>largest predatory dinosaur ever>bigger specimens found all the time>recently found to have hunted and killed adult individuals of large herbivore species by biting them in the face>by far the most popular dinosaur>if you combine the popularity of the rest of the top ten dinosaurs, they’re about as popular as T. rex is on its own>has a stranglehold on media depictions in every form, in spite of the small arms>studies will specifically include rex because it increases the odds of the study being funded significantly >is responsible for a lot of interest in dinosaurs in general and helped push the field forward in many waysHow is one species so influential on the field it’s a part of?
>ruined forever
>>5106274dont forget the lips.
>>5106274The random ahh sakura blossoms are the fruitiest part of this. What were they thinking?
>>5106245That's because, in reality, animals are as cool as kids say. It's retards that want to tell you that in reality they are hecking wholesome chungusses
>>5106303On the second half of points. I mean are you not looking at your own pic? how can you see that skeleton mount and not think it is the coolest thing to ever exist?
>>5106304their arms look stupid
>>5106303>>5106304It was more rhetorical tbqh
>>5106284Chinese dinosaurs in Japan?
>>5106284>ahhHere comes my dick! Keep that mouth open wide!
>>5106245it is called REX for a reason.
>>5106303Animals don't fucking start random dino battles for the enjoyment of some 5 year old little shit, they care about being injured and don't want to fucking die.
>>5106725Yeah and we also have evidence a T. rex crushed an adult Edmontosaurus skull with its jaws. Stop being an extremist retard.
>>5106756While the edmontosaurus was aliveImportant distinction
>>5106245It's a motherfuckin t-rex
It has the most aura
>>5106756Yeah, and then the defining injury that killed an Allosaurus was an infected toe.
>>5106789Not the CBT thagomizer?
>>5106274No anon, having feathers and lips does not nullify any of the feats listed by OP
>>5106245It's hard for me to appreciate T. rex unless I'm looking at the skeleton. It was an incredibly cool animal and paleoart can't do it justice.
>>5106700Crunchy.
>>5106245My utter limp, fragile and meek twink body is collapsing on my self as we speak, spinobros....
>>5106791Sadly, that has yet to get an adaptation to make it widely known.
>>5106854I-I can’t run away fast enough, my legs are too small!
>>5106864>>5106854Kek
>>5106245that's nothing>strongest bite force of any land animal ever>potentially the best vision of any animal ever>unusually long cochlea for hearing footsteps>unusually large olfactory bulbs for smelling prey>largest encephalization of any dinosaur aside from a few small dromaeosaurs
>>5106245Was there any event similar to the theft of the Mona Lisa that contributted to it's popularity? No one cared for the Mona Lisa before the theft but now it's the most famous piece of art of human history.
>>5106854>just wants to eat fish in the marsh>gets dragged into an endless monkey dick waving competition millions of years after its deathSpino doesn't deserve this
>>5106901It being a movie star
>>5106901In the 1950s American oil companies used dinosaurs extensively to promote their companies. They only knew about like 5 dinosaurs. T. rex was the only giant predator they advertised
>>5106845it literally does
>>5106894>>unusually large olfactory bulbs for smelling prey>>largest encephalization of any dinosaur aside from a few small dromaeosaurswould be impressive except these are the same thingsolfactory bulbs are generally calculated as part of encephalization even though they don't add to intelligence at all
>>5106284>The random ahh sakura blossoms are the fruitiest part of this. What were they thinking?The oldest known fossil flowers were tree flowers similar to cherry blossoms. This fossil was from the Hell Creek formation, same place T. rex was from.Tyrannosaurs have always been illustrated alongside cherry blossoms, it's a very old and probably accurate depiction.
>>5107030Dragged into it by an Epstein client of all people.
>>5107092Notice the difference in skill and tastefulness between the two art pieces
>>5106845Good thing it didn't have feathers and lips are not a proven fact
>>5107097>lips are not a proven facteveryone forgets that Daspletosaurus skull with the face preserved.It's like the feather debate of a few years back.we already know it didn't have lips, we have fossils of it. But people are going to ignore the fossil and argue about lips anyways.
