of time incapacitated with nothing to do but sponge up knowledge of things I'm passionate about. It's not like I'd be publishing it! For starters I'd need to snip most of the pictures from Deviantart, unsolicited. ;P
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Immortan Jonesy on Feb 13, 2014, 09:34:02 PM
I like big dromaeosaurs like Utahraptor or Austroraptor

(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FS528QQd.jpg&hash=c44f1ced51e9a2527dccd3776cf78cf080d3e0c0)

(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2F7MKrew7.jpg&hash=ac15c5a6301cdf8ef088ad7d39c9f61f0be6cabf)

(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FDb0vXv3.jpg&hash=abef147aa1f8fc44ed217e6f48e9def7c2da2a1c)

Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on Feb 13, 2014, 10:48:49 PM
Quote from: Vertigo on Feb 13, 2014, 06:49:40 PM
Nope, just spent a ton of time incapacitated with nothing to do but sponge up knowledge of things I'm passionate about. It's not like I'd be publishing it! For starters I'd need to snip most of the pictures from Deviantart, unsolicited. ;P

Well, keep it up. Knowledge is power. I'm guessing you're like me when you go to a museum. You give your friends tours in the dinosaur gallery, say waaaaaaaaay too much, then have strangers come up to you and ask if you're a guide?
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Vertigo on Feb 14, 2014, 12:12:10 AM
Quote from: DoomRulz on Feb 13, 2014, 10:48:49 PM
Well, keep it up. Knowledge is power. I'm guessing you're like me when you go to a museum. You give your friends tours in the dinosaur gallery, say waaaaaaaaay too much, then have strangers come up to you and ask if you're a guide?

Well, you're not the first person to ask if I'm a palaeontologist... When I'm at a museum looking at an extinct animal though, I'm generally occupied reconstructing my mental picture of what it was like, and searching for any new observations I can add into that picture; I tend to forget I'm with anyone.
It is great having that information though, isn't it? You see these places in a whole different light.


Quote from: Crazy shrimp on Feb 13, 2014, 09:34:02 PM
I like big dromaeosaurs like Utahraptor or Austroraptor

(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FS528QQd.jpg&hash=c44f1ced51e9a2527dccd3776cf78cf080d3e0c0)

(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2F7MKrew7.jpg&hash=ac15c5a6301cdf8ef088ad7d39c9f61f0be6cabf)

(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FDb0vXv3.jpg&hash=abef147aa1f8fc44ed217e6f48e9def7c2da2a1c)

Interesting to note, Austroraptor (which I think those are illustrating) is part of a highly distinct dromaeosaurid group exclusive to South America (and possibly Madagascar, though I think that particular animal is a bit of a reach). All of them had very shallow and long snouts, and lived (highly successfully) alongside a wide range of other predators.
I've just been reading Matthew Martyniuk's book about Mesozoic birds and advanced maniraptorans, and it did a great job of putting the group (unenlagiinae) into context. It seems these dromies were specialised for preying on fish - explaining their spearlike jaws. They were originally small enough to avoid competition with the spinosaurids that dominated waterways in the region, but after the spinos went into decline, some unenlagiines like Austroraptor grew vastly larger, to fill the vacant niche that the superpredators left behind.

It's a similar story with Utahraptor, which appeared to take advantage of allosaurid extinction in the area; the giant dromies then disappeared from North America when carcharodontosaurids moved in.
Seems to be paralleling the more recent story of large flightless birds, which take up the apex predator role if it's left empty, but tend to vanish quite quickly if another group of predators move in (big cats and wolves outcompeting the terror birds in South America, for example). The impression is that they can fill the niche, but their ancestral evolution is too derived and specific for them to excel at it.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on Feb 14, 2014, 03:51:12 AM
Quote from: Vertigo on Feb 14, 2014, 12:12:10 AM
Quote from: DoomRulz on Feb 13, 2014, 10:48:49 PM
Well, keep it up. Knowledge is power. I'm guessing you're like me when you go to a museum. You give your friends tours in the dinosaur gallery, say waaaaaaaaay too much, then have strangers come up to you and ask if you're a guide?

Well, you're not the first person to ask if I'm a palaeontologist... When I'm at a museum looking at an extinct animal though, I'm generally occupied reconstructing my mental picture of what it was like, and searching for any new observations I can add into that picture; I tend to forget I'm with anyone.
It is great having that information though, isn't it? You see these places in a whole different light.

'ken oath. I always picture where the organs were, how the muscles fit onto it, what its locomotion was like, what colour was it, in the case of theropods how many feathers did it have, what sounds did it make...

:')

Quote from: Vertigo on Feb 14, 2014, 12:12:10 AM
Quote from: Crazy shrimp on Feb 13, 2014, 09:34:02 PM
I like big dromaeosaurs like Utahraptor or Austroraptor

(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FS528QQd.jpg&hash=c44f1ced51e9a2527dccd3776cf78cf080d3e0c0)

(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2F7MKrew7.jpg&hash=ac15c5a6301cdf8ef088ad7d39c9f61f0be6cabf)

(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FDb0vXv3.jpg&hash=abef147aa1f8fc44ed217e6f48e9def7c2da2a1c)

Interesting to note, Austroraptor (which I think those are illustrating) is part of a highly distinct dromaeosaurid group exclusive to South America (and possibly Madagascar, though I think that particular animal is a bit of a reach). All of them had very shallow and long snouts, and lived (highly successfully) alongside a wide range of other predators.
I've just been reading Matthew Martyniuk's book about Mesozoic birds and advanced maniraptorans, and it did a great job of putting the group (unenlagiinae) into context. It seems these dromies were specialised for preying on fish - explaining their spearlike jaws. They were originally small enough to avoid competition with the spinosaurids that dominated waterways in the region, but after the spinos went into decline, some unenlagiines like Austroraptor grew vastly larger, to fill the vacant niche that the superpredators left behind.

It's a similar story with Utahraptor, which appeared to take advantage of allosaurid extinction in the area; the giant dromies then disappeared from North America when carcharodontosaurids moved in.
Seems to be paralleling the more recent story of large flightless birds, which take up the apex predator role if it's left empty, but tend to vanish quite quickly if another group of predators move in (big cats and wolves outcompeting the terror birds in South America, for example). The impression is that they can fill the niche, but their ancestral evolution is too derived and specific for them to excel at it.

Fish-eating dromies? Damn, never saw that one coming. Also, which carcharodontosaurids were in NA?

On a different note, enjoy this absolutely f**king beautiful drawing by Frank Lode of Tyrannosaurus Rex.

(https://fbcdn-sphotos-b-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-prn2/t31/1780093_10202844736469659_374045829_o.jpg)
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: judge death on Feb 14, 2014, 10:17:37 AM
Quote from: DoomRulz on Feb 13, 2014, 04:48:34 PM
http://www.amazon.ca/Dinosaurs-Complete-Up---Date-Encyclopedia/dp/0375824197/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&qid=1392310051&sr=8-2&keywords=thomas+holtz%5C (http://www.amazon.ca/Dinosaurs-Complete-Up---Date-Encyclopedia/dp/0375824197/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&qid=1392310051&sr=8-2&keywords=thomas+holtz%5C)
Thanks so much! :D Gonna try that one out :)
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Vertigo on Feb 14, 2014, 02:55:35 PM
Quote from: DoomRulz on Feb 14, 2014, 03:51:12 AM
Also, which carcharodontosaurids were in NA?

That'd be Acrocanthosaurus. Carchies then apparently vanished from the continent, with recently discovered Siats the neovenatorid taking their place. Tyrannosaurids popped up 20 million years later, but we have no idea what (if anything) held the giant predator niche during the interim.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on Feb 14, 2014, 03:46:55 PM
I'm pretty sure smaller tyrannosaurids did. Didn't Lythronax appear right around the same time? Or was Siats already gone by then?
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Requiem28 on Feb 14, 2014, 05:19:52 PM
Quote from: DoomRulz on Feb 14, 2014, 03:51:12 AM
(https://fbcdn-sphotos-b-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-prn2/t31/1780093_10202844736469659_374045829_o.jpg)

Fantastic!
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Vertigo on Feb 14, 2014, 06:15:45 PM
Quote from: DoomRulz on Feb 14, 2014, 03:46:55 PM
I'm pretty sure smaller tyrannosaurids did. Didn't Lythronax appear right around the same time? Or was Siats already gone by then?

Just under 20 Ma after Siats.

We're not really sure what the tyrannosauroid family was up to at the time, there aren't any major finds for them anywhere throughout the middle of the Cretaceous. Only fragmentary remains prove they even existed in North America before the evolution of true tyrannosaurids (of which Lythronax is the earliest known example).

:edit: To clarify the fragmentary remains. One is Stokesosaurus from the Jurassic (70Ma before Lythronax), known from a hipbone, some vertebrae and a braincase.
The more interesting examples are teeth, which indicate something very similar or identical to Asian Xiongguanlong, around 112Ma (contemporaneous with Acrocanthosaurus). The animal's quite big for an earlyish tyrannosauroid, just under 300kg, but not exactly challenging for the apex predator role.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on Feb 14, 2014, 07:47:29 PM
When you say tyrannosauroid, does that term refer to basal specimens, or something in-between basal and true?

If it was contemporaneous with Acrocanthosaurus, then there's no way it could have been the apex predator. Unless it's name was Saurophaganax, which was long gone by then, it couldn't have been. These mystery teeth are definitely tyrannosauroid in design?
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Vertigo on Feb 14, 2014, 09:28:04 PM
Well, Tyrannosauroidea is the superfamily name within Coelurosauria, so technically it encompasses everything from Proceratosaurus to Tyrannosaurus. The group only has two subdivisions, Proceratosauridae and Tyrannosauridae, but has a large nexus of animals which don't fit into either of those (they're more basal than tyrannosaurids, and typically more derived than proceratosaurids). There's a lot of uncertainty around the early members of the family, some researchers don't consider proceratosaurids to be a valid group at all.

Personally though, if I'm talking about a 'tyrannosauroid', I'm generally talking about something from the family that's more basal than a tyrannosaurid. There's a pretty clear divide - the earlier members of the group are mostly small, three-fingered sprinters, whereas pretty much all the tyrannosaurids are huge and bulky with two functional fingers.


Tooth fossils can be very misleading, as tooth shape can be similar through convergent evolution rather than a taxonomic relationship (I'm guessing you know that already). It's also incredibly rare for a tooth find to later be associated with a full animal (which gives you some idea of what a vast number of species there must have been). With that said, in this case, the teeth show a number of evolved traits also seen in Xiongguanlong's, and also occurred contemporaneously, so it'd be one hell of a coincidence if they weren't closely related.


Anyway, in my opinion the 20Ma gap between Siats and Lythronax is caused by the incomplete fossil record rather than a lack of the niche being filled. There should be a series of 500-1500kg tyrannosauroids with diminishing arms, heavier builds and deepening skulls lurking somewhere in the deposits of that period.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on Feb 15, 2014, 02:15:11 PM
Quote from: Vertigo on Feb 14, 2014, 09:28:04 PM
Well, Tyrannosauroidea is the superfamily name within Coelurosauria, so technically it encompasses everything from Proceratosaurus to Tyrannosaurus. The group only has two subdivisions, Proceratosauridae and Tyrannosauridae, but has a large nexus of animals which don't fit into either of those (they're more basal than tyrannosaurids, and typically more derived than proceratosaurids). There's a lot of uncertainty around the early members of the family, some researchers don't consider proceratosaurids to be a valid group at all.

Then where would they fit in, in the minds of those researchers? Super-Coelurosauria? :P

Quote from: Vertigo on Feb 14, 2014, 09:28:04 PM
Personally though, if I'm talking about a 'tyrannosauroid', I'm generally talking about something from the family that's more basal than a tyrannosaurid. There's a pretty clear divide - the earlier members of the group are mostly small, three-fingered sprinters, whereas pretty much all the tyrannosaurids are huge and bulky with two functional fingers.

More basal than a tyrannosaurid to me sounds like it would be proceratosaurid.

Quote from: Vertigo on Feb 14, 2014, 09:28:04 PM
Tooth fossils can be very misleading, as tooth shape can be similar through convergent evolution rather than a taxonomic relationship (I'm guessing you know that already). It's also incredibly rare for a tooth find to later be associated with a full animal (which gives you some idea of what a vast number of species there must have been). With that said, in this case, the teeth show a number of evolved traits also seen in Xiongguanlong's, and also occurred contemporaneously, so it'd be one hell of a coincidence if they weren't closely related.

For my own sake, because my knowledge of scientific terminology is limited, convergent evolution means the evolution of two animals that evolved similar features (e.g. dolphin and a shark, in terms of body design) but aren't actually related, right?

Quote from: Vertigo on Feb 14, 2014, 09:28:04 PM
Anyway, in my opinion the 20Ma gap between Siats and Lythronax is caused by the incomplete fossil record rather than a lack of the niche being filled. There should be a series of 500-1500kg tyrannosauroids with diminishing arms, heavier builds and deepening skulls lurking somewhere in the deposits of that period.

There had to have been. Either that, or something changed with the prey items of that period. A tiddler like Lythronax isn't going to just knock off a heavyweight like Acrocanthosaurus.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Vertigo on Feb 18, 2014, 01:05:30 AM
Quote from: DoomRulz on Feb 15, 2014, 02:15:11 PMThen where would they fit in, in the minds of those researchers? Super-Coelurosauria? :P
...
More basal than a tyrannosaurid to me sounds like it would be proceratosaurid.

Well, you asked. It will get geeky.
The argument is whether or not Proceratosaurus and its closest relatives form a divergent group within Tyrannosauroidea, sistered to other discovered tyrannosauroids, or if they're ancestral to these later members of the group (including tyrannosaurids), which would lump them in with the rest of the superfamily.
Important to note, there are at least six genera which aren't members of either subdivision, including Dryptosaurus and Appalachiosaurus which were the dominant predators in eastern North America near the end of the dinosaur era, contemporaneously with tyrannosaurids in the west (kept apart by the Western Interior Seaway).


QuoteFor my own sake, because my knowledge of scientific terminology is limited, convergent evolution means the evolution of two animals that evolved similar features (e.g. dolphin and a shark, in terms of body design) but aren't actually related, right?

Exactly.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Sabby on Feb 18, 2014, 01:20:45 AM
I'm an arachnophobic, but I find insects wnd arachnids in general to be fascinating. What are some interesting prehistoric bugs?
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Vertigo on Feb 18, 2014, 02:17:57 AM
Well, the Carboniferous saw a profusion of giant insects (probably due to increased oxygen levels, we had a little discussion about this earlier), so it's a good place to start.

The go-to giant creepy prehistoric bugs are Meganeura and Arthropleura. Meganeura's a gargantuan carnivorous dragonfly, with a wingspan over 60cm. Arthropleura is rather nightmarish - a proto-centipede which could rear up to look you in the eye. Thankfully, it didn't appear to have jaws capable of large-scale predation.

(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.saarland.de%2Fbilder%2Fressort_ministerpraesident_staatskanzlei%2FMeganeura2_rdax_750x500.jpg&hash=dd430559faa5617ba0daa370ddbb90caadd7b1c7)(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Ft1.gstatic.com%2Fimages%3Fq%3Dtbn%3AANd9GcR7wZzjAP3HS2kY2dlYpxEFmH1XMHWGuLIHJHQfJRDRDdhYHV_cmA&hash=47045966286b571e55f24bcfffb8851b3d43061e)



Extending the term 'bug' out to cover all arthropods, the most iconic has to be the trilobite. Not particularly big, not doing anything particularly bodacious, but extraordinarily ancient, long-lasting and generally cool-looking.
They're some of the first complex animals to evolve, 521 million years ago, and immediately dominated their environments throughout the Cambrian and Ordivician. They weathered a number of mass extinctions, gradually whittled away a bit further each time, and it took the apocalyptic Permian extinction of 250 million years ago to finally wipe them out (the worst extinction event in history, obliterating most life on the planet). In total, they were around for 270 million years - longer than mammals, archosaurs or any land-based vertebrate order alive today.

(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Ffarm3.staticflickr.com%2F2686%2F4398126564_71518b34c7_b.jpg&hash=4d7b83dcfe2862ede894dd5ea9b724e0b6682b62)


There's a slightly more comprehensive list of creepy old bugs here (http://akorra.com/2012/03/02/top-10-ancient-insects/).
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Sabby on Feb 18, 2014, 03:14:52 AM
I'm curious as to why there are no spiders on that list :/
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on Feb 18, 2014, 03:44:48 AM
Quote from: Vertigo on Feb 18, 2014, 01:05:30 AM
Quote from: DoomRulz on Feb 15, 2014, 02:15:11 PMThen where would they fit in, in the minds of those researchers? Super-Coelurosauria? :P
...
More basal than a tyrannosaurid to me sounds like it would be proceratosaurid.

Well, you asked. It will get geeky.
The argument is whether or not Proceratosaurus and its closest relatives form a divergent group within Tyrannosauroidea, sistered to other discovered tyrannosauroids, or if they're ancestral to these later members of the group (including tyrannosaurids), which would lump them in with the rest of the superfamily.
Important to note, there are at least six genera which aren't members of either subdivision, including Dryptosaurus and Appalachiosaurus which were the dominant predators in eastern North America near the end of the dinosaur era, contemporaneously with tyrannosaurids in the west (kept apart by the Western Interior Seaway).

Wouldn't a relation to the superfamily or being ancestral be dependent on whether they show traits shared amongst tyrannosaurids, i.e. shortened snouts, stronger jaw muscles, smaller front limbs, etc...?

Quote from: Sabby on Feb 18, 2014, 03:14:52 AM
I'm curious as to why there are no spiders on that list :/

Spiders aren't insects.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Omegamorph on Feb 18, 2014, 01:19:22 PM
And the list has Chilopoda and Eurypterida... both Arthropoda but not Insecta. Should have had a different title.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Vertigo on Feb 18, 2014, 03:15:05 PM
Quote from: DoomRulz on Feb 18, 2014, 03:44:48 AM
Quote from: Vertigo on Feb 18, 2014, 01:05:30 AM
Quote from: DoomRulz on Feb 15, 2014, 02:15:11 PMThen where would they fit in, in the minds of those researchers? Super-Coelurosauria? :P
...
More basal than a tyrannosaurid to me sounds like it would be proceratosaurid.

Well, you asked. It will get geeky.
The argument is whether or not Proceratosaurus and its closest relatives form a divergent group within Tyrannosauroidea, sistered to other discovered tyrannosauroids, or if they're ancestral to these later members of the group (including tyrannosaurids), which would lump them in with the rest of the superfamily.
Important to note, there are at least six genera which aren't members of either subdivision, including Dryptosaurus and Appalachiosaurus which were the dominant predators in eastern North America near the end of the dinosaur era, contemporaneously with tyrannosaurids in the west (kept apart by the Western Interior Seaway).

Wouldn't a relation to the superfamily or being ancestral be dependent on whether they show traits shared amongst tyrannosaurids, i.e. shortened snouts, stronger jaw muscles, smaller front limbs, etc...?

They're within the superfamily either way. Proceratosaurus has been shuffled around numerous groups over the years (as its name suggests), but today the majority consensus is that it and the other proceratosaurids are tyrannosauroids.

The difficulty in determining whether proceratosaurids were directly ancestral to tyrannosaurids, is the fragmentary nature of the record. The only reasonably well-known Jurassic tyrannosauroids are proceratosaurids, but they show quite a few highly individual traits - most obviously, head crests.


:edit: I've had a nagging feeling all day that I know at least one researcher who doesn't consider Proceratosaurus itself a tyrannosauroid, and I've just realised it's Gregory Paul, who thinks it's closer-related to Ornitholestes. With Tyrannosauroidea lurking so close to the base of Coelurosauria, the distinction at the top can be very blurry. With that said, Paul's classification for Proceratosaurus (and Ornitholestes) is in "maniraptoran miscellanea". ¬_¬
Doesn't help that Proceratosaurus is known only from a skull, and even then, one missing its top.

So there we have it, a third option. Proceratosauridae not being a valid group because of Proceratosaurus not being a proceratosaurid.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on Feb 18, 2014, 04:06:16 PM
I would take that with a grain of salt until someone like Holtz or Currie come out and say it. Paul isn't a certified palaeontologist.

The idea of proceratosauridae not being directly related to tyrannosauroid but rather an offshoot of coelurosauria makes sense on one level I think because from a skeletal structure, share more in common with them than say Guanlong with tyrannosaurid.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Greedo on Mar 07, 2014, 06:40:38 PM
WTF SERIOUSLY!

http://worldnewsdailyreport.com/200-million-years-old-dinosaur-egg-hatches-in-berlin-museum/ (http://worldnewsdailyreport.com/200-million-years-old-dinosaur-egg-hatches-in-berlin-museum/)

(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fworldnewsdailyreport.com%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2014%2F02%2Fdinosaur-egg-hatching-460x307.png&hash=bf6b178c13fdefbd74bc7decf18b6fd06b9f0c14)
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on Mar 07, 2014, 06:54:04 PM
And here comes the cloning talk...
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Greedo on Mar 07, 2014, 06:58:51 PM
Loads of people are now saying its a hoax...

I dont know what to make of this tbh, they proberly saying it because they dont want to believe and if its real they will be scared, thats how it goes...

Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Vertigo on Mar 07, 2014, 10:30:32 PM
In related news, the heating in my house failed at the same time as the Berlin museum. The ensuing cold made my genitals shrink by so many orders of magnitude that they could only be described as a set of subatomic particles. Being subject to quantum physics in this state, they now allow me to travel through time, at will. Using my time travelling schlong, I travelled back to the time when some arsehole thought up that story, and have returned to my present quantum state to inform you that the story is bullshit.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Crazy Rich on Mar 08, 2014, 02:23:41 AM
I wanted it to be true so much.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Greedo on Mar 08, 2014, 09:15:04 AM
How do we know though ?

Theres nothing in that story which claims its true or it isnt ?

If theres evidence thats its fake then fair enough.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Vertigo on Mar 08, 2014, 12:52:27 PM
Okay, for starters, the most obvious point is that a chunk of actual biological non-avian dinosaur preserved in the present day would instantly be the headline for news outlets around the world. When a researcher discovered trace amounts of protein in a Tyrannosaurus bone, it was reported all over the place. But if you do a quick search for "Gasosaurus egg Berlin", you don't see any results from BBC News, New Scientist, National Geographic, Huffington Post, etc. The fifth result is HumourOrTruth. Given that the "news" article dates from a fortnight ago, that should tell you all you need to know right there.

Anyway, why it couldn't be true.
As one of the comments of the article says, an egg starts to go rotten after just a few days, let alone millions of years. Bacteria within the egg start to decay the contents, and that should occur to some degree even if the egg was buried in quicksand or some other substance capable of petrifying it.
Furthermore, even if organic material is petrified, it's still subject to fossilisation. It's still being buried under layers of rock for a colossal span of time, replacing the biological matter with minerals. The survival of any organic substance - a scattering of proteins, invisible to the naked eye - is miraculous and rare.

The article describes the egg as hatching when warmed - suggesting the egg contained living contents. There is no animal on the planet, no matter how embryonic, that can survive for over a hundred million years. An egg's occupant dies very quickly if not kept in proper conditions.

Finally, the article's full of scientific inaccuracy. Gasosaurus' family didn't exist 200 million years ago, and the last non-avian dinosaur was born 66 million years ago, not 100.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on Mar 08, 2014, 02:13:56 PM
Not to mention, the headline has a spelling mistake:
Quote200 Million Years

That should've been "year" so there's your giveaway :P
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Xenodog on Mar 08, 2014, 05:13:36 PM
(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.kinja-img.com%2Fgawker-media%2Fimage%2Fupload%2Ft_ku-xlarge%2F1879hnslhezhojpg.jpg&hash=429b164cc68a5a2ad5c3208b443f3bcf308330fd)
Wobegong Plesiosaur...awesome.

From here : http://io9.com/5965389/a-book-that-will-make-you-question-everything-you-know-about-dinosaurs (http://io9.com/5965389/a-book-that-will-make-you-question-everything-you-know-about-dinosaurs)
Be sure to read the sounding off from some palaeontologists in the comments too, though.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on Mar 08, 2014, 05:31:00 PM
QuoteI can't speak for the book itself, but the way it's being reported here makes the mistake of blurring the line between science and art. It criticizes the way artists draw dinosaurs as if that is a reflection on the imagination of scientists. But science is tentative; it tries not to make claims it can't support. So until there is evidence that Leaellynasaura was a fat cottonball, there is no reason to assume it was. Scientists can make reasonable estimates of the musculature of an animal based on its skeleton, but they aren't going to create fanciful reconstructions based on a dissatisfaction with other people's artwork. I suspect that the book is aimed more at criticizing artists more than scientists, but either way this article should make a better distinction. Don't mistake the map for the road

This sums up my thoughts well; this guy hit it on the head. The book looks more like neo-modern paleoartists wanting to express wacky ideas than something that would be realistic. 
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Xenodog on Mar 08, 2014, 05:45:45 PM
Quote from: DoomRulz on Mar 08, 2014, 05:31:00 PM
QuoteI can't speak for the book itself, but the way it's being reported here makes the mistake of blurring the line between science and art. It criticizes the way artists draw dinosaurs as if that is a reflection on the imagination of scientists. But science is tentative; it tries not to make claims it can't support. So until there is evidence that Leaellynasaura was a fat cottonball, there is no reason to assume it was. Scientists can make reasonable estimates of the musculature of an animal based on its skeleton, but they aren't going to create fanciful reconstructions based on a dissatisfaction with other people's artwork. I suspect that the book is aimed more at criticizing artists more than scientists, but either way this article should make a better distinction. Don't mistake the map for the road

This sums up my thoughts well; this guy hit it on the head. The book looks more like neo-modern paleoartists wanting to express wacky ideas than something that would be realistic.

I agree with a lot of that, but I don't think a 'carpet plesiosaur' is too hard to imagine ecologically.
I've read some more stuff from the authors - often Darren Naish's stuff - and it seems to focus more on the wacky and 'cool' than citations following them.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Requiem28 on Mar 09, 2014, 06:00:16 AM
Quote from: Xenodog on Mar 08, 2014, 05:13:36 PM
(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.kinja-img.com%2Fgawker-media%2Fimage%2Fupload%2Ft_ku-xlarge%2F1879hnslhezhojpg.jpg&hash=429b164cc68a5a2ad5c3208b443f3bcf308330fd)
Wobegong Plesiosaur...awesome.

From here : http://io9.com/5965389/a-book-that-will-make-you-question-everything-you-know-about-dinosaurs (http://io9.com/5965389/a-book-that-will-make-you-question-everything-you-know-about-dinosaurs)
Be sure to read the sounding off from some palaeontologists in the comments too, though.

