Diabetes Rex.
>>4820736friendly fat dino
They went too far in a few places
I wasn't aware dinosaurs played MtG
>>4820736Clearly food wasn’t as scarce as is commonly thought…>>4820753oldgod gem
>>4820736Probably one of the worst current t. rex in media, Prehistoric Kingdom and even fucking life on our planet did it better
hehe. look at its arms!
Besides looking under muscled what is wrong with Jurassic parks rex?
>>4822126The shape of the skull, the position of the arms and that's it, T. rex really hasn't changed as much as paleotards want you to believe
>>4822126Le heckin chonki boi's from reddit can't relate to it.
>>4822176I once got a 7 day ban for a reply like this.
>>4822201Good
>>4822115>even fucking life on our planet did it betterNo it didn’t, not even remotely close lol. Just because the show makes you seethe uncontrollably doesn’t make it a bad recon. It’s one of the better depictions in recent years, definitely much better than fucking life on our planet
>>48222017 days weren't enough.
Thread Hidden
>>4820736>people here constantly scream about dinosaurs being portrayed as too birdy>then one deciption shows a t-rex sporting bit of a proper reptilian girth>they also hate it
>>4822201what was the stated reason lol>>4822456>people hereone person
>>4822449Better hide your asscrack, lardass.>>4822456Based, birds are elegant while reptiles look like the downies of the animal kingdom.
>>4822347Yes it is better, the skeletal and muscular anatomy seems a lot more like a T. rex than the PP one, which i think is much more important than it having lips or not
>>4822662>much more important than it having lips or notBoth of them have lips, that has nothing to do with it. The life on our planet recon couldn’t even get the teeth right, it has way too many teeth that are way too small and thin. There’s also a lot of questionable design choices they made, like giving it even more feathers than the PP rex, barely noticeable keratin on the brows and huge studded feature scales. Those aren’t necessarily objectively wrong but they’re definitely not in line with current understanding. They did least improve the final T. rex design a fair bit from the dogshit they were initially going to use, but it’s still nowhere near as good as PP’s. The fact the life on our planet rex is constantly screaming its lungs out and soifacing doesn’t help. They were never going for accuracy or realism in the show, there’s a reason the narrative is some dogshit about dynasties battling and is full of shit designs and retarded mistakes>seems a lot more like a T. rex than the PP oneIn what way does it “seem” more like a T. rex? If you can’t say specifically what it is that’s bad then it sounds like you just have a problem with the show and are looking for problems that aren’t there
>>4822824The PP one looks to be based on the Sue skeleton that is quatting because she didn't fit in the room but everyone went with the belly being that close to the ground in a neutral stance for some reason. >>4822664 is a perfect example of that
>>4822830Its legs aren’t nearly as crouched as the Sue mount. That has nothing to do with the musculature or skeletal structure either. Even if it was squatting, that’d be just in this one scene and wouldn’t make as bad as the life on our planet rex let alone “one of the worst current t. rex in media”
>>4822912That is exactly what i mean. people take that mount and apply the belly position as if it was in a neutral stance, making it look way fatter than it actually was
>>4822922Scotty's mount shows better where the belly would reach in a neutral position, and the much better PK rex shows this
>>4822922That’s a 3/4 view Einstein. Its body isn’t that close to the ground and it isn’t crouching. Look at any shot where it’s facing the camera. Your inability to see perspective is not an issue with the reconstruction
>>4822490>birds are elegant while reptiles look like the downies of the animal kingdom.Then how come birds originated from reptiles?
>>4822992You don't look much like a tunicate, either
>>4822992Most modern reptiles belong to a retarded red-headed stepchild branch of evolution that never dominated the planet unlike their sister branch that included the dinosaurs, and, by extension, birds.
>>4823058That’s really funny to me. The least deserving ones survived. Very tragic irony
>>4823312But borbs survived...
Best T. Rex design.
Idk what this dude is on about, the only thing i remember looking weird about the PP rex is that they tail seemed a little too long even for dinosaur standards, other than that it's spot on
>>4823350Birds are like the least deserving amongst the most deserving
>>4823395Birds look good, fly, and are amongst the smartest animals on the planet.>>4823393It looks like dog shit.
>>4823416Non-avian dinosaurs were better
>>4823393It does seem that way. Here you can see i made the image exactly 1240 pixels long (1240 cm is 40 feet) and the overly long tail does makes it come up a little short (368 cm)
>>4823451Compared to a skeletal in a similar pose which comes up at 413 pixels tall
>>4823416>It looks like dog shitIt looks perfectly fine. Cope harder
>>4823610It's a retarded lardass. Just like you.
The Saurian rex is still my favorite depiction.
>>4823738That image didn't really convince me but the model looks much better
>>4823451>>4823452And people say he's not a fat fuck
Many of these legs look too lean
T. rex legs would look like Ronnie Coleman
>>4823709>still can’t articulate what’s wrong about itDelicious
Get over the fact that T. rex was fat as fatass and move on.