>>5107099>people who get autistic over “accuracy” ignore the actual fossilsPaleontology becoming a fandom was a mistake.
>>5106274Why is this meme still perpetuated when no palaeontologist believes it had feathers, and no modern Dino show depiction shows that.>>5106725Then why do we find dinosaurs with injuries from fights? Why did dinosaurs evolve defense mechanisms and hunting tools, just like all animals have done?Why arr you gay?>>5107301>>5107099It is because of the type of teeth it had. They were likely protected as they were not fast growing and easily replaced, like crocodiles or sharks.Lips are something found in reptiles throughout history, and mammals, and there is no reason why it wouldn't have them to protect its most useful tools. It was Hollywood that have them big shredding-curved teeth that stuck out, and it looks retarded.This t-rex looked great to me.
>>5107092Those are Magnolias.
>>5107311I could do without the cope peach fuzz and the legs seem too short for me but other than that it is a good model
>>5107082I think I know which are the other 4
>>5107311>They were likely protected as they were not fast growing and easily replaced,I see you know nothing about theropodsbroken teeth are by far the most common theropod fossil found. They broke them constantly. Every time they ateand again, we have a fossil preserving the facethey didn't have lips
>>5107740There are also fossils of growing teeth that are rubbing against the already established teeth which is pretty cool and sounds painful
>>5107605
>>5107740>>5107740>and again, we have a fossil preserving the faceWhich one is this
>>5107740>I see you know nothing about theropodsHe’s not wrong though. T. rex had a really slow tooth replacement rate compared to something like a crocodile or allosaurus
>>5107753There isn’t one
>>5106245Spinosaurus went woke, T-rex resisted the feathers.
>>5106274They're unironically cooler this way. The traditional brown lizard depiction is boring
>>5108540no they aren't
>>5108540Stop lying
>>5106245>unsubstantiated claims perpetrated by a sci-fi novel and its movie adaptation
>>5108564Jurassic park literally says none of those things.
>>5109400Ough
>>5107311>whyBecause some people think depicting an animal as less „cool“ must automatically be more accurate.Just like people are more likely to think a car is safe if it’s ugly
Please rate my reconstruction
>>5111627Ugly = accurate is so goddamn gay and retarded.It’s as if we don’t have animals that look cool right now. Or do they want to say visually pleasing animals are inaccurate?It’s like the American museum of natural history vs the field museum with their rex models. AMNH had a disgusting looking rex, while the field museum had a really cool looking rex that was actually more accurate than the ugly one.
>>5111696Animals aren't meant to look like movie monsters chud. There's no such thing as a monstrous-looking animal
>>5111717>dinosaurs couldn’t roar, modern reptiles can’t!>videos of gators roaring are readily available Do internet paleofags even look at extant animals?
>>5111729well gators and crocos dont roar like a lion, its more like a rumble, its closer to frogs, it just sounds meaner because theyre bigger
>>5111729Don't forget:>Dinosaurs couldn't roar, they would sound more like birds >Meanwhile birds:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7QxIv62-rq8https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jB1GyHGumkQHell that vulture at the end sounds very similar to the Spinosaurus from JP3
>>5111737If that sounds comes out of a 150 pound cassowary imagine what sound would come out of an 8+ ton theropod
Anyone else have this shit on vhs back in the day? https://youtu.be/ngVMwf9yRGU
>>5111740Fucking soul
>>5111756As a kid I never realized how disjointed it is>early flash animation music video to begin with (nothing to do with the rest of the film) >Ben savage has a room full of dinosaur stuff and can't figure out what to do his school report on>FINALLY decides to make it about dinosaurs >report is due TOMORROW MORNING>goes to sleep instead of grinding out the project>dreams about breaking open two rocks with a hammer >HORROR scene of a triceratops being eaten>jump-cut to the following morning and Ben savage has completed the entire report BEFORE school>jump-cut to a claymation video that was made almost a decade prior>HORROR claymation scenes of dinosaurs eating each other with excessive gore >credits
>>5106305Lets see your arms. I bet you have stupid arms
>>5106274This new Jehova Witnesses' pamphlets look better.