That's cool
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: SiL on Mar 09, 2014, 07:17:35 AM
The book doesn't really criticize anything, it's just saying "What if?". It illustrates our ignorance, rather than anyone saying "Naw, I don't like the common view, this is what I think it was really like."
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Xenodog on Mar 10, 2014, 10:28:13 PM
http://www.iflscience.com/plants-and-animals/strange-reptile-fossil-discovered-china (http://www.iflscience.com/plants-and-animals/strange-reptile-fossil-discovered-china)

"Hey guysh"
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Vertigo on Mar 10, 2014, 10:59:28 PM
Atopodentatus has been causing a bit of a stir. Aside from being a ridiculously well-preserved fossil and occupying a highly specialised ecological niche, it's thought to be basal to the group that led to plesiosaurs and pliosaurs (not ichthyosaurs or mosasaurs though, which aren't closely related). Their ancester would have been something like this guy, probably without the freaky dentition though.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Sabby on Mar 11, 2014, 04:56:46 AM
Quote from: ディロフォサウルス on Mar 08, 2014, 09:15:04 AM
How do we know though ?

Theres nothing in that story which claims its true or it isnt ?

If theres evidence thats its fake then fair enough.

Ever heard of Occams Razor?
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: judge death on Mar 12, 2014, 08:53:13 AM
Obviously a fake.

Hmm may I ask you experts for some advices:
I have started to read 3 books about prehistoric life and dinos but when reading in this thread your knowledge is far beyond what i have at the moment, how did you guys and girls manage to learn so much about these time eras and wildlife? Working with it or studied it or just personal interest which lead you to read all books and documentaries you could find?
Advices you have for someone like me who want to learn and become a mini pro at this? :)
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on Mar 12, 2014, 11:16:50 AM
Quote from: judge death on Mar 12, 2014, 08:53:13 AM
Obviously a fake.

Hmm may I ask you experts for some advices:
I have started to read 3 books about prehistoric life and dinos but when reading in this thread your knowledge is far beyond what i have at the moment, how did you guys and girls manage to learn so much about these time eras and wildlife? Working with it or studied it or just personal interest which lead you to read all books and documentaries you could find?
Advices you have for someone like me who want to learn and become a mini pro at this? :)

That's my response to your first question and really, the full sentence there answers your second question. You have to want to learn all about it. There's a whole universe of knowledge out there on prehistoric life, not just dinosaurs. Hell, I'm learning a lot from Vertigo because he clearly knows much more than I do. The only way to learn is just to keep seeking information and always be cross-referencing it with other sources because no two paleontologists always believe the same things.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Sabby on Mar 12, 2014, 09:29:50 PM
I'm more interested in early sea life, before land based life was even a thing.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on Mar 13, 2014, 11:08:59 AM
That would be Cambrian, Silurian, and Devonian-era life you'd be interested in then. Armoured fish, giant orthocones, & sea scorpions were the big guys on the block.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Vertigo on Mar 13, 2014, 06:06:50 PM
Quote from: judge death on Mar 12, 2014, 08:53:13 AM
Hmm may I ask you experts for some advices:
I have started to read 3 books about prehistoric life and dinos but when reading in this thread your knowledge is far beyond what i have at the moment, how did you guys and girls manage to learn so much about these time eras and wildlife? Working with it or studied it or just personal interest which lead you to read all books and documentaries you could find?
Advices you have for someone like me who want to learn and become a mini pro at this? :)

Well, in my opinion the best way is to build up your knowledge base in a graded way. If you dived straight in to an academic book, it'll be indecipherable and impenetrable, because they're jam-packed with terminology, descriptors and cladistic groups that wouldn't mean anything to you. If you read something more accessible, you'll be exposed to enough tricky terms that you'll be able to fill in the gaps and figure out what the more advanced works are saying. Here are a few avenues you can pursue for dinosaur research, with their approximate level:

-TV programmes. These vary in quality, but all tend to be very basic - accessible to anyone, rarely offering much in the way of academia. And in many cases, they'll be rife with inaccuracy. Walking With Dinosaurs, for example, was littered with errors and speculation even at the time, and at 15 years old it's been left far behind by modern palaeontology's rapid pace. Planet Dinosaur was based on sound science from what I remember. For the most part, these will just be helping you put together an image of the Mesozoic world, and developing a basic familiarity with the major dinosaur groups.
Every so often they have a piece of very useful information that's hard to find elsewhere (such as the results of the spinosaurid oxygen isotope research in Planet Dinosaur), but you should take everything you learn on these shows with a pinch of salt until you can find a corroborating source.

-Generalist dinosaur books. Non-academic books for adults are quite few and far between, but should provide you with a proper fundamental grounding. Find a good one, re-read it a couple of times, and you'll have a good knowledge base.
I can't really offer you much in the way of recommendation. The last one I read was Paul Barrett's Dinosaurs: A Natural History, but this was in 2002, it'll be hopelessly outdated by now. Things to look for... make sure it's from the last decade at least, and ideally within the last five years. If it has a scaly Velociraptor pictured anywhere, it's a no-go.
I can recommend DK's Prehistoric: The Visual History Of Life On Earth to build up a general knowledge of life's entire history, and an understanding of how the different groups inter-relate. If you're looking for specific information about anything in particular, though, you're out of luck with that one.
One proviso with books. In most cases, they aren't peer-reviewed, and will contain the viewpoint of just one or two experts. As Doom mentioned earlier, every palaeontologist and enthusiast has a different viewpoint, and will disagree on a wide range of subjects (you might even disagree with them yourself as you learn more). Some researchers have highly controversial views that they'll try to convey as proven fact. If there are multiple authors who worked on the book, it should prove more reliable.

-Online resources.
Wikipedia might sound like a cop-out, but the palaeontology sections are brilliantly curated. It's generally very reliable, and absolutely jam-packed with good information, written at a level that you're probably already ready for (I'm listing these avenues as kind of a tiered approach, if you haven't noticed yet). If a question suddenly pops into your mind - "What was Tyrannosaurus' top speed?" "Which animals occupied X ecosystem at Y time?" "Was Michael Crichton right about Z?" - fire up Google and open the relevant Wikipedia page. You'll often find yourself falling down a rabbit hole of time-annihilating information sponging. Similarly, if you hear some tidbit on TV or in a newspaper that piques your interest, fact-check it in Wikipedia to verify its accuracy.
If you come across a word that you're not familiar with (there may be a lot of them on Wikipedia), look it up on Google. This will set you up nicely for more advanced research in the future.
Google's also great for bring up news articles in National Geographic or similar, and the image search is useful if you just have to see a particular fossil for any reason.
Basically... be curious. There's a virtually bottomless well of information at the end of your ethernet cable, and easily found. Wikipedia's usually a better source than most books, because it's curated by multiple authors. Where there's a difference of opinion, both perspectives will usually be detailed.

If you have any question about dinosaur evolutionary relationships, there's just one stop you need to make: thescelosaurus.com (http://www.thescelosaurus.com). Its cladogram (http://www.thescelosaurus.com/dinopage_index.htm) is the best I've ever seen, and lists every remotely viable dinosaur genus. There's a full table for understanding the subdivisions of geological time here (http://www.thescelosaurus.com/background.htm). Most of the information here is compiled from ultimate dinosaur tome™ The Dinosauria, a monstrously comprehensive 700-page peer-reviewed academic work which is virtually impenetrable to pretty much everyone.
I do strongly recommend sitting down and taking a flick through Thescelosaurus' clade index, it may be low-tech but I consider it an indespensable resource. You do need a familiarity with the various group names though, which is why I suggest a thorough reading of a generalist adult book first.

-Looking out the window. You can understand a lot about extinct animals by studying living animals which either are related, or occupy a similar ecological niche and body plan. If every palaeontologist did this properly, there question of Tyrannosaurus being an exclusive scavenger would never have been seriously entertained - no living terrestrial vertebrate does it, and even among birds, it's just the vulture, a creature which can travel hundreds of miles with negligible energy expenditure. Anyway, the more you study today's animals, the more you'll understand. Population densities, thermoregulation, energetics, behavioural patterns... a vast amount of it can be transposed to extinct fauna.
Also, if you put a bird feeder in your back garden, you'll have a tiny, highly specialised and successful dinosaur visiting you every day.

-Academic books. If it's written by an active palaeontologist then it's likely to be at this level. Typically, they'll be a tough read, and you'll need quite a broad internal dictionary of technical terms to get through it. But if you build up to it, reading at this level is very attainable. Recent examples I've read and can recommend:

Gregory S Paul's Dinosaurs: A Field Guide. As Doom pointed out, Paul isn't a qualified palaeontologist, and some of his views I strongly disagree with. But this book is extraordinarily comprehensive, with in-depth information about dinosaur biology and ecology, followed by the bulk of the book containing basic information about every viable dinosaur genus (or those he considers viable, I should say). The skeletal diagrams are peerless, and show which parts of the skeleton have been discovered; these diagrams are used for most major species. Even if the early part of the book is impenetrable to you, you might want to pick it up anyway, just for the sake of leafing through the diagrams.
Mark Witton's Pterosaurs: Natural History, Evolution, Anatomy. Alright, this one's not actually about dinosaurs, but it's always helpful to know more about the ecosystems they inhabited; pterosaurs were an important part of that, and occupied niches that remain vacant to this day. I won't say the book brings them to life, it's very stuffily written, but you couldn't ask for anything more comprehensive. More importantly to this topic, this is one of the few academic books which actually explains a lot of its terminology, making it unusually accessible, and a handy stepping-stone for getting into other works.
Matthew P Martyniuk's Field Guide To Mesozoic Birds And Other Winged Dinosaurs. This is quite a short book, and reasonably accessible. It actually focuses more on what most of us would call dinosaurs rather than birds, starting with the most basal example of vaned feathers (and wings) in the oviraptorids. He uses some very unusual cladistics (ever heard of a deinodontid?), but what particularly stands the book apart is that the bulk of it is comprised of illustrations and general information for every relevant species... and the dinosaurs will be considerably birdier than you're accustomed to. Which is not an inaccuracy.
The Dinosauria, which I mentioned earlier, is generally considered the ultimate resource for dinosaur information, but it's at such a high level (and unintuitively presented) that graduates struggle to grapple with it. It's at a level where I can just about understand it, but it's not the kind of thing you can just sit and read.

And one more thing - if you have a question, post it on here. I'm happy to help, and I'd imagine a few other people will be too.



Anyway, that's my advice. Personally, I've been very interested in prehistoric life, evolution and ecology, and particularly dinosaurs, pretty much all my life. I've had a great deal of free time to just sponge up information wherever I can find it, and I've listed some of my favourite sources. At one point I'd intended to study Palaeobiology & Evolution at Portsmouth University when my health picked up, but that's not really on the cards now.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Xenodog on Mar 13, 2014, 08:26:59 PM
Top notch post as ever Vertigo.  8)

Quote from: Vertigo on Mar 13, 2014, 06:06:50 PM
I can recommend DK's Prehistoric: The Visual History Of Life On Earth to build up a general knowledge of life's entire history, and an understanding of how the different groups inter-relate. If you're looking for specific information about anything in particular, though, you're out of luck with that one.
Straight up yes. This is still one of the best dinosaur books on the market.

Quote from: Vertigo on Mar 13, 2014, 06:06:50 PM
If every palaeontologist did this properly, there question of Tyrannosaurus being an exclusive scavenger would never have been seriously entertained - no living terrestrial vertebrate does it, and even among birds, it's just the vulture, a creature which can travel hundreds of miles with negligible energy expenditure.
Not entirely. There is also the Brown Hyaena. Whilst the brown hyaena (often unsuccessfully) hunts around 5% of it's prey and also eats Kalahari truffles, tsama melons and ostrich eggs, the bulk of it's diet (over 80%) is simple carrion. But this brings up what I think could be interesting ecological comparisons.
Brown hyaena live in areas with good predator guilds = lots of carrion to appropriate. Did Rex have the same potential? Possibly not, as there doesn't seem to be many sympatric carnivores other than much smaller dromeosaurs. But i think it's been noted how much more lighter young rexes were. It's possible adults could steal a large percentage of their food from their own young.

I should also add I don't think it was one, I just think it's an interesting thing to explore. I of course believe it is both, like the majority of carnivores today, with adaptations that also allow it to find carrion like many carnivores today.

Quote from: Vertigo on Mar 13, 2014, 06:06:50 PM
Matthew P Martyniuk's Field Guide To Mesozoic Birds And Other Winged Dinosaurs. This is quite a short book, and reasonably accessible. It actually focuses more on what most of us would call dinosaurs rather than birds, starting with the most basal example of vaned feathers (and wings) in the oviraptorids. He uses some very unusual cladistics (ever heard of a deinodontid?), but what particularly stands the book apart is that the bulk of it is comprised of illustrations and general information for every relevant species... and the dinosaurs will be considerably birdier than you're accustomed to. Which is not an inaccuracy.
I've spoke with the author online, great guy. Also seen some quotes and work of his on display on Montana, in some of the cool dinosaur museums there.

Quote from: Vertigo on Mar 13, 2014, 06:06:50 PM
At one point I'd intended to study Palaeobiology & Evolution at Portsmouth University when my health picked up, but that's not really on the cards now.
Oh man, what happened there man?  :-\
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Vertigo on Mar 14, 2014, 12:51:33 AM
Why thank you!

Quote from: Xenodog on Mar 13, 2014, 08:26:59 PM
Quote from: Vertigo on Mar 13, 2014, 06:06:50 PM
If every palaeontologist did this properly, there question of Tyrannosaurus being an exclusive scavenger would never have been seriously entertained - no living terrestrial vertebrate does it, and even among birds, it's just the vulture, a creature which can travel hundreds of miles with negligible energy expenditure.
Not entirely. There is also the Brown Hyaena. Whilst the brown hyaena (often unsuccessfully) hunts around 5% of it's prey and also eats Kalahari truffles, tsama melons and ostrich eggs, the bulk of it's diet (over 80%) is simple carrion. But this brings up what I think could be interesting ecological comparisons.
Brown hyaena live in areas with good predator guilds = lots of carrion to appropriate. Did Rex have the same potential? Possibly not, as there doesn't seem to be many sympatric carnivores other than much smaller dromeosaurs. But i think it's been noted how much more lighter young rexes were. It's possible adults could steal a large percentage of their food from their own young.

I should also add I don't think it was one, I just think it's an interesting thing to explore. I of course believe it is both, like the majority of carnivores today, with adaptations that also allow it to find carrion like many carnivores today.

How did I not know about the brown hyena? Well spotted. It does sound like it's a bit of a generalist to a degree, I wonder how comparable that diet would be to something like a fox.

With regards to rexy's ecosystem, it did contain a wide variety of herbivores, but most importantly, vast herds of elephant-sized animals (both ceratopsians and hadrosaurs). Because Tyrannosaurus' growth exploded during late adolescence, they'd have to be virtually adult before they could tackle mature examples of those herbivores - a ten-year-old rex probably didn't have the mass or musculature to take them on.
And the trouble is, scavenging the kills of their smaller kin (or other predators such as Acheroraptor) just wouldn't be enough to keep the adults well fed. A 250-kilo Struthiomimus would be a standard kill for a juvenile rex, but for a 6-ton adult, that's like a lion eating a serval - barely enough to keep it fuelled through the day.
The only predator in the ecosystem that could bring down prey suitable for an adult Tyrannosaurus, would be another adult Tyrannosaurus.

That said, I do think rexes may have fulfilled an important ecological function of the vulture: hoovering up any meat left standing around, which otherwise would slowly rot and become a breeding ground for contagion. They were well-adapted for finding a free meal if one happened to be in the area, and could gulp it down bones-and-all.

Quote from: Xenodog on Mar 13, 2014, 08:26:59 PM
Quote from: Vertigo on Mar 13, 2014, 06:06:50 PM
At one point I'd intended to study Palaeobiology & Evolution at Portsmouth University when my health picked up, but that's not really on the cards now.
Oh man, what happened there man?  :-\

I've had chronic fatigue syndrome for most of my life, and seriously since I was 14. I'd been hoping it would have buggered off by the time I got into my twenties, but eight years into them, it's still there and I still can't do very much. I'm currently struggling with two weekly hours of voluntary work which basically consists of sitting in a room and occasionally talking to people, plus just enough moderate exercise to prevent me degenerating into a porcine lump.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Sabby on Mar 14, 2014, 01:29:44 AM
This thread has to have the most intellectually emasculating posts I've seen on this website ._____.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Xenodog on Mar 14, 2014, 10:52:17 AM
Quote from: Vertigo on Mar 14, 2014, 12:51:33 AM
How did I not know about the brown hyena? Well spotted. It does sound like it's a bit of a generalist to a degree, I wonder how comparable that diet would be to something like a fox.
It does eat any carrion and protein it can find, but comparing it to foxes from say, here in Britain from Prof. David MacDonald's early field studies of them (Running with the Fox, if you're interested!) in England, foxes are the greater generalists I'd say. Much less carrion, much more small vertebrates, invertebrates and fruit.
Though the bulk of the good Brown hyaena studies have been done in either the southern Kgalagadi Transfrontier Park, or the Central Kalahari area, both highly arid. It is relatively understudied in the lusher bushveld or lowveld or Botswana or South Africa where it's diet may be different.

Quote from: Vertigo on Mar 14, 2014, 12:51:33 AM
With regards to rexy's ecosystem, it did contain a wide variety of herbivores, but most importantly, vast herds of elephant-sized animals (both ceratopsians and hadrosaurs). Because Tyrannosaurus' growth exploded during late adolescence, they'd have to be virtually adult before they could tackle mature examples of those herbivores - a ten-year-old rex probably didn't have the mass or musculature to take them on.
Though haven't there been arguments for possible pack hunting in young rexes? And don''t forget young animals. Juvenile hadrosaurs or ceratopsians would certainly be a large meal - far bigger than struthiomimus  - and yet not out the reach of a young rex.
But again, this is just playing ideas, I'm not serious on adult rex being scavengers!
But thinking about it, taking young prey may provide ecological separation between juvenile and adult rexes to reduce competition that could lead to cannibalism; modern predators today take different ages classes of common herbivores to avoid competition. The different age groups of Rexes could almost act as an entire predator guild itself.

Quote from: Vertigo on Mar 14, 2014, 12:51:33 AM
That said, I do think rexes may have fulfilled an important ecological function of the vulture: hoovering up any meat left standing around, which otherwise would slowly rot and become a breeding ground for contagion. They were well-adapted for finding a free meal if one happened to be in the area, and could gulp it down bones-and-all.
Aye, agreed. I think when Jack Horner compared it to a spotted hyaena (ignorantly so, not knowing of their hunting prowess) he on the money: An active predator that scavenges whenever it has the chance.


Quote from: Vertigo on Mar 14, 2014, 12:51:33 AM
I've had chronic fatigue syndrome for most of my life, and seriously since I was 14. I'd been hoping it would have buggered off by the time I got into my twenties, but eight years into them, it's still there and I still can't do very much. I'm currently struggling with two weekly hours of voluntary work which basically consists of sitting in a room and occasionally talking to people, plus just enough moderate exercise to prevent me degenerating into a porcine lump.
Really sorry to hear that man.  At least you can always have armchair paleontology!
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on Mar 14, 2014, 11:22:25 AM
Quote from: Vertigo on Mar 14, 2014, 12:51:33 AM
With regards to rexy's ecosystem, it did contain a wide variety of herbivores, but most importantly, vast herds of elephant-sized animals (both ceratopsians and hadrosaurs). Because Tyrannosaurus' growth exploded during late adolescence, they'd have to be virtually adult before they could tackle mature examples of those herbivores - a ten-year-old rex probably didn't have the mass or musculature to take them on.
And the trouble is, scavenging the kills of their smaller kin (or other predators such as Acheroraptor) just wouldn't be enough to keep the adults well fed. A 250-kilo Struthiomimus would be a standard kill for a juvenile rex, but for a 6-ton adult, that's like a lion eating a serval - barely enough to keep it fuelled through the day.
The only predator in the ecosystem that could bring down prey suitable for an adult Tyrannosaurus, would be another adult Tyrannosaurus.

That said, I do think rexes may have fulfilled an important ecological function of the vulture: hoovering up any meat left standing around, which otherwise would slowly rot and become a breeding ground for contagion. They were well-adapted for finding a free meal if one happened to be in the area, and could gulp it down bones-and-all.

I first heard your last point mentioned in an episode of PaleoWorld entitled, "The Legendary T.Rex" and Peter Larson and Phil Currie said the same thing. Of course, it featured Jack Horner who seemed (as he does now) hell-bent on proving T.Rex just couldn't have been a hunter, end of story. You'd think they guy's lawyer was eaten by a T.Rex and he has a personal vendetta or something.

All the evidence points to T.Rex being primarily a hunter, the most damning of which is the Triceratops frill with a healed Rex bite mark. At the same time, every top hunter in an ecosystem will scavenge. They all do; it's that simple.

Quote from: Xenodog on Mar 14, 2014, 10:52:17 AM
Though haven't there been arguments for possible pack hunting in young rexes? And don''t forget young animals. Juvenile hadrosaurs or ceratopsians would certainly be a large meal - far bigger than struthiomimus  - and yet not out the reach of a young rex.
But again, this is just playing ideas, I'm not serious on adult rex being scavengers!
But thinking about it, taking young prey may provide ecological separation between juvenile and adult rexes to reduce competition that could lead to cannibalism; modern predators today take different ages classes of common herbivores to avoid competition. The different age groups of Rexes could almost act as an entire predator guild itself.

I don't know about juveniles specifically, but I have read about T.Rex in general hunting in packs. I'm not sure I agree because the only animal that shared T.Rex's environment that would warrant pack hunting is Alamosaurus. There's also been speculation by Thomas Holtz of the University of Maryland that T.Rex may have only hunted juvies because the adults were simply too big to go after. In this instance, it's hypothesized that Alamosaurus reached Sauroposeidon proportions. For an animal like T.Rex, when you have ceratopsians and hadrosaurids running about, there's no reason to go after something that big.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Vertigo on Mar 14, 2014, 10:51:25 PM
Quote from: Xenodog on Mar 14, 2014, 10:52:17 AM
Quote from: Vertigo on Mar 14, 2014, 12:51:33 AM
With regards to rexy's ecosystem, it did contain a wide variety of herbivores, but most importantly, vast herds of elephant-sized animals (both ceratopsians and hadrosaurs). Because Tyrannosaurus' growth exploded during late adolescence, they'd have to be virtually adult before they could tackle mature examples of those herbivores - a ten-year-old rex probably didn't have the mass or musculature to take them on.
Though haven't there been arguments for possible pack hunting in young rexes? And don''t forget young animals. Juvenile hadrosaurs or ceratopsians would certainly be a large meal - far bigger than struthiomimus  - and yet not out the reach of a young rex.
But again, this is just playing ideas, I'm not serious on adult rex being scavengers!
But thinking about it, taking young prey may provide ecological separation between juvenile and adult rexes to reduce competition that could lead to cannibalism; modern predators today take different ages classes of common herbivores to avoid competition. The different age groups of Rexes could almost act as an entire predator guild itself.

Yeah, I did think about the potential with pack hunting when I was writing my last post. Trouble is, pack hunting is virtually impossible to prove - pretty much the only thing that can do it conclusively is an extraordinary set of footprints. We aren't even certain about Deinonychus' pack hunting, even though it seems obvious given the frequency with which numerous teeth are found in association with the vastly larger ornithopod Tenontosaurus.
My view is, looking at the relationships between big game hunters and their prey, the ideal target tends to be roughly in the region of the weight (or combined weight) of the hunters. This makes sure there's enough to go around. Tyrannosaurus reached a size equivalent to an adult Struthiomimus at just a few years old, so it seems there wasn't a particular need for them to combine arms.

The argument for pack hunting in tyrannosaurids is mainly resting on a fossil site which appears to preserve a 'pride' of Albertosaurus; numerous individuals of wildly varying ages. Currie's even suggested the possibility of the whole family hunting together, with the fast youngsters flushing prey towards the adults.
It's not really a theory I support. Social groups don't necessarily infer group hunting. A good example of this is the great white shark, which in many ways (despite a wholly different environment) is quite analogous to Tyrannosaurus - immensely potent battery of senses, excessive musculature, hunting strategy focused on inflicting massive tissue loss and shock in a single bite. Great whites often travel together, and form groups segregated by age or gender, but they always hunt alone.
My opinion is that Tyrannosaurus (or Albertosaurus at least) formed family groups, with each individual making kills separately. The advantage for the adults would be that having their offspring within their territory, they could protect them against rival adults. Using their extraordinary sense of smell, they could all converge back together when one of them made a kill. Just a theory, anyway.


Quote from: DoomRulz on Mar 14, 2014, 11:22:25 AM... Jack Horner who seemed (as he does now) hell-bent on proving T.Rex just couldn't have been a hunter, end of story. You'd think they guy's lawyer was eaten by a T.Rex and he has a personal vendetta or something.

I think Horner's problem is that he's particularly fond of ceratopsians and hadrosaurs, and doesn't take too kindly to anything that saw them as walking lunchboxes.


Quote from: DoomRulz on Mar 14, 2014, 11:22:25 AM
I don't know about juveniles specifically, but I have read about T.Rex in general hunting in packs. I'm not sure I agree because the only animal that shared T.Rex's environment that would warrant pack hunting is Alamosaurus. There's also been speculation by Thomas Holtz of the University of Maryland that T.Rex may have only hunted juvies because the adults were simply too big to go after. In this instance, it's hypothesized that Alamosaurus reached Sauroposeidon proportions. For an animal like T.Rex, when you have ceratopsians and hadrosaurids running about, there's no reason to go after something that big.

It wouldn't surprise me if nothing touched Alamosaurus once they reached a certain size. It took them many years to reach adulthood (I've read 45 for full size), during most of which they'd be fair game for rexes of various ages. I'd imagine a tiny percentage of them would reach maturity.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Xenodog on Mar 14, 2014, 11:43:18 PM
Good comparison of Rex vs. Great white. Also agree it was unlikely a whole family hunted together. Ate, maybe, hunted, no. With modern group hunting predators the youngsters never play a prevalent role. In wolves, pairs (male and female combo) are the significantly most successful because youngsters that form the pack just f*ck everything up.

And on age and maturity...wasn't Sue estimated to be 28?
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Vertigo on Mar 15, 2014, 12:16:38 AM
She is indeed, I meant Alamosaurus in that last paragraph. I'll edit it to make it clear.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: judge death on Mar 15, 2014, 02:55:52 AM
Thank you so much Vertigo and DoomRulz!

I will try these advices and what you wrote, I see it is the same way in how I learned so much about WW1-2, read everything I can and build up my knowledge and then go further from there.
Will later check out these books and try to find some others as well. Now I will be busy for the closest half year!