>>4822830>>4822912>>4822922>>4822928"crouching" moves the center of mass forward from the ball of the femur to somewhere closer to the knee. this may have been the neutral stance, as it would allow the front-heavy animal to balance better. It's common in birds on the ground.>/an/ bitches that T. rex is front-heavy and will fall on its face>fix it so it's balanced and /an/ bitches about it "crouching."There is no pleasing you guys.
>>4823359Wrong.
>>4822176sIeep tight pupper
>>4824071Who is "you guys"? i never once have complained about T. rex losing balance
Every time we have one of these threads it becomes very apparent that the design is good and it’s just someone having an autistic meltdown, like when paleoschizo was complaining about the PP rex having a head that is widest at the lower jaw because he forgot jaw muscles exist
>>4824250>like when paleoschizo was complaining about the PP rex having a head that is widest at the lower jaw because he forgot jaw muscles existhaha good timesI liked when he posted a diagram with the external jaw muscles removed to show the muscles underneath and he thought it was proof they didn't have them.
>>4824250The complaint about the size and number of teeth on one depiction is valid if true. Teeth are diagnostic, if there's too many or they're too small it's probably the wrong species.the complaints about girth or "fat" are probably wrong since that's actually just how wide the bones of the chest are. It's not fat, it's full of air. Round like a fricken sparrow.
>>4824287>The complaint about the size and number of teeth on one depiction is valid if trueThe life on our planet rex has absolutely fucked teeth, like they were trying to make it look scarier but ended up giving it dinky little spikes instead of the thick bone crushers the animal actually had
>>4823359Nah I never liked this. The color scheme is cool but the faces always looked goofy
>>4820736Hank hill Rex
>>4822456They hate anything that doesn't look like the jurassic park dolls on their shelf
>>4822456Cchonk with toothies
>>4824830>brings up Jurassic Park out of nowhere
>>4824830>They
>>4824596That cannot be Hank Hill Rex.He is using charcoal instead of propane.
>>4824596
>>4822176>>4822176sleep >tight pupper STOP MARKING THIS AS SPAM DAMMIT
>>4825127kek
>>4825154Rest in peace lil borker
>>4825154don't reply to your own post like that
Jesus Christ
>>4825635>tyrannosaurus imperatorDidn't they already shoot down that idea?
>>4825650no
>>4825635are those teeth accurate
>>4825650Yeah, it was hot shit when it was first announced but even the most left-leaning of paleontologists couldn't justify the faulty science. Now T. mcraeensis, that's a genuine species.
>>4825812On the artwork it is, the model isn’t high enough quality for it to be spot on though
>>4825635The proportions in this one look good
I miss when paleontologists/artists wanted dinosaurs to be cool instead of this modern race to the bottom of desperately trying to make dinosaurs look lamer and lamer because they think it makes them look more realistic, to the point of ignoring the actual fossils
>>4822176sleep tight pupError: Our system thinks your post is spam. Please reformat and try again.
>>4820736Why is T-rex so fat? Lions and tigers are goddam anorexic in the wild.
>>4828619Lions and tigers don't have 26 huge air sacs distributed in their torso, neck, face, and hips.
>>4828621yes they do
I have a soft spot for the Dinosaur Revolution T. rex.
>>4828599They are just like real animals, not the jurassic park monsters from your childhood, chud
>>4828677>noooo real animals can't look cool muh jurrassic paaaaaaaaarrrrrrrk
>>4828621op's pic doesn't look like 26 huge air sacs distributed in their torso, neck, face, and hips.
>>4828743it absolutely does.you guys see an obese lizard. I see a featherless bird balloon
>>4828743Probably because they’re internal
>>4828666Ok Satan
>>4828666>Satan tripsPottery
>>4824596>>4825127Hank Hill is a propane shill, shame on you
>>4825635I was looking forward to this one after seeing the original 3D model but the production quality on Eofauna is just so shit.
>just want a great looking rex figure for my den but all the good ones are "kits" you have to buy or 3D print yourself, paint yourself, and cost like 1000 bucksShit sucks.
>>4828619Big cats are shredded what the fuck are you talking about
>>4828788>>4828770Op’s pick looks like mammalian fat, not air sacks
>>4829074>Op’s pick looks like mammalian fat, not air sacksyou're the expert.what would you say the difference is?
>>4822176sleep tight
>>4829108it looks exactly like elephant fat
>>4829382>it looks exactly like elephant fatthat's not a difference, that's a similarityhow do air sacs look different from mammal fat?how do you, the leading expert on air sacs, tell them apart?
The largest and most dangerous reptiles alive today are all fat as fuck
>>4823312theres no merit in evolution
>>4822456I don't even know why I'm replying to a retard, but Dinosaurs are neither lizards nor birds. And T. rex for the 2 millionth time IS NOT A FUCKING VARANID.
>>4830251all dinosaurs alive right now are birds
>>4823451I can't unsee Earl Sinclair every time I see the Pee Pee fatrex. This fucker makes me hear oboe noises.