>>5111768N-no I don't
>>5111696It reminds me of medieval movies all beeing shit brown because „realism means lame“>>5111717I don’t even like this framing. Nobody „designed“ dinosaurs to look cool,People just find them cool. It’s weird modern „“paleoart“““ reconstructions that designed them to look stupid.And yeah it’s almost as if the concept of a „monster“ is based on real animals that you wouldn’t want to be locked in a cage with
>>5111740I had eyewitness dinosaurs
t rex is closer related to a penguin than it is to allosaurus. can you believe this shit
>>5111845Birds existed before Allosaurus
>>5111847That doesn't change that what anon said is true
>>5106284>ahhyou have to go back
>>5111908What anon said is neither true nor false. It's an undefined statement with no meaning
>>5111927true
>>5111847Define "bird",
>>5111945a feathered biped.
>>5111945Taxa can't be defined.They can only be described
>>5111947Behold: a bird
>>5108564truth nuke: jurassic park did nothing to boost or diminish the popularity of dinosaurs, all it did was cash in on an already popular concept. i am old enough to remember a time before JP came out and already there were kids everywhere who were crazy about dinosaurs, we had dinosaur cartoons, dinosaur movies, dinosaur toys, bands named after dinosaurs, brands named after dinosaurs, well before JP came out. JP has had a negligible impact on dinosaurs as a whole and both JP lovers and JP haters vastly overstate its importance as a cultural phenomenon, and i seethe every time that fucking movie is even brought up in any sort of relation to dinosaurs.
>>5112238People can't imagine life before they were born. I think I was 21 when the book was popular and by that time I had been interested in both dinosaurs and Michael Crichton books for most of my life
>>5111717>There's no such thing as a monstrous-looking animal>posts a monstrous-looking animal
>>5107092Sovl>>5106274Sovlless
>>5112247i think that was anons point
>>5111740I had this taped off the television. it was hosted by Christopher Reeves and it had a cool scenes with deinonychus and T Rex vs triceratops https://youtu.be/gYe3r-wH_1s?si=3P05TsY-IAeecKII
>>5106894>unusually long cocowo what's this
>>5112238Cope. There was an explosion of books, toys and games trying to ride on JP's success, all copying the JP dinosaur designs. There were tons of bootleg JP T-Rex toys, the Dino Crisis games pretty much use 1:1 JP designs etc etc. Even today on supposedly accurate dino documentaries, they always refer back the dinos JP made popular like Velociraptors as landmarks for normalfags to latch on to (picrel)
>>5112315Zoomers cannot comprehend a world they missed
>>5112238good times
>>5112238>>5112315The reasonable compromise (and actual reality) is that JP made dinos about 20% more popular while becoming a household name itself.
>>5112351In my experience JP made dinosaurs less popular.Since you guys were either children or not born yet your experience is different but not more accurate
>>5112384Bait or retardationCall it
>>5112457I can prove I was an adult when JP came out.Can you?
dinosaurs were hugely popular in the 80s but then their popularity was down by the end of the decade. Jurassic Park just brought their popularity back up
>>5112384Absolutely retarded
>>5112492Do you also believe in Santa Claus and think pogs are a great investment?The way you remember your childhood isn't exactly the way adults remember it
>>5106725Evidence?
>>5112315>big hollywood production got endlessly milked because of consumerismWhy are you acting like this is some kind of gotcha? The only reason it was milkable in the first place is because dinosaurs are always popular.Also if it was the JP franchise in particular that was popular and not just dinosaurs in general, why are the later JP movies all stinkers (with Rebirth straight-up a box office bomb), while Prehistoric Planet was such a big hit?
>>5112457>>5112492Do you also think that nobody cared about cars until Cars?
>>5112315He's right, JP just created a vector into an already popular fandom.
