>>5126229
I hate this shit too. When people notice a paleomeme they always overcorrect it by going to the oposite extreme and i am so sick of it

>>5126229
I think the best example of what you are specifically talking about is the whole smilodon lips shitstorm that started not with a paper but with a fucking blog post. I also remember the title was something like "every smilodon reconstruction ever? INACCURATE" or something pretentious like that

File: dimetrodon.png (188 KB, 640x354)

188 KB PNG

>>5126234
I forgot about that one. Paleofags really have a "This key must go into every hole" mentality. One animal being found with integument means that integument must go on EVERY animal in the clade. Most ridiculous shit I remember was Dimetrodon having fur and whiskers slapped onto it because people couldn't figure out the line between mammal and mammal-like reptile. There's some shit we'll never know for certain due to the nature of fossilization, yet some will insist we can find out everything, even without direct evidence.

>>5126635
Really funny because you can disprove that mentality by looking at the biodiversity of today. It's like if all cats were extinct and we found evidence that lions had manes. They would put manes on every single cat species including female lions.

>>5126229
>posers pretending volaticotheres didn't fly despiste all other gliding mammals being herbbivores and being discovered on all continents

Let people have fun.

Most shit about dinosaurs is made up anyway because we're missing tons of material and mostly just working with bones.

Its insane to me people dedicate a ton of time to know, for sure, an animals pinkie finger was actually angled 2% differently than thought when like 90% of said animal hasn't been found at all and is straight up just imaginary

>>5126229
>Dakotaraptor being dubious because of some guy pointing out its sickle claw had a vague resemblance to a Nanotyrannus claw. (Yeah no shit they’re both theropods) It’s like they needed a new target to point the dubious finger at after the Nano paper dropped.
Dakotaraptor has been considered potentially dubious for years now and it has nothing to do with Nanotyrannus. Despite your high horse you really don't know what you're talking about.

>>5126229
Daily reminder, that at least 99% of all animals that ever lived on this planet are completely lost in time and unknowable

>>5127995
40+ feet long 8+ton abelisaur... i know you are real....

File: saurian_axestemys_by_chri(...).jpg (56 KB, 1280x590)

56 KB JPG

>>5127979
dakotaraptor my beloved

>>5126229
>I fucking despise armchair paleontologists.
what are you exactly then?

iv'e never heard of a real paleontologist that's an expert in ALL THOSE TOPICS. You are the thing you hate. Don't worry, we hate you too.

>>5126229
Kind of ironic. Do you have actual counter arguments or points to make? Or are you just armchairing yourself?

>>5127858
>Most shit about dinosaurs is made up anyway
>just imaginary
thats such a retard take on paleontology, I cant even describe how fucking stupid that is

>>5128048
Honestly kino. Turtles are way cooler than dromaeosaurs

>>5128096
I used to post almost complete skeletals every time someone said that but i don't do it anymore because i'm convinced it's one retard trolling.

>>5128195
>i'm convinced it's one retard trolling.
you're right
there aren't that many posters here. Which makes it funny that that guy is here every day preaching his inane bullshit to the echoes of empty halls.

>>5127979
>>5128048
Incredible how dense you retards are. It does not take much digging at all to know that only one bone describing Dakotaraptor was from a turtle. What I'm talking about is what happened afterwards, with people trying to jump to the extreme conclusion that the entire genus is invalid. There are obvious large dromaeosaur bones described in the Dakotaraptor paper, yet to push a false narrative there are baseless claims saying they're from Anzu or Nanotyrannus. As though we've somehow lost the ability to differentiate the bones of theropods from completely different clades. Thanks for showing exactly what I mean.

>>5126229
>ven though we already knew about its tooth count
>It’s like they needed a new target to point the dubious finger at after the Nano paper dropped.
Holy shit, quit yapping retard. You have absolutely no idea what you are talking about

>>5126229
>Carnotaurus being the “Cretaceous cheetah” because it ran fast, ignoring literally every other aspect of its anatomy
Never heard of that one. What do you mean?

File: treytheexplainer.jpg (19 KB, 320x180)

19 KB JPG

>>5128807
>Paper describing Carno's caudofemoralis and how it made it run fast but turn badly drops.
>Tuber (pic related) takes this paper and makes the extreme conclusion that Carno was a 1:1 analog to a cheetah, dubs it the "Cretaceous cheetah".
>Video blows up and paleo community takes the idea as fact since it sounds sensible and Carno has a visual resemblance to a cheetah too. (Short face, long legs.)
>Entire concept falls apart when you remember cheetahs have to turn well to catch their prey (Their tails are designed as a counterbalance) while Carno couldn't turn for shit.
>Most ignore this because it's easier to think of extinct animals as equivalents to familiar modern ones.

>>5128887
>treytheexplainer
Oh I see, its from that part of the internet. Youtuber midwits and the reddit smartasses who parrot them are doing so much damage by confidently spreading bullshit.

>>5128887
That image too. Despite being so small, the arms of Carnotaurus had a very wide range of movement. And of course these people treat it as 100% confirmation that this means they wiggled them around for mating dances and probably had colorful display structures in them

>>5128947
Not confirmation, but its a sensible hypothesis.

>>5128887
>>5128946
>>5128947
All yesterdays and its consequences have been a disaster for the field of paleontology

>>5128948
Indeed it is (well the arm wiggling thing is reasonable. Adding unknown soft tissue structures is a couple of steps too far for me) but i've seen people acting like it is a fact and showing abelisaurs not doing it in mating dances is inaccurate

>>5129047
Yes, that was the 2017 T. rex scales paper

File: Trey Carnotaurus.jpg (104 KB, 1024x768)

104 KB JPG

>>5128887
Trey's very own accurate Carnotaurus reconstruction by the way

we should be sceptical of the traditional therapod bodyplan reconstruction because we do not see it conserved anywhere in nature

>>5129238
>123 results
>last use 7 months prior

File: rey.png (806 KB, 640x542)

806 KB PNG

>>5128952
>And of course these people treat it as 100% confirmation that this means they wiggled them around for mating dances and probably had colorful display structures in them
The dumbest part about this is that it completely neglects Carnotaurus being one of the only carnivores with genuine horns. There is only a handful of uses for horns in nature and nine times out of ten its sparring for mating rights or territory.

>>5129246
That image you just posted is very interesting because they have some traits common in modern paleoslop such a gross pink fold sticking out of the mouth and scrotum-looking skin dangling from its neck and yet it doesn't look retarded because it was drawn by a very talented artist. Which is a luxury many modern pieces don't have.

File: IMG_0663.jpg (167 KB, 539x517)

167 KB JPG

>>5129297
ehhhh Luis V. Rey is very hit or miss…

File: IMG_0662.jpg (2.02 MB, 2877x1887)

2.02 MB JPG

this one is kino ignoring the anachronistic species.

>>5129322
>predicted the Irritator pelican throat pouch
what a prophet

File: original (6).jpg (222 KB, 1075x1600)

222 KB JPG

>>5128947

>>5129403
And here we can see one from an artist that isn't very talented

>>5128096
he's right though. you don't know, and will quite literally never know, what they actually looked like, behaved like, lived like. any random retard's guess is as good as yours because you it is impossible for you to be correct
>b-b-b-but we can make le educated guesses
you don't know. YOU DON'T KNOW. so eat a sack of shit. i hate you and the paleontology community so intensely. my idea of dinosaurs will start and end with jurassic park and i'm just as valid as you are

>>5129568
new study aiming to disappoint kids suggests that T. rex was a slow moving feathered scavenger

>https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/technology/t-rex-slow-feathered-new-study-disappoints-kids-rewrites-dinosaur-story/ar-AA1HwQ2c?ocid=msedgntp&pc=U531&cvid=6a18bd9904cc4b23a30b8dc5d1129707&ei=11

>>5129568
>any random retard's guess is as good as yours
thats just not how it works. stop yapping about shit you dont know anything about

>>5129577
world's oldest human at 70 million years old right here. tell us what it was like

>>5129578
gr8 b8 m8

>>5129579
and yet a "bait" you cannot possibly retort. concession accepted, have a terrible evening

>>5129568
That is precisely why i think all depictions of dinosaurs should be as conservative as possible and this overly speculative shit has no place in paleontology

>>5129586
Well he's mocking you because he noticed your attempt at baiting him. Not gracing you with a proper response is the correct move.

>>5129593
it's not even a bait, lol. it's just a perfect summation of everything that's wrong with the "experts" theories

>>5129596
You do not understand the scientific process

File: 646d0c9d60b9b.jpg (68 KB, 733x702)

68 KB JPG

>sit on park bench
>just chilling
>suddenly theres this horrid putrid smell
>smells like the devils shit
>like a festival toilet in the summer heat
>smell gets even worse as you see a guy approaching you
>as he gets closer you see flies circling him
>there is a huge brown stain even on the front of his pants
>brown substance is dripping on his shoes
>holy fuck, almost throw up
>guy is coming to your bench, attempting to sit next to you
>say "Oh no fuck off! You cant sit here!"
>"But why not?!"
>"Because you shat your pants you retard!"
>"Nooo, I didnt shit my pants. How would you even know that? Were you following me around inspecting my anus all day? No you werent there. You dont know. It might be chocolate pudding who knows. My guess is as valid as yours"

>>5129592
The conservative reconstruction is itself speculative, shit for brains.

File: 3d24d5b70706758f623691a54(...).jpg (46 KB, 753x500)

46 KB JPG

>>5129715
You just know they looked like that. Everybody else is just speculating

>>5129715
Refer to >>5129711
And by conservative i mean sticking as close as humanly possible to actually known material (aka, not adding retarded soft tissue structures that are impossible to confirm. You know, because in order for science to be science it needs to be provable) not vintage dinosaurs like >>5129718

>>5129885
>in order for science to be science it needs to be provable
No

>>5129910
Yes. It's the basis of the scientific method.

>>5129918
I will not keep replying to you because you are clearly either a troll, a child or a retard

>>5129918
Gravity is still "just a theory".

>>5129918
Nobody wants to talk to retards, this is the downfall of any forum that allows them to speak.

Once you allow the retards in, everyone else leaves

File: IMG_7549.png (288 KB, 2532x1170)

288 KB PNG

>>5129238
What is your alternative?

>>5129918
nope

>>5129885
>Refer to
I was literally making a point against your way of thinking you moron. Dont quote my shitty greentext when you didnt even get its point

>>5129982
Then you did not do a good job at communicating it because the "you were not there how do you know i shat my pants" part sounds more like the people saying anything goes because you were not there

>>5129948
wings and breathes fire

Nobody seems to remember dunkleosteous getting downsized to oblivion and turned into a rachitic quasimodo fish because of ONE single paleoart.

File: colored_dinosaurs.jpg (719 KB, 5141x1603)

719 KB JPG

>>5129568
>never know what they actually looked like
Anon...

>>5130180
I think that one is a case of "we don't have material of the rest if the animal so we are going to give it the same proportions as other palcoderms". Meaning it's all speculation, but the type of speculation that is kind of needed because only the head is known

>>5130182
Interesting that the one with bright neon colors is the smallest one while the larger ones have pretty muted colros. Funny how that works don't you think?

>>5130126
retards can't detect sarcasm aimed at them.

you think he's agreeing with you while normal humans instantly understand he's making fun of you

you're too dumb to be talking

>>5126229
Why is the Edmontosaurus raping the T. rex

File: dfick8b-93f1c5f5-16e7-410(...).jpg (79 KB, 768x768)

79 KB JPG

All you chuds can cope all you want but THIS is real science

File: 1759684986105641.png (517 KB, 747x685)

517 KB PNG

Carnobros...

>>5130206
That was sarcasm
You couldnt tell....

>>5130061
You could say the same about a peacock's train. Or how stags will frequently get their antlers tangled up in vegetation or even with another stag's. Sometimes elaborate display structures make you worse at surviving, they can still be successful traits if the reproductive benefit outweighs this.

>>5130245
I remember i used to watch these guys reviews of the JWE designs but they got boring very quickly. It got to a point where they barely talked about the actual in-game model. Then they turned their logo into prideflag shit and i stoped watching them.

>>5130247
And the guy you are replying too is also being sarcastic. Get sarcasm'd NERD!

>>5130249
The rule tends to be that if they are allowed to fuck before the retarded structures get them killed then such structures stay

>>5130216
they didn't have mobile tongues.

>>5130271
Yes they did.

>>5130272
no they didn't

>>5130271
You don't know that. Where you there? thought so chud

>>5130279
just like you don't know if they had eyes

>>5130284
Well of course. Because i wasn't there.

>>5130245
>clickbait thumbnail encouraging people to swing the pendulum to the complete other extreme and start believing Carno was slow.
Ironic how this is just as retarded as the cheetah idea, just in the opposite direction. People can never just think of something falling in the middle for some reason.

>>5130402
I hate paleofags so much bro. They do that all the time

File: IMG_7561.jpg (645 KB, 1274x1500)

645 KB JPG

>>5130139
Please take your meds.

>>5126635
Paleoschizo ass post.

>>5130473
You fucks calling everyone paleoschizo will always be funny to me. Specially when it's someone with such a reasonable take

>>5130245
TLDW
>we don't have Carnotaurus' legs so there is no reason to believe it had longer legs than its relatives which range from short to moderately sized legs
>its large muscles were most likely used for pushing and pulling in whatever which way you imagine they would do these actions for such as tearing apart a carcass or shoving each other
>carnotaurus was most likely not exceptionally fast but fast enough to catch prey items like isasicursor (I know it wasn't found in the same formation but it lived at the same time and on the same continent as carnotaurus)
>redditors are retarded
if you want my guess on how carnotaurus hunted it probably ambushed and dispatched its prey by biting, holding on, and thrashing it in its jaws since carnotaurus’ skull could handle a lot of vertical and horizontal stress and it had a very strong neck. if the prey item was the same size or larger it could use those huge caudofemoralis muscles to either pin its prey or keep its feet firmly planted on the ground.

>>5130475
Spreading anti-scientific propaganda linked to creationism isn't "a reasonable take". We know for a fact that fur is basal to synapsids, just as feathers are basal to theropods.

>>5130480
nigger we have scaly varanopsid skin impressions.

>>5130482
This is always paleoschizo's line.
>um what about this cherrypicked non-evidence
Synapsids had fur. Seethe more. Your next line is anti-Chinese racism.

>>5130245
>>5130479
Inb4 the lower half of the legs are found and they are actually as long as previously thought and we go back to Carnotaurus being fast. That sort of cosmic coincidence has happening so many times that i am going to assume it's the default every time people start speculating about the unknown parts of an animal. Just look at how they are reconstructing Mosasaurs with long bodies the same way they did in the 1900's

>>5130484
So did Dimetrodon have whiskers?

>>5130484
I'm not paleoschizo or the person here >>5130475 faggot, and we can see the transition of more derived synapsids losing scales in fossil record with a mummified lystrosaurus having smooth leathery skin.

>>5130486
No, basal synapsids were very scaly and that's why the most modern reconstructions of dimetrodon depict scales.

>>5130485
to be fair the elongation of mosasaurs recently mainly comes from straightening out the spine because people have come to the shocking conclusion that mosasaurs are not whales lol and shouldn't be depicted as being so tubby.

>>5130251
Honestly it's guys like you that make me happy to see rainbow or tranny flags because every time I do I know there are a bunch of easily triggered reverse snowflakes seething as soon as they lay eyes on them.

>>5130496
You seem to be exaggerating my reaction for the sake of your narrative. I had already lost interest i the series, seeing the faggot profile pic just made me realize "Huh i haven't watched the last 5 episodes, i guess i don't really care about these videos anymore"

>>5130494
Why the fuck did they start reconstructing them as whales in the first place?

>>5130498
that's what happens when you go too deep into doing comparative vertebrate anatomy for animals that are totally unrelated to each other. it was part of the initial pendulum swing trend of adding tons of extra soft tissue to animals due to fear of shrink wrapping. a lot of prehistoric reptiles were being compared to mammals during this time, marine reptiles included and since we totally lack anything like the large predatory marine reptiles today and sharks have cartilage instead of bone, whales were used as the measuring stick when we really should've been looking at crocodiles and god damn monitor lizards since monitors are the closest living relatives to mosasaurs. thankfully that's ending but goes to show how destructive paleomemes can be.

>>5130503
I may bitch a lot in these threads, mostly for comedic effect, but it genuinely makes me very happy that we are finally getting out of the unscientific mid 2010's phase.
As i always say, all yesterdays and its consequences have been a disaster for the field of paleontology.

>>5128066
what a fucking basedboy bitch response holy shit.
>Oh yeah well where's your proof that these people do these things huh? Pattern recognition doesn't exist, you aren't allowed to remember information presented to you, where's your source for being annoyed? Source? Source your annoyance?
shut the FUCK up you limp-wristed waste of a sperm cell

>>5130487
>I'm not paleoschizo
Denying it a little too loudly.

>>5130526
then consider the fact that I don't instantly disregard every asian fossil ever found or say insane shit like therizinosaurids and alvarezsaurids weren't real. paleoschizo as in the actual guy has gone so far off the he lives on a different planet now, makes it easier to ignore him desu since there is zero chance of reconciliation or actual discussion with him now.

>>5130529
He's not replying, i'm betting on it. I've been in this exact situation before and he never replies

>>5130529
Nice backpeddling attempt, unfortunately you already outed yourself here >>5130503

>>5130534
So you think Mosasaurs should be compared to whales?

>>5130534
I diagnose you with terminal poopdickschizo derangement syndrome and sadly it's inoperable. my condolences.

>>5130536
Why shouldn't it? Do you think mosasaurs were made of magic and didn't need insulation against cold water?

>>5130543
Then the new reconstructions are wrong?

File: HI2ewWdWwAAd3OA.jpg (189 KB, 1533x653)

189 KB JPG

>>5130545
of course they are! (plz ignore that this guy made it into national geographic)

>>5130543
>Do you think mosasaurs were made of magic and didn't need insulation against cold water?
Paleontologists ignoring ecodynamics is a massive pet peeve of mine.

>>5130550
what species is that?

>>5130561
torvoneustes a thalattosuchian

>>5130562
Cool

>>5130543
do sea turtles? what about nile crocodiles?

>>5130509
I didn't ask for a source and I didn't say OP was wrong.

I said no real paleontologist is an expert in all those topics, meaning OP is an armchair paleontologist just like the ones he's complaining about

I did enjoy your little tantrum and projection though. Thanks. I do enjoy watching retard melties

>>5130565
I actually and unironically want to know the answer to this

File: Torvoneustes.jpg (63 KB, 900x359)

63 KB JPG

>>5130562
What the fuck i googled it and this thing's back flippers are longer than the front ones. It looks so weird

>>5130574
the answer is there are multiple possible ways for vertebrates to deal with cold water, and fat is not the most common one.

The first most common is just to hang out in latitudes and depths that aren't that cold.

second is to have antifreeze in the blood and go into cold waters.

third is to get huge and use muscle heat

fourth is to get huge and use muscle heat along with a countercurrent heat exchange forming a primitive warm-blooded metabolism

last and most derived is a combination of all of those along with fat.

>>5130574
the reason fat is fairly uncommon is because of the energy and nutrient cost.

not only do you have to have a diet that's high energy to produce fat, but you also have to overcome the buoyancy of the fat, meaning extremely heavy bones. And bones are also very costly to grow. For an aquatic animal to grow and maintain thick fat they about have to be fully warm-blooded just to have the energy to get enough food.

Cold blooded marine vertebrates and those with weak warm-blooded metabolisms generally don't have much fat to them.

Mosasaurs last I read were thought to be warm blooded and have fat, something that can be determined somewhat indirectly by the oxygen isotopes in their bones and teeth. Those isotopes come primarily from their food and surrounding water, but some are sorted in their body as well, depending on rate of deposition. Bone or enamel that deposits rapidly will have more cold-water isotopes from food, while tissues that deposit over longer periods of time will have more body-temperature isotopes

>>5130582
another way metabolism can be inferred is by comparing growth rates in axial bones vs. appendicular.

generally warm-blooded vertebrates will have slow even growth in axial bones of the torso and somewhat faster, less even growth in the limbs and tail.

this is contrasted with cold-blooded vertebrates that have fast, uneven growth throughout the entire skeleton because the limbs and tail are roughly the same temperature as the body and bone growth is entirely controlled by external temperature and diet.

>>5130585
this is however somewhat modulated in marine vertebrates because water itself is fairly stable in temperature and also highly conductive of heat.

Meaning an animal that spends most of its time in warm, productive water will probably appear to have a warm-blooded bone growth pattern. But that can be determined by distribution of the fossils. If an animal is never found in cold-water environments then it may be cold blooded but just never left warm areas.

>>5130587
Mosasaurs swam in some extremely cold water, so bone and isotope evidence of warm-bloodedness is probably accurate.

I see. Thank you for the answers

>>5127995
That is very real.
Think about how we know almost fuck all about the entire Eastern-half of the US because fossils are just way harder to find there for various reasons.
Even more tantalizing for Cretaceous era freaks because of the very plausible theory that Nanotyrannus came from the East.
You could have giant bull necked Acrocanthosaurus descendants and long legged Tyrannosaur cheetas living aside one another for millions of years and we'd never know because it is just way harder to pull bones out of the ground in the Eastern US.

File: 1778662456041353.jpg (1.12 MB, 2700x1803)

1.12 MB JPG

>>5129231
I hate the modern meme that all dinosaurs were smooth sausage monsters without any definition.
Mammals are usually fattier than reptiles or archosaurs. Bovines are particularly fatty. But anyone that has ever been near a cow can tell you that you can see a lot of the skeletal structure of the animal purely casually.

On humans, a natural weight human can have visible ribs, shoulder blades, ridges of the pelvis, etc. And again, humans are fattier than most reptiles or archosaurs.

File: 1775172935544252.png (915 KB, 800x653)

915 KB PNG

>>5130245
Does kinda work if you think about Maned Wolves.
They have very long legs, but aren't known for being particularly quick.

File: Edmontosaurus.jpg (151 KB, 1000x411)

151 KB JPG

>>5130754
I'm so glad Prehistoric Kingdom moved away from that style last time they updated their models

File: allosaurus_by_fredthedino(...).jpg (99 KB, 1280x734)

99 KB JPG

>>5130498
Overcorrection from the "dinosaurs are just animals and should be portrayed as such" phase paleontology had. Where the problem was that it was hard to portray them as familiar animals since they are wholly unique creatures. Thus people projected mammalian traits onto them since mammals are the dominant large vertebrates of today like how the dinosaurs (And other large reptiles) were the dominant large vertebrates in their time. So a dinosaur with vague mammalian inspiration would look natural, until you stopped for a moment and realized that the idea of an Allosaurus convergently evolving a vague resemblance to a lion was retarded.

>>5130786
Fred is the GOAT.

File: frederic-wierum-theropod-(...).jpg (161 KB, 1200x1200)

161 KB JPG

>>5130786
>>5130788
Fred was guilty of that in his early days but his art is fucking based now. Easily my favorite modern paleoartist

>>5130786
Another overcorrection is "they're animals, not movie monsters" which led to such gripping artistic movements as "what does T-Rex look like if it is sleeping?"
Which fair enough, T-Rex probably did its fair share of sleeping, but a better question is "what do people want to see a T-Rex doing?" And the answer isn't lounging around. Like if I were going to draw a picture of a lion, it'd probably be hunting or looking regal or something similar. Why? Because there is a very limited market of interest for sleeping lions, and quite a large market for lions doing cool things. Paleoart needs to be art, first and foremost, rather than just "naturalistic depictions of how an animal spends 99% of its time".

>>5130928
if it's realistic people complain that it's not artistic enough

if it's artistic people complain that it's not realistic enough

the actual solution is to illustrate however you want and ignore people like this thread

the opinions of critics simply don't matter unless they plan on buying some art. And even then there's more than enough customers to go around.

>>5130943
Wrong. The correct solution is to draw paleoart specifically the way i like it

>>5130928
>but a better question is "what do people want to see a T-Rex doing?" And the answer isn't lounging around. Like if I were going to draw a picture of a lion, it'd probably be hunting or looking regal or something similar. Why? Because there is a very limited market of interest for sleeping lions, and quite a large market for lions doing cool things. Paleoart needs to be art, first and foremost, rather than just "naturalistic depictions of how an animal spends 99% of its time".
nah you're just wrong on this one bro, the increased variety in paleoart has done nothing but improve its profitability and quality. We have more stinkers but we also have more gems.

>>5130479
>we don't have Carnotaurus' legs so there is no reason to believe it had longer legs than its relatives which range from short to moderately sized legs
Aucasaurus was very closely related and did have fairly long legs along with the same sort of beefy caudofemoralis that Carnotaurus had, so I wouldn’t say there’s no reason to believe they were fast. Maybe not as fast as the memes suggest but still fast enough

>>5130971
>The correct solution is to draw paleoart specifically the way i like it
pretty sure they'll draw anything you want for enough money.

your failure is being poor and opinionated. If you want your opinion heard stop being poor.

>>5131004
No, it's their moral obligation for all (100% (every single piece)) to be drawn the way i like it

>>5130991
>>5130991
Another example of overcorrection i guess. Again, inb4 it turns out it did have long legs just like it turned out T. rex didn't have feathers after all!

>>5131098
>just like it turned out T. rex didn't have feathers after all!
the most recent science says T. rex had feathers and was a slow scavenger.

>>5129572

>>5130991
>>5131098
It isn't just long legs, but long legs in the right way.
Long lower legs.
Just having proportionately long legs isn't the same as being fast.

>>5131217
Same thing stands. Cosmic coincidence will make its lower legs long. Because it always happens

File: carnotaurus.jpg (53 KB, 742x309)

53 KB JPG

>>5131229
It's going to look like this

File: 1779386201276943.png (910 KB, 600x900)

910 KB PNG

>therapods need lips because their teeth with dry out and rot without them!!!

File: IMG_4421.jpg (368 KB, 2360x1469)

368 KB JPG

a little bit older but I hope you guys get some enjoyment out of this. This guy should be an olympian the crazy distance he can cover jumping to conclusions

>>5129229
Context here? I used to casually watch Trey and I don't remember him speaking from a high horse.

>>5131760
He was basically a misinformation spreading machine. Bastion of the "if you can't prove it then that means it's accurate!" fallacy

>>5131760
If I remember right he posted a video attempting a point-by-point rebuttal of the paper a day after it was published and then within 24 hours deleted his video and issued an apology and retraction of his rebuttal.

I could be wrong, my memory isn't perfect.

>>5131850
I think he took longer to delete it but yeah pretty much. And after that he left the topic of dinosaurs entirely. I guess because he couldn't pretend to be a paleontologist anymore the topic was not interesting for him anymore

File: Trey.png (103 KB, 1857x202)

103 KB PNG

>>5131760
Unironically i recommend searching "Trey" on desuarchive. There are a lot of discussions on the topic there. Pic related is my favorite

>>5131758
He’s probably 11 years old

>>5131850
Right. Around the time when he went from paleontology+cryptozoology to history and culture

>>5130498
Not sure if it’s related but I remember there was some evidence for certain plesiosaurs having more flesh or fat than previously thought

>>5131877
That sounds familiar. I think it was blubber maybe? but i also think it was specifically a plesiosaur that lived in australia which was a lot colder back then so i don't know

File: IMG_4433.jpg (269 KB, 1567x1138)

269 KB JPG

>>5131869
Thank you, Anon. That was an absolute delight. There's not a single good word on him. What's the context with the response to Trey's video on scales, did they actually respond? I love this drama.

>>5132169
That i do not know i'm afraid, but he did back in the day

>>5132169
I doubt it. I didn’t even know he still made videos

>>5132093
the archives cut off at 2015 but most of the actual story is before that. So nobody here really knows what happened with Trey and that's fine.

File: IMG_4438.jpg (90 KB, 662x1000)

90 KB JPG

I'm back in the paleo game after like 10 years. Is this book worth it as a general refresher?

File: IMG_7601.jpg (319 KB, 899x1200)

319 KB JPG

>>5132372
No. It’s just Brusatte talking about his friends and the research they do. He’s not an especially talented writer.
Naish and Barrett’s “Dinosaurs: How they lived and evolved” is a much better contemporary review. Naish has his particular quirks and they are lean to embrace new studies and trendy ideas without a lot of skepticism (especially if they’re behind them) but it’s overall worth a buy. You can also go back and read “the dinosaur heresies” by Bakker. It is a much more fun book. Just use Wikipedia to get more contemporary info. Check the sources ofc.

File: 1772793155918999.png (108 KB, 805x867)

108 KB PNG

I'm curious if anyone has heard anything more about this.
Paul Sereno, a few years ago seemed to have put a nail in the coffin of Spinosaurus having any real aquatic adaptations, but just googling around earlier I found an interesting reference to Nizar Ibrahim and co. working on a pretty substantial response a few years ago that otherwise seems to not really have reference elsewhere. The abstract is about a talk from 2024, which is already 2 years ago.
>https://www.researchgate.net/publication/381260634_Spinosaurus_aegyptiacus_resolving_weighty_matters

I'm curious if anyone has mentioned anything more about this.

>>5130180
The main reason it got downsized is they remeasured material and realised old numbers were bogus

>>5130565
Large sea turtles do have blubber and there was a whole paper speculating on applying this to plesiosaurs

File: IMG_4464.jpg (43 KB, 568x540)

43 KB JPG

>>5132379
Spino may be a water dweller but those depictions of it having a huge tadpole-like tail are retarded. That is my personal bias. I wholeheartedly believe that the "accurate spinosaurus call" reconstruction bs where it's just a slowed down loon call are more scientifically accurate. Because I like Spino and those depictions of him looking like a quadriplegic just don't feel right

>>5132636
Didn't they just make up a completely different body from the previous one that was already made up?

File: IMG_7609.jpg (242 KB, 1600x1068)

242 KB JPG

>>5132664
The tail is actually the only thing we can say with reasonable certainty is accurate. The body proportions are a result of scaling elements from different individuals together (some based off pictures of the destroyed holotype). The tail is articulated, but it prob looked les tad pole-ish and more like basilisk’s tail.

>>5132792
Not a big fan of the crocodile scales in this model

>>5132792
>it prob looked les tad pole-ish and more like basilisk’s tail
I can't stop loving this creature. A basilisk tail fits it so well.
I just visited the Munich Museum of Palaeontology a few weeks ago where the holotype was kept before it was destroyed. I went looking for a little dedication plaque or pictures of it or anything but sadly, there was nothing. It could be used for a great exhibit of all the iterations a theropod goes through before you can say anything with certainty. Justice for my spino bro

File: IMG_7624.jpg (802 KB, 3072x2287)

802 KB JPG

>>5133034
Well that’s a shame. They couldn’t buy / print replicas of other specimens? It’d be cool of them to replicate the original display.

File: IMG_7625.jpg (244 KB, 1200x800)

244 KB JPG

>>5133034
>>5133122
They even did it that exact thing for the nat geo exhibit that went along with Sereno’s ridiculous PR-hype machine.

>>5133123
Not a very good replica i have to say. The cracks don't look very natural

>>5133034
I will never forgive the kikes for this!

File: IMG_7629.png (419 KB, 400x400)

419 KB PNG

>>5133125
In that particular case they’re probably sculptures rather than casts.

See pic related for something truly monstrous

>>5133130
But Auschwitz has a souvenir shop. Sorry, a "memorial store" or whatever they call it.

>>5127858
>>5129568
>anatomy is fake
this is really retarded. I don't know how things are with people who study dinosaurs but if you think reasonable inferences can't be made from the anatomy of a creature you just don't know anatomy.

>>5127856
Hello Carlos Albuquerque, long time no see!

>>5134812
I love Dimetrodon. That being said, I'm going to kill you with my bare hands.

>>5134812
Actually it's a misidentified Secodontosaurus

>Prehistoric Planet ep 1
>What if trex.......... didn't enter a frenzy at the sight of anything alive?
>woaaaah

Somewhat related to what OP's talking about, I keep hearing people say carcharodontosaurus was definitively larger than giganotosaurus but I can't find a single source for that claim that isn't youtube shorts slop.

>>5137195
You say that as if "T. rex entering a frenzy upon seeing anything alive" was a common depiction

>>5130215
He thought it would be funny.
>the artist or the edmontosaur?
Yes.

>>5126229
>I fucking despise armchair paleontologists despite the fact that I am one

>>5137247
>"T. rex entering a frenzy upon seeing anything alive" was a common depiction
As a kid born in the early 80's you almost never had a drawing of a T-Rex where it wasn't fighting another dino.
Mostly because
A) Its a big predator with sharp teeth
B) Demonstrates the "defensive" capacity of other Dinos like the club tales, armor, spikes, etc (even if the two never actually physically coexisted)
C) Kids love smashing their favorite toys together
D) The thing had teeth the size of a butcher's knife, gotta show them bitches in action.

>>5133133
jesus that schnoz

>>5126229
>You can't just make a hypothesis, stop there, and assume you're correct,
Yes I can

>>5126229
Archeology is a waste of time. All the "advancements" in this field achieve nothing in real life, and you wont even be able to ever actually knowing how those animals looked like.
Your degree is useless

File: fat croc.png (2.3 MB, 1504x1018)

2.3 MB PNG

>>5130754
archosaurs are fat pieces of shit

>>5130754
Consider a lot of the bony parts you can see on the cow stand out because its got a bunch of fat pulling the skin down. And having bony hips/shoulder/ridges on the spine give big places to anchor muscle, and gives any predator attaching from their blind side a bony bite.
And dinosaurs probably didn't store fat like mammals do. Compare the meat of a fatty bird versus a fatty cut of steak or pork. You're not getting fat-back off a turkey.
You wouldn't expect them to carry their weight the same.
Not to excuse bad depictions, i think sausage dinos are just easier explained as people drawing pictures for kids books and laymen don't actually know or give that much of a shit about anatomy.
I also think a more minimalist recreation is just about restraint, maybe they did look fucking crazy with wild colors and dulaps, but since you don't have direct evidence it feels like too much supposition in a field that is forced to work with supposition.

>>5138885
Make a bird bald. Elongate it. Replace some feathers with scales. Make the beak a proper jaw again. Add a gator tail. Dinosaur