I will ask here and ask for help when needed :)

Vertigo: Sad to hear about that, you sound like someone who should have a such job in no time or be a guide or such at a museum, you know probably already more than most in this area :)
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Vertigo on Mar 15, 2014, 08:09:12 AM
Thank you.  :)
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on Mar 15, 2014, 04:59:00 PM
Quote from: Vertigo on Mar 14, 2014, 10:51:25 PM
My opinion is that Tyrannosaurus (or Albertosaurus at least) formed family groups, with each individual making kills separately. The advantage for the adults would be that having their offspring within their territory, they could protect them against rival adults. Using their extraordinary sense of smell, they could all converge back together when one of them made a kill. Just a theory, anyway.

Is this sort of behaviour present in modern-day reptiles? My only issue with this is that beyond a certain age, adults would see juveniles as a food source because paternal/maternal instincts would wear out.

Quote from: Vertigo on Mar 14, 2014, 10:51:25 PM
Quote from: DoomRulz on Mar 14, 2014, 11:22:25 AM... Jack Horner who seemed (as he does now) hell-bent on proving T.Rex just couldn't have been a hunter, end of story. You'd think they guy's lawyer was eaten by a T.Rex and he has a personal vendetta or something.

I think Horner's problem is that he's particularly fond of ceratopsians and hadrosaurs, and doesn't take too kindly to anything that saw them as walking lunchboxes.

Heh, wouldn't surprise me. I think he's also bitter because science journals aren't sucking his cock anymore for discovering Maiasaura.

Quote from: Vertigo on Mar 14, 2014, 10:51:25 PM
Quote from: DoomRulz on Mar 14, 2014, 11:22:25 AM
I don't know about juveniles specifically, but I have read about T.Rex in general hunting in packs. I'm not sure I agree because the only animal that shared T.Rex's environment that would warrant pack hunting is Alamosaurus. There's also been speculation by Thomas Holtz of the University of Maryland that T.Rex may have only hunted juvies because the adults were simply too big to go after. In this instance, it's hypothesized that Alamosaurus reached Sauroposeidon proportions. For an animal like T.Rex, when you have ceratopsians and hadrosaurids running about, there's no reason to go after something that big.

It wouldn't surprise me if nothing touched them once they reached a certain size. It took them many years to reach adulthood (I've read 45 for full size), during most of which they'd be fair game for rexes of various ages. I'd imagine a tiny percentage of them would reach maturity.

Indeed, but here's something I just thought of. With the discovery of Mapusaurus, multiple fossils were found in a bed together suggesting they at least hunted in gangs (but like you said, it doesn't mean they lived together in a unit). Paleontologists have established a predator/prey relationship between it and Argentinosaurus (adults, specifically) so I don't think it's far-fetched to use that as an analogy when describing T.Rex/Alamosaurus. The only difference would be what other herbivores were around during the time of Mapusaurus in Argentina. Like I said, with smaller prey items around, why go after a giant?

Quote from: judge death on Mar 15, 2014, 02:55:52 AM
Thank you so much Vertigo and DoomRulz!

Cheers! Enjoy the journey :)
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Vertigo on Mar 15, 2014, 07:11:22 PM
Quote from: DoomRulz on Mar 15, 2014, 04:59:00 PM
Quote from: Vertigo on Mar 14, 2014, 10:51:25 PM
My opinion is that Tyrannosaurus (or Albertosaurus at least) formed family groups, with each individual making kills separately. The advantage for the adults would be that having their offspring within their territory, they could protect them against rival adults. Using their extraordinary sense of smell, they could all converge back together when one of them made a kill. Just a theory, anyway.

Is this sort of behaviour present in modern-day reptiles? My only issue with this is that beyond a certain age, adults would see juveniles as a food source because paternal/maternal instincts would wear out.

Well, for starters, Tyrannosaurus is much closer-related to birds than any extant reptile, and even has the beginnings of an avian brain structure. Most birds provide some form of parental care until the offspring is more or less fully grown, but of course no bird takes 18 years to reach full size (and Tyrannosaurus had the physical tools to fend for itself from a young age, unlike most birds).

It also has a higher encephalisation quotient (brain size in relation to what's expected for the body weight) than any non-maniraptoran dinosaur that I know of - nearly double that of a crocodile, I believe, if you use the reptile EQ formula. I'm not particularly well versed in reptile behaviour, they constantly surprise me, but rexy had an unusual and possibly exceptional mental toolbox. Given the animal's potent sense of smell, it could easily recognise specific individuals, and it may have been smart enough to remember familial connections over extended periods.

Quote from: DoomRulz on Mar 15, 2014, 04:59:00 PM
With the discovery of Mapusaurus, multiple fossils were found in a bed together suggesting they at least hunted in gangs (but like you said, it doesn't mean they lived together in a unit). Paleontologists have established a predator/prey relationship between it and Argentinosaurus (adults, specifically) so I don't think it's far-fetched to use that as an analogy when describing T.Rex/Alamosaurus. The only difference would be what other herbivores were around during the time of Mapusaurus in Argentina. Like I said, with smaller prey items around, why go after a giant?

Yeah, I agree with that. It's not implausible for Tyrannosaurus to gang up to hunt adult sauropods, it's just that it seems unnecessary. Given Alamosaurus' lengthy growth period, I'd imagine there would be at least as many juvenile animals as adults at any one time, which still gives a lone rex plenty of predatory opportunities within that species. Plus, as you say, there are other species which made good targets for Tyrannosaurus.


Quote from: Xenodog on Mar 14, 2014, 10:52:17 AM
Predators today take different ages/classes of common herbivores to avoid competition. The different age groups of Rexes could almost act as an entire predator guild itself.

I forget to reply to this bit earlier, but yes, I completely agree. Tyrannosaurus had different specialisations at various ages, and could probably catch its own prey when it was young. Given the absence of any predator between dromie-size and Tyrannosaurus-size in the ecosystem, but plenty of herbivores that fit in the bracket, it seems that young rexes filled the niche.






(New post)

There's an important new tyrannosaurid on the block: Nanuqsaurus hoglundi.

One unusual element is its size - nearly half the length of Tyrannosaurus at 25ft, and the specimen appears to be mature (the skull bones are fused). I'm pretty sure this makes it the smallest known adult tyrannosaurid. It's also very closely related to rexy.

Second thing is the environment. This is an arctic tyrannosaurid, discovered in northern Alaska. During winter months the region became very dark and cold, and it appears the population was isolated by a mountain range (hence the genetic differentiation from southern tyrannosaurids - it's the same with the giant Alaskan Troodon, which was contemporaneous).

Nanuqsaurus' smaller size was probably related to the local conditions - either due to a comparative scarcity of prey, or because it had difficulty hunting in the dark (it's unknown how well tyrannosaurids could see at night). Being lighter meant it could survive on less.
Troodon was specialised for nocturnal predation, so probably grew larger because it had more hours than usual to hunt in optimal conditions.


Some handy illustrations:
(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.plosone.org%2Farticle%2Finfo%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0091287.g008%2Flargerimage&hash=3adbf32ca8167e47061e6fa7d56174491cd71cef)
Scale bar = 1 metre. A: Nanuqsaurus. B: Tyrannosaurus rex (Sue). C: Tyrannosaurus rex (AMNH 5027 from the American Museum of Natural History). D: Daspletosaurus torosus. E: Albertosaurus sarcophagus. F: Troodon formosus, southern species. G: Troodon, northern species (estimate based on tooth size).

And a superb cladogram detailing the age and relationships of Tyrannosauroidea, including its latest addition. The thick bars delineate uncertainty range of a genus' age, rather than its overall timespan.
(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.plosone.org%2Farticle%2Finfo%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0091287.g006%2Flargerimage&hash=6842b4d9bc8ec233a27e66cd0f7d5c507f5bbaf6)
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on Mar 17, 2014, 12:50:40 PM
Forget Nanotyrannus, here's a real pygmy tyrannosaur, lol. A tyrannosaurid that could be bullied by a troodontid; blasphemy I tells ya.

Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Xenodog on Mar 17, 2014, 02:04:57 PM
Quote from: DoomRulz on Mar 17, 2014, 12:50:40 PM
Forget Nanotyrannus, here's a real pygmy tyrannosaur, lol. A tyrannosaurid that could be bullied by a troodontid; blasphemy I tells ya.

The more robust tyrannosaurid would still be the top dog; it'd be like a leopard vs a cheetah.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: maledoro on Mar 19, 2014, 09:31:22 PM
Quote from: Xenodog on Mar 17, 2014, 02:04:57 PM
Quote from: DoomRulz on Mar 17, 2014, 12:50:40 PM
Forget Nanotyrannus, here's a real pygmy tyrannosaur, lol. A tyrannosaurid that could be bullied by a troodontid; blasphemy I tells ya.

The more robust tyrannosaurid would still be the top dog; it'd be like a leopard vs a cheetah.
But leopards and cheetahs are not dogs. N'yuk, n'yuk, n'yuk...
:D
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on Mar 20, 2014, 01:36:08 PM
http://news.discovery.com/animals/dinosaurs/chicken-from-hell-is-a-fowl-looking-dinosaur-140319.htm#mkcpgn=rssnws1 (http://news.discovery.com/animals/dinosaurs/chicken-from-hell-is-a-fowl-looking-dinosaur-140319.htm#mkcpgn=rssnws1)

Technically, all theropods were chickens from hell, but a cool find nonetheless.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Vertigo on Mar 20, 2014, 09:47:06 PM
It's somehow not surprising that Maastrichtian North America's oviraptorosaur would be one of the largest ever discovered. USA, 66-72,000,000 BC: when evolution went nuts.

Curious how we're suddenly finding so many new dinosaur genera from that time and place though, given that it's been heavily excavated for well over a century. Off the top of my head, that's Acheroraptor, Nanuqsaurus and Anzu, just in the last four months.
Finally puts paid to that old 'theory' about dinosaur diversity declining around the end of the Cretaceous.

:edit: The journal publication for Anzu has another of those handy time-referencing cladograms, for the Oviraptorosauria, if anyone's interested.

(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.plosone.org%2Farticle%2Finfo%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0092022.g007%2Flargerimage&hash=33ab626819f7824eab0b8079a4369685816025c8)
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on Mar 21, 2014, 02:00:25 PM
Speaking of dino diversity; is it my imagination or does North America seem to really favour giant dinosaur discoveries the most, aside from the exceptions in South America?
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Vertigo on Mar 21, 2014, 03:39:23 PM
There's a definite bias that way. Most dinosaur groups in the region got an exceptional dollop of giantism around the end of the Cretaceous though.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: judge death on Mar 21, 2014, 06:31:10 PM
Quote from: Vertigo on Mar 21, 2014, 03:39:23 PM
There's a definite bias that way. Most dinosaur groups in the region got an exceptional dollop of giantism around the end of the Cretaceous though.
Are there any theories on why they became so huge around the Cretaceous era?
What I knew from before is that the air and oxygen were thicker and made it possible to become bigger but that is an old theory which is too simple to be true in my opinion.

The journal you posted were very interesting to read and seems to counteract some info I got that at the end of creta era the variety of dino species were decreasing and dying out but according to that journal it seems to have been the opposite and not the empty and dying world some documentaries show it like.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Vertigo on Mar 21, 2014, 11:30:41 PM
Increased oxygen density is certainly a leading theory for insect giantism in certain periods of the Palaeozoic, but the principal behind it wouldn't apply to vertebrates (we discussed it a few pages ago).
I suppose you could speculate that higher oxygen intake could have given dinosaurs more energy, and that they might have used the energy to carry greater bulk around with them, but aside from the concern over whether that would be physically plausible, the oxygen content during the Mesozoic is actually uncertain. Some estimates put it lower than today's.

My personal theory is that dinosaur giantism stems from the need for the herbivores to develop giant stomachs. This gave them greater capacity and efficiency in fermenting plant matter. There are two reasons why this was so important. One, the Mesozoic was dominated by extremely tough plant material that most of today's animals struggle to digest, if they can at all - conifers, cycads, ginkgos, horsetails, ferns. Two, many dinosaurs lacked cheeks or grinding dental batteries, so their stomachs (and swallowed gizzard stones) would do a lot of the work that mammalian grazers' mouths perform.
A giant stomach needs giant legs to carry it, giant muscles to propel that bulk away from predators or onto a mate, a giant mouth to shovel down food quickly enough, a giant neck to reach the ground, and a giant tail to balance the neck.
And of course, predators evolve to match their herbivorous prey, which is why the allosauroids appeared when sauropods started to dominate.

There are other theories, and probably more than one of them are true.

The herbivores and their predators could have been locked in an evolutionary arms race, each undergoing natural selection for increased size as a tool for defence / predation. I'm sure this must have been going on, but doesn't explain the situation in itself - why aren't mammals prone to giantism for the same reason?
Temperatures dropped during the late Jurassic, concurrent with the appearance of colossal sauropods and allosaurs; it's possible (just) that this may be a thermoregulatory development. Larger animals retain body heat more easily, and as we've never found evidence of protofeathers in either group, temperature may have been very important for them. (Personally, I suspect it's only a matter of time until we find feathery baby sauropods and non-coelurosaurian theropods.)
Another theory is that dinosaur populations could survive with few adults compared with mammals, because they didn't need to put as much effort into raising their young. With less adults, there could have been more food to go around, allowing them to sustain larger sizes. Maybe.
Sexual selection has also been proposed... larger dinosaurs won intraspecific contests, or were more attractive to mates.
There's also an old theory that animal groups will simply tend towards giantism if they have the physical tools and requirements for it. But it was proposed by the bloke who put Elasmosaurus' head on the end of its tail, so might be best not to put much stock in that one.

There are other theories I can't think of from the top of my head, and there would certainly have been other factors involved.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on Mar 22, 2014, 06:42:13 PM
Found this on eBay 8)

http://instagram.com/p/l2tYJvlEiq/ (http://instagram.com/p/l2tYJvlEiq/)
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Requiem28 on Mar 23, 2014, 01:55:59 AM
His son is my teacher!

But some of us already know this!
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Xenodog on Mar 23, 2014, 09:55:57 AM
Quote from: DoomRulz on Mar 22, 2014, 06:42:13 PM
Found this on eBay 8)

http://instagram.com/p/l2tYJvlEiq/ (http://instagram.com/p/l2tYJvlEiq/)

Out dated prehistoric life magazines...
*Nostalgic, happy sigh*.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on Mar 23, 2014, 02:08:42 PM
Quote from: Requiem28 on Mar 23, 2014, 01:55:59 AM
His son is my teacher!

But some of us already know this!

Whose son?
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: maledoro on Mar 25, 2014, 01:03:26 AM
Sam Neill's.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: judge death on Apr 03, 2014, 04:28:56 PM
Have now these books on the way:
Prehistoric: The Visual History Of Life On Earth book
Dinosaurs: The Most Complete, Up-to-Date Encyclopedia for Dinosaur Lovers of All Ages 2007
encyclopedia of dinosaurs & prehistoric life 2009
THE ILLUSTRATED ENCYCLOPEDIA OF DINOSAURS AND PREHISTORIC ANIMALS

A fast question:
Is looking into the family trees of many dinosaurs but cant find one which shows them all on the same page so to speak, but just shows cuts from it.
Example: Trying to see from which animals the Allosaurinae family tree came from and how they evolved later and if they are related to the tyrannosaurus family tree in any way.
Do you know a good site where I can see the whole family trees for all dinos? :)
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on Apr 03, 2014, 06:33:53 PM
From Dr. Thomas Holtz himself:

http://www.geol.umd.edu/~tholtz/G104/lectures/104dinorise.html
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Vertigo on Apr 04, 2014, 08:49:01 AM
Ahh, goddamnit. I spent half the evening whipping up a family tree/timeline of my own.
Anyway, here it is...

(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi705.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fww57%2FLordVertigo%2FForum%2520stuff%2FTimeline_zps74b3abf1.png&hash=51a54027939297cc99b89bea6ce0165f9d949d8e)

(Full sized version here (http://i705.photobucket.com/albums/ww57/LordVertigo/Forum%20stuff/Timeline_zps74b3abf1.png~original))

The timeline represents the presence of a family down to the certainty of an age (eg. Campanian, Maastrichtian), rather than an exact date. Some of these ages are longer than others, and a group didn't necessarily survive throughout the entire age, or spring into existence at the start of the age. For example, it seems Herrerasaurids disappeared very quickly into the Norian, but it's a long-arse age so they have a long-arse line.
Main reason I'm doing this is because date estimates can be inaccurate, but it's usually possible to tell which age/geological strata that a fossil comes from.

Dotted lines represent possible evidence of the family being around at the indicated date (teeth, a couple of misc bones, or a hard-to-place genus - the kind of evidence which may not be accurate).

Cross-hatched lines represent times during which we can infer the presence of a group of animals, based on their evolutionary relationships, but haven't found evidence to date. Examples include basal dinosaurs, allosaurs, thyreophorans and pachycephalosaurs.

Notes:
I've represented a number of theropod, sauropod and ornithischian groups as as a diagonal line - for each, there's an enormous cluster of short-lived families which formed a linear progression. For example, saurischians begat theropods, which begat neotheropods, which begat tetanurans, which begat coelurosaurs, which begat maniraptorans.
I haven't bothered with an exact timeline for them, because it's a complex subject, and they tend to be quickly replaced by their more specialised cousins.

The allosaur family is generally called "Carnosauria", but it's a confusing term and personally I don't use it.

Apologies for the messiness! It's my first try at a cladogram, and it's a bit tricky to make it work with a time reference.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on Apr 04, 2014, 11:41:05 AM
Speaking of sauropods, did you factor in this little guy into your tree?

http://phenomena.nationalgeographic.com/2014/04/02/dinosaur-antetonitrus-sets-the-stage-for-sauropods/ (http://phenomena.nationalgeographic.com/2014/04/02/dinosaur-antetonitrus-sets-the-stage-for-sauropods/)
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Vertigo on Apr 04, 2014, 08:42:36 PM
He fits into my tree comfortably (surprising behaviour for a sauropod). It's worth noting that true sauropods were rare throughout the Triassic, they only started widely replacing the prosauropods during the next period.

Also, in Europe, non-diplodocoid or macronarian sauropods survived a little longer than shown on the chart - sometime shortly before or after the end of the Jurassic.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on Apr 07, 2014, 02:58:45 AM
According to that piece, the term prosauropod doesn't exist anymore. Personally, I prefer it to "sauropodomorphs", even though that one's been around since I was a wee lad.

Some random dino stuff for y'all:
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2013/04/130408123502.htm (http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2013/04/130408123502.htm)
http://io9.com/another-fine-feathered-friend-from-the-cretaceous-1558700065 (http://io9.com/another-fine-feathered-friend-from-the-cretaceous-1558700065)
http://io9.com/ready-this-3d-model-reconstructs-a-110-million-year-old-1558469828 (http://io9.com/ready-this-3d-model-reconstructs-a-110-million-year-old-1558469828)
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Vertigo on Apr 07, 2014, 11:03:44 PM
Yup, 'prosauropod' is more of an informal term now. I prefer it too, and downright refuse to stop using it.

I've been waiting for ages for the new descriptions of Utahraptor, good to see a preview. Rectangular skull and downward-curving jaw remind me of Dromaeosaurus, short legs remind me of Achillobator.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on Apr 08, 2014, 02:37:44 AM
Scott Hartman is a brilliant artist. I wish I could understand the process behind his work. It's as if the guy is in tune with skeletons just by looking at fragments.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: judge death on Apr 08, 2014, 08:16:50 PM
Vertigo: That species/animal tree is great, easy to understand and easy to use, is it okay if I download it? :) Shall try to learn it so I know it even if I sleep xD
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Vertigo on Apr 09, 2014, 10:29:54 AM
Yeah please do! Glad you find it so easy to read, it looks like a mess to me.  ;D

Just a few things I'd like to clarify about it though:

-Despite ornithischians only appearing later (and becoming common much later), they're probably a more basal offshoot than saurischians (theropods and sauropodomorphs). They lack the air sac breathing system of their cousins; some very advanced ornithischians seem to have developed a mammal-like diaphragm-based system instead.

-Although herrerasaurids are some of the earliest dinosaurs ever discovered (and the earliest fragmentary dinosaur remains - from the Anisian - are thought to be of herrerasaurid origin), other groups are not descended from them. Herreras must have become highly specialised extremely quickly after the evolution of the first dinosaurs, and are so unusual that it's often been argued whether they are in fact dinosaurs.

-There are a few controversial theories around the connection between dilophosaurids and ceratosaurs. It's been proposed that the ceratos may have evolved from dilos. It's also been proposed that dilos may not be so closely related to coelophysoids (then again, others have suggested that dilos are so similar to coelos that they shouldn't be classed as a separate group!).
I quite like the idea of an evolutionary line between coelos, dilos and ceratos, as it would mean the coelophysoid lineage lasted throughout the Mesozoic. This is not a majority opinion though.

-Coelurosaurs didn't evolve from allosaurs, I had a bit of trouble drawing that part of the graph. They both evolved from avetheropods, apparently around the same time.

-The maniraptoran lineage is a mess. We have very little evidence for what basal maniraptorans looked like, and it seems there are huge gaps in the fossil record. Therizinosaurs and oviraptorosaurs are descended from more basal creatures than paravians, yet we have no evidence of such animals existing for tens of millions of years before we start finding the earliest theris and ovis.
You'll find similar gaps throughout the tree. Some spans of time just have very few fossil beds associated with them - the early Triassic, Jurassic, Cretaceous and early Late Cretaceous are all particularly poor.

-There's a bit of blurring between dromaeosaurids and paravians/protobirds - some researchers consider Archaeopteryx a dromaeosaurid. I don't, but I do think it's close to their evolutionary root (which probably makes dromies secondarily flightless, like today's ostrich).

-With the sauropod line, brachiosaurids and titanosaurs are much closer-related than diplodocoids. However, all three evolved around the same time, and other sauropod groups disappeared quickly after. In my opinion this has something to do with a possible ice age during the late Jurassic.

-It's possible that marginocephalians (ceratopsians and pachycephalosaurs) may have evolved from heterodontosaurids. This is a highly minority view though, and based mainly on similar tooth shape. As crocodylians and spinosaurids prove, tooth similarity has a high likelihood of evolving independently.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on Apr 09, 2014, 11:25:48 AM
Aren't titanosaurids a sub-group of the diplodocoid family? I'm pretty sure Diplodocus is related to Argentinosaurus and other giants.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Vertigo on Apr 09, 2014, 12:46:57 PM
That was the going theory at one point, but not anymore. The currently prevailing tree goes like this:

Eusauropoda (eg. Cetiosaurus, Mamenchisaurus)
|
Neosauropoda (classification group only, no basal members assigned)
|                         |
Diplodocoidea    Macronaria (eg. Camarasaurus)
                          |                      |
                       Brachiosaurids    Titanosaurs
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on Apr 09, 2014, 01:16:24 PM
Titanosauria is part of Macronaria? I want to be sure I'm reading that correctly.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Vertigo on Apr 09, 2014, 01:20:54 PM
Yup.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on Apr 09, 2014, 01:29:19 PM
What's the distinguishing feature separating Diplodocoidea from Macronaria?
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Vertigo on Apr 09, 2014, 07:48:38 PM
Macronarians have a more upright upper-body/neck posture, longer hands, bigger nostrils, more rounded heads, and in most species their tails don't tend to be so super-extended and whip-like.

They're all very closely related though, and you do see a few diplodocoid features appearing in titanosaurs.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Jegeren on Apr 25, 2014, 03:19:02 AM
How can you not love dinosaurs? I have been a fan of them since my single digits and always will be. Since they were obviously extinct, hearing brand new things about them every year is always awesome. Hard to pin an exact favorite as there are so many great specimens that existed.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Effectz on Apr 25, 2014, 10:38:51 PM
(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Ffc06.deviantart.net%2Ffs70%2Fi%2F2012%2F216%2Ff%2Fd%2Ftarbosaurus_with_dead_therizinosaurus_by_baryonyx_walkeri-d59te8g.jpg&hash=d18309077683ebcce16bae8250c5f7e31f81216a)

Check this out.
http://baryonyx-walkeri.deviantart.com/gallery/?offset=24 (http://baryonyx-walkeri.deviantart.com/gallery/?offset=24)
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on Apr 26, 2014, 05:30:04 PM
Classic dino docu ahoy! Uncut and revised versions, plus the sequel lol

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rE1ogh3eNjc# (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rE1ogh3eNjc#)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YZ9RXDUYhzI# (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YZ9RXDUYhzI#)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1Yjx_bgfSCM# (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1Yjx_bgfSCM#)
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on Apr 29, 2014, 06:00:44 PM
http://www.itsokaytobesmart.com/post/83126647445/what-is-isnt-a-dinosaur (http://www.itsokaytobesmart.com/post/83126647445/what-is-isnt-a-dinosaur)
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: judge death on Apr 30, 2014, 09:11:04 AM
Hmm that were some old dino videos xD Reminds me of yesterday when I took a look in some old dino books I found and how outdated they were and the illustrations especially. Some facts were still correct although.

I knew that already that only a few are dinos the rest are different species :) But to the average person all reptiles etc are dinos.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on May 06, 2014, 03:12:22 PM
Deinocheirus repatriated! (http://www.infomongolia.com/ct/ci/7787/60/The%20%C3%A2%EF%BF%BD%C5%93horrible%20hand%C3%A2%EF%BF%BD%20%20Deinocheirus%20dinosaur%C3%A2%EF%BF%BD%E2%84%A2s%20fossils%20are%20repatriated%20to%20its%20home%20country)
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: judge death on May 06, 2014, 03:36:48 PM
I have now learned a lot about dinosaurs and their world and started to look on animal life after them and prior to them, a bit harder to find good info about those, hence I would like to ask here if you could share some info/knowledge about some animals I´m interested in. I will start with asking for info about this one:

Thylacoleo "marsupial lion" who lived too not long ago and the info I´ve managed to find so far is that they are one of the most specially adapted mammal predators to live but not much info why? So need your help to learn more about this animal to start with. :)
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Vertigo on May 07, 2014, 10:46:16 PM
It's new tyrannosaurid time.

(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fcdn4.sci-news.com%2Fimages%2F2014%2F05%2Fimage_1907_2-Qianzhousaurus-sinensis.jpg&hash=b78b1afbfdf23bb1ef89d436b0fa1071f2131a14)

Qianzousaurus is one of the smaller known tyrannosaurids, 29 feet long and weighing around 800kg, making it a little bigger than Alaskan dwarf Nanuqsaurus that we were talking about a few months ago. It may be the adult version of Alioramus.

More importantly, it proves the existence of a new subfamily living at the end of the Cretaceous, with long, shallow, narrow snouts. I would guess they may have been analogous to the spinosaurids and larger unenlagiines - big fish-eaters which occasionally dabbled in land predation. Qianzhousaurus lived in the same place (China) and time (Maastrichtian) as Tarbosaurus, making it likely that the two had different predation habits, and/or occupied different habitats in the same region.