>>4823738Prosciutto-bear.
>>4824250>>4824285That wasn't me, retarded foid.
>>4825635Well turning T. rex into a seal is a new one.
>>4828599This is a glownigger well-poisoning post. Stupid =/= more accurate. Paleoartists USED to try for accuracy. Now they don't. Now they try to make their "art" as subversive and stupid as possible. You know this. I know this. Even the paleowhore knows this.
>>4828677Chud is now antisemitic. You can't just criticize people for crawling out of sewers anymore. DO BETTER.
>>4828870>Boot lips>All the scales are exactly the same>Fat, wrinkly>Almost no hornageThey phoned this one in, but tried to make sure it was "hip" too so it would sell to reddit.
>>4829895Air sacs don't make you look fat, stupid. And this is how much "fatty, floppy shit" reptiles ACTUALLY have haning off of them. Basically none. Yes, even your precious Varanids and crocoducks. They have very little fat. God shrink-wraps his reptiles. Deal with it. All the "fat" you see on a croc is either muscle or saggy viscera. Same with Varanids. Oh reptiles do have fat, obviously, but they don't hoard it like women.
>>4830252Birds aren't dinosaurs anymore than you're a person.
>>4830258kek
>>4829382Elephants don’t have much body fat though, they have about the same amount as a racehorse>>4830260>And this is how much "fatty, floppy shit" reptiles ACTUALLY have haning off of them. Basically noneLol
>>4830601Why his neck so big?
A 10 ton carnivore would look pretty chonky. Also keep in mind they looked rounder at the end of their lives, they were thinner and faster when young.
>>4830768There's a xenomorph growing in it.
>>4830798Does that mean Hank is nearing the end...
>>4830601so the air sacs are on the neck and arms?
>>4831505You can’t see air sacs on that T. rex in the first place, nor does it have any fatty floppy shit. You’re complaining about something that isn’t there
>>4831508the entire design is bloated
>>4829292>lust-provoking image
>>4830768big jaw muscles + fat zoo animal
>>4831513It is indeed very bloated, reffer to the Prehistoric Kingdom rex for a proper bulky non-obese rex
How about this one?
>>4820736>find a cool skull>it's certainly a skull of an amazing monster>wokeslop comes in and tries to ruse me into thinking it's some kind of diabetes fatty nonbinary animal
>>4831551Looks very good
>>4831554
>>4822176Sleep Tight pup-per
>>4831513>>4831537It’s not bloated, it’s torso is as wide as the prehistoric kingdom one. See >>4822928
>>4831969The legs do seem bloated.I think the legs might be the problem, they seem to short as seen here >>4823451
>>4832010The legs look pretty muscle-y to me. Also the differences in leg length between all the recons in this thread are pretty minimal. In >>4823451 the knee is slightly below the torso but in this shot >>4822928 the knee is slightly above, which makes it seem like it’s more a matter of posture than anatomy. In the saurian reconstruction the torso also reaches below the knee and the ph rex’s knee sits about equal to the torso. Even if there are slight differences it doesn’t seem like anything that can’t be due to individual variation, especially in prehistoric planet’s case where different individual animals have slightly different models. Even if it “looks” wrong on a first glance, that doesn’t necessarily mean it is. It’s not even fat for the sake of it like an engh drawing
>>4831537they ruined the PK rex by removing the lipsthey had the perfect designed and just shat all over it with generic gator-faced movie monster shit
>>4832193Lips are not set in stone. Also>movie monster
>>4824596more like Dauterive Rex
>>4832193Both of the rexes in that pic have lips. Even the Jurassic park T. rex has lips. Teeth poking out =/= lipless, actual liplessness would be like a crocodile face where the tooth is exposed all the way down to the base
>>4823035I am a synapsid thoughever
>>4823738>Gabagool with legs
>>4820736
>>4832245that's even worse, there's no zoological basis for such a phenotypical expression at all, it's just an excuse to show the movie monster's teeth
>>4832693
>>4820736Why does t-rex look smaller than the jurassic park t-rex. Diabetes Rex looks 4 feet tall.
>>4832787Despite what this anon may tell you, his legs are objectively too short >>4823451 >>4823452
What about this depiction. I always had a sweetspot for it
Why is a board dedicated to animals and nature so fixated on fictitious creatures?
>>4823451The legs are ridiculously short, great, now I can’t unsee it.
>>4832256Prove it. >>4832840Were T-Rexes not real?
>>4832927>Were T-Rexes not real?Dinosaurs in general are an iffy subject.
>>4832957dinosaurs are real by definition. They are a concept, and the concept is applied to real organisms.What they actually looked and acted like is mostly unknown. But the idea is just as real as the ideas of insects or fish. They are real things within and without the bounds of the construct.
