What's with those long feathers on the forelimbs of raptors? Why would this winglike structure be present before flying? This never made any sense to me.
Allows it to launch whirlwind attacks.
You think they evolved flight first and then grew wings after?
>>4933697I mean they have / are represented with all those differentiated flight feathers on their forelimbs. What purpose would this serve on the grounded animal?
>>4933699Flaps to aid in changing their direction of movement.
>>4933699Ask all the flightless birds around today who have flight feathers
>>4933707Kiwi completely lost their wings for one, the ostrich repurposed them to some kind of fag mating display, emu also completely lost them.I guess kakapo still have wings but they lost the flying ability very recently?>>4933705Maybe
>>4933697personally I subscribe to the theory that most dromaeosaurids are secondarily flightless!>>4933692to answer OP's question, you are most likely correct that terrestrial dromaesaurids especially the larger ones would've had arm feather more similar to ostriches and other ratites instead of proper pennaceous feathers but the current art trend is ground eagles and they've played a significant role in making people accept feathers on CERTAIN dinosaurs. is that kinda fucked up? yeah it is but it does look cool.
>>4933692Sorry, you're not allowed to have this opinion.
>>4933692>facial fat pads completely depletedwhy do paleoartists always make their dinosaur faces as emaciated as possible?
>>4933692They flap to get more air when they jump.>>4933838reddit pseud
>>4933699>all those differentiated flight feathersthose aren't flight feathersmystery solved, you don't know what flight feathers are.nobody here does.>>4933838pennaceous feathers had to evolve BEFORE flight could, meaning bird ancestors were flightless and had pennaceous feathers on the arms. Weird the creationist OP doesn't understand this. Organs have to evolve BEFORE they become fully useful. It's one of the great mysteries of evolution.also quill knobs are useless on plumes. They only make sense if the feathers supported body weight. Meaning raptors had pennaceous feathers on the arms, but probably not flight feathers. OP doesn't know the difference between flight feathers and pennaceous feathers, but he's got bigger problems if he doesn't understand that flight feathers had to evolve BEFORE flight could happen. Probably long before. flight feathers and flight didn't just magically appear at the same time. That's creationism. Evolution says one of them had to evolve first, and it was useless for its current role when it first evolved. The blows OP's tiny little mind.
>>4933871>Evolution says one of them had to evolve first, and it was useless for its current role when it first evolved.dinosaurs had to evolve flight feathers on their arms BEFORE they could fly.and when they first evolved, those flight feathers were NOT used for flight.
>>4933699>What purpose would this serve on the grounded animal?that is the correct question. we know they had them, and we know they couldn't fly. So what purpose did they serve?A few dozen different ideas have been proposed. Catching insects or prey, steering while running, flapping to increase jump distance, sexual display, combat, thermoregulation, waste removal, gliding off trees and hills, communication, noise, protection from parasites, probably a few others I'm forgetting.and they may have had multiple uses. Organs normally have more than one use.
>>4933863Dinosaurs aren't related to squamates
>>4933692Display. Any retarded structure on animals can be easily explained with "the opposite sex finds it hot"
>>4933888>displayBased on what evidence?>B-but what ifBased on what evidence?
>>4933893Any retarded structure on animals can be explained with "the opposite sex finds it hot". This also applies to living animals btw
>>4933932But it doesn't seem like a retarded structure at all, but something that has a big impact on movement/hunting behavior
>>4933710>the ostrich repurposed them to some kind of fag mating displayOstriches also use their wings for turning at speed.could also be useful for leaping onto large prey
>>4933957they also use them for thermoregulation and waste disposal. And as threats.>>4933883>Dinosaurs aren't related to squamatessure they are.every living thing is related
>>4933871>Organs have to evolve BEFORE they become fully useful. It's one of the great mysteries of evolution.Organs evolve for a particular use and then get repurposed and adapt to the new use. Human hands were originally used for brachiation and also for grasping of objects; later they became used exclusively for manipulation and tool use. Similarly, feathers probably served as insulation (note that raptors were turkey-sized), then gliding and finally for flight.