(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fcdn4.sci-news.com%2Fimages%2F2014%2F05%2Fimage_1907_1-Qianzhousaurus-sinensis.jpg&hash=07636ad43ae4dfffb202238fe29e3823b71f342f)
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on May 07, 2014, 11:16:20 PM
Snouts look like those of the fabled fish-eaters, but what story do the teeth tell? I hear tyrannosaurid and I instinctively think of thick bone crushers.

Also, on a different note,

http://deadspin.com/a-goddamned-dinosaur-threw-out-the-first-pitch-at-the-p-1573135172?utm_campaign=socialflow_deadspin_facebook&utm_source=deadspin_facebook&utm_medium=socialflow (http://deadspin.com/a-goddamned-dinosaur-threw-out-the-first-pitch-at-the-p-1573135172?utm_campaign=socialflow_deadspin_facebook&utm_source=deadspin_facebook&utm_medium=socialflow)
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Vertigo on May 08, 2014, 07:42:07 AM
Quote from: DoomRulz on May 07, 2014, 11:16:20 PM
Snouts look like those of the fabled fish-eaters, but what story do the teeth tell? I hear tyrannosaurid and I instinctively think of thick bone crushers.

They're apparently longer and narrower than usual.

Quote from: judge death on May 06, 2014, 03:36:48 PMThylacoleo "marsupial lion" who lived too not long ago and the info I´ve managed to find so far is that they are one of the most specially adapted mammal predators to live but not much info why? So need your help to learn more about this animal to start with. :)

Well, after a skim of good old Wikipedia, it looks like they were adapted for tackling large kangaroos, like the 230kg Procoptodon, and other giant marsupials (such as Thylacoleo's herbivorous relative, 2-and-a-half-ton Diprotodon).
Kangaroos can take care of themselves pretty well in a fight, and can bound at speed for enormous distances, so they present some unusual challenges for a predator. And, obviously, so does prey weighing twenty times that of the predator.
Thylacoleo had hands designed a little like ours, for grasping (albeit tipped with gigantic claws). Long, powerful limbs for wrestling, and the ability to rear up stably on its hind legs to free its entire upper-body for prey capture. Also very strong jaws designed for crippling extremely large prey.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on May 08, 2014, 11:29:43 AM
Quote from: Vertigo on May 08, 2014, 07:42:07 AM
Quote from: DoomRulz on May 07, 2014, 11:16:20 PM
Snouts look like those of the fabled fish-eaters, but what story do the teeth tell? I hear tyrannosaurid and I instinctively think of thick bone crushers.

They're apparently longer and narrower than usual.


Fish-eating tyrannosaurids...who thought the day would come, eh? I love this guy's nickname too: Pinocchio Rex, lol.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on May 15, 2014, 02:24:24 PM
I just finished a piece on Phil Currie in Reader's Digest and would you believe this? The man is having his own museum opened up in Alberta opened up!! It's being named the Philip J. Currie Dinosaur Museum and will be located in Grand Prairie, Alberta. It opens this December. He deserves it. The man is a genius and was one of my idols growing up.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: maledoro on May 15, 2014, 02:44:34 PM
Quote from: DoomRulz on May 15, 2014, 02:24:24 PM
I just finished a piece on Phil Currie in Reader's Digest and would you believe this? The man is having his own museum opened up in Alberta opened up!! It's being named the Philip J. Currie Dinosaur Museum and will be located in Grand Prairie, Alberta. It opens this December. He deserves it. The man is a genius and was one of my idols growing up.
Ask him to buy out that dumbass Ken Ham's spot in Kentucky.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Vertigo on May 15, 2014, 03:39:59 PM
Currie's great. I think Sam Neill's version of Alan Grant is a lot closer to him than to Jack Horner.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on May 21, 2014, 02:26:00 AM
http://luisvrey.wordpress.com/2014/05/20/the-time-is-now-finally-deinocheirus/ (http://luisvrey.wordpress.com/2014/05/20/the-time-is-now-finally-deinocheirus/)

Deinocheirus!!!!
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Requiem28 on May 23, 2014, 05:32:46 PM
Quote(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fluisvrey.files.wordpress.com%2F2014%2F05%2Fdeinocheirus-finalb1.jpg%3Fw%3D640&hash=bbae62f85593dfae70d870e08d24be2122498074)

....
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on May 28, 2014, 03:16:18 PM
http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/health-science/dinosaurs-on-an-ordinary-jurassic-afternoon/2014/05/23/fee223a0-e026-11e3-8dcc-d6b7fede081a_story.html (http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/health-science/dinosaurs-on-an-ordinary-jurassic-afternoon/2014/05/23/fee223a0-e026-11e3-8dcc-d6b7fede081a_story.html)

http://romangm.com/new-ceratopsian-dinosaurs-head-paleo-reconstructions/ (http://romangm.com/new-ceratopsian-dinosaurs-head-paleo-reconstructions/)

Modern dinosaur art can be really epic sometimes.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on Jun 06, 2014, 12:52:32 PM
http://www.smithsonianmag.com/science-nature/found-fossilized-flying-reptiles-plus-eggs-180951661/?no-ist (http://www.smithsonianmag.com/science-nature/found-fossilized-flying-reptiles-plus-eggs-180951661/?no-ist)

First time I heard about a pterosaur egg was a John Candy movie, lol.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Immortan Jonesy on Jun 14, 2014, 06:23:41 PM
Dinosaurs neither hot nor cold blooded :o

http://news.discovery.com/animals/dinosaurs/dinosaur-blood-ran-just-right-not-warm-not-cold-140613.htm (http://news.discovery.com/animals/dinosaurs/dinosaur-blood-ran-just-right-not-warm-not-cold-140613.htm)
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Vertigo on Jun 14, 2014, 06:30:37 PM
There's been a study that's been making headlines recently, in which it's concluded that pretty much every non-avian dinosaur (including Archaeopteryx) is a mesotherm.

"Mesothermic" is a very fuzzy definition which essentially means intermediate between cold-blooded (ectothermic) animals like reptiles, amphibians and most fish, and warm-blooded (endothermic) animals like mammals and birds. The broad definition of a "dinosaur" nowadays is an intermediary form between birds and archosaurian reptiles, so this probably won't surprise you.
The most notable modern mesotherms are lamnid sharks (incl. great white and mako), swordfish, tuna and monotreme mammals (echidna and platypus). They have several methods of generating and retaining heat, but have fewer systems of temperature control than an endotherm, and are therefore less energy efficient and more dependant on environmental conditions.

The study was performed by measuring growth rates in 21 dinosaur species, and comparing them with a large number of present-day animals.

So, that's the news. Personally though I don't agree, and think the study has serious problems.

The reason is, growth rates are not on a fixed scale dictated solely by metabolism. It's made possible by burning off energy, but various factors can determine how much excess energy an animal has to put into growth. It's determined by how much nutrition the animal is receiving, and how much energy it's burning off due to its lifestyle.

Today's warm-blooded animals tend to have lifestyles in which the babies are highly dependant on their parents - they don't travel much, and rely on the adults to protect them and feed them. The adults are able to provide them with far more nutrition than a small animal could ever find on its own; either through calorie-rich milk in mammals, or the all-day foraging cycle of birds (and there's almost always two adults caring for a chick).
Basically, a young mammal/bird has little more requirement than to sit around, get used to how its body works, eat and grow. They can put a HUGE amount of energy into their growth, because they've got so much to spare. They're close to (or at) full growth by the time they leave their parents.

But dinosaurs were different. Most or all of them had to fend for themselves well before adulthood, and most seem to have been from a very early age. Some of them may have been independant from the moment they hatched.
This means they wouldn't get nearly as much nutrition as today's warm-blooded animals, without milk or a full-sized food provider. But there's more to it than that: an independant animal has to burn off energy on travel, evading predators, finding their food, and even digesting it (mammal and bird parents do most of the digestion for their offspring).
Therefore it's inevitable that a dinosaur would grow more slowly than one of today's warm-blooded animals, due to lifestyle. It's not a smoking gun about their metabolism.

It's worth noting that growth rates do vary among dinosaurs. Ceratopsids, ornithopods, tyrannosaurids and large sauropods all grow quicker than their relatives. And interestingly, most of those (sauropods being the exception I think, which baffles me) also seem to have raised their babies for extended periods.

Anyway. As for what sort of metabolism dinosaurs had, the one certainty is that it seemed to be highly variable.
Some very early dinosaurs show definite signs of advanced ectothermy, as prosauropods demonstrate a mish-mash of growth rates (within species and even within groups), which probably show animals that were getting more sun and environmental warmth growing faster.
Some dinosaur groups had better heat insulation than others, a sure sign that they were less dependant on sunbathing to warm their bodies.
And the respiratory system in each dinosaur order grew increasingly sophisticated and capable over time. I think this is a sign of the progression of dinosaur energetics.

It's perfectly plausible that maniraptoran dinosaurs may have had metabolisms on par with today's ground birds, and ornithopods may have had energetics similar to mammals. But it's an issue that's been debated almost as long as palaeontology's been in existence.



(There's more here (http://phenomena.nationalgeographic.com/2014/06/12/dinosaurs-tuna-great-whites-echidnas/). I recommend following Phenomena, it's where I get most of my dinosaur news. You may find a similar post to this in the comments section; it ain't plagiarism.)


Sigh, once again my lengthy typing has exposed me for a brutal ninja'ing. Cheers, Shrimp. :P
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Immortan Jonesy on Jun 14, 2014, 11:22:35 PM
Woa, Vertigo, are you a scholar of paleontology?. Thanks for the link by the way :D I'm a big fan of dinosaurs and paleontology :)
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Vertigo on Jun 15, 2014, 02:57:03 PM
Nope, just a dinosaur groupie.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on Jun 16, 2014, 03:18:40 PM
Quote from: Vertigo on Jun 14, 2014, 06:30:37 PM
Today's warm-blooded animals tend to have lifestyles in which the babies are highly dependant on their parents - they don't travel much, and rely on the adults to protect them and feed them. The adults are able to provide them with far more nutrition than a small animal could ever find on its own; either through calorie-rich milk in mammals, or the all-day foraging cycle of birds (and there's almost always two adults caring for a chick).
Basically, a young mammal/bird has little more requirement than to sit around, get used to how its body works, eat and grow. They can put a HUGE amount of energy into their growth, because they've got so much to spare. They're close to (or at) full growth by the time they leave their parents.

But dinosaurs were different. Most or all of them had to fend for themselves well before adulthood, and most seem to have been from a very early age. Some of them may have been independant from the moment they hatched.
This means they wouldn't get nearly as much nutrition as today's warm-blooded animals, without milk or a full-sized food provider. But there's more to it than that: an independant animal has to burn off energy on travel, evading predators, finding their food, and even digesting it (mammal and bird parents do most of the digestion for their offspring).
Therefore it's inevitable that a dinosaur would grow more slowly than one of today's warm-blooded animals, due to lifestyle. It's not a smoking gun about their metabolism.

"Most of them"? I would doubt that because parenthood is a widely accepted concept in dinosaur behaviour.

Quote from: Vertigo on Jun 14, 2014, 06:30:37 PM
It's worth noting that growth rates do vary among dinosaurs. Ceratopsids, ornithopods, tyrannosaurids and large sauropods all grow quicker than their relatives. And interestingly, most of those (sauropods being the exception I think, which baffles me) also seem to have raised their babies for extended periods.

Not really, when you consider that sauropods lived in herds and were constantly on the move. Combined with their massive size, how could an adult realistically look after it's mouse-sized young?

Quote from: Vertigo on Jun 14, 2014, 06:30:37 PM
Anyway. As for what sort of metabolism dinosaurs had, the one certainty is that it seemed to be highly variable.
Some very early dinosaurs show definite signs of advanced ectothermy, as prosauropods demonstrate a mish-mash of growth rates (within species and even within groups), which probably show animals that were getting more sun and environmental warmth growing faster.
Some dinosaur groups had better heat insulation than others, a sure sign that they were less dependant on sunbathing to warm their bodies.

It'll be interesting to see how this affects the prevailing views on sails and spines as thermal regulators.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Vertigo on Jun 16, 2014, 04:21:33 PM
Quote from: DoomRulz on Jun 16, 2014, 03:18:40 PM"Most of them"? I would doubt that because parenthood is a widely accepted concept in dinosaur behaviour.

Childrearing behaviour is only known in a handful of groups, and even then, probably not to maturity in the way most birds and mammals do. We know plenty of them incubated their nests (whether by brooding or covering them), but that's a different story.
Most young dinosaurs are clearly precocial, showing physical traits which would allow them to fend for themselves; mammalian and avian babies are generally fairly helpless.
Like I mentioned, the species for which we have the best evidence of childrearing, tend to be the ones which grew faster.

Quote from: DoomRulz on Jun 16, 2014, 03:18:40 PM
Quote from: Vertigo on Jun 14, 2014, 06:30:37 PM
It's worth noting that growth rates do vary among dinosaurs. Ceratopsids, ornithopods, tyrannosaurids and large sauropods all grow quicker than their relatives. And interestingly, most of those (sauropods being the exception I think, which baffles me) also seem to have raised their babies for extended periods.

Not really, when you consider that sauropods lived in herds and were constantly on the move. Combined with their massive size, how could an adult realistically look after it's mouse-sized young?

That's not what baffles me; it's hard to imagine a 50-ton sauropod being a capable parent for a dog-sized baby. What I don't understand is how they grew so quickly when they don't appear to have been cared for.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on Jun 16, 2014, 04:46:52 PM
Quote from: Vertigo on Jun 16, 2014, 04:21:33 PM
Quote from: DoomRulz on Jun 16, 2014, 03:18:40 PM"Most of them"? I would doubt that because parenthood is a widely accepted concept in dinosaur behaviour.

Childrearing behaviour is only known in a handful of groups, and even then, probably not to maturity in the way most birds and mammals do. We know plenty of them incubated their nests (whether by brooding or covering them), but that's a different story.
Most young dinosaurs are clearly precocial, showing physical traits which would allow them to fend for themselves; mammalian and avian babies are generally fairly helpless.
Like I mentioned, the species for which we have the best evidence of childrearing, tend to be the ones which grew faster.

I think they grew fast because they needed to. A theropod needs to attain large size so that it isn't offed by larger predators and a sauropod needs to grow quickly so that its size, which realistically is its best defense, is there when the animal needs it the most.

Quote from: Vertigo on Jun 16, 2014, 04:21:33 PM
Quote from: DoomRulz on Jun 16, 2014, 03:18:40 PM
Quote from: Vertigo on Jun 14, 2014, 06:30:37 PM
It's worth noting that growth rates do vary among dinosaurs. Ceratopsids, ornithopods, tyrannosaurids and large sauropods all grow quicker than their relatives. And interestingly, most of those (sauropods being the exception I think, which baffles me) also seem to have raised their babies for extended periods.

Not really, when you consider that sauropods lived in herds and were constantly on the move. Combined with their massive size, how could an adult realistically look after it's mouse-sized young?

That's not what baffles me; it's hard to imagine a 50-ton sauropod being a capable parent for a dog-sized baby. What I don't understand is how they grew so quickly when they don't appear to have been cared for.

Yeah, that's what I meant. As to your second statement, I imagine it's just eating, eating, eating. Animals that grow that large need to be constantly feeding themselves to gain and maintain their bulk.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Vertigo on Jun 16, 2014, 05:41:49 PM
Quote from: DoomRulz on Jun 16, 2014, 04:46:52 PM
I think they grew fast because they needed to. A theropod needs to attain large size so that it isn't offed by larger predators and a sauropod needs to grow quickly so that its size, which realistically is its best defense, is there when the animal needs it the most.

Just needing something to happen doesn't make it so, otherwise we'd all grow up super-fast. My point is, it looks like the dinosaurs which were reared for an extended period grew the quickest.

Quote from: DoomRulz on Jun 16, 2014, 04:46:52 PM
Quote from: Vertigo on Jun 16, 2014, 04:21:33 PMWhat I don't understand is how [large sauropods] grew so quickly when they don't appear to have been cared for.

I imagine it's just eating, eating, eating. Animals that grow that large need to be constantly feeding themselves to gain and maintain their bulk.

Again - why wouldn't every dinosaur herbivore do the same and achieve the same effect? For that matter, why wasn't it the case with the smaller sauropod species?
I assume there must have been something in their lifestyle which was offering them increased nutrition or a decrease in general energy demands. Then again, getting back to the original article, it could have been something to do with the energetics of these species.

My mini-point is, they don't appear to fit the trend of the other faster-growing dinosaur groups.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on Jun 16, 2014, 06:42:25 PM
Quote from: Vertigo on Jun 16, 2014, 05:41:49 PM
Again - why wouldn't every dinosaur herbivore do the same and achieve the same effect? For that matter, why wasn't it the case with the smaller sauropod species?

Because like I said, if you need size to rely on for your survival, you're going to grow faster. It might also have been an evolutionary trait, reliant upon which predators sauropods coexisted with. Living with a Mapusaurus or a T.Rex is going to mean that Argentinosaurus or Alamosaurus need to shoot up as quickly as possible, whereas living with a Dracovenator means that Aardonyx doesn't need to grow super fast.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Vertigo on Jun 16, 2014, 10:26:38 PM
We've discussed the merits of dinosaur giantism here recently, the question here - stemming from this study - is what biological mechanism allowed these species to grow faster than their relatives. It doesn't happen automatically just because there's selective pressure. Everything is naturally selected to grow up as fast as it can, mortality is highest among subadults in pretty much every vertebrate species on the planet.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on Jun 17, 2014, 01:25:29 AM
What allowed them to grow so fast?

My guess would be super efficient digestion systems to maximize nutrient intake.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on Jun 21, 2014, 03:09:22 AM
Vertigo :(

http://qz.com/222734/in-china-paleontology-is-going-the-way-of-the-dinosaur/ (http://qz.com/222734/in-china-paleontology-is-going-the-way-of-the-dinosaur/)
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Vertigo on Jun 21, 2014, 08:24:21 AM
Curious. The main example they pick sounds like it's more a problem with the university, as they describe the one-graduate year as being typical, and two enrollees an all-time record.

If it is true that there's a declining interest in palaeontology in China, I'd want to know if there are any similar trends going on globally. It may be an example of the increasing pull of capitalism in the region, they describe it as losing out to fields with higher earning potential.
Probably goes hand-in-hand with the trend that's seeing endangered species increasingly hunted despite wildlife campaigning being at an all-time high, and "amateur palaeontologists" digging up bones to sell on the black market, never to be seen by science. There's a huge push in the region towards people making a buck at any cost.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on Jun 21, 2014, 01:39:58 PM
I fear for China's fossil sites. Do you think the government would let them go to waste as a result?
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Vertigo on Jun 21, 2014, 02:09:43 PM
Well there'll always be plenty of western palaeontologists itching to dig around China, but my understanding is that the government's quite protective (when it comes to legitimate excavation...). It could be that they'd be more willing to let the fossil sites go untapped and left for pirate diggers (the best name I could come up with right now) and a nebulous future generation, rather than loosening restrictions for foreign scientists.

That said, I don't know the exact extent of the current restrictions. And it's probably not something we'll need to worry about until Xu Xing's generation grow too old to lead research.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Xenodog on Jun 21, 2014, 04:37:49 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QtpSOpUDCb8#t=52 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QtpSOpUDCb8#t=52)
Found this pretty cool.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Vertigo on Jun 21, 2014, 07:04:06 PM
Yeah, I couldn't believe it when I first heard that. One of the increasingly numerous things we've accomplished in palaeontology that I thought would never be possible.

Not to mention, it's pretty goddamn hair-raising in its own right.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Xenodog on Jun 21, 2014, 07:50:37 PM
Quote from: Vertigo on Jun 21, 2014, 07:04:06 PM
Yeah, I couldn't believe it when I first heard that. One of the increasingly numerous things we've accomplished in palaeontology that I thought would never be possible.

Not to mention, it's pretty goddamn hair-raising in its own right.

The first one especially is really odd. Awesome stuff though.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on Jun 21, 2014, 08:44:50 PM
Quote from: Vertigo on Jun 21, 2014, 07:04:06 PM
Yeah, I couldn't believe it when I first heard that. One of the increasingly numerous things we've accomplished in palaeontology that I thought would never be possible.

Not to mention, it's pretty goddamn hair-raising in its own right.
Hair-raising indeed!! that blew me away. can you imagine what this will lead to? imagine if this could be done with other dinosaurs!
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on Jun 22, 2014, 02:51:48 PM
Vertigo, check this out.

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0195667114000755 (http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0195667114000755)
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Vertigo on Jun 22, 2014, 06:40:30 PM
That is very interesting indeed. I'm curious to know where that puts the rest of the neovenatorids, within which Megaraptora has lately been dumped.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on Jun 22, 2014, 10:02:09 PM
Assuming they share similar traits, I imagine they'll be put into the tyrannosauroid family.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Immortan Jonesy on Jun 25, 2014, 09:37:56 PM
http://www.foxnews.com/science/2014/06/23/meet-mercuriceratops-dinosaur-with-wings-on-its-head/ (http://www.foxnews.com/science/2014/06/23/meet-mercuriceratops-dinosaur-with-wings-on-its-head/)


Quote from: DoomRulz on Jun 22, 2014, 02:51:48 PM
Vertigo, check this out.

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0195667114000755 (http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0195667114000755)

A relative of Tyrannosaurus in South America? wow, that sounds interesting
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on Jun 26, 2014, 01:30:32 AM
Not really seeing a whole-lot of wing shaped structures on its head. It doesn't look that different from Chasmosaurus.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Immortan Jonesy on Jul 01, 2014, 06:21:31 PM
Chasmosaurus reminds me of a xeno queen xd

btw look at this strange sea creature...

(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi1371.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fag299%2Fenchiridion86%2Fhenodus-sw_zpsc691adcd.jpg&hash=f59409aea8374309191481c77e319c508e3aada3)

(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi1371.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fag299%2Fenchiridion86%2FHenodus_chelyops_1_zps202fb465.jpg&hash=419fd76a88b475e823db5fba9b7dd582afd304e8)

(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi1371.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fag299%2Fenchiridion86%2Fhenodus1_zps18fbe67e.jpg&hash=3e966698271ccafe92af88740f0c33934643e377)

The first thing I thought was that the creature was a prehistoric turtle as archelon, but apparently is another kind of reptile :p
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Vertigo on Jul 01, 2014, 07:58:06 PM
Their closest widely-known relatives are actually plesiosaurs. Sauropterygians were a diverse group, lots of odd critters lurking in that tree.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Shasvre on Jul 02, 2014, 07:07:15 AM
(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Ffc09.deviantart.net%2Ffs70%2Ff%2F2014%2F169%2F1%2F6%2F16ea43b93a196fd48d6e72bc0e59c21e-d7mwifa.jpg&hash=945812d0069df7215b7e4b1c01141190d260bdd8)

http://nisachar.deviantart.com/art/CHASMOSAURUS-BELLI-461731654 (http://nisachar.deviantart.com/art/CHASMOSAURUS-BELLI-461731654)
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on Jul 02, 2014, 03:04:10 PM
Aw, look. Cera's little sister, lol. Awesome artwork 8)
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Immortan Jonesy on Jul 02, 2014, 05:43:49 PM
Quote from: Vertigo on Jul 01, 2014, 07:58:06 PM
Their closest widely-known relatives are actually plesiosaurs. Sauropterygians were a diverse group, lots of odd critters lurking in that tree.

Anyway plesiosaurs (the long neck) are like turtles crossed by snakes. Henodus other hand, looks like a cross between a turtle and platypus.

Here other sea monsters

(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi1371.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fag299%2Fenchiridion86%2FNeusticosaurus2_zps599f3fc4.jpg&hash=5872d98a843218ebafa0a3ee55c3842633bd19d7)

(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi1371.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fag299%2Fenchiridion86%2FNothosauroidea_zps02a99ceb.jpg&hash=2cd4ec5b451f7d55c5245a522548276fd3324445)

and apparently the long necks began in the Triassic, as in the case of Pistosaurus

(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi1371.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fag299%2Fenchiridion86%2FAugustasaurus_BW_zpsb169c5b6.jpg&hash=493bb58705564effe53ace3c206ac8ef5635a951)


Quote from: Castiel on Jul 02, 2014, 07:07:15 AM
(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Ffc09.deviantart.net%2Ffs70%2Ff%2F2014%2F169%2F1%2F6%2F16ea43b93a196fd48d6e72bc0e59c21e-d7mwifa.jpg&hash=945812d0069df7215b7e4b1c01141190d260bdd8)

http://nisachar.deviantart.com/art/CHASMOSAURUS-BELLI-461731654 (http://nisachar.deviantart.com/art/CHASMOSAURUS-BELLI-461731654)

Amazing peace of art...

By the way, all of you must see toys from Sideshow, which in my opinion are very realistic

(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi1371.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fag299%2Fenchiridion86%2F2002091-t-rex-the-tyrant-king-002_zps5b8e78b4.jpg&hash=995abbe8e1d5d35a71e2c10b4ba9f401f9ddfea1)

(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi1371.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fag299%2Fenchiridion86%2F200361-mosasaur-004_zps17136020.jpg&hash=ec8ba8404db8d889f2dc84c4de87a362d026222a)

(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi1371.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fag299%2Fenchiridion86%2F200361-mosasaur-001_zps0e5f4621.jpg&hash=5856080cfaaeab26c6049e5445b2bdc457d48570)

(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi1371.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fag299%2Fenchiridion86%2F2000152-tyrannosaurus-rex-011_zps2b50e8b9.jpg&hash=2d791147ab36e6b48b02e6979a531b8f722cf9f8)

(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi1371.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fag299%2Fenchiridion86%2F2000163-product-feature-740x448_zps7c328a28.jpg&hash=f5cc5f2823c25b2bdc079ab8d04073d8f9217b9f)

(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi1371.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fag299%2Fenchiridion86%2F200077-protoceratops-vs-velociraptor-009_zpsa57a3ba9.jpg&hash=75c455be7c6273da69e164f22896612141f67e6c)
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Omegamorph on Jul 02, 2014, 08:38:52 PM
That Mosasaur looks slick as hell. Love it.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on Jul 02, 2014, 11:28:43 PM
That Protoceratops vs. Velociraptor one looks incredible! *sigh* why must they be so pricey...
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Omegamorph on Jul 05, 2014, 08:37:38 AM
Question: when did we actually discover that bipedal Dinosaurs did not walk upright and instead walked with the body parallel to the ground?
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Vertigo on Jul 05, 2014, 09:10:06 AM
That's a good question. It's a development that came out of the dinosaur revolution, and gained traction throughout the 1980s (though you still see some vertical/diagonal theropods in early '90s palaeoart).
I don't know exactly when it started, but may have come out of studying Deinonychus, with a tail that was so obviously intended for balancing a lengthy body. You can see that Bakker and Ostrom reconstructed it with horizontal body posture as early as 1969.