>>4832789The prehistoric planet rex is not based on that skeletal though. It’s legs might be a bit short but just looking at how far off the ground the belly is doesn’t really give you an accurate idea of how long the legs are, especially when you don’t account for different postures in the two pics and the doco model clearly has more meat on it than the skeletal. Leg length also varied between individuals, Stan’s femur is apparently longer than either Sue’s or Scotty’s despite being a fair bit smaller in overall size
>>4832927>>4832957Dinosaurs were real you tardo mctardington faglords
>>4832999the legs look super short.
>>4833512But are they? Try measure them and see if it’s correct or not
>>4832965So why don't we have a thread about dragons and beholders?
>>4833521When you dig up some beholder bones you can make one
>>4832999>Stan’s femur is apparently longer than either Sue’s or Scotty’s despite being a fair bit smaller in overall sizethere's a pretty huge margin of error due to taphonomy and diagenesis. It's normal for 2 femora presumed to be from the same dinosaur to be significantly different lengths.this is a problem for everything from overall size estimates to reconstructing any skeleton ever.
I believe dinosaurs are real but that there are too many spurious genera/species and they ought to be consolidated. I heard a saying once that if paleontologists were in charge of naming species of beetles, an order with 400,000 observed extant species, then they would have identified 10 million different species of beetles, and if entomologists were in charge of naming species of dinosaurs, an order with about 1500 different species (excluding modern extant birds), there would only be about 50.
>>4832310I know this pic is bait but it will always be funny to me because in the early days of paleontology dinosaurs were assumed to be big, dumb, slow reptiles. Now we know that Tyrannosaurus rex had vision comparable to a hawk, averaged at 8 tons in weight, and had the strongest bite of any animal that has ever existed. Dinosaurs have only gotten cooler the more we've learned about them imo. Also this is for all the "birds aren't scary" fags.https://youtu.be/yS71VeptuEc?si=TueM_Xhr7aRqpbSG
>>4833574But anon! It might have had a peach fuzz haircut! That clearly invalidates it having hawk-vision, 8 ton weight and a 35,000 to 57,000 newton bite force!
>>4833582Stop with your peach fuzz cope please
>>4833524I could make some, after all most dinosaur bones are made of plaster through sheer guesswork.
>>4833574Well, we don't "know" that, technically.
>>4833600we have more evidence to support that than we do to suggest that it spent all it's time lying in swamps because it couldn't stand up or waddled around with the posture of a kangaroo. The important thing is that depictions of dinosaurs will always change the more we find out about them, but that doesn't make them any less "cool". Deinonychus having feathers is not a conspiracy created by the chinese and the jews in order to make people become transsexuals, despite what the paleoschizo might think.
>>4833617>all it's timeThat's " all its time ". It's means it-is.
>>4833663ah fuck, thanks.
>>4833617It's a pretty huge leap from>poor binocular vision>large eyes>distantly related to birdsall the way to>vision comparable to a hawk.I mean most birds don't even have vision comparable to a hawk, and birds could actually use such a thing. T. rex had no use for it, and almost certainly didn't have it. They did have one of the most developed senses of smell ever, but that would indicate weak vision, not hawklike.I get that scientists want to deboonk Jurassic Park, but hawk vision is dumb. The evidence for it is non-existent. They probably had better vision than JP implied, but that doesn't mean they had the greatest vision ever.
>>4833091I asked him a question, relax
>>4833560>>4833563>>4833568these are some ghastly creatures
>>4833906>poor binocular visiondidn't that particular study show that it actually had really good binocular vision, unlike most other theropods? The bird of prey comparison comes from that.https://ix.cs.uoregon.edu/~kent/paleontology/binocularVision/
>>4833906>It's wrong>Why?>I don't know it just isA brilliant argument
>>4833906>These are the subhumans you unironically argue withWhat happened to this board? It wasn't this brain-dead once
>>4833947>didn't that particular study show that it actually had really good binocular vision,sure, compared to a zebra. Compared to a lion or a human it had shit binocular vision. And lions and humans certainly don't have hawk vision just because they have excellent binocular range.>>4833954>A brilliant argumentHoly shit, you're dumb.
>>4833956are you retarded?
>>4833947>The bird of prey comparison comes from that.Yes, I am aware. That's why I specifically attacked the results of the study1. Good binocular vision FOR A THEROPOD is shit binocular vision for lots of other animals.2. Lots of animals with great binocular vision don't see as well as hawks3. T. rex had one of the most developed senses of smell ever found, which usually indicates poor vision4. Being distantly related to hawks doesn't imply that they had hawk vision, since even much closer relatives of hawks don't have it.5. Hawks actually have a need for incredible vision, which T. rex didn't share. Rex wasn't hunting field mice from 500 feet in the air while moving at 45 mphThe hawk comparison is faulty. Rex had good vision for a theropod, but that was probably shit compared to a hawk.
>yet another professaar of therapodology thread about guessing at unknowable soft tissue characteristicsseethe when you have a t rex mummy fags
>>4834049>seethe when you have a t rex mummy fagsnot sure if sarcasm or ironythere are currently 2 published T. rex partial mummies. One went public last month.