>>5112548That’s not the same as saying something like “cars made cars less popular”.If you believe that you have brain damage.
>>5112230Fuck off Diogenes nobody has time for your shit.
>>5112614The reason JP made dinosaurs less popular is because it took a serious scientific topic and chewed it up, took away all accuracy, and turned it into a crappy monster movie for children and retards. Which is exactly what it still is. It spawned entire generations of retards that only relate to dinosaurs in the context of JP movies and still think those movies are the most significant thing to ever happen to the public perception of dinosaurs. Like most of you fools.In reality it was a remarkable step forward for CGI and a huge step backwards for the popularity of dinosaurs among adults
>>5112614If "Cars" became so overwhelmingly famous that everyone related to vehicles as movie characters and debated whether their car is a Lightning McQueen or a Chip Hicks,Then yes. That would make liking cars much less cool and much less popularOf course nobody took "Cars" seriously the same way you tards take JP seriously
Imagine if every thread on /o/ inevitably turned into a debate about how accurate "Cars" was and whether or not Pixar intended it to be an accurate depiction of how cars look and actThat's the exact state of dinosaur discussion here and most places now
What JP did do was expand public awareness of more obscure dinosaurs. Most adults probably hadn't heard of dilophosaurus or spinosaurus before the movies. In the 80s and 90s people knew maybe a dozen dinosaurs and most of them were from the Morrison and hell creek.And since JP, perceived interest spiked to the point that the number of dinosaur paleontologists went from maybe a dozen to well over a thousand. New discoveries also increased to the point where we name more dino species in an average year than were named in the 100 years prior.But this also served to decrease popularity among adults by flooding the market to the point where nobody can keep up. Instead of knowing a lot about a few dinosaurs you instead know very little about over a thousand dinosaurs. It's difficult to keep interest in such a broad topic that's constantly expanding far faster than any one person can keep up with.
>>5112650This is also an obstacle to serious discussion here or any other forum with less than a few million users.You could post a few thousand dinosaur threads without even one of them raising any serious interest or discussion just because it's all obscure and new enough that most people don't have a opinion.The topics that are broad enough got several people to know about them and have an opinion on them are invariably shallow and already debated to death hundreds of times over both here and everywhere else.Which is the real reason JP constantly comes up. Not because it's interesting or impactfulJust because everyone has seen it and has an opinion on itIt's one of the few topics everyone knows about and can debate
>>5112652Though there's not much serious debate about JPEveryone knows it's deeply inaccurate. All you can really debate is whether or not it was ever intended to be accurate
>>5106245Yahweh
>>5112655>All you can really debate is whether or not it was ever intended to be accurateAnd this is key to understanding dinosaur popularity prior to JPIf you check out Crichton's books you'll see he was a very famous and popular author before JP. And back then writing a top selling novel and having it turned into a blockbuster movie was one of the very few ways an author could get rich.He was not in the habit of writing about dinosaurs, and arguably JP wasn't even a book about dinosaurs in particular.Crichton was very simply trying to get rich, and dinosaurs were already popular enough to serve as the vehicle of his success. He cashed in on the existing popularity of dinosaurs. Some would say that helped increase popularity, some would say it ruined it.But neither was Crichton's intention. He wanted to sell books so he chose an extremely popular topic to do it.
>>5112659Crichton wrote a formulaic novel about the hubris of controlling nature and the dangers of science and technologyIt became extremely popular because it tangentially included dinosaurs, and dinosaurs were immensely popular at the timeHe previously wrote pretty much the same novel about bees and nobody cared because bees simply weren't that popular or frightening
>>5112623>it took a serious scientific topic and chewed it up, took away all accuracyI'm the guy who said JP had no impact on the popularity of dinosaurs - but at the time JP's representation of dinosaurs was cutting edge and based on the latest science, with real paleontologists informing the designs of all the animals. At the time most cartoons still had dinosaurs dragging their tails around for instance.This is also why it's ironic when soifacing dinotubers today can't stop talking about how insanely inaccurate JP allegedly is and how it's not "true to science" - at the time, it WAS true to science, truer than any other depiction.