(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.lindahall.org%2Fevents_exhib%2Fexhibit%2Fexhibits%2Fdino%2Fimg%2Fbak2h.jpg&hash=6b9cc1d9416f93e874e175233f143e8554fb13f8)

However, it was still contentious in the late '80s, when a number of studies were published on the capabilities of dinosaur hip regions.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Omegamorph on Jul 05, 2014, 12:30:22 PM
Thank you. :) I had no idea Bakker had already 'got' it in the late 60s -- always thought it was something that came out during the late 80s.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on Jul 05, 2014, 03:34:26 PM
As I understand things, what really confirmed the idea that they walked with their tails held out for balance was the fact that not a single trackway shows tail dragging marks behind the footprints.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on Jul 18, 2014, 06:31:57 PM
Vertigo, have you seen this?

http://www.slate.com/blogs/wild_things/2014/07/15/largest_flying_dinosaur_four_wings_on_changyuraptor_kept_it_from_crash_landing.html (http://www.slate.com/blogs/wild_things/2014/07/15/largest_flying_dinosaur_four_wings_on_changyuraptor_kept_it_from_crash_landing.html)
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Vertigo on Jul 18, 2014, 07:33:06 PM
Nope, that's a new one for me. Just speculating, but those super-long tail feathers (for adjusting course mid-flight) might suggest that it flew over longer distances than its relatives.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on Jul 21, 2014, 11:24:28 AM
Speaking of dinosaurs and birds, you're gonna love this.

http://io9.com/real-life-dinosaurs-are-way-scarier-than-the-movies-1608044920 (http://io9.com/real-life-dinosaurs-are-way-scarier-than-the-movies-1608044920)

I wouldn't rank these feathered critters ahead of T.Rex or Titanis, but the point is still well-made.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Vertigo on Jul 21, 2014, 08:45:14 PM
"A face perpetually frozen in an expression resembling that of a frat bro who just challenged you to a bar fight"
:laugh:

Bird-related tidbit from my reading today, a Mongolian troodontid may have been a nest parasite, like a cuckoo. Two very young trooies (copyright pending) were found in an oviraptorid nest.
This may be an example of predation by the ovis, bringing their catches back to the nest. But there's no evidence of other small animals in ovi nests, and their feeding strategies aren't well known. Furthermore, it would have been tricky for one oviraptorid to carry two intact prey animals in one trip.
Troodontids were better-adapted for sneaking into nests than oviraptorids, because they were nocturnal specialists - they could approach unnoticed when the oviraptorids were sleeping or just couldn't see well enough.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DJ Pu$$yface on Jul 22, 2014, 11:46:32 AM
Saw a Dinotopia dvd the other day, kinda wish I bought it. God I loved it as a kid, I found it so dramatic, exciting and scary and times.

I was dino obsessed as a lad. Still am, I suppose. Tyrannosaurus Rex will always be the king to me :P
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on Jul 22, 2014, 11:55:26 AM
Quote from: Vertigo on Jul 21, 2014, 08:45:14 PM
"A face perpetually frozen in an expression resembling that of a frat bro who just challenged you to a bar fight"
:laugh:

Bird-related tidbit from my reading today, a Mongolian troodontid may have been a nest parasite, like a cuckoo. Two very young trooies (copyright pending) were found in an oviraptorid nest.
This may be an example of predation by the ovis, bringing their catches back to the nest. But there's no evidence of other small animals in ovi nests, and their feeding strategies aren't well known. Furthermore, it would have been tricky for one oviraptorid to carry two intact prey animals in one trip.
Troodontids were better-adapted for sneaking into nests than oviraptorids, because they were nocturnal specialists - they could approach unnoticed when the oviraptorids were sleeping or just couldn't see well enough.

Ever since Oviraptor was labeled a brooder instead of an egg thief, is there still evidence of egg consumption amongst small theropods? I don't hear much about it anymore. Since the Oviraptor revelation, it's sort of dropped off the map.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Vertigo on Jul 22, 2014, 05:54:57 PM
Quote from: DJ Pu$$yface on Jul 22, 2014, 11:46:32 AM
Saw a Dinotopia dvd the other day, kinda wish I bought it. God I loved it as a kid, I found it so dramatic, exciting and scary and times.

I highly recommend getting hold of the books. James Gurney's artwork is beautiful, even for people who aren't big dinosaur fans it's quite mesmerising. And if you are a fan, Gurney's also a proper palaeo-artist, so the animals all look authentic (for the time - the original Dinotopia is 22 years old and the science has come a long way since then), human interactions and ornamentation notwithstanding.




Quote from: DoomRulz on Jul 22, 2014, 11:55:26 AMEver since Oviraptor was labeled a brooder instead of an egg thief, is there still evidence of egg consumption amongst small theropods? I don't hear much about it anymore. Since the Oviraptor revelation, it's sort of dropped off the map.

As far as I'm aware, the only signs of inter-species nest interaction are the little troodontids in the oviraptorid nest, and a snake eating sauropod eggs. Theropods are occasionally found not far from ornithischian nest sites, but we're generally talking about predators big enough to take on juveniles or even adults.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on Jul 23, 2014, 12:21:41 AM
Going after a hatchling would make for an easy treat though. I liked seeing the Ornitholestes in WWD devour a sauropodlet.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Omegamorph on Jul 23, 2014, 03:06:00 AM
Quote from: DoomRulz on Jul 23, 2014, 12:21:41 AM
I liked seeing the Ornitholestes in WWD devour a sauropodlet.
Those sounds, man.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Vertigo on Jul 23, 2014, 03:40:24 AM
Quote from: DoomRulz on Jul 23, 2014, 12:21:41 AM
Going after a hatchling would make for an easy treat though.

Yup, you'd think so, and sauropod babies would have an extremely low chance of survival as they apparently weren't raised at all. With other groups, I suppose it depends on how attentive the parents were. It wouldn't be easy for a predator to sneak into a herd of hadrosaurs to get at the nests in the middle, but they might be able to catch a theropod couple's nest unattended for a brief period (just as modern bird nests are occasionally left unattended even with two parents handling care duties).
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on Jul 23, 2014, 11:29:04 AM
Would an egg thief be gutsy enough though to go after a theropod hatchling? It's like dancing with fire. I would imagine theropods might leave some kind of marking (e.g. urine) to indicate that the area is off-limits.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Vertigo on Jul 23, 2014, 11:48:06 AM
Yup. Even among large mammals smart enough to know the risks, leopards will take tiger cubs if given the opportunity, despite the adults occasionally attacking and killing them.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on Jul 25, 2014, 01:27:56 PM
Speaking of hunting behaviours...

http://io9.com/new-evidence-suggests-tyrannosaurs-hunted-in-packs-1610336730 (http://io9.com/new-evidence-suggests-tyrannosaurs-hunted-in-packs-1610336730)

and this, on a different note

http://www.iflscience.com/plants-and-animals/newly-discovered-fossils-hint-all-dinosaurs-had-feathers (http://www.iflscience.com/plants-and-animals/newly-discovered-fossils-hint-all-dinosaurs-had-feathers)
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Vertigo on Jul 25, 2014, 10:23:36 PM
Tyrannosaurid social behaviour probably isn't represented in any living predator. Those footprints look like yet another indicator that the young stayed with at least one of their parents right the way through to adulthood. That's not uncommon among today's animals, but what sets tyrannosaurs apart is their life history - they came into breeding age around their teens, and died in their 20s. This means that the parent (I'm assuming the mother, but it may not have been) would be protecting its children right until it died, because even a firstborn would reach breeding age when the parent reached its life expectancy.

(Link title's a bit misleading though, because there's still no indication that tyrannosaurs hunted in packs.)


The feathered ornithischian has been making headlines, I even saw it on BBC News this evening. The downy sections of Kulindadromeus's feathers do sound like the ones found in coelurosaurs, but the usage is very strange. They're more efficient than the monofilaments lining its back, so why aren't they the only type of feather used? This is an advanced dinosaur, halfway down the ornithischian family tree, and halfway through the Mesozoic era. When theropods evolved downy feathers, monofibres were completely phased out - why would they have been retained (and as the primary integument) for so long in their cousins?
Logic would dictate that this was a new piece of evolution for the group, and the similarity to theropod down feathers is coincidental. This discovery might have more implications for Kulindadromeus's descendants than for its ancestors.

Then again, the one 100% predictable thing about dinosaurs is that they will surprise the shit out of you. 2015 might bring quill knobs on Scelidosaurus.

[/brainfart]
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on Jul 26, 2014, 11:56:31 PM
Quote from: Vertigo on Jul 25, 2014, 10:23:36 PM
Tyrannosaurid social behaviour probably isn't represented in any living predator. Those footprints look like yet another indicator that the young stayed with at least one of their parents right the way through to adulthood. That's not uncommon among today's animals, but what sets tyrannosaurs apart is their life history - they came into breeding age around their teens, and died in their 20s. This means that the parent (I'm assuming the mother, but it may not have been) would be protecting its children right until it died, because even a firstborn would reach breeding age when the parent reached its life expectancy.

I'm interested to see if this could be translated into pack-hunting behaviour in other theropods as well. I grew up with images of Jurassic carnosaurs like Allosaurus hunting in packs, tackling sauropods all at once. It's hard to imagine something as big as T.Rex hunting in packs, unless they went after Alamosaurus. About the motherhood, that would suggest her maternal instincts are eternal, so to speak. Don't those wear off after a certain age in reptiles?

Quote from: Vertigo on Jul 25, 2014, 10:23:36 PM
The feathered ornithischian has been making headlines, I even saw it on BBC News this evening. The downy sections of Kulindadromeus's feathers do sound like the ones found in coelurosaurs, but the usage is very strange. They're more efficient than the monofilaments lining its back, so why aren't they the only type of feather used? This is an advanced dinosaur, halfway down the ornithischian family tree, and halfway through the Mesozoic era. When theropods evolved downy feathers, monofibres were completely phased out - why would they have been retained (and as the primary integument) for so long in their cousins?
Logic would dictate that this was a new piece of evolution for the group, and the similarity to theropod down feathers is coincidental. This discovery might have more implications for Kulindadromeus's descendants than for its ancestors.

Evolutionary quandry. I know, doesn't really help but I would think it was some kind of transitional period between species.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Vertigo on Jul 31, 2014, 11:19:22 PM
Quote from: DoomRulz on Jul 26, 2014, 11:56:31 PM
Quote from: Vertigo on Jul 25, 2014, 10:23:36 PM
Tyrannosaurid social behaviour probably isn't represented in any living predator. Those footprints look like yet another indicator that the young stayed with at least one of their parents right the way through to adulthood. That's not uncommon among today's animals, but what sets tyrannosaurs apart is their life history - they came into breeding age around their teens, and died in their 20s. This means that the parent (I'm assuming the mother, but it may not have been) would be protecting its children right until it died, because even a firstborn would reach breeding age when the parent reached its life expectancy.

About the motherhood, that would suggest her maternal instincts are eternal, so to speak. Don't those wear off after a certain age in reptiles?

Well, dinosaurs are generally much more like birds than reptiles, and tyrannosaurs have the beginnings of an avian brain structure. Many birds raise their offspring all the way to adulthood, though of course none of them have the growth cycle of a tyrannosaurid.

What's curious is that the young apparently stayed with their parents even though they could hunt for themselves. The obvious answer is for protection, but even if adult rexes did attack or prey on youngsters, the latter's best defence would be running away. It'd be like a buffalo chasing a Lamborghini.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Vertigo on Aug 07, 2014, 01:09:11 AM
Apparently a complete(ish?) Spinosaurus has been discovered in the Sahara by Paul Sereno, it's due for official description in October. Previously, the remains were extremely fragmentary - just the jaws and some vertebrae.

Anyway, a few details have been made known, including a low-res photo. It's still definitely the largest theropod ever discovered, but it seems to be even more unusual than we'd realised. Short and very weak legs, a bizarre double-humped sail, and a ludicrously long and chunky tail.


(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fevents.nationalgeographic.com%2Fmedia%2Fimages%2Fphotos%2FSpino610x343_png_610x343_crop_upscale_q85.jpg&hash=aa2bf432b28e63205b088dd587d617a470576114)

(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fevents.nationalgeographic.com%2Fmedia%2Fimages%2Fphotos%2FSpinosaurus_Inline.png&hash=deb22fb8f9db293909ba102d0c5be615327c4d1a)

http://events.nationalgeographic.com/events/exhibits/2014/09/12/spinosaurus-lost-giant-cretaceous/ (http://events.nationalgeographic.com/events/exhibits/2014/09/12/spinosaurus-lost-giant-cretaceous/)
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on Aug 07, 2014, 06:25:58 AM
It seems rather apropos that Sereno should be the one to find it, given his obsession with African fossils. A double-humped sail, eh? I wonder if that served some kind of practical purpose. And short legs are lol. I guess this thing wouldn't be able to intimidate T.Rex after all.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: judge death on Aug 12, 2014, 04:57:47 PM
Quote from: Vertigo on Aug 07, 2014, 01:09:11 AM
Apparently a complete(ish?) Spinosaurus has been discovered in the Sahara by Paul Sereno, it's due for official description in October. Previously, the remains were extremely fragmentary - just the jaws and some vertebrae.

Anyway, a few details have been made known, including a low-res photo. It's still definitely the largest theropod ever discovered, but it seems to be even more unusual than we'd realised. Short and very weak legs, a bizarre double-humped sail, and a ludicrously long and chunky tail.


(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fevents.nationalgeographic.com%2Fmedia%2Fimages%2Fphotos%2FSpino610x343_png_610x343_crop_upscale_q85.jpg&hash=aa2bf432b28e63205b088dd587d617a470576114)

(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fevents.nationalgeographic.com%2Fmedia%2Fimages%2Fphotos%2FSpinosaurus_Inline.png&hash=deb22fb8f9db293909ba102d0c5be615327c4d1a)

http://events.nationalgeographic.com/events/exhibits/2014/09/12/spinosaurus-lost-giant-cretaceous/ (http://events.nationalgeographic.com/events/exhibits/2014/09/12/spinosaurus-lost-giant-cretaceous/)

Exciting! :D I´m just curious of where you got that info so far about the design on the head and the short and weak legs? I presume you are going after that picture they released of the skeleton or somewhere else?
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Blacklabel on Aug 12, 2014, 06:30:22 PM
...Truth is stranger than fiction.

I LIKE it.  ;D
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Vertigo on Aug 12, 2014, 07:21:09 PM
I did read about it elsewhere, can't remember the source now though (I think it may have been on Reddit).
The legs look very weird, other people have been commenting that they look mismatched. I guess we'll get all the details clarified next month (or maybe in October, it looks like there's a talk on the 16th).
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Blacklabel on Aug 12, 2014, 08:01:16 PM
That thing doesnt look like it could walk for too long on it's hind legs.... Maybe a quadruped, most of the time? :P
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: King Rathalos on Aug 12, 2014, 09:02:24 PM
Somehow a quadruped Spinosaurus sounds way cooler. ;D
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Vertigo on Aug 12, 2014, 09:30:59 PM
Theropod wrists couldn't be turned so the palms faced downwards (pronating), so none of them were quadrupedal, including spinosaurids. The skeleton does give that impression though, right? I'm wondering if the legs might be some kind of perspective trick.

It is pretty common for spinosaurid legs to be underdeveloped compared with overall body length, though. Part of the explanation is that they spent a lot of time in water - some spinosaurids spent even more time submerged than contemporary turtles and crocodiles. And obviously, an underwater animal's weight is supported for it, so it doesn't require strong, load-bearing legs.

Spinosaurus itself seems to have spent more time on dry land than its relatives - making its apparently super-spindly legs pretty mysterious - but still less than other theropods.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on Aug 13, 2014, 02:34:29 AM
What indication is there that Spinosaurus spent more time on land than a Suchomimus or a Baryonyx? Is it something in the bones? As for a quadrupedic spinosaurid, I doubt the arms could support that much weight behind them.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Blacklabel on Aug 13, 2014, 03:12:57 AM
...or....

could it be that "THAT" particular Spinosaurus had a genetic anomaly, and that it managed to survive until adulthood, despite the weaker legs? :D

I think there's a trick of perception in that photo of the skeleton anyway....  :P
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Vertigo on Aug 13, 2014, 08:50:54 AM
Quote from: DoomRulz on Aug 13, 2014, 02:34:29 AM
What indication is there that Spinosaurus spent more time on land than a Suchomimus or a Baryonyx? Is it something in the bones?

The reason we know spinosaurids were semi-aquatic is a 2009 study which measured the amount of isotopic oxygen in twelve well-preserved spinosaurid fossils. The theory is, an underwater animal is exposed to less oxygen, so preserve less of the isotope.

The full study's only accessible under an expensive subscription, so I've only been able to find a couple of charts which show the main data. I've annotated it with the species which I think may correspond to the fossils, based on when they were alive.
There are a lot of Cenomanian results, so Spinosaurus and Oxalaia could be any one of them (or none).

(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi705.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fww57%2FLordVertigo%2FForum%2520stuff%2FInfo-spinosauridoxygenisotoperesults_zps8a30a64f.png&hash=36451ac475f9bccaabe797d6bc87859e5c4624ad)

Oxygen isotope ratios vary over time, due to differing atmospheric conditions and other crap. So they're not all on the same scale. The main point of comparison is using crocodylomorphs, turtles and non-spinosaurid theropods, from the same time and place. The spinosaurid is then plotted on the scale to determine which group it gets closest to.

As you can see, the earlier spinosaurids tend to be the most aquatic, and the late ones (of which Spinosaurus is the best-known example) are often the least. The last of them is even less aquatic than the theropod control group.
If I had some way of reading the regions each fossil is from, I'd be able to be more specific. I know the full article does state them.
In any case, the Wikipedia page on spinosaurids (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spinosauridae#Habitat) does corroborate my analysis.
(Wikipedia also directly states that Siamosaurus is result #1, but I can't find an exact date for that genus.)
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on Aug 13, 2014, 12:13:08 PM
I already knew about the isotope levels. I'm wondering why exactly the earlier ones were more aquatic than the later ones. My guess would be because either water beds were more shallow and there were fewer of them (or at least it varied by region) and that land-based prey was more readily available.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Vertigo on Aug 13, 2014, 12:46:27 PM
You'd think it would vary depending on the species and ecosystem, and the results I have access to are annoyingly non-specific. Some genera may have been better-adapted for an aquatic lifestyle than others, and most spinosaurids are extremely poorly-known.

I've been watching through Planet Dinosaur recently, and they posit that Spinosaurus died out after the regional river system changed, depriving access to the large fish it primarily subsisted on. It could be that they had a brief final period eking out an existence as exclusive land predators (which their carcharodontosaur and abelisaur peers were better adapted for).
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on Aug 13, 2014, 01:24:34 PM
I can't imagine it's because they were too heavy to walk on land (not saying you are Vertigo; just throwing it out there). Saying such a thing makes me think back to the days when paleontologists said that sauropods spent time in the water for just that reason. Spinosaurids almost seem to be the amphibians of the dinosauria, if you will, because they could live on land and in water.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Vertigo on Aug 13, 2014, 02:03:55 PM
I'm sure they could get around just fine on dry land (as evidenced by that last isotope reading), it's just that terrestrial hunting wasn't their strong suit. Their legs are neither chunky for power nor long for sprinting.


Also:

Quote from: DoomRulz on Aug 13, 2014, 01:24:34 PM
I can't imagine it's because they were too heavy to walk on land (not saying you are Vertigo; just throwing it out there)

I'm very proud of my weight loss, damnit.







New development in Spinosaurus 2014: Luis V. Rey illustration based on the new remains.

(https://luisvrey.files.wordpress.com/2014/08/spinosaurus-serenob.jpg)

It's a modification of an older picture, so spot the difference. The stiffened neck is an interesting feature that I hadn't picked up on.

(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fluisvrey.files.wordpress.com%2F2014%2F04%2Fspinosaurus-ouranosaurus-ff1.jpg&hash=4ab2fe428f2c2125247b74c282c4a272f2bc2cc7)

(Rey has a tendency for weird and slightly speculative imaginings of dinosaurs, but it should give you some idea of the new view. Just don't read anything into the sail spikes or throat pouch.)

More info on his blog: http://luisvrey.wordpress.com/2014/08/13/that-was-then-this-is-now/ (http://luisvrey.wordpress.com/2014/08/13/that-was-then-this-is-now/)
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on Aug 14, 2014, 12:12:16 PM
Quote from: Vertigo on Aug 13, 2014, 02:03:55 PM
Quote from: DoomRulz on Aug 13, 2014, 01:24:34 PM
I can't imagine it's because they were too heavy to walk on land (not saying you are Vertigo; just throwing it out there)

I'm very proud of my weight loss, damnit.

Most archaeocetians are ;)

Quote from: Vertigo on Aug 13, 2014, 02:03:55 PM
New development in Spinosaurus 2014: Luis V. Rey illustration based on the new remains.

(https://luisvrey.files.wordpress.com/2014/08/spinosaurus-serenob.jpg)

It's a modification of an older picture, so spot the difference. The stiffened neck is an interesting feature that I hadn't picked up on.

(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fluisvrey.files.wordpress.com%2F2014%2F04%2Fspinosaurus-ouranosaurus-ff1.jpg&hash=4ab2fe428f2c2125247b74c282c4a272f2bc2cc7)

(Rey has a tendency for weird and slightly speculative imaginings of dinosaurs, but it should give you some idea of the new view. Just don't read anything into the sail spikes or throat pouch.)

More info on his blog: http://luisvrey.wordpress.com/2014/08/13/that-was-then-this-is-now/ (http://luisvrey.wordpress.com/2014/08/13/that-was-then-this-is-now/)

Weird and speculative doesn't begin to describe it. It looks like a fat, toothy duck. How the hell would something that (appears to be) sluggish survive long enough to grow up to 11 tons?
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Effectz on Aug 14, 2014, 12:17:17 PM
Probably only a handful of the hatchlings survive to grow to adulthood like Crocs and Gators.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on Aug 14, 2014, 12:36:05 PM
Perhaps but I'm also thinking about staying one step ahead of your prey. Spinosaurus was primarily a fish-eater but when it came time to hunt on land, I can't see it lasting for too long if it really had that sort of gait.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Effectz on Aug 14, 2014, 02:06:17 PM
It probably didn't actively hunt on land,it would probably scavenge though only really leaving the water when it began to dry up,also gators and crocs do this.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Omegamorph on Aug 14, 2014, 02:06:59 PM
Rey is one of my least favourites when it comes to paleontological reconstructions. I prefer Martin, Marshall, Beneteau, Bonadonna...
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on Aug 14, 2014, 02:24:14 PM
Quote from: Effectz on Aug 14, 2014, 02:06:17 PM
It probably didn't actively hunt on land,it would probably scavenge though only really leaving the water when it began to dry up,also gators and crocs do this.

It would have also hunted when need be. There's no such thing as a pure hunter and/or a pure scavenger.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Effectz on Aug 14, 2014, 02:26:49 PM
Quote from: DoomRulz on Aug 14, 2014, 02:24:14 PM
Quote from: Effectz on Aug 14, 2014, 02:06:17 PM
It probably didn't actively hunt on land,it would probably scavenge though only really leaving the water when it began to dry up,also gators and crocs do this.

It would have also hunted when need be. There's no such thing as a pure hunter and/or a pure scavenger.

I'm sure it was opportunistic,but there is such things as pure hunter and scavengers in nature,namely Vultures.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on Aug 14, 2014, 02:30:04 PM
Vultures do hunt as well, only they don't go for healthy animals. They will attack sick or injured ones though.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Effectz on Aug 14, 2014, 02:33:10 PM
Quote from: DoomRulz on Aug 14, 2014, 02:30:04 PM
Vultures do hunt as well, only they don't go for healthy animals. They will attack sick or injured ones though.

http://wildtracks.wordpress.com/2009/05/06/bone-bustin-birds/ (http://wildtracks.wordpress.com/2009/05/06/bone-bustin-birds/)
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: P.Funkei on Aug 17, 2014, 02:12:21 PM
Fascinating hypothesis regarding the putative lifestyle of Spinosaurus aegyptiacus vis-à-vis the new reconstruction on the nat geo site, posited here (http://antediluviansalad.blogspot.ca/2014/08/did-bakker-get-spinosaurus-right-after.html?spref=fb&m=1). Although of course, it is always prudent to wait for the paper before speculating wildly. :P

On the subject of papers, from what I could glean from my perusal of the last twenty or so pages of this thread, it seems that none of you have the means to circumvent the all-too-prevalent paywalls. The Hell Creek paleontology forums (http://z13.invisionfree.com/Hell_Creek/index.php?) are an excellent resource to do just that. All you have to do is make an account and ask for the paper you require in the Paper Exchange forum. The forums themselves aren't all that active, since the forum members Skype most of the time, but it's not a ghost town.

Ask A Biologist (http://www.askabiologist.org.uk/) is another excellent resource which allows you to ask actual biologists, including paleontologists, questions such as why sauropods were able to grow so quickly, despite seemingly receiving no parental care. ;)

Oh, btw, this (http://forum.primalcarnage.com/viewtopic.php?p=265891#p265891) was where I found the link to the aforementioned post on Spinosaurus.


Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on Aug 17, 2014, 04:15:29 PM
A new dino fanatic to add to the mix! Welcome 8) and thank you for the links.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: P.Funkei on Aug 17, 2014, 07:27:26 PM
Thanks for the welcome and you're welcome for the links. :)

Speaking of links, I've got another one; seems the recent reconstructions of S. aegyptiacus we've been seeing may be inaccurate after all, if what Darren Naish has said is any indication. (https://mobile.twitter.com/TetZoo/status/499601419713134592)
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Vertigo on Aug 18, 2014, 10:52:00 AM
Howdey Funkei!

Naish never followed up that tweet on Spinosaurus, did he? I wonder if we might be in for one of his blog marathons (http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/tetrapod-zoology/) on the subject. Not sure how long it takes him to write those things, but looking forward to it.

Great theory about spinosaurid forelimbs being used to help them clamber over muddy riverbanks. I'd always wondered why their arms were so ridiculously robust despite having much shorter reach than their more obviously piscivorous snouts. Makes you wonder if the long hand claws might have been for clambering as much as fish gutting.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on Aug 18, 2014, 02:53:49 PM
Quote from: P.Funkei on Aug 17, 2014, 02:12:21 PM
Fascinating hypothesis regarding the putative lifestyle of Spinosaurus aegyptiacus vis-à-vis the new reconstruction on the nat geo site, posited here (http://antediluviansalad.blogspot.ca/2014/08/did-bakker-get-spinosaurus-right-after.html?spref=fb&m=1). Although of course, it is always prudent to wait for the paper before speculating wildly. :P

If there turns out to be any truth to this, Jurassic Park 3 will become that much dumber of a movie, good Christ.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on Aug 20, 2014, 01:45:19 AM
Vertigo, Funkei, check it.

http://dinosours.wordpress.com/2014/07/16/museums-and-the-triceratops-posture-problem-part-1/ (http://dinosours.wordpress.com/2014/07/16/museums-and-the-triceratops-posture-problem-part-1/)
http://dinosours.wordpress.com/2014/08/19/museums-and-the-triceratops-posture-problem-part-2/ (http://dinosours.wordpress.com/2014/08/19/museums-and-the-triceratops-posture-problem-part-2/)
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Vertigo on Aug 20, 2014, 09:18:34 AM
Good article. It's worth pointing out that the upright-hindlimb, sprawling-forelimb posture isn't without precedent. Most Mesozoic mammals had this arrangement, and only evolved a fully-non-sprawling stance in the therean line (the ancestors of marsupials and placentals which tended to be fairly rare throughout the Mesozoic; probably appearing around 164 Ma but we only have evidence of upright limbs from 125 Ma).