>>4834060Then you should be able to provide pictures of both and post something interesting for once instead of arguing with yourself
>>4834065>post something interestingI lost my crayons, I cannot post anything that would interest you.
>No, I don't have anything interesting to postarguing with yourself it is thenhave fun
>>4834092>projectionfag projects
>>4834095But I do have something interesting to postCeiling pitbull is in ur ceilingsolving ur voyeurism problems
>>4834099
>/an/ can post facebook pet memes easier than they can post actual paleontological factsKek just goes to show its all a larp
>>4834103>/an/ can post facebook pet memes easier than they can post actual paleontological factswe've been discussing one T. rex partial mummy since 2011 shortly after it was publishedwe've been discussing the second partial mummy since 2012, a full 12 years before it was published.if people don't know of them by now, or don't realize they're mummies, that's their problem.
>>4834104you can always post them instead of “we”ing your way into other peoples accomplishmentsi already found both i just want to see if you can:^)
>>4834110>you can always post them instead of “we”ing your way into other peoples accomplishmentsI know a suspiciously large amount of insider info on Larson's accomplishments. I have since I began posting here in 2011 and broke embargo on one of "his" papers from 2012-2017.
>>4834112>*larps*concession accepted
>>4834114
>>4834114the good old daysnotice this fossil STILL HASN'T BEEN PUBLISHED IN A JOURNALso /an/ remains completely unaware of itit was mentioned in passing in Bell et al (2017). But since it was still for sale at that time it couldn't be formally described.Now it's found a home in a museum, and will likely be published this year.
>>4834127>it was mentioned in passing in Bell et al (2017). But since it was still for sale at that time it couldn't be formally described.that post is from 2016, a good year BEFORE Bell et al (Including Larson) published.someone on /an/ knows an awful lot about T. rex mummies, and it isn't (You)>>4834114
>>4834129>someone on /an/ knows an awful lot about T. rex mummies, and it isn't (You)That certainly doesn't prove that I'm a dinosaur paleontologistit merely proves I attended one of Larson's lectures and/or personally communicated with him about the fossil.Though I don't imagine any non-paleontologists are attending Larson's lectures or talking with him about unpublished T. rex mummies he's found. That would be weird.
>>4834114Here's a shot of me discussing the topic in 2015with bugguywho sounds exactly like paleoschizo in this conversationright down to paleoschizo's "scutes aren't scales" bullshitodd.I wonder what bugguy thought about the mummy I told him about in 2015 finally getting released to the public last month? I bet he feels a bit dumb for denying it even exists.
>>4834114you got really quiet there paleoschizo/bugguywhat happened?did you lose an argument in your head after thinking you won an argument in your head?
>>4834114anyways>be me>year: 2015 AD>location: /an/>tell users about unpublished T. rex mummy>get called a lying faggot by bugguy/paleoschizo and Trey the Complainer>EIGHT FUCKING YEARS LATER>the mummy I mentioned is released to the public>tripfaggot that didn't believe me is proven wrongI play a very, very long game.
I see a lot of schizo replies and larping but no mummies ITTWhoever this weirdo is impersonating, I hope he files a defamation suit
>>4834149How do you impersonate something someone knows that other people cannot know?
>>4834150>Be you>A college student>Sign up for a paleontology course>TA/instructor pisses you off, calls you a retard, fails you>hahaha you think you got me to straighten out sucker but little did you know im a 4chan schizo>Use university resources to keep up on his research>"Impersonate" him maintaining a vague semblance of plausible deniability and going through lots of proxies>Call random people dogfuckers, have meltdowns about "white males", and other nonsense>Periodically remind everyone that you are implying that you are him>Nonetheless remain unable to prove anything because you no longer have access to anything but memories and google>End result:>nobody follows up on it and you accomplished nothing but wasting your timeI don't know what else it could be because if you're telling the truth there's about 200 desuarchive links that would end your career and your personal life forever.
>>4834149>Whoever this weirdo is impersonating, I hope he files a defamation suitnobody is going to sue me because those are my postsand if 4chan keeps records that far back, all that will come out in court is that those are my posts.
>>4834160You hope a court of law requests that 4chan prove you're unhinged and go on racist/dogfucking rants?Yeah I hope larson's buddy files a defamation suit. I personally won't do anything because even drawing real life attention to it would be vindicating you.
>>4834158close. Very close. Except I don't hate anyone and have broken embargo on at least 3 papers here.>if you're telling the truth there's about 200 desuarchive links that would end your career and your personal life forever.you assume that because you think I am several personas that I am not.I don't bother trying to prove I'm not the people you think I am. But if it became public we'd very quickly find out who several of those posters are, and they're not me.
>>4834163>You hope a court of law requests that 4chan prove you're unhinged and go on racist/dogfucking rants?I expect that would be a much bigger threat to you than to me.I talk about dinosaurs, and that's about it.