>>4934010>Organs evolve for a particular use and then get repurposed and adapt to the new use.yes but this is too much for OP to understand.If he could understand all that, he wouldn't be asking his question.also raptors probably didn't use their arm feathers for gliding or insulation, so their original uses remain an open question. They're one example of an organ whose original uses are not known or obvious. Lots of guesses what they were used for, but no solid facts.
>>4934010>note that raptors were turkey-sizedexcept for all the ones that weren't.they also apparently had arm quills.
>>4934010>Organs evolve for a particular usealso at the most basic level this is falseevery possible organ evolves, and the ones that find a use survive. Organs can't evolve for a purpose.that's OP's mistake. Flight feathers didn't evolve for the purpose of flight. They evolved for no reason and then found a use in flight.
>>4934021Dont even ask these people how bats got wings. Or how marine mammals get flippers. And then post a picture of a deformed man with webbing and say "NOPE". Its not funny to watch them cope. Its sad actually.
>>4934048At this point OP is just doing a roll call thread. This exact same topic has been discussed at least 20 times over the last 8 years according to the archives. I know he's just trolling but I do like the topic. Teleological language in evolutionary description is a fun troll. It's very difficult to explain evolution without using words like "purpose" and "design," and even "use." Hell, even the idea of an advantage implies a fixed goal and purpose that simply doesn't exist.
>>4933863>why do paleoartists always make their dinosaur faces as emaciated as possible?probably because the antorbital fenestra that takes up most of the face was hollow and full of air. Also it probably sucked in and out as the animal breathed, since it was the nasal passage.
>>4933692It's bullshit. Flightless birds after separating from their ancestors for a few million years don't have them. Ducks have literally done this multiple times. Animals that are nearly 100 million years distant from them CERTAINLY would not have this trait.Threadly Reminder: The Archaeoraptor hoax was never "unmasked" it was certified. Microraptor is fruit of the poison tree and is the only evidence for Dromaeosaurs having this wing bullshit.Come at me angry retard bot.
>>4933707But they don't have flight feathers, you halfwit. Flightless birds with actual asymmetrical flight feathers are ALL VERY recent descendants of flying animals. Like within 5 million years. Once you start getting more than this that type of feather DISAPPEARS FROM THE ANIMAL.
>>4933871Here comes the angry reddit bot. Bots need to be banned from this website.
>>4934075>Bots need to be banned from this website.I feel like you get banned a hundred times more often than I do.>>4934074>Once you start getting more than this that type of feather DISAPPEARS FROM THE ANIMAL.truewhich means they're not that distant
Op here just to clear it up, I am not a featherschizoposter, nor am I a creationist, this raptor wing thing was just puzzling for me for a long time. When I was a kid I thought these reconstructions were silly but then I learned that there are actual nobs on the arm bones and very strong evidence for these wing liek forelimbs.
>>4934086fair enoughas anons have said there are three possibilities1. They evolved from birds (fairly recently)2. They were evolving towards birds (also closely in time)3. The pennaceous feathers had some other use that allowed them to persist for almost 100 million years despite being no good for flighteach of these interpretations has advantages and disadvantages.
>>4934058Lol I'm not trolling, I am genuinely interested. Like how those flightless birds ended up losing all their wings, except for the ostrich who:>>4933957Why didn't those other birds like kazuar or emu benefit from the wings at all?And the raptor wings are so complex with differentiated feathers, it's a ridiculously handy structure to evolve into wings but no apparent ground use unless the jumping / direction changing theory hold true.I thought about the secondary flightless / evolved from gliding raptor theory but afaik there isn't much evidence for that.
>>4934088ultimately paleoschizo is right here>>4934071>>4934074raptors had pennaceous feathers on their arms almost 100 million years AFTER birds evolved flight.meaning there must have been some other use for them.
>>4934087>1. They evolved from birds (fairly recently)no, you fucking moronare you one of those retards that thinks maniraptora came from mysterious basal archosaurs?
>>4934093I said it's one possibilityI didn't say I believe it to be true.one of the problems you have is you can't imagine stating a possibility you don't personally believe to be true.
oh god the schizo thinks he's talking to a specific person and double spacing all his posts again
>>4934100I always double space my posts, and the person I'm talking to knows I recognize him.he and I BOTH use caps lock for emphasis
>>4934102No we don't.Only I double space my posts, you are trying to mimic me.
>>4934103kekI was here before you, so you are copying me
Brian Engh sloppa time?
I am a mossad agent posting from eglin airforce baseThe namewilloughbyemily willoughbybut my family used to call me brian before i started hrtand i am here to tell you, yes you, the stupid person i recognizethat birds are dinosaurs. sexier dinosaurs. and cats are dumb as hell.
>>4934110I agree with you, Emily. I'm Harry in the cubicle 12 down from yours. Which dinosaur do you want to fuck the most? For me, it's utahraptor.
>>4933710>ostrich repurposed them to some kind of fag mating displayMaybe it's the rare case of superficial mating-selection becoming actually useful.
>>4934086"Quill knobs" were also found on Concavenator. How'd that turn out?
>>4934089OR, bear with me, paleontologists are just lying, which is their bread and butter and always has been. People that think scientists are more honest than politicians are retards.
>>4933707They are secondarily flightless. While dromaeosaurs were flightless by deafult.
>>4934251Maybe superficial mating selection is actually a mechanism to speed up the emergence if new traits.
>>4934110>be absent on the board for a year or so>come here to make a neat Allosaurus thread>visit the nearest dinothread>...>reddit-spacing moron is still having the same meltdown just like a year agoThis is both funny and scary at the same time. *Btw, you're an unironical tranny and a buttsniffer.
>>4934315Reddit spacer sniffs cat butts to up his test levels. True fact.
>>4933692one big thing that a lot of extant raptorial birds use their wings for is stabilization while grappling prey on the ground, something that is also applicable to... raptors
>>4934294The suspected quill knobs on concavenator face into the body, so it is unlikely they’re actually quill knobs. On dromaeosaurs they do not, and since we know some had wings then it’s likely they are actually quill knobs
>>4934420>so it is unlikely they’re actually quill knobs.doesn't work that wayif they're quill knobs facing one way they're quill knobs facing the other way.WE don't get to pick and choose.either they're quill knobs or they aren't.feathers facing medially aren't impossible.just a failed plan concavenator is probably mis-classified.It's probably a raptor of some sort. because feathers
>>4934420>>4934502alternative is concavenator doesn't have quill knobs and neither does velociraptorand that's fucking unlikely because dakotamost likely those are quill knobs and they're backwards on concavenator
>>4934508>most likely those are quill knobs and they're backwards on concavenatormeaning concavenator ISN'T an allosauroidoh no allosauroidea and tyrannosauroidea are wastebasket taxa
>>4934511>oh no allosauroidea and tyrannosauroidea are wastebasket taxawhich everyone already knows
>>4934513>which everyone already knowspublished repeatedly in blogs and on 4chan almost ten years ago
>>4933699Well to their credit.Some dromaeosaurs are absolutely associated with flying/flight capabilities. Or at the absolute worst, could glide well.>Microraptor>Sinornithosaurus>ChangyuraptorI know sinornithosaurus specifically was a glider, but still.>>4933863Not defending it, but its AI generated, one of its killing claws is bent upwards.
>>4934514>and on 4chan almost ten years agoI personally refuted Rauhut's interpretation of Tyrannosauroidea and Tyrannosauridae on 4chan ten years agowhich has since been prove true.
>>4934071
>>4934517>which has since been prove true.I've got a few papers which were published on /an/ years before they were published to science.T. rex non-feathers were published here 2 years before they made the papers.
>>4934519>>4934517Oh god its delusional narcissist guy again
>>4934537If I can prove my "delusions" are true does that make you delusional?archives existI can EASILY prove you're delusional
>>4934537Do you want proof that I published T. rex lack of feathers on /an/ before I published the paper?or would you like proof that I published criticism of Rauhut's tyrannosauroid before it hit the papers?I can easily post proof of either one because archives
>>4934538You have done this before and it was determined you are pretending to own a former associates accomplishments. Please, take your meds.
>>4934542>you are pretending to own a former associates accomplishments.lolthis is why I allow myself to be doxxedto prove I am who I say I am
>chewing gum commercial
>>4934591>the literally hundreds of times you've been wrong and won't admit it to yourself
>>4934598You don’t even know who you’re replying to schizo
>>4934601You're not a personSchizo aren't people