However, a semi-sprawling gait would very likely impact their respiration ability as in modern reptiles, which is a trait dinosaurs had specifically evolved out of. Bakker, Paul etc.'s reconstructions may be more likely.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on Aug 20, 2014, 11:11:53 AM
It's amazing how much Bakker gets right, but the paleo community always shuns him for it.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: P.Funkei on Aug 21, 2014, 08:10:08 PM
Quote from: Vertigo on Aug 18, 2014, 10:52:00 AM
Howdey Funkei!

Naish never followed up that tweet on Spinosaurus, did he? I wonder if we might be in for one of his blog marathons (http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/tetrapod-zoology/) on the subject. Not sure how long it takes him to write those things, but looking forward to it.

Great theory about spinosaurid forelimbs being used to help them clamber over muddy riverbanks. I'd always wondered why their arms were so ridiculously robust despite having much shorter reach than their more obviously piscivorous snouts. Makes you wonder if the long hand claws might have been for clambering as much as fish gutting.

Thanks for the greeting  ;D
I interpreted said tweet as implying that something new regarding Spinosaurus was coming in the scientific literature. After all, Naish is on the "inside", as it were. I doubt Naish would be able to blog about the new material though, since it is still unpublished. There are usually embargoes on inside information being leaked before publication, in order to prevent unruly competition between scientists.

Quote from: Vertigo on Aug 20, 2014, 09:18:34 AM
Good article. It's worth pointing out that the upright-hindlimb, sprawling-forelimb posture isn't without precedent. Most Mesozoic mammals had this arrangement, and only evolved a fully-non-sprawling stance in the therean line (the ancestors of marsupials and placentals which tended to be fairly rare throughout the Mesozoic; probably appearing around 164 Ma but we only have evidence of upright limbs from 125 Ma).

However, a semi-sprawling gait would very likely impact their respiration ability as in modern reptiles, which is a trait dinosaurs had specifically evolved out of. Bakker, Paul etc.'s reconstructions may be more likely.

Agreed on the quality of the articles. I actually didn't know that about Mesozoic mammals, though tbh I don't know much about extinct non-dinosaurs anyway. :P
Vis-à-vis ceratopsid posture though, couldn't there have been a partial evolutionary reversal to a semi-sprawling gait? Not that I believe this hypothesis however, because the putative influence of direct fossil evidence on the LACM and HMNS mounts satisfies me pending further publication on the subject.

Quote from: DoomRulz on Aug 20, 2014, 11:11:53 AM
It's amazing how much Bakker gets right, but the paleo community always shuns him for it.
I kinda doubt Bakker is still being shunned, since he is a curator for the HMNS. It's not some sort of private creation museum or anything. :P
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Vertigo on Aug 22, 2014, 04:30:32 AM
Quote from: P.Funkei on Aug 21, 2014, 08:10:08 PM
Quote from: Vertigo on Aug 20, 2014, 09:18:34 AM
Good article. It's worth pointing out that the upright-hindlimb, sprawling-forelimb posture isn't without precedent. Most Mesozoic mammals had this arrangement, and only evolved a fully-non-sprawling stance in the therean line (the ancestors of marsupials and placentals which tended to be fairly rare throughout the Mesozoic; probably appearing around 164 Ma but we only have evidence of upright limbs from 125 Ma).

However, a semi-sprawling gait would very likely impact their respiration ability as in modern reptiles, which is a trait dinosaurs had specifically evolved out of. Bakker, Paul etc.'s reconstructions may be more likely.

Agreed on the quality of the articles. I actually didn't know that about Mesozoic mammals, though tbh I don't know much about extinct non-dinosaurs anyway. :P
Vis-à-vis ceratopsid posture though, couldn't there have been a partial evolutionary reversal to a semi-sprawling gait? Not that I believe this hypothesis however, because the putative influence of direct fossil evidence on the LACM and HMNS mounts satisfies me pending further publication on the subject.

It's certainly possible, neoceratopsians evolved quadrupedalism independently of other dinosaurs so they may have had a different method of locomotion. It's just that, if the gait impacted their aerobic capacity, it'd be a much less efficient form than every other group.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on Aug 22, 2014, 11:34:58 AM
Quote from: Vertigo on Aug 22, 2014, 04:30:32 AM
Quote from: P.Funkei on Aug 21, 2014, 08:10:08 PM
Quote from: Vertigo on Aug 20, 2014, 09:18:34 AM
Good article. It's worth pointing out that the upright-hindlimb, sprawling-forelimb posture isn't without precedent. Most Mesozoic mammals had this arrangement, and only evolved a fully-non-sprawling stance in the therean line (the ancestors of marsupials and placentals which tended to be fairly rare throughout the Mesozoic; probably appearing around 164 Ma but we only have evidence of upright limbs from 125 Ma).

However, a semi-sprawling gait would very likely impact their respiration ability as in modern reptiles, which is a trait dinosaurs had specifically evolved out of. Bakker, Paul etc.'s reconstructions may be more likely.

Agreed on the quality of the articles. I actually didn't know that about Mesozoic mammals, though tbh I don't know much about extinct non-dinosaurs anyway. :P
Vis-à-vis ceratopsid posture though, couldn't there have been a partial evolutionary reversal to a semi-sprawling gait? Not that I believe this hypothesis however, because the putative influence of direct fossil evidence on the LACM and HMNS mounts satisfies me pending further publication on the subject.

It's certainly possible, neoceratopsians evolved quadrupedalism independently of other dinosaurs so they may have had a different method of locomotion. It's just that, if the gait impacted their aerobic capacity, it'd be a much less efficient form than every other group.

The impression I got from the blog posts I linked is that they were portrayed with a semi-sprawled gait due to outdated information and lackluster skeletal reconstruction practices. I find it hard to imagine a ceratopsian walking around with its belly hanging loose, especially if we accept that they were capable of charging towards opponents with some speed.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Shasvre on Aug 31, 2014, 02:37:23 PM
(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Ffc03.deviantart.net%2Ffs70%2Fi%2F2014%2F222%2Fe%2Fc%2Fraptors_by_streetx222-d7umct8.jpg&hash=8db2855c04b31da7627c4ee745d551672a0d2ca8)
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on Aug 31, 2014, 03:35:21 PM
Necks are off, but the look isn't that bad. I would like to see the full body render! Also, in other news, new Spino illustration based on the new bones.

http://miyess.deviantart.com/art/Spinosaurus-Revised-479151633 (http://miyess.deviantart.com/art/Spinosaurus-Revised-479151633)
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: ikarop on Aug 31, 2014, 04:22:58 PM
The spino illustration used in the exhibition's announcement is from 2011 actually.

(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg.webme.com%2Fpic%2Fs%2Fspinosauridae%2Fspinosaurus_bonadonna2.jpg&hash=11a1b125dc057c94463e5eb9a8c07e0212c00dd2)

There's even a statue made from it:

(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fupload.wikimedia.org%2Fwikipedia%2Fcommons%2Ff%2Fff%2FGiardino_dei_semplici%2C_mostra_dinosauri%2C_spinosaurus_aegyptiacus_02.JPG&hash=0eed051e427fca2ecdccaabce4c67358f54e7fd4)

Not sure if anything has changed since then tho, some parts could have been reworked but I believe these things usually take years to get officially announced.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Aspie on Aug 31, 2014, 04:48:05 PM
nerdzzzzzzzz
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on Aug 31, 2014, 05:33:37 PM
Quote from: ikarop on Aug 31, 2014, 04:22:58 PM
The spino illustration used in the exhibition's announcement is from 2011 actually.

(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg.webme.com%2Fpic%2Fs%2Fspinosauridae%2Fspinosaurus_bonadonna2.jpg&hash=11a1b125dc057c94463e5eb9a8c07e0212c00dd2)

There's even a statue made from it:

(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fupload.wikimedia.org%2Fwikipedia%2Fcommons%2Ff%2Fff%2FGiardino_dei_semplici%2C_mostra_dinosauri%2C_spinosaurus_aegyptiacus_02.JPG&hash=0eed051e427fca2ecdccaabce4c67358f54e7fd4)

Not sure if anything has changed since then tho, some parts could have been reworked but I believe these things usually take years to get officially announced.

I find it interesting that the new weight of the animal is placed at six tons. That's definitely not more than T.Rex, though Spino would still be longer. Someone's going to have to rework the "King Placement", so to speak.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Vertigo on Aug 31, 2014, 08:48:35 PM
Quote from: ikarop on Aug 31, 2014, 04:22:58 PMI believe these things usually take years to get officially announced.

Yeeeup. It's extremely common for new finds to become locked in palaeontological development hell waiting to be officially described in peer reviewed literature. There have been major Utahraptor discoveries sitting on a shelf for years, and (despite a couple of leaks) aren't likely to see the light of day any time soon. And that's just one particularly well-known example.
I have no idea how long Sereno etc. have taken between discovering and describing their Spinosaurus discovery, but it's perfectly possible that it dates before 2011.

Anyway, now we have Darren Naish saying the illustrations are inaccurate, so I guess we'll find out the truth in the next few weeks.
To me, that full illustration does look like it deviates from the low-res skeleton photograph in a few ways - lower jaw doesn't swell at the back, neck's too skinny towards the shoulders, sail's not in an M, arms look a bit too long and a bit too weak. Or maybe I just need my eyes tested.

(That model with humans for scale (http://33.media.tumblr.com/e22dca0b91b132a821ba4646bdb36d50/tumblr_mqb4ptyQ291r38ji3o8_1280.jpg), by the way.)
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: judge death on Aug 31, 2014, 09:42:04 PM
I´m wondering if anyone here have this book and can tell if it is good or not:
http://www.ebay.com/itm/THE-ILLUSTRATED-ENCYCLOPEDIA-OF-DINOSAURS-AND-PREHISTORIC-ANIMALS-Palmer-Doug-/111202477866?pt=Antiquarian_Books_UK&hash=item19e42f272a (http://www.ebay.com/itm/THE-ILLUSTRATED-ENCYCLOPEDIA-OF-DINOSAURS-AND-PREHISTORIC-ANIMALS-Palmer-Doug-/111202477866?pt=Antiquarian_Books_UK&hash=item19e42f272a)

?
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: ikarop on Aug 31, 2014, 09:59:52 PM
Quote from: Vertigo on Aug 31, 2014, 08:48:35 PM
To me, that full illustration does look like it deviates from the low-res skeleton photograph in a few ways - lower jaw doesn't swell at the back, neck's too skinny towards the shoulders, sail's not in an M, arms look a bit too long and a bit too weak. Or maybe I just need my eyes tested.

Yeah, that's a general issue with illustrations for official discoveries tho. You can't always fully trust a reconstruction until you see the actual skeleton and even then there will be differences depending on the author.

I just find it odd that they are apparently using an illustration from 2011 that is all over the net.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: P.Funkei on Sep 02, 2014, 04:47:46 AM
Quote from: DoomRulz on Aug 31, 2014, 05:33:37 PM
Quote from: ikarop on Aug 31, 2014, 04:22:58 PM
The spino illustration used in the exhibition's announcement is from 2011 actually.

(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg.webme.com%2Fpic%2Fs%2Fspinosauridae%2Fspinosaurus_bonadonna2.jpg&hash=11a1b125dc057c94463e5eb9a8c07e0212c00dd2)

There's even a statue made from it:

(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fupload.wikimedia.org%2Fwikipedia%2Fcommons%2Ff%2Fff%2FGiardino_dei_semplici%2C_mostra_dinosauri%2C_spinosaurus_aegyptiacus_02.JPG&hash=0eed051e427fca2ecdccaabce4c67358f54e7fd4)

Not sure if anything has changed since then tho, some parts could have been reworked but I believe these things usually take years to get officially announced.

I find it interesting that the new weight of the animal is placed at six tons. That's definitely not more than T.Rex, though Spino would still be longer. Someone's going to have to rework the "King Placement", so to speak.

I would be careful not to take that estimate as gospel. As of now, we are unaware of how they arrived at that mass estimate. Depending on the method used, mass estimates can vary wildly. Even the most accurate methods can deviate from actual mass by 20% when done on extant animals. (http://svpow.com/2011/01/20/tutorial-11-graphic-double-integration-or-weighing-dinosaurs-on-the-cheap/) I doubt this particular estimate will be the last word on the mass of Spinosaurus.

Quote from: judge death on Aug 31, 2014, 09:42:04 PM
I´m wondering if anyone here have this book and can tell if it is good or not:
http://www.ebay.com/itm/THE-ILLUSTRATED-ENCYCLOPEDIA-OF-DINOSAURS-AND-PREHISTORIC-ANIMALS-Palmer-Doug-/111202477866?pt=Antiquarian_Books_UK&hash=item19e42f272a (http://www.ebay.com/itm/THE-ILLUSTRATED-ENCYCLOPEDIA-OF-DINOSAURS-AND-PREHISTORIC-ANIMALS-Palmer-Doug-/111202477866?pt=Antiquarian_Books_UK&hash=item19e42f272a)

?
I haven't perused the book you mentioned, but it is probably outdated by now since it is almost fifteen years old. In a field as dynamic as paleontology, publications like this can become outdated quickly. You could always inquire about the accuracy of said book at Ask A Biologist (http://www.askabiologist.org.uk/answers/post.php). 
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Gilfryd on Sep 02, 2014, 08:16:33 PM
Thought this was neat -
(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fth09.deviantart.net%2Ffs71%2FPRE%2Ff%2F2014%2F031%2F5%2F3%2Fdinosaur_classification_simplified_by_ewilloughby-d74gbvb.png&hash=8f0a876c3672d324d0e7199dbec247972c9d6b23)

http://ewilloughby.deviantart.com/art/Dinosaur-Classification-Simplified-430743575 (http://ewilloughby.deviantart.com/art/Dinosaur-Classification-Simplified-430743575)
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: P.Funkei on Sep 02, 2014, 09:24:35 PM
Willoughby's rendition of Tyrannosaurus is vaguely reminiscent of Saurian's Tyrannosaurus (http://tyranttr.deviantart.com/art/Everybody-Walk-the-Tyrannosaur-411646977) to me :P.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on Sep 02, 2014, 09:30:22 PM
Quote from: P.Funkei on Sep 02, 2014, 04:47:46 AM
I would be careful not to take that estimate as gospel. As of now, we are unaware of how they arrived at that mass estimate. Depending on the method used, mass estimates can vary wildly. Even the most accurate methods can deviate from actual mass by 20% when done on extant animals. (http://svpow.com/2011/01/20/tutorial-11-graphic-double-integration-or-weighing-dinosaurs-on-the-cheap/) I doubt this particular estimate will be the last word on the mass of Spinosaurus.

Yeah, I would imagine so. I seriously doubt that the estimates, even the more liberal ones, would exceed 11 tons. I was always highly skeptical of the 20 ton estimate.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: P.Funkei on Sep 03, 2014, 02:16:08 AM
Interestingly enough, a few GDI (http://www.skeletaldrawing.com/home/mass-estimates-north-vs-south-redux772013) estimates (http://www.plosone.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0026037) of T.rex mass hover around a weight of 9-10 tons for the largest individual, Sue.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on Sep 03, 2014, 03:39:50 PM
I've heard of the nine ton estimate. 10, eh? Damn, T.Rex is growing larger all the time. I hate to think of T.Rex as a fat ass, lol. I know it wasn't a speedy runner, but I still like to envision a semi-lean tyrant.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: P.Funkei on Sep 03, 2014, 10:26:37 PM
Personally, I've thought of adult T. rex as being the ambush hunting beefcakes of the theropods ever since I learned that cursorial hunting is probably an untenable hypothesis. :P

Although of course, something to note about Sue's weight of 9-10 tons is that it is an outlier. The PLoS ONE paper in the second link stated that "adult T. rex had body masses around 6000–8000 kg, with the largest known specimen ("Sue") perhaps ~9500 kg.". So Sue may very well be an extreme case here. Sue is, after all, the largest individual we have found.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on Sep 04, 2014, 01:33:31 PM
I've grown up with the idea that T.Rex weighed up to 7 tons, on average at least.

Let's assume for the moment that Spinosaurus really did weigh 6 tons. I see the new size list going like this.
1. Carcharodontosaurus
2. T.Rex
3. Spinosaurus
4. Giganotosaurus
5. Mapusaurus
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Vertigo on Sep 04, 2014, 09:05:41 PM
Spinosaurus is still the big dog, as far as I've heard. Where'd you find the six ton estimate, Doom?
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on Sep 04, 2014, 09:34:53 PM
Quote from: Vertigo on Sep 04, 2014, 09:05:41 PM
Spinosaurus is still the big dog, as far as I've heard. Where'd you find the six ton estimate, Doom?

http://events.nationalgeographic.com/events/exhibits/2014/09/12/spinosaurus-lost-giant-cretaceous/ (http://events.nationalgeographic.com/events/exhibits/2014/09/12/spinosaurus-lost-giant-cretaceous/)

QuoteMeet Spinosaurus. At over 50 feet long, 20 feet high and weighing in at 6 tons, Spinosaurus is the largest predatory dinosaur to ever roam the Earth — even bigger than T. rex.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: P.Funkei on Sep 05, 2014, 04:33:43 AM
Well, 7 tons is within the weight range found in the paper, so 7 tons probably was the average size of T. rex.

As for that list, is it based on actual published mass estimates (excluding Spinosaurus and T. rex) or is it mostly hypothetical? If it's the former, how were those mass estimates calculated? If they were calculated using different methods it may be a flawed comparison.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on Sep 05, 2014, 01:39:24 PM
Published mass estimates. My knowledge of determining dino-weight isn't nearly deep enough for me to make any kind of hypothetical estimates.

On another note, check out some stuff I found on Facebook this morning.
http://palaeofail.tumblr.com/post/96643332435/supposedly-a-therizinosaur (http://palaeofail.tumblr.com/post/96643332435/supposedly-a-therizinosaur)
http://albertonykus.deviantart.com/art/Dinosauria-Phylogeny-179223260 (http://albertonykus.deviantart.com/art/Dinosauria-Phylogeny-179223260)

Oh, and a morning dose of lunacy up in here:
http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/new-dreadnought-dinosaur-most-complete-specimen-of-a-giant/ (http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/new-dreadnought-dinosaur-most-complete-specimen-of-a-giant/)

Here's the crazy part:
QuoteIt is more than seven times as massive as a Tyrannosaurus rex.

I don't even...are people really so ignorant about dinosaurs that everything has to be compared to T.Rex? NO SHIT IT WEIGHS MORE THAN T.REX. IT'S A GODDAMN SAUROPOD. Idiots.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Hubbs on Sep 11, 2014, 03:02:10 AM
Not really prehistoric but getting there...

Something in the ocean is eating great white sharks, June 2014, really cool

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X8dFMWmYuVo#ws (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X8dFMWmYuVo#ws)
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on Sep 11, 2014, 11:27:57 AM
Old news; it was another Great White doing the eating.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on Sep 11, 2014, 08:06:46 PM
The Spinosaurus hype train is going full steam ahead!

http://phenomena.nationalgeographic.com/2014/09/11/the-new-spinosaurus/ (http://phenomena.nationalgeographic.com/2014/09/11/the-new-spinosaurus/)
http://www.top7news.gr/english/giant-spinosaurus-was-bigger-t-rex-and-first-dinosaur-known-s (http://www.top7news.gr/english/giant-spinosaurus-was-bigger-t-rex-and-first-dinosaur-known-s)
http://www.sciencemag.org/content/345/6202/1232.summary (http://www.sciencemag.org/content/345/6202/1232.summary)
http://www.nature.com/news/swimming-dinosaur-found-in-morocco-1.15901 (http://www.nature.com/news/swimming-dinosaur-found-in-morocco-1.15901)
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/09/12/science/a-nomads-find-helps-solve-the-mystery-of-the-spinosaurus.html (http://www.nytimes.com/2014/09/12/science/a-nomads-find-helps-solve-the-mystery-of-the-spinosaurus.html)
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: P.Funkei on Sep 12, 2014, 02:33:37 AM
Quote from: DoomRulz on Sep 05, 2014, 01:39:24 PM
Published mass estimates. My knowledge of determining dino-weight isn't nearly deep enough for me to make any kind of hypothetical estimates.

On another note, check out some stuff I found on Facebook this morning.
http://palaeofail.tumblr.com/post/96643332435/supposedly-a-therizinosaur (http://palaeofail.tumblr.com/post/96643332435/supposedly-a-therizinosaur)
http://albertonykus.deviantart.com/art/Dinosauria-Phylogeny-179223260 (http://albertonykus.deviantart.com/art/Dinosauria-Phylogeny-179223260)

Oh, and a morning dose of lunacy up in here:
http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/new-dreadnought-dinosaur-most-complete-specimen-of-a-giant/ (http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/new-dreadnought-dinosaur-most-complete-specimen-of-a-giant/)

Here's the crazy part:
QuoteIt is more than seven times as massive as a Tyrannosaurus rex.

I don't even...are people really so ignorant about dinosaurs that everything has to be compared to T.Rex? NO SHIT IT WEIGHS MORE THAN T.REX. IT'S A GODDAMN SAUROPOD. Idiots.

This is only a sample size of one, but if this (https://www.facebook.com/SmallNameBigEgo/posts/826019254076816) is any indication... :P

Also, here's a download link (http://www.fileswap.com/dl/VXJHQM1Paa/) to the actual paper about the new Spinosaurus material, if you can manage to glean anything from it.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Blacklabel on Sep 12, 2014, 02:57:41 AM
http://io9.com/they-ate-sharks-and-were-fifty-feet-long-1633604299 (http://io9.com/they-ate-sharks-and-were-fifty-feet-long-1633604299)
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on Sep 12, 2014, 11:19:15 AM
Quote from: P.Funkei on Sep 12, 2014, 02:33:37 AM
Quote from: DoomRulz on Sep 05, 2014, 01:39:24 PM
Published mass estimates. My knowledge of determining dino-weight isn't nearly deep enough for me to make any kind of hypothetical estimates.

On another note, check out some stuff I found on Facebook this morning.
http://palaeofail.tumblr.com/post/96643332435/supposedly-a-therizinosaur (http://palaeofail.tumblr.com/post/96643332435/supposedly-a-therizinosaur)
http://albertonykus.deviantart.com/art/Dinosauria-Phylogeny-179223260 (http://albertonykus.deviantart.com/art/Dinosauria-Phylogeny-179223260)

Oh, and a morning dose of lunacy up in here:
http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/new-dreadnought-dinosaur-most-complete-specimen-of-a-giant/ (http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/new-dreadnought-dinosaur-most-complete-specimen-of-a-giant/)

Here's the crazy part:
QuoteIt is more than seven times as massive as a Tyrannosaurus rex.

I don't even...are people really so ignorant about dinosaurs that everything has to be compared to T.Rex? NO SHIT IT WEIGHS MORE THAN T.REX. IT'S A GODDAMN SAUROPOD. Idiots.

This is only a sample size of one, but if this (https://www.facebook.com/SmallNameBigEgo/posts/826019254076816) is any indication... :P

Wait, what?

Also, someone shared this on Facebook:
(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2F3.bp.blogspot.com%2F-3ks8NFKqcro%2FVBHvQEebvsI%2FAAAAAAAAGUo%2F7I1w4s-ypmE%2Fs1600%2F03%252Bcopia.jpg&hash=7ce269adfb8440b4b6d40fb76c07630dd42c9212)

Poor Spino. It looks like a snake with an elongated snout and arms and legs that have been pasted on.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: P.Funkei on Sep 13, 2014, 02:56:17 AM
Quote from: DoomRulz on Sep 12, 2014, 11:19:15 AM
Wait, what?

Also, someone shared this on Facebook:
(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2F3.bp.blogspot.com%2F-3ks8NFKqcro%2FVBHvQEebvsI%2FAAAAAAAAGUo%2F7I1w4s-ypmE%2Fs1600%2F03%252Bcopia.jpg&hash=7ce269adfb8440b4b6d40fb76c07630dd42c9212)

Poor Spino. It looks like a snake with an elongated snout and arms and legs that have been pasted on.

The facebook link was just a joke in reference to the all too prevalent comparisons between T. rex and other dinosaurs, regardless of how relevant these comparisons may be.

And there may be some "hope" for Spinosaurus yet, because it  seems that Ibrahim et al. may have made an error in scaling the hips and legs in their reconstruction, resulting in legs and hips that were too small (http://www.skeletaldrawing.com/home/theres-something-fishy-about-spinosaurus9112014).

Also, here's a new rendition based on Scott Hartman's findings by Tomozaurus (http://www.deviantart.com/art/New-Spinosaurus-Sketchup-481837428).
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on Sep 13, 2014, 03:39:44 AM
I read that earlier on today. Eh, even with Scott's adjustments, the posture doesn't change that much. It's still a very top-heavy theropod.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Vertigo on Sep 13, 2014, 07:51:58 AM
Top-heavy, but not a preferred or obligatory quadruped like the initial reconstruction suggested. It's a good stance for occasionally using those front limbs to help drag itself out of a muddy shoreline, as suggested by one of Funkei's links a little while ago.
Kind of a shame though, a quadrupedal theropod would have been pretty damn cool.

Interesting to note, Ibrahim/Sereno etc's study states that the sail bones are poorly vascularised, and it seems they don't think it would have been used as a heat regulator.
Not sure I agree with that, the bones' solidity is part of the animal's aquatic adaptations, and we don't know enough (well, anything) about the nature of the soft tissue that surrounded the spines.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Omegamorph on Sep 13, 2014, 08:38:49 AM
So if they are "poorly vascularized" and the thing was acquatic... that definitely drives the "hunch" theory to extinction. Right?
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Vertigo on Sep 13, 2014, 09:07:18 AM
Do you mean as in the shape of the sail structure, the theory that it may be a fatty hump? In the study, they directly posit that the structure has similarities to the crested chameleon (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crested_chameleon). They think the bones were "wrapped snugly in skin" and formed a sail rather than a hump.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Omegamorph on Sep 13, 2014, 09:45:30 AM
Precisely. Thank God. I never could see the Spinosaurus with a hump, much less now.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Blacklabel on Sep 13, 2014, 02:51:28 PM
I'm getting warmed up to this newer vision of the Spinosaurus.