>>4834164Keep on cycling through your personas. It's the same every thread.You always come up short on material because you've never been who you want us to think you are. You can only talk about things you happen to know through contact with people who are actually accomplished (and legitimately too busy to post here, this is a site for neets, day traders, IT help desk mooks, and other low accomplishment high reward types).
>>4834169>You can only talk about things you happen to know through contact with people who are actually accomplished (and legitimately too busy to post here,yesIt would be weird for those people to be in contact with me if I wasn't a dinosaur paleontologist though. Do you suppose I am an accountant specializing in saving money for theropod scientists or something?
>>4834173I suppose you went to college and rubbed shoulders with someone who doesn't post on /an/ 24/7, and the best case scenario is you're just a nutcase instead of actively trying to ruin some random paleontologists life
>>4834186several someones, I studied theropods in the US.that's not a huge crowd of people.but yes. I have no accomplishments of my own, and relatively few publications. I'm not trying to ruin anyone's life, and if I'm doxxed all a person is going to find is that I am who I have always said I am.
>>4834187At any point where you are telling a story, I am not believing it. I don't believe people who talk forever. I believe people who present something real. Mostly, you just posture.The least embarrassing story I can believe is that you are trying to co-opt someone elses work to look cool on the internet. But insanity follows you wherever you go, so, who knows how bad it really is
>>4833906This. Half of this modern junk is theory based on theory based on theory based on some guy who wanted to leave his mark by changing the way dinosaurs are supposed to work.
>>4834195>insanity follows you wherever you go,I call him paleoschizo, or bugguy. But you can call him whatever you want.>>4834198>some guy who wanted to leave his mark by changing the way dinosaurs are supposed to work.it's a requirement of the job. We're literally required to go debunk something.in my post there I am debunking the debunking of the debunking
>>4834201>I call him...you.
>>4834202to the uneducated even an expert looks like a fool. Or a crazy person.Only a true moron would mistake me for paleoschizo, but the board is chock full of morons such as yourself.
>>4834203You expect me to assume a rational actor. I do not assume you are a rational actor. I assume you may be so unhinged you actually have DID and not a case of aspie boredom.Anyways, put up - pics, scans, links, not claims - or shut up. I dislike larpers who make vague references and "if you were in the know you'd know" posts.
>>4834205>I dislike larpers who make vague references and "if you were in the know you'd know" posts.I literally left the T. rex mummy hanging for 10 years without posting pics or links. only to be proven right in the end.that is much funnier to me than trying to educate a bunch of people who demand proof of everything, including literal secrets.
>>4834206Yeah yeah nice monologue>I just went to college for this, for at least one semester, and overheard some actual research a few times. Maybe I actually know the guy and I'm not trying to ruin his career. Maybe I just like stroking my e-peen. Maybe I'm crazy. You'll never know!Rumplestiltskin ass retard
>>4834208What it actually is->Nobody irl is impressed with my accomplishments>Go on 4chan>NO WAY YOU'RE A THEROPOD PALEONTOLOGIST THAT'S UNBELIEVABLE>Instant gratificationyou find my mundane life unbelievable. That's immensely satisfying.
>>4834210you being anything but an unemployed nut who poses on 4chan is unbelievable. its not that anyone thinks paleontology is impressive. you just dont act anything like a functional human being and are too retarded to have a GED.
>>4834219>>4834203>to the uneducated even an expert looks like a fool. Or a crazy person
>>4834221you can repeat your adage all you want but it doesnt change that you’re a larper and literally are a crazy person lmao
>>4834222You can't tell me from the dogfucking/cat hating/vegan thread making/pitbull posting/chinesefossilsareallfake paleoschizoor you are himeither way you're a fucking retard.
>>4834223You dont hate cats, paleoschizo. You get unreasonably angry if people simply dont think they’re all that great. Keep track of your personas better.
>>4834225why are you addressing yourself, schizo?you accuse everyone else of your own insanity.
I leave for 20 minutes and the guy who swears he isn't nuts is already going nuts.You'd be less angry if you acted like a normal person>yes, i know ____ about t. rex, here's an excerpt from the paper _____ by _____ et alIt's that simple bud but then you don't get to say "eet wuz a soshul experiment hehehehehehe"
>>4834229>I leave for 20 minuteswe all wish
>>4834231Looks like it was actually 24:03. Missed me that much?Anyways you're clearly totally fucking bonkers.
>>4834234you can't pretend to be multiple people when you've been posting here for 12 years straight and your entire vocabulary is catalogued thousands of times over.There simply aren't that many retards here, let alone retards that have been here over a decade.
>>4834239>third paleoschizo persona enters the chat
Post cool T. rex images
>>4834239Who do you think I am? Keep going nuts. On the one hand I want to drop the truth to watch you freak out and start schizo theorycrafting. On the other hand, nah. Watching your insanity stagnate will be more fun. God knows you're dangerous.Anyways all you have to do is act like a normal person, but you're really not one. Try to be better.
>>4834250I've plugged your text and paleoschizos into a text analysis program. Word frequency, vocabulary, reading difficulty levels, education level.what do you suppose it said?
>>4834252You're NUTS
>>4834254somebody here certainly is
>>4834255It's you.
>>4834257keep telling yourself that. It's probably for the best.
>>4834263You know how you thought you were laughing about your unrevealed sekrit paleontology knowledge and how cool you were for knowing what your teacher was up to before everyone else? That's what I'm feeling right now, with you thinking i'm whoever the fuck.
>>4834265>with you thinking i'm whoever the fuck.I think you're the person that's been copying me for over a decade now. No finer homage can be paid.
>>4834265>how cool you were for knowing what your teacher was up to before everyone elsethis is how I know you're not a paleontologistdo you know why? What did you say there that makes no sense to a paleontologist?
>>4834266>You think you're smart>You think I'm copying you>I'm not>You don't know who I am at all>I think you're nutsFlattering or insulting?>>4834273I'm not a paleontologist and never have been. I do think it's hilarious that your entire schtick boils down to this>i knew about the paper bro>you didnt because you're not a paleontologist['s student]I just wanted to see a dinosaur mummy man. Something concrete and interesting instead of one idiot bickering with himself because he lost all his vegan/cat/dog arguments. But nope, gotta deal with the batshit insane DID case before you can even get an author for the paper, if you get anything.
>>4834275>you didnt because you're not a paleontologist['s student]c'mon it's funnygo on Larson's wikipedia page and see what school he taught at. It'll make you laugh.He's not my teacher. He's not anyone's teacher. He is a friend and someone I have worked with in the past. >before you can even get an author for the paper, if you get anything.>>4834127>notice this fossil STILL HASN'T BEEN PUBLISHED IN A JOURNAL>>4834110>i already found both i just want to see if you can
>>4834275also>>4834127>it was mentioned in passing in Bell et al (2017).You're complaining about your own inability to read. That's funny, but it's not my fault.I gave you the authors from the very start.
>>4834275>before you can even get an author for the paper, if you get anything.so to sum up>Larson published one mummy in 2009 with Carpenter>Larson published the second mummy in lecture in 2015 and 2016>Larson, Bell, and others published briefly on both mummies in 2017>The second mummy was released for public viewing last monthThese are the hints I have given you. Including author's names. You don't have to argue with me for hours straight, I told you this information at the very start.
>>4834278link #3 isn't me:^) :^) :^)You don't like that face do you:^)>notice this fossil STILL HASN'T BEEN PUBLISHED IN A JOURNALYes one possibility I hold in consideration is that you rubbed shoulders with someone and parrot what you get from them to try and be cool on 4chan. Maybe he's your dad's best friend. Maybe he's your dad! Maybe you just overheard it and they don't actually know you. Who the fuck knows. All I know is you are curiously unable to do more than just claim. You're a sideshow. I had one question, wheres your soft tissue sperg, all you had to do washttps://royalsocietypublishing.org/doi/10.1098/rsbl.2017.0092I wasn't even involved in your eyeball argument. Shocking I know. I can look at T. rex and know there's no way that overgrown jock ostrich had or needed eyesight as good as a hawks. I already knew about its oversized olfactory bulb, and that while it probably had to have good sight compared to its contemporaries, because being tall, blind, and decently fast is not a good combination, it was most likely not hyper-specialized for hunting from 250 feet in the air while moving at 120mph in a full dive. I also know this is pure "common sense" speculation and only retards argue over it.>>4834279I did get the authors. They can be googled. I did get that was "new observations". I did in fact know about the dueling dinosaurs and the skin impressions. But I didn't ask for passing mention. I asked for the resident gloating child to put up something more concrete instead of hints. I thought you knew about what is normally meant by a mummy, but instead you just overheard that some more t rex skin was found oh well, I also already knew the phylogeny is fucked by featherfaggotry and not every theropod ever evolved from a bird, just that a lineage of feathered theropods certainly existed, or there would not be birds. I just wanted to see a god damn t. rex mummy not your mental condition
>>4834275if you're having trouble tracking the progression, be aware that Larson considers the second mummy to be "Nanotyrannus." This makes hunting down older references easier. and newer discussions of the second mummy such as this onehttps://www.mdpi.com/2813-6284/2/1/1
>>4834285He did it. About fucking time. Any idiot can throw out a hint to get someone to do their research for them. If you know, you can just post what you learned it from.This is literally all I asked for. The rest was kind of like cow tipping. I'm glad you found the time to finally do your research.
>>4834283>I thought you knew about what is normally meant by a mummyI was waiting for that one. >No true mummy fallacyI even prepared for it by saying PARTIAL mummythanks, that's BINGO!
>>4834287>you can just post what you learned it from.You think I learned in 2015 information published a couple months ago?