>>5112754It was purposefully inaccurate on a number of points. The size and intelligence of raptors being the most obvious purposeful inaccuracies but by no means the only ones.When I say it's inaccurate I mean compared to reality, not to inaccurate science of 35 years ago. But even by 1990 standards the book was quite inaccurate and the movie was much worse
>>5112805By the time the movie came out we knew deinonychus wasn't a species of velociraptor, raptors were feathered, pack hunting and social behavior were pretty well debunked, dilophosaurus wasn't venomous, But you can't fix that without ruining the plot. Not that anyone wanted to fix it
>>5112808were feathered raptors actually an established fact in 1993? i know the Velociraptor quill knobs were in 2007 but i don't know if there was a find before that
>>5112754Something i really appreciate about JP over JW is that, despite all its flaws, some designs have enough small detuals that tell the people who designed them actually looked at references instead of designing the them from memory like i assume they do in JW.
>>5112864Also holy shit the quality of this image sucks
>>5112863Do you think it's an established fact now?
>>5112863Most of the reasons for thinking raptors were feathered were discovered in 1861Then they were forgotten for 106 years and rediscovered in 1967None of those reasons were quill knobs
>>5112961well dont beat around the bush, what are they
>>5112971Synsacrum semilunate carpal cannon bone reduction of the cervical and caudal series pneumaticization of the cranial cervical and axial skeleton furcula fusion of the sternal series patent acetabulum rising astragalus reduction of manual and pedal digits
>>5112971>>5112974Not to mention unpaired occipital condyle and elongation of the hyoid and recruitment of the stapes for hypoglossal support
>>5112971Raptors are just primitive birdsAll dinosaurs are
This is close enough to a paleofag general. Is the Edelman museum in South Jersey worth it? I saw picrel and it looks incredible, but the whole joint, you know, is it worth the drive from midstate New York? I can always go to the NYC natural History museum in less than half the time. But I've heard Edelman has some goooood shit.
>>5112754>This is also why it's ironic when soifacing dinotubers today can't stop talking about how insanely inaccurate JP allegedly is and how it's not "true to science" - at the time, it WAS true to science, truer than any other depiction.The greatest irony of JP is that it was actually everything the diehard paleofags said it should be. I read the novel recently and it never forgets to remind you that the dinosaurs are just animals. A view which plays a role in feeding into the illusion of control Hammond and the park staff had. The dinosaurs themselves are completely accurate for their time and even behave in ways you could easily see on a documentary made today. Like the adult raptors immediately eating a juvenile raptor that gets thrown in front of them. Or the raptors attacking one of their own after it gets poisoned and starts dying. They were portrayed as pack hunters, but definitely not in the sense of wolves that care for their own. There's also the dozens of times characters outright state how the raptors move like or remind them of birds.It's not even like the movies abandoned this animals over monsters idea either. The closest thing to a movie monster in the original trilogy is the JP3 Spinosaurus chasing bite sized snacks across an entire island. Yet somehow after that a massive narrative got made over JP as a franchise being "awesomebro propaganda". Long before JW came out and actually shit the bed with the Indominus rex, mind you.
>>5107744>>5107605Why are the legs so tiny?
>>5113417But notice how that realistic behavior you listed is stuff that animals do in real life but is perceived as "awesomebro". That is why paleofags don't like it, they would rather have detailed scenes of the raptors sleeping and taking a shit.
>>5113469I am convinced it is because they based the model on the Sue mount, not taking into account that she is crouching
>>5113472Fuck meant for >>5113464
>>5106245Jurassic Park was just that good a movie and was seen by possibly billions of people by now
>>5113417Most people who talk about the book haven’t read the book. They just see idiots rambling about the “gore” on TikTok
>>5113760That shit is so stupid. Specially when they parrot that the line "those things out there are not dinosaurs" because it was never said once in the novel.
>>5113417Yeah, the whole they were 100% fake monsters is largely a JP3 and on retcon.