It's essentially a really badass aligator from hell.. :P
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on Sep 13, 2014, 04:25:14 PM
Quote from: Vertigo on Sep 13, 2014, 07:51:58 AM
Top-heavy, but not a preferred or obligatory quadruped like the initial reconstruction suggested. It's a good stance for occasionally using those front limbs to help drag itself out of a muddy shoreline, as suggested by one of Funkei's links a little while ago.
Kind of a shame though, a quadrupedal theropod would have been pretty damn cool.

Interesting to note, Ibrahim/Sereno etc's study states that the sail bones are poorly vascularised, and it seems they don't think it would have been used as a heat regulator.
Not sure I agree with that, the bones' solidity is part of the animal's aquatic adaptations, and we don't know enough (well, anything) about the nature of the soft tissue that surrounded the spines.

Quadruped or not, being top heavy to me would be a serious disadvantage in the long run. Let's assume for the moment that Planet Dinosaur was 100% right when they said the area in which Spino lived was prone to seasonal droughts. I don't see it taking down Ouranosaurus or even fighting Carcharodontosaurus if it can barely lift its head above the ground.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Vertigo on Sep 13, 2014, 06:26:50 PM
That's probably why the line didn't go any further. The isotope analysis does suggest that the very last known spinosaurids didn't spend much time in water, and Spinosaurus in particular just wasn't well-adapted for a terrestrial lifestyle.

I don't expect Carcharodontosaurus would particularly want to get scrappy with Spinosaurus (the latest estimates I've heard are over 10 tonnes for the adults), but even if the spinos were able to scavenge food from other theropods, it'd be very hard for them to subsist on that alone.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on Sep 13, 2014, 08:48:23 PM
Quote from: Vertigo on Sep 13, 2014, 06:26:50 PM
That's probably why the line didn't go any further. The isotope analysis does suggest that the very last known spinosaurids didn't spend much time in water, and Spinosaurus in particular just wasn't well-adapted for a terrestrial lifestyle.

Was there further spinosaurid evolution beyond Spinosaurus?

Quote from: Vertigo on Sep 13, 2014, 06:26:50 PM
I don't expect Carcharodontosaurus would particularly want to get scrappy with Spinosaurus (the latest estimates I've heard are over 10 tonnes for the adults), but even if the spinos were able to scavenge food from other theropods, it'd be very hard for them to subsist on that alone.

I'd hold off on estimates, until we have something more concrete. Some folks are saying 20 tons and I don't believe that. It's all wild speculation.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Cvalda on Sep 13, 2014, 11:33:45 PM
(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fgiant.gfycat.com%2FUnluckyVigilantConch.gif&hash=eeba9c5e17519f6126dc490cf2a753a9f4de0a58)
dinosrs
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Vertigo on Sep 14, 2014, 12:19:27 AM
Quote from: DoomRulz on Sep 13, 2014, 08:48:23 PM
Quote from: Vertigo on Sep 13, 2014, 06:26:50 PM
That's probably why the line didn't go any further. The isotope analysis does suggest that the very last known spinosaurids didn't spend much time in water, and Spinosaurus in particular just wasn't well-adapted for a terrestrial lifestyle.

Was there further spinosaurid evolution beyond Spinosaurus?

Spinosaurus and poorly-known Brazilian giant Oxalaia were concurrently the last definite spinosaurids.
It's unclear how closely related the two were - Spinosaurus seemed to be an extremely long-lived genus, evolving right as the two landmasses split, but Oxalaia appeared 12 Ma after the split. It may be a relict Spinosaurus population, or it may be a massive baryonychine; hard to tell from a braincase and a scattering of teeth.

There are tooth finds attributed to spinosaurids for another 12 million years, but there's a history of spino teeth being confused with those of crocodilians, so they may not be valid. Spinosaurid evidence is generally extremely poor - it's basically just Baryonyx, Suchomimus, Irritator and Spinosaurus that are known in any significant detail.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: P.Funkei on Sep 14, 2014, 07:28:30 AM
Quote from: Vertigo on Sep 13, 2014, 06:26:50 PM
That's probably why the line didn't go any further. The isotope analysis does suggest that the very last known spinosaurids didn't spend much time in water, and Spinosaurus in particular just wasn't well-adapted for a terrestrial lifestyle.

I don't expect Carcharodontosaurus would particularly want to get scrappy with Spinosaurus (the latest estimates I've heard are over 10 tonnes for the adults), but even if the spinos were able to scavenge food from other theropods, it'd be very hard for them to subsist on that alone.

Perhaps Spinosaurus primarily subsisted off of aestivating fish during the dry season (http://antediluviansalad.blogspot.com/2014/08/a-very-dated-picture-of-spinosaurus.html) (in fact, Andrea Cau, author of the theropoda blog (http://theropoda.blogspot.com/), has posited the same hypothesis (http://antediluviansalad.blogspot.com/2014/08/did-bakker-get-spinosaurus-right-after.html?showComment=1408178204943#c3090438446336364232).). 

Also, here's another researcher with some reservations about the new reconstruction from Ibrahim et al. (http://qilong.wordpress.com/2014/09/12/the-outlaw-spino-saurus/)
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on Sep 14, 2014, 02:18:09 PM
Quote from: Vertigo on Sep 14, 2014, 12:19:27 AM
Quote from: DoomRulz on Sep 13, 2014, 08:48:23 PM
Quote from: Vertigo on Sep 13, 2014, 06:26:50 PM
That's probably why the line didn't go any further. The isotope analysis does suggest that the very last known spinosaurids didn't spend much time in water, and Spinosaurus in particular just wasn't well-adapted for a terrestrial lifestyle.

Was there further spinosaurid evolution beyond Spinosaurus?

Spinosaurus and poorly-known Brazilian giant Oxalaia were concurrently the last definite spinosaurids.
It's unclear how closely related the two were - Spinosaurus seemed to be an extremely long-lived genus, evolving right as the two landmasses split, but Oxalaia appeared 12 Ma after the split. It may be a relict Spinosaurus population, or it may be a massive baryonychine; hard to tell from a braincase and a scattering of teeth.

There are tooth finds attributed to spinosaurids for another 12 million years, but there's a history of spino teeth being confused with those of crocodilians, so they may not be valid. Spinosaurid evidence is generally extremely poor - it's basically just Baryonyx, Suchomimus, Irritator and Spinosaurus that are known in any significant detail.

I'm thinking that the Spinosauria will be like Tyrannosauria. It used to be that when people thought of the latter, they thought of T.Rex, Albertosaurus, Tarbosaurus, Daspletosaurus, and Nanotyrannus. Now it's expanded those (minus Nano) and includes Guanlong, Appalachiosaurus, Lythronax, and so on. I think the Spinosauria will eventually be the same with new discoveries.

Quote from: P.Funkei on Sep 14, 2014, 07:28:30 AM
Quote from: Vertigo on Sep 13, 2014, 06:26:50 PM
That's probably why the line didn't go any further. The isotope analysis does suggest that the very last known spinosaurids didn't spend much time in water, and Spinosaurus in particular just wasn't well-adapted for a terrestrial lifestyle.

I don't expect Carcharodontosaurus would particularly want to get scrappy with Spinosaurus (the latest estimates I've heard are over 10 tonnes for the adults), but even if the spinos were able to scavenge food from other theropods, it'd be very hard for them to subsist on that alone.

Perhaps Spinosaurus primarily subsisted off of aestivating fish during the dry season (http://antediluviansalad.blogspot.com/2014/08/a-very-dated-picture-of-spinosaurus.html) (in fact, Andrea Cau, author of the theropoda blog (http://theropoda.blogspot.com/), has posited the same hypothesis (http://antediluviansalad.blogspot.com/2014/08/did-bakker-get-spinosaurus-right-after.html?showComment=1408178204943#c3090438446336364232).).

If this is how it had to survive during droughts, I don't see Spino having a long life to live. Being able to get through drought would ultimately depend on how many fish (big ones to be exact) are sticking around year-round and not simply species that come and go as the seasons dictate. Have there been any studies on that?

Quote from: P.Funkei on Sep 14, 2014, 07:28:30 AM
Also, here's another researcher with some reservations about the new reconstruction from Ibrahim et al. (http://qilong.wordpress.com/2014/09/12/the-outlaw-spino-saurus/)

You and Vertigo are gonna love this. Parts of Spinosaurus may actually be a sauropod. (http://theropoda.blogspot.ca/2014/06/lomero-di-spinosaurus-gigante.html?spref=tw)

And for some fun,
(https://fbcdn-sphotos-b-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-xfp1/t31.0-8/10608753_527009080776059_742000833144987689_o.png)

Somewhere, a T.Rex is laughing.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Gilfryd on Sep 14, 2014, 03:49:22 PM
(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2F31.media.tumblr.com%2Fdf03adbf01f1e989a5de17d7fa0dc900%2Ftumblr_nbr43jywkE1r0p8d9o1_500.gif&hash=9fceb8ffd303c10ebe18caf1ceb62a26f668a2a2)

It's like a big wiener dog.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Omegamorph on Sep 14, 2014, 04:09:46 PM
I just can't see an animal walking like that. Something from its arms should be more flexible than we think it is.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on Sep 15, 2014, 11:15:02 AM
It's come to light now that the arms are in fact composites, so this may yet change. As for flexibility, "opposable wrists" (I don't know what the correct terminology is) haven't been observed in any theropods so until we have original material, we have to assume they were stuck like that.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Omegamorph on Sep 15, 2014, 11:33:08 PM
Not necessarily opposable wrists, but just more mobile wrists combined with a perhaps more versatile shoulder would already help the poor thing. Always more plausible than putting ALL that weight on its knuckles. They'd get kinda damaged in the long run.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on Sep 16, 2014, 02:42:59 AM
Not unless they were reinforced. They may have evolved to support all the weight, like a gorilla.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: King Rathalos on Sep 16, 2014, 04:16:01 PM
Quote from: Gilfryd on Sep 14, 2014, 03:49:22 PM
(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2F31.media.tumblr.com%2Fdf03adbf01f1e989a5de17d7fa0dc900%2Ftumblr_nbr43jywkE1r0p8d9o1_500.gif&hash=9fceb8ffd303c10ebe18caf1ceb62a26f668a2a2)

It's like a big wiener dog.

heheh nerdiest dinosaur confirmed
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on Sep 16, 2014, 05:04:09 PM
Here's a better GIF of it walking; one that doesn't disappear after half a second.

(https://33.media.tumblr.com/1ee5586f665e06695f1944f5565250bc/tumblr_nbswhfl8dB1t5fphqo2_500.gif)
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Lovely Maggot on Sep 22, 2014, 08:33:54 PM
I didn't read all the posts here so excuse me if anyone already asked this but is anyone insterested in prehistoric arthropods?  :)

My personal favourite is Arthropleura, it just defiles what we know about arthropods so far because it's just so damn big! In fact it might well be the biggest arthropod that ever existed simply because the fossils are of shed exoskeletons which means that a living adult might be bigger than expected  :o

(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.sickchirpse.com%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2013%2F09%2FMassive-Prehistoric-Insects-Meganeuropsis-permiana-Arthropleura-Model-670x502.jpg&hash=1b61ad09d252e390fece8ffc040bbfe57e15795a)
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on Sep 22, 2014, 09:40:15 PM
It would make a great guard dog.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Lovely Maggot on Sep 22, 2014, 09:55:50 PM
Quote from: DoomRulz on Sep 22, 2014, 09:40:15 PM
It would make a great guard dog.

It's supposed to be slow and docile so I don't think that'll work ;) Then again it would scare most entomophobes away :D
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Omegamorph on Sep 28, 2014, 10:51:27 PM
A bit of nostalgia:

(https://dinosours.files.wordpress.com/2014/03/amnh_rex_model.png)
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Blacklabel on Sep 28, 2014, 10:54:25 PM
The T-rex in the original King Kong is definitely my favourite on screen representation of dinos in that era.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on Sep 29, 2014, 11:27:29 AM
http://io9.com/a-simple-chart-to-help-you-understand-how-birds-evolved-1639741326 (http://io9.com/a-simple-chart-to-help-you-understand-how-birds-evolved-1639741326)
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on Oct 06, 2014, 11:55:48 AM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t4pJL1eAh00#ws (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t4pJL1eAh00#ws)

On a different note, Happy Belated 109th Birthday to Tyrannosaurus Rex!!!
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Hubbs on Oct 11, 2014, 04:30:28 AM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y0oP7CK8zl0#ws (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y0oP7CK8zl0#ws)
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Vertigo on Oct 11, 2014, 12:31:43 PM
Larry Witmer and a few other researchers from Ohio and Calgary universities will be presenting research in November about a new method of estimating dinosaur intelligence. Apparently they've found a way to calculate evolutionary changes to brain structure, and the preview states that existing calculations of dino encephalisation quotients are too low.

The sample group will be Stegosaurus, Euoplocephalus, Hypacrosaurus, Pachyrhinosaurus, Diplodocus, Majungasaurus and Troodon, they'll be compared with birds and reptiles. I'm hoping the findings make their way online quickly.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on Oct 11, 2014, 01:24:07 PM
No shit! I wonder how much more intelligent ankylosaurids will become, given that the prevailing idea that having a reinforced head doesn't leave much room for brain space.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on Oct 21, 2014, 11:30:14 AM
I read Nat Geo's piece on Spinosaurus; interesting stuff. Of course now it's outdated since Scott Hartman's analysis, along with Ibrahim's new take on it, were released soon after the initial announcement, but it was still nice. Looking at the old Stromer photos, I'm surprised no one caught on to the true shape of the sail. It had the look that is used now, rather than a single, smooth half-moon that we used to see.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on Oct 22, 2014, 05:20:02 PM
http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/vaop/ncurrent/full/nature13874.html (http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/vaop/ncurrent/full/nature13874.html)

New Deinocheirus paper!
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Vertigo on Oct 22, 2014, 05:51:31 PM
(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.nature.com%2Fnature%2Fjournal%2Fvaop%2Fncurrent%2Fcarousel%2Fnature13874-f1.jpg&hash=93fc713825f62d7d6ec7d39c9b2686f312a09ce3)

Fish-eaters, interesting. Also, I thought they were desert-dwellers, but the article states they lived in more of a temperate, moistish area.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Immortan Jonesy on Oct 23, 2014, 11:30:35 PM
Deinocheirus it's looked like this?

(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi1371.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fag299%2Fenchiridion86%2Fpkpyvzip3iywikgeb1qx_zps9e88d107.jpg&hash=a263f64a16463bdf7888cd23165b69be4e1bbc22)
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Lovely Maggot on Oct 24, 2014, 12:08:14 AM
Love his hairdo though.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on Oct 24, 2014, 12:51:55 AM
Quote from: Crazy Shrimp on Oct 23, 2014, 11:30:35 PM
Deinocheirus it's looked like this?

(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi1371.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fag299%2Fenchiridion86%2Fpkpyvzip3iywikgeb1qx_zps9e88d107.jpg&hash=a263f64a16463bdf7888cd23165b69be4e1bbc22)

That, or it might've been completely covered in feathers!
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Vertigo on Oct 24, 2014, 08:15:22 AM
One thing we do know for sure is that it had a fan of feathers at the tip of its tail, which is something I think current palaeo-art is underplaying.

The last few bones of its tail are fused together into a hyper-flexible structure called a pygostyle, which birds have (albeit right at the base, as they've lost their long tails) and a few maniraptoran dinosaurs.
The one example of ornithomimosaur feathers is inconclusive, but it looks like it was a down type of feather - more advanced than the hair-like structures of more basal coelurosaurs, but not yet possessing a central quill like dromaeosaurids and troodontids had on their tails and arms.
It's possible that ornithimimosaurs had more advanced feathers than we thought, and just haven't found them yet, but as far as we know right now, Deinocheirus probably had a massive fan of tufty down on its tail, which it could wave around in display.

As for that image's use of feathers on its arms and head, as far as I know that's entirely speculative. It has the evolutionary potential to have had down anywhere on its body, but it didn't need it, because it's a six-ton animal whose sheer size provides it with insulation. Scales would be more useful, because they function as light armour. Not to mention, as it apparently spent a lot of time splashing around in rivers, feathers get heavy when waterlogged, so would be a hindrance.

So, if it did have feathers, they would have mostly just been display structures - and possibly on its arms for brooding nests, if it did this (its size wasn't necessarily an impedement to brooding, but they may not have evolved it at that stage in the coelurosaur tree).
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on Oct 24, 2014, 11:20:17 AM
Another water-dweller? Not saying it was like Spinosaurus, but that's news to me. When was this reported?
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Vertigo on Oct 24, 2014, 03:27:52 PM
Probably not a water dweller, but evidence that it relied on waterways for its diet. Lots of fish scales found in its gut, and the study proposed that Deinocheirus was well adapted for eating slippery water plants (it may have had a giant tongue to facilitate this).
This is all stuff that's just come out from this recent study.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on Nov 01, 2014, 04:45:32 PM
https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/210659515/dinosaurchanneltv (https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/210659515/dinosaurchanneltv)

Please consider supporting this!
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Vertigo on Nov 10, 2014, 11:51:39 PM
Done a bit of reading up about sharks today, and it's been surprising, given the established dogma that they've been around, broadly similar, for 400 million years.

The 'unchanged for aeons' idea is one that's easily dismissed just by looking at the diversity of living species, which have a massive array of energetic capabilities, reproductive systems, bodyplans, sensory differences, swimming ability and environmental tolerances. Some of these traits involve massive evolutionary chains that would have to have occurred over a very long time.
I think I've ranted about this on these boards before, it's not too surprising.

Anyway, turns out, the crown group (the nearest common ancestor of all living species) only appeared in the late Triassic, making them younger than dinosaurs. Though shark-ish elasmobranchs did exist for a very long time before that, it's not technically accurate to call them sharks (not sure why it's so often used in the literature, as Mesozoic metathereans are rarely called 'marsupials' for the same reason).
Furthermore, it seems they had major physiological differences - only the crown group developed the strong, reinforced vertebra that makes them such powerful swimmers, and apparently the earlier elasmobranchs lacked the serrated teeth which makes sharks so efficient at cutting through meat, as well as the mobile jaw joints that allow sharks to open their mouths so wide. Along with rays, they also have larger brains and a better sense of smell than their immediate forebears.

The first major subdivision in modern shark groups may have happened in the Triassic, though there isn't much evidence. The smaller group contains the Hexanchiformes (six/seven-gill and frilled sharks), the Squaliformes (dogfish and sleeper sharks) and the Squatiniformes (angel sharks).
A handful of recognisable modern forms appeared in the Jurassic, such as angel sharks, but most of today's families started appearing in the Cretaceous and Cenozoic (making them younger than birds).
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on Nov 11, 2014, 04:41:47 AM
Hand off that info to Discovery Channel so that we may have a proper shark week rather than faux docus about Megalodon still existing.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Gilfryd on Nov 12, 2014, 12:05:39 AM
PBS' Nova series had a fantastic episode on Spinosaurus last week. The big skeleton they put together at the end was beautiful.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on Nov 12, 2014, 04:12:44 PM
I'll look for it, thanks!

Quote from: Vertigo on Nov 10, 2014, 11:51:39 PM
Anyway, turns out, the crown group (the nearest common ancestor of all living species) only appeared in the late Triassic, making them younger than dinosaurs. Though shark-ish elasmobranchs did exist for a very long time before that, it's not technically accurate to call them sharks (not sure why it's so often used in the literature, as Mesozoic metathereans are rarely called 'marsupials' for the same reason).

There weren't any around in the Devonian?? Hm, news to me.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Vertigo on Nov 12, 2014, 06:19:52 PM
No crown-group sharks for another 140 million years, but there were elasmobranchs that could colloquially be called sharks, such as this (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cladoselache) little puppy. It's ancestral to rays as well as sharks, however.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Vertigo on Nov 14, 2014, 07:41:34 PM
Jim Kirkland is looking for help moving a Utahraptor group find. (http://www.ksl.com/?sid=32345105&nid=148&title=paleontologist-hopes-to-move-dinosaur-remains-with-help-from-donations&s_cid=queue-4) Possible evidence of pack hunting, which has never been inferred for Utahraptor (or indeed any dromaeosaur that isn't Deinonychus, as far as I know).
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on Nov 16, 2014, 04:38:34 PM
Lol, the comments are laughable. If you don't want to donate, then just don't; asshats. I wouldn't mind donating though.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: MrSpaceJockey on Nov 27, 2014, 10:33:49 PM
Dinosaur questions:
1) Did dinosaurs in different groups evolve feathers simultaneously (think mini-convergent evolution)? Or did a species like, for example, Archaeopteryx, and a feathered Tyrannosaurus share a common, feathered ancestor (and wouldn't every species in between be feathered as a result?)

2) At what point did dinosaurs evolve feathers? Would Coelophysis have had feathers (or fuzz) all the way back in the Triassic. I think it's common thinking for me to associate feathers with the Cretaceous era (Liaoning Province fossils and all those dromaeosaurs) but Jurassic theropods must have had it too, if something like Archaeopteryx evolved, right? Would Allosaurus have had feathers (or fuzz)?

3) Any herbivorous dinosaurs with feathers (which I would have to assume is due to convergent evolution or some sort)? I mean like ornithischians, not herbivorous therizinosaurs or something.  Also not including whatever the hell is on Psittacosaurus (if anyone could elaborate on that too?).

Even though I haven't posted too much here, I've always been a huge dinosaur enthusiast, and they practically got me into drawing.  I've been trying to get back into drawing them but since I'm not a huge expert but I'd like them to be as scientifically accurate as possible, that's why I've come here to ask.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Vertigo on Nov 28, 2014, 12:25:00 AM
Good questions, and the first two are ones that scientists are still grappling with.

1) Probably both. Feathers evolved in a gradual progression, and we see different stages of them in different families. Here's a list...


The theropod progression looks pretty simple - hair-like structures appear in coelurosaurs, and become gradually more complicated in each wave of their descendants. This leaves out coelophysoids, ceratosaurs, megalosaurs and allosauroids, unless a new find reveals evidence of feathers in them (though we don't have much evidence of scales either).

Ornithischian integument is trickier. We don't know whether their structures are related to the proto-feathers seen in theropods - if they are, then bristles must have been present even in the earliest dinosaurs. To add further weight to that theory, dinosaurs' close relatives the pterosaurs were all furry, and a few other archosaurs may have been too.
But getting back on point, ornithischians show a definite preference against any type of insulation - the vast majority of their skin samples have been scaly, unlike theropods; this even includes juveniles of the fastest-growing (and therefore probably highest-metabolismed) families. Even Psittacosaurus' weird bristles would only have been for display - it's entirely possible that they evolved separately.
The real oddball is Kulindadromeus, and I'll get to that in #3.


2) Welp, looks like I've answered that. The earliest examples of feathers date back to the Late Jurassic. Interesting to note, the first trace of mammalian hair is only 15 million years earlier, but our ancestors from the earliest Triassic probably had it.


3) Okay, Kulindadromeus is a small Jurassic neornithischian, ancestral to ornithopods and hadrosaurs, and probably to marginocephalians (pachies/topsies). It will either go down in history as the watershed moment that we discovered feathers were a pervasive dinosaur trait, or a truly bizarre quirk of convergent evolution.
It has several types of integument. Firstly, scales in an unusual pattern, on its tail, feet and lower forelimbs. Second, hair-like feathers (similar to those found in basal coelurosaurs and compsognathids) over most of the rest of its body. Third, down-like feathers on its upper arms and legs. Finally, unique narrow bunches of fibre sparsely across parts of its leg.

What makes it really weird is that it seems to show advanced feathers which hadn't developed in early coelurosaurs. Surely that, at least, has to be convergent evolution. Curiously, no trace of the bristles we see in those two other ornithischians.


Anyway, hope that's been of some help.

:edit: All that trouble, and it turns out there was a much simpler chart online I could have used. Here it is (it's missing quite a few groups though, my list's still more comprehensive...).

(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.nature.com%2Fnature%2Fjournal%2Fv464%2Fn7293%2Fimages%2Fnature08965-f3.2.jpg&hash=a1931fbdac113078805d938b57fa327aabb103fb)
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on Nov 28, 2014, 02:51:14 AM
On feathers; what's the current consensus on feathery/fuzzy sauropods and other giant herbivores?
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: MrSpaceJockey on Nov 28, 2014, 03:13:16 AM
Thank you so much Vertigo.  That was extremely interesting, informative, and helpful!  Saving that response.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Vertigo on Nov 28, 2014, 10:12:22 AM
Quote from: DoomRulz on Nov 28, 2014, 02:51:14 AM
On feathers; what's the current consensus on feathery/fuzzy sauropods and other giant herbivores?

With sauropods, we've only ever found scaly skin. Some palaeontologists think it's only a matter of time before we find some form of proto-feather, but for now that's purely speculative. I'm not sure if we've ever found skin traces from a baby sauropod, which is where I'd expect to find fluff if they ever had it.

Giant ornithischians all had scaly skin, though Triceratops had pores in a small number of its scales that may have anchored quills, similar to Psittacosaurus.

With giant herbivorous theropods, there's not much hard evidence, so most assumptions are based on phylogenetic bracketing (assuming the ability to have feathers due to their presence in a relative). Their size means that they didn't need insulation (unless they lived in a cold region, like mammoths), but they may still have retained feathers for other purposes - ie. for display, or to cover their nests when brooding.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on Nov 28, 2014, 11:15:36 AM
I'm guessing the jury's still out on ankylosaurids, stegosaurids, and hadrosaurs when it comes to feathers?

Not surprised about the herbivorous theropods (which sounds like an oxymoron when I say it aloud). The former two are tied to Coelurosauria.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Vertigo on Nov 28, 2014, 12:06:34 PM
Nah, it's very likely that those three ornithischians were all scales-only. We have skin remains of a young Scelidosaurus, from the family which is ancestral to ankys and stegs, as well as adults from the descendant groups.
Hadrosaurs are completely known at various ages, and they were entirely scaly.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: MrSpaceJockey on Nov 29, 2014, 11:11:24 PM
I'm going to repost here a paleontological question I asked on my art thread:

QuoteI looked up eagle skulls and such, and it always seemed to me that their eyes would "fit" inside their huge sclerotic rings (if I'm correct).  That is what I've done here for my Velociraptor and Deinonychus, but the eyes look almost too small.  I don't know whether or not I still am misunderstanding the eye-sclerotic ring size correlation, or that the reconstructions I've seen for the dromaeosaurs which have eyes bigger than the sclerotic rings of their skull, are just wrong.
(https://www.boneroom.com/img/idPics/2647_1.jpg)
(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Ffc07.deviantart.net%2Ffs46%2Fi%2F2009%2F171%2F9%2F3%2FHarpy_Eagle_by_shadowleoparddreams.jpg&hash=fa542fe118bc43976418a50067e5c5fac51d6300)

versus

(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fblogs.smithsonianmag.com%2Fdinosaur%2Ffiles%2F2011%2F04%2FDeinonychus-skull.jpg&hash=e2765e5b3454a46cf588b9c34f6d7b42737d588b)
(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fupload.wikimedia.org%2Fwikipedia%2Fcommons%2F3%2F33%2FDeinonychus_ewilloughby.png&hash=53419937bc5d35e016839817d8c17aa8903ab642)

(if you're interested in some of my dinosaur art: http://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/index.php?topic=51859.0 (http://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/index.php?topic=51859.0))
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Vertigo on Nov 29, 2014, 11:48:00 PM
Yeah, the visible eyeball should be fractionally smaller than the inner diameter of the sclerotic ring.
The reason eyes look so small on dromies is that eye size doesn't increase in direct parallel to body size; birds obviously tend to have much smaller bodies, so their eyes are proportionately larger.
Also, dinosaur heads are more substantial than birds', so the eye appears smaller in relation to the head size as well as the body size. Take a look at that eagle, Deinonychus has about double the proportional skull between its jawline and eyeball.

For an example of both points, take a look at a cat compared with a lion. Both animals have comparable night vision and general acuity, but because the lion is a) much larger and b) has a proportionately bigger head structure, the eyes look a lot smaller. I've never tried measuring the eyes of a cat or a lion, but I'd guess the latter's only a little bit bigger.

(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimages1.nicepetsonline.com%2Fnlarge%2Fadult-female-cat-tuxedo-daisy_3530274.jpg&hash=16c8329959ce9a4cdea1c978288c79a454416a8b)

(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fstatic.ddmcdn.com%2Fgif%2Fmale-lion-660.jpg&hash=27966c618c6a653f93ad7dc3a497d3e35ef6f81a)

(Edit- fixing broken picture)
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: MrSpaceJockey on Nov 29, 2014, 11:54:36 PM
Thanks for clearing that up!  Drawing dinosaurs in a scientifically accurate manner is a lot more difficult that I thought.  I think I just learned today that the big wing feathers on dromaeosaurs only attach to the forearms (actual scientific terms, like 'primaries' or whatever, escape me). 

Do you actually have a professional job in paleontology, or is this just something you're very interested in?  :D
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Dark Blade1 on Dec 03, 2014, 03:25:22 PM
i love trex i loved it since i was a kid.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on Dec 05, 2014, 12:36:50 PM
http://phenomena.nationalgeographic.com/2014/12/01/prehistoric-lizard-had-the-teeth-of-a-dinosaur/ (http://phenomena.nationalgeographic.com/2014/12/01/prehistoric-lizard-had-the-teeth-of-a-dinosaur/)

QuoteIn museums, documentaries, and books, the terrestrial environments of the Mesozoic are often presented as being the sole domain of dinosaurs, with stands of conifers parting just enough to see titanic creatures snarl at each other. It's easy to forget that other forms of life – like some weird little mammals – also thrived at the same time. If we're really going to understand what life was like back then, we need the whole picture. That includes carnivores that competed with the dinosaurs. Strange teeth uncovered at a dinosaur-bearing site in Texas remind us that small, non-dinosaurian predators also carved out a living in the Mesozoic world.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Ryu on Dec 11, 2014, 04:08:51 PM
(https://fbcdn-sphotos-f-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-xfa1/v/t1.0-9/384165_255852767806991_1613552695_n.jpg?oh=907fc89738a4c3b37236cd7a90e19e36&oe=551066DE&__gda__=1430528599_5c464869f058b0d55419f7870138e0d0)
I have a question:
The illustration above, already obsolete, or T-rex and deinonychus, would have to have the body full of feathers?
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on Dec 11, 2014, 04:57:48 PM
I would say yes.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Gilfryd on Dec 11, 2014, 06:33:56 PM
CNN is airing the documentary Dinosaur 13 (2014) tonight.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on Dec 11, 2014, 06:38:53 PM
http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-nation/wp/2014/12/08/dinosaur-13-broadcast-on-cnn-unearths-old-drama-over-a-t-rex-named-sue/ (http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-nation/wp/2014/12/08/dinosaur-13-broadcast-on-cnn-unearths-old-drama-over-a-t-rex-named-sue/)

Apparently, it's not that good :-\
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on Dec 15, 2014, 12:16:20 PM
http://store.steampowered.com/app/322920/ (http://store.steampowered.com/app/322920/)

Check this out. A feathered T.Rex in a video game? The times are a-changin' indeed!
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on Dec 16, 2014, 03:48:06 PM
https://www.voluminajurassica.org/volumina/article/view/173/153 (https://www.voluminajurassica.org/volumina/article/view/173/153)

The fragile legacy of Amphicoelias
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: P.Funkei on Dec 16, 2014, 06:11:43 PM
Quote from: DoomRulz on Dec 15, 2014, 12:16:20 PM
http://store.steampowered.com/app/322920/ (http://store.steampowered.com/app/322920/)

Check this out. A feathered T.Rex in a video game? The times are a-changin' indeed!
Well, there's always Saurian (http://www.indiedb.com/games/Saurian). ;)
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on Dec 16, 2014, 06:16:02 PM
Quote from: P.Funkei on Dec 16, 2014, 06:11:43 PM
Quote from: DoomRulz on Dec 15, 2014, 12:16:20 PM
http://store.steampowered.com/app/322920/ (http://store.steampowered.com/app/322920/)

Check this out. A feathered T.Rex in a video game? The times are a-changin' indeed!
Well, there's always Saurian (http://www.indiedb.com/games/Saurian). ;)

Well well, look who decided to show up.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: P.Funkei on Dec 16, 2014, 07:41:53 PM
Hey there  ;D . I apologize for the abrupt and unannounced absence; I became a bit lackadaisical.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: The Shuriken on Dec 16, 2014, 08:38:24 PM
These days I find myself more interested in Triassic reptiles than dinosaurs. Especially the crocodile lineage. Poposaurus, Arizonasaurus, Postosuchus, etc. All incredible beasties.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: P.Funkei on Dec 16, 2014, 09:09:27 PM
I think this (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AjYiO_bB6ho) may be relevant to your interests.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: The Shuriken on Dec 16, 2014, 09:19:03 PM
Quote from: P.Funkei on Dec 16, 2014, 09:09:27 PM
I think this (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AjYiO_bB6ho) may be relevant to your interests.

Heh, that was pretty clever. Kudos to the creator.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Vertigo on Dec 16, 2014, 09:24:10 PM
I loved that way too much.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: The Shuriken on Dec 16, 2014, 09:55:55 PM
I forgot to mention Desmatosuchus and Mosaurus, two other favorites of mine. So happy to see Mosasaur is in Jurassic World.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on Dec 17, 2014, 01:39:00 AM
Quote from: P.Funkei on Dec 16, 2014, 09:09:27 PM
I think this (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AjYiO_bB6ho) may be relevant to your interests.

Lousy singer but points for creativity.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: P.Funkei on Dec 17, 2014, 02:21:59 AM
Quote from: DoomRulz on Dec 17, 2014, 01:39:00 AM
Quote from: P.Funkei on Dec 16, 2014, 09:09:27 PM
I think this (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AjYiO_bB6ho) may be relevant to your interests.

Lousy singer but points for creativity.
Agreed.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Hellspawn28 on Dec 18, 2014, 06:37:49 PM
Quote from: DoomRulz on Dec 15, 2014, 12:16:20 PM
http://store.steampowered.com/app/322920/ (http://store.steampowered.com/app/322920/)

Check this out. A feathered T.Rex in a video game? The times are a-changin' indeed!

Does not bother me. The upcoming Power Ranger show (based on 2013's Super Sentai Kyoryuger) has a T-rex with feathers and it does not look that bad.

(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg2.wikia.nocookie.net%2F__cb20140913132442%2Fpowerrangers%2Fimages%2Fe%2Fe1%2FGabutyra.jpg&hash=cf0f33522e3a41e93a8e6022d44dc2524abdc473)

I just hope Godzilla will never have feathers despite him being a dinosaur depending on the movie.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on Dec 18, 2014, 11:40:53 PM
Quote from: Hellspawn28 on Dec 18, 2014, 06:37:49 PM
Quote from: DoomRulz on Dec 15, 2014, 12:16:20 PM
http://store.steampowered.com/app/322920/ (http://store.steampowered.com/app/322920/)

Check this out. A feathered T.Rex in a video game? The times are a-changin' indeed!

Does not bother me. The upcoming Power Ranger show (based on 2013's Super Sentai Kyoryuger) has a T-rex with feathers and it does not look that bad.

(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg2.wikia.nocookie.net%2F__cb20140913132442%2Fpowerrangers%2Fimages%2Fe%2Fe1%2FGabutyra.jpg&hash=cf0f33522e3a41e93a8e6022d44dc2524abdc473)

I just hope Godzilla will never have feathers despite him being a dinosaur depending on the movie.

Godzilla is entirely fictitious. His very existence defies nature so there's no reason for him to conform to scientific ideals.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: The Shuriken on Dec 19, 2014, 12:47:25 AM
Quote from: Hellspawn28 on Dec 18, 2014, 06:37:49 PM
Quote from: DoomRulz on Dec 15, 2014, 12:16:20 PM
http://store.steampowered.com/app/322920/ (http://store.steampowered.com/app/322920/)

Check this out. A feathered T.Rex in a video game? The times are a-changin' indeed!

Does not bother me. The upcoming Power Ranger show (based on 2013's Super Sentai Kyoryuger) has a T-rex with feathers and it does not look that bad.

(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg2.wikia.nocookie.net%2F__cb20140913132442%2Fpowerrangers%2Fimages%2Fe%2Fe1%2FGabutyra.jpg&hash=cf0f33522e3a41e93a8e6022d44dc2524abdc473)

I just hope Godzilla will never have feathers despite him being a dinosaur depending on the movie.

The way I look at it, is this. Godzilla is based on the old school dinosaurs. Slightly upright, tails dragging, scaly skin. He's the old embodiment of dinosaurs, when they were all considered to just be big lizards. Hell, even his Godzillasaurus form shows it. Nah, Godzilla is a dinosaur only in the sense that he's a "terrible lizard". He'll never have feathers.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Gilfryd on Dec 19, 2014, 05:30:41 AM
I figure he has more in common with crocodiles than birds anyway.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on Dec 19, 2014, 01:12:19 PM
Quote from: The Shuriken on Dec 19, 2014, 12:47:25 AM
Quote from: Hellspawn28 on Dec 18, 2014, 06:37:49 PM
Quote from: DoomRulz on Dec 15, 2014, 12:16:20 PM
http://store.steampowered.com/app/322920/ (http://store.steampowered.com/app/322920/)

Check this out. A feathered T.Rex in a video game? The times are a-changin' indeed!

Does not bother me. The upcoming Power Ranger show (based on 2013's Super Sentai Kyoryuger) has a T-rex with feathers and it does not look that bad.

(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg2.wikia.nocookie.net%2F__cb20140913132442%2Fpowerrangers%2Fimages%2Fe%2Fe1%2FGabutyra.jpg&hash=cf0f33522e3a41e93a8e6022d44dc2524abdc473)

I just hope Godzilla will never have feathers despite him being a dinosaur depending on the movie.

The way I look at it, is this. Godzilla is based on the old school dinosaurs. Slightly upright, tails dragging, scaly skin. He's the old embodiment of dinosaurs, when they were all considered to just be big lizards. Hell, even his Godzillasaurus form shows it. Nah, Godzilla is a dinosaur only in the sense that he's a "terrible lizard". He'll never have feathers.

Bingo, this. Godzilla taking a modern dinosaurian form would look pretty disastrous anyway.

(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Ffc01.deviantart.net%2Ffs42%2Ff%2F2009%2F101%2Ff%2Fd%2FZilla_Dane_Cook_by_Godzilla_Club.jpg&hash=120635e2f5daeb6680b6987c226e6ce7e53f5d5b)

See, even he thinks so.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Gilfryd on Dec 23, 2014, 10:34:02 AM
(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.kinja-img.com%2Fgawker-media%2Fimage%2Fupload%2Fs--rZC8Vacc--%2Fjyjsiexdvqsoarx8lnqi.gif&hash=b9c3114a64da56141c4596e0c87b1ff99ea82bdc)
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on Dec 23, 2014, 01:16:31 PM
Mal posted this on my FB wall this morning. Nanuqsaurus made the top 100 stories of 2014!

http://discovermagazine.com/2015/jan-feb/36-a-pint-size-polar-predator (http://discovermagazine.com/2015/jan-feb/36-a-pint-size-polar-predator)
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on Dec 25, 2014, 06:18:49 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m-zBxBF8pys# (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m-zBxBF8pys#)

Vertigo, you'll like this. It's a good commentary.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Vertigo on Dec 25, 2014, 09:40:31 PM
Sorry, my eyes glazed over pretty quickly; was almost as bad as reading one of my posts.  ;D
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Shinawi on Dec 26, 2014, 04:00:07 AM
Quote from: Gilfryd on Dec 23, 2014, 10:34:02 AM
(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.kinja-img.com%2Fgawker-media%2Fimage%2Fupload%2Fs--rZC8Vacc--%2Fjyjsiexdvqsoarx8lnqi.gif&hash=b9c3114a64da56141c4596e0c87b1ff99ea82bdc)
When I was a kid, I wanted to do that when an adult, but my dad disapproved. He thought paleontologists didn't make enough money.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: P.Funkei on Dec 26, 2014, 05:48:00 AM
He was probably correct about the relative poverty of paleontologists, Shinawi :P
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on Dec 26, 2014, 01:48:11 PM
Quote from: Vertigo on Dec 25, 2014, 09:40:31 PM
Sorry, my eyes glazed over pretty quickly; was almost as bad as reading one of my posts.  ;D

What, can't handle a little genius? ;)
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on Jan 08, 2015, 03:12:59 PM
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2015/01/150106-utahraptor-death-trap-fossil/ (http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2015/01/150106-utahraptor-death-trap-fossil/)

QuoteThe fossils might help resolve a long-standing debate about whether these predators hunted in groups. In the Jurassic Park films, velociraptors were shown cooperating to chase down prey, an idea based at the time on several predators that had been found alongside an herbivore. The new fossils may help confirm whether the silver screen got it right.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: P.Funkei on Jan 30, 2015, 05:36:54 AM
This is only tangentially related to this topic - if at all - but this blog post detailing basic concepts in science seems to be an excellent resource (http://evolvingthoughts.net/basic-concepts-in-science/), and I wanted to share it with you all.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on Jan 30, 2015, 12:43:14 PM
The physics and mathematics page don't have chaos theory! For shame.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: P.Funkei on Jan 31, 2015, 06:37:27 AM
Well, these are supposed to be basic concepts. :P
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Ryu on Jan 31, 2015, 05:01:14 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rJx5VlIAMk0 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rJx5VlIAMk0)
https://twitter.com/dailyplanetshow/status/560544200090202115?utm_source=fb&fb_ref=Default&utm_content=561244037165101056&utm_campaign=IlliterateDino&utm_medium=fb (https://twitter.com/dailyplanetshow/status/560544200090202115?utm_source=fb&fb_ref=Default&utm_content=561244037165101056&utm_campaign=IlliterateDino&utm_medium=fb)
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/B8dz-srCIAAD8wW.jpg)
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Vertigo on Jan 31, 2015, 05:08:31 PM
What the what?!
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: The Cruentus on Jan 31, 2015, 10:34:52 PM
Quote from: Ryu on Jan 31, 2015, 05:01:14 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rJx5VlIAMk0 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rJx5VlIAMk0)
https://twitter.com/dailyplanetshow/status/560544200090202115?utm_source=fb&fb_ref=Default&utm_content=561244037165101056&utm_campaign=IlliterateDino&utm_medium=fb (https://twitter.com/dailyplanetshow/status/560544200090202115?utm_source=fb&fb_ref=Default&utm_content=561244037165101056&utm_campaign=IlliterateDino&utm_medium=fb)
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/B8dz-srCIAAD8wW.jpg)

Yep bottom pic is an ankylosaurus I believe, those where the dinos with the club tail, I would hate to have been hit by one of them lol

My favorite is T-rex though and I know that is a common favorite but meh, sue me its my fav dammit.

Hopefully the next JP will feature it again as the "main" dinosaur, I like spinosaurus but its no T-Rex and doesn't hold the candle to it in my opinion. Bonus points for trying to go a new direction though.

Some of the sea creatures were nasty, there was something, liopleurodon or something that was considered an apex predator among the oceane. Big creature that had a bite force stronger than T-rex.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on Feb 02, 2015, 04:47:16 PM
Quote from: Vertigo on Jan 31, 2015, 05:08:31 PM
What the what?!

Wow. What are the odds on finding something like that?! If only it were always that easy.

Also, Save Dippy the Diplodocus!! (https://www.change.org/p/natural-history-museum-save-dippy)
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Vertigo on Feb 02, 2015, 04:56:27 PM
Quote from: DoomRulz on Feb 02, 2015, 04:47:16 PMAlso, Save Dippy the Diplodocus!! (https://www.change.org/p/natural-history-museum-save-dippy)

Yeah, that situation is bizarre. I think there must be a senior curator at the Natural History Museum who hates dinosaurs. Would certainly explain why their dusty, cramped, poorly-lit and outdated dinosaur exhibition is still largely the same one I queued around the block to visit 20+ years ago.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on Feb 02, 2015, 05:23:13 PM
Maybe they don't have the funding to renovate it? ROM's dino gallery stayed the same since the 70s I think until 2007 and Michael-Lee Chin came around.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Vertigo on Feb 02, 2015, 05:38:56 PM
They just spent tens of millions of pounds on the stupid bloody Darwin Centre which is totally unmemorable, and something that no-one was asking for. The one really interesting part, an actual preserved giant squid, is off-limits to the general public. Utterly infuriates me that the money wasn't spent on overhauling the existing galleries. I miss the days when they relied on entry ticket money, because it meant they had to keep the exhibitions fresh, and cater to what people actually wanted to see.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on Feb 02, 2015, 06:15:56 PM
Weird; why would they close it off the public? Also, start a petition!
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Omegamorph on Feb 02, 2015, 07:02:07 PM
How the f**k is a whale better than a Diplodocus? I mean, shit.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Darkblade 25 on Feb 03, 2015, 06:44:08 PM
I always like T-Rex Raptors and that's it.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: MrSpaceJockey on Feb 04, 2015, 12:56:49 AM
The best first post I've ever read.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: King Rathalos on Feb 04, 2015, 04:00:00 AM
someone pls draw t rex raptors
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on Feb 04, 2015, 01:00:14 PM
Oh Vertigo, check this out. The new ceratopsian from the Milk River Formation. I saw it in person at the ROM a few weekends ago 8)

https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=10100973806687111&l=f353718be8 (https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=10100973806687111&l=f353718be8)

Couldn't tell you the name of it though as it hasn't been published yet.

And here's me meeting Brian Switek the very same day! He's an awesome guy.

https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=10100973796282961&l=27ea812a7e (https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=10100973796282961&l=27ea812a7e)
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Vertigo on Feb 04, 2015, 01:43:13 PM
Nice! Milk River's a very early formation for a ceratopsid, that one might be older than any currently described.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on Feb 04, 2015, 02:40:55 PM
It's a basal centrosaurine. My guess is that it's likely one of the last to evolve before the chasmosaurines started to take over.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Vertigo on Feb 04, 2015, 05:04:28 PM
According to wikipedia, that formation dates to 84 Ma, which is around 5 Ma before any ceratopsid I know of, be it centrosaurine or chasmosaurine.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on Feb 04, 2015, 05:52:41 PM
I'm probably wrong on the "last to evolve" part (was basing it on some charts I saw) but it's definitely basal. That's how David Evans is describing it.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: P.Funkei on Feb 04, 2015, 08:47:20 PM
Quote from: King Rathalos on Feb 04, 2015, 04:00:00 AM
someone pls draw t rex raptors

Perhaps this (https://twitter.com/GreyGriffon/status/562954291296874496) may suffice.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Gilfryd on Feb 06, 2015, 11:40:19 AM
QuoteMeet Sophie, the most complete stegosaurus skeleton ever found: Scientists hope to reveal its weight, eating habits and weaponry using X-rays and models
•Stegosaurus has gone on display at London's Natural history Museum
•'Sophie' is named after the daughter of the principal donor, but experts aren't sure of the 150 million-year-old dinosaur's sex
•The skeleton is the most complete in the world - and is 85 per cent real
•Scientists have X-rayed and scanned bones to make a computer model
•They are using it to calculate the creature's weight, eating habits and walk
•Mystery of what the animal spinal plates were for will also be unravelled

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2859296/Meet-Sophie-complete-stegosaurus-skeleton-found.html (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2859296/Meet-Sophie-complete-stegosaurus-skeleton-found.html)
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on Feb 06, 2015, 12:35:44 PM
•Mystery of what the animal spinal plates were for will also be unravelled

That's what's got me intrigued the most. Hopefully whatever they unravel could be used to answer questions about Dimetrodon or Spinosaurus.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: MrSpaceJockey on Feb 06, 2015, 11:13:09 PM
That's my sisters favorite dinosaur, and her name is Sophia.

Dope.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on Feb 09, 2015, 02:08:23 PM
Poor thing is popular for the wrong reason, lol.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Vertigo on Feb 11, 2015, 11:18:05 PM
A new amber specimen (http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/offbeat/dinos-got-high-oldest-grass-fungus-fossil-hints/ar-AA9g4WV) shows that a hallucinogenic fungus infested grass spores 100 million years ago - and it's very likely that dinosaurs would have eaten them.

Aside from the mental image of a sauropod tripping balls, this is also the final, conclusive evidence that grasses were present and well-evolved by at least the Late Cretaceous.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on Feb 12, 2015, 07:19:05 PM
JW should totally have a T.Rex on acid.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Vertigo on Feb 14, 2015, 12:16:04 AM
I don't know if you're into non-JP dinosaur figures, Doom, but thought you might want to check these (http://dinotoyblog.com/2015/01/17/upcoming-releases-from-collecta-new-for-2015/) out. The swimming Spinosaurus, Acrocanthosaurus, Nasutoceratops and mammals look pretty bodacious in my opinion.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on Feb 16, 2015, 04:50:39 PM
Yes!! I've seen the swimming Spino which is awesome enough, but that feathered T.Rex is f**king gorgeous. f**k you Papo!!! Y'all ain't shit 8)
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Gilfryd on Feb 18, 2015, 11:20:17 PM
(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2F41.media.tumblr.com%2F34a5ec652d98a0b9042718183badb63d%2Ftumblr_njxfywwhkp1scll6no1_1280.jpg&hash=955ece05f0aa4c695c13a8823ca6cb0a53aa5d64)
(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2F36.media.tumblr.com%2F99bb1e1b2281dc320137f266297aa78a%2Ftumblr_njxfywwhkp1scll6no2_1280.jpg&hash=7076ede3035e08e1570ce11fd086b79a1ed4c645)
(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2F41.media.tumblr.com%2Fb192fb63a7f1b62eb588e3b139cacef2%2Ftumblr_njxfywwhkp1scll6no3_1280.jpg&hash=737c54fdebdcb4869fba33f318caf3371d727165)
(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2F41.media.tumblr.com%2Ff12587d0a4ca4bcab9cb2e0de58b550e%2Ftumblr_njxfywwhkp1scll6no4_1280.jpg&hash=4c177098e98bb17ab4f494c9694e4a296962a293)
https://twitter.com/NEBU_KURO (https://twitter.com/NEBU_KURO)
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on Feb 19, 2015, 01:52:18 PM
That's overdoing it :P
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Hellspawn28 on Feb 21, 2015, 11:45:37 PM
That T-rex looks too cute :P!
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Immortan Jonesy on Feb 24, 2015, 03:28:30 AM
QuoteDid Dark Matter kill the Dinosaurs?

http://news.sciencemag.org/earth/2015/02/did-dark-matter-kill-dinosaurs?rss=1 (http://news.sciencemag.org/earth/2015/02/did-dark-matter-kill-dinosaurs?rss=1)

Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on Feb 24, 2015, 03:23:07 PM
I think it's still just a matter of right time, right place. I can't recall who said/wrote this, but if the asteroid had hit the Earth one million years earlier or later than when it did, the dinosaurs wouldn't have died out because Earth wasn't in complete turmoil.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: Vertigo on Feb 24, 2015, 09:07:05 PM
Potentially, yeah. The Deccan Traps were formed around the same time, a colossal chain of volcanoes - when they erupted, they blanketed half of India in lava, and would have had a profound effect on global climate. Sea levels dropped massively, and this could be related to global cooling caused by the volcanoes.
The latest research I've read postulated that the volcanic event happened half a million years before the Chicxulub impact, so it seems the end-Cretaceous was subjected to two mass-extinction events in a short span of time.

It's a bit similar to the age we're living in right now. Global fauna's already decimated by the glaciation-thaw cycle of our present ice age, and now that the world has human agriculture and poaching to contend with, most species around the top of the food chain are critically endangered.

Still. There's no way of knowing if the non-avian dinosaurs could have survived the asteroid impact if it had come out of a clear blue sky, its effects may just have been too great for any ecosystem based on living plant matter to survive. Possibly some descendants of the insectivorous and smallest dinosaurs (such as alvarezsaurs) may have made it through.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on Feb 25, 2015, 12:27:12 PM
I think it would depend on the state of the planet. One thing the K/T extinction has in common with the Permian/Triassic extinction is that the planet was already collapsing, environmentally. The continents were shifting, animals were dying out due to extreme environmental changes, and all it takes is one last major blow to throw everything into chaos.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: DoomRulz on Feb 26, 2015, 01:24:50 PM
http://www.jspowerhour.com/comics/148 (http://www.jspowerhour.com/comics/148)

This made me yuk.
Title: Re: Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures
Post by: SizzyBubbles on Mar 11, 2015, 07:15:25 AM
Quote from: Gilfryd on Feb 18, 2015, 11:20:17 PM
(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2F41.media.tumblr.com%2F34a5ec652d98a0b9042718183badb63d%2Ftumblr_njxfywwhkp1scll6no1_1280.jpg&hash=955ece05f0aa4c695c13a8823ca6cb0a53aa5d64)
(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2F36.media.tumblr.com%2F99bb1e1b2281dc320137f266297aa78a%2Ftumblr_njxfywwhkp1scll6no2_1280.jpg&hash=7076ede3035e08e1570ce11fd086b79a1ed4c645)
(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2F41.media.tumblr.com%2Fb192fb63a7f1b62eb588e3b139cacef2%2Ftumblr_njxfywwhkp1scll6no3_1280.jpg&hash=737c54fdebdcb4869fba33f318caf3371d727165)
(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2F41.media.tumblr.com%2Ff12587d0a4ca4bcab9cb2e0de58b550e%2Ftumblr_njxfywwhkp1scll6no4_1280.jpg&hash=4c177098e98bb17ab4f494c9694e4a296962a293)
htt