>>4820736Fuck you science kike
>>4834288You may have dropped the act part of the way.>>4834290>You think I learned in 2015 information published a couple months ago?I think you vaguely remember some 2015 information that your more qualified friends were discussing and had to think and find it. Thanks. >nick longrichaaaah I hope that's not you but if it were i'd believe it
>>4834294>aaaah I hope that's not you but if it were i'd believe itkek true>I think you vaguely remember some 2015 information that your more qualified friends were discussing and had to think and find it.we can go back to my 2015 comments again and see if you'd like. I have no trouble finding them in the archive since I wrote them.
>>4834296Smart of you to work against your failing memory and shitpost about overheard paleontology rumors ASAP.
>>4834298I have near perfect recall of what I read and write.
>>4834300>I have bookmarksknext time you can lower your blood pressure by just posting sources when you claim to know about an semi-obscure partial mummy of a tyrannosaurid
>>4834302>next time you can lower your blood pressure by just posting sources when you claim to know about an semi-obscure partial mummy of a tyrannosaurid>>4834127>notice this fossil STILL HASN'T BEEN PUBLISHED IN A JOURNAL>so /an/ remains completely unaware of it>it was mentioned in passing in Bell et al (2017).literally 4 1/2 hours ago
>>4834305>i gave you a hint>why didnt you do my research for meIt's funner to mess with you.And finally >>4834285It even has picturesGood job
>>4834307>It even has picturesIf you want to go back even furtherit used to be called the "Bloody Mary" fossil. Before it went up for sale.the archives don't go that far back, but me and bugguy/paleoschizo were arguing it even then.>>4834283>You don't like that face do you:^)I'm the one that first used it here. I love it. It tells me either you've been here that long or you picked up a meme I started ages ago.
>>4834311>I'm the one that first used it here. I love itthree guesses who I was talking to when I first posted it
Mom he's going full schizo again
>>4834315oldfags knowSome might even remember the Cereal Guy meme. It was drawn by Lego_Robotbetter known on /an/ and /sci/ as MadScithe fag that built hampture. The underwater hamster enclosures.
>>4834315I posted:^) in a response to bugguyhe started posting it daily"someone" has been posting it ever since.
>>4834311You did not start :^) as a memeIt predates you and 4chan
>>4834326He has narcissism. He thinks he knows every “famous” person (it seems he learns a new one he knew every month) and invented every meme. Delusions of grandeur.
>>4834329He once thought he was actually nick longrich. Why would anyone want to be nick longrich? I don’t and i am nick longrich.
removing poster counts was really great, thanks hiroshimoot.
>>4834326>It predates you and 4chan>>4834311>I'm the one that first used it here.>heresee if you can spot your mistake>>4834354>He once thought he was actually nick longrich. Why would anyone want to be nick longrich? I don’t and i am nick longrich.kekpretty sure that was actually nick longrich. I'm way older than that dude.>>4834329>He thinks he knows every “famous” personnope.If you check back, I know very few famous people, and all of them are (very old) theropod paleontologists except for one.you'll also find all of the famous theropod paleontologists I know worked at one place.
>>4834387
>>4834329>He thinks he knows every “famous” person (it seems he learns a new one he knew every month)I'm sure they'd be flattered you heard of them.But the simple fact is way back in the 1990's when I was studying theropodsthey were the ONLY people studying them. So it's not some weird coincidence I met them. There wasn't anyone else doing it.
>>4834395>they were the ONLY people studying them.1st gen->Bakker>Ostrom>Welles2nd gen->Madsen>Paul>Horner>Holtz>Chatterjee3rd gen->Carpenter>Larson>Foster>Kirkland4th gen->Chure>A couple other random Allosaurus authors5th gen->Who are these kids?>Get off my lawn!
>>4834377That didn't matter, everyone accusing everyone of samefagging is a staple across all boards.
>>4834405>everyone accusing everyone of samefagging is a staple across all boards.so is posting from multiple IP's either by accident or on purpose. I post from 2 devices with dynamic IP and from 3 cell phones that change IP several times per day if I don't travel and several times per hour if I do. I've been as many as 100 ID's in a single thread without even trying. The counter was always bullshit.
>>4834329Sending an email to someone is knowing them, didn’t you know that?
>>4834411Yes, Larson breaks embargo and shares unpublished info with everyone who sends him an emailI swear you guys are fucking retardswe actually tested this in 2016I told anon to EMAIL LARSON ABOUT THE DUELING DINOS MUMMIESyou know what happened?Larson straight up lied to him.I told him the truththis is all in the archives.
>>4834411>Sending an email to someone is knowing them,>>4834413>I told anon to EMAIL LARSON ABOUT THE DUELING DINOS MUMMIES>you know what happened?>Larson straight up lied to him.this post here>>4834118>email him and askhe didI know he did because Larson told me.
>>4834415>I know he did because Larson told me.and that's how I learned paleoschizo's real name.
>>4834415>Larson straight up lied to him.He didn't actually lieHe said>I have a very interesting paper about feathers in T. rex coming out soonwhat anon didn't know is that was also my paper. And what it said about T. rex feathers is it didn't have any.just like Lindsay Zanno has a very interesting paper about T. rex feathers coming out soonspoiler alert:it didn't have any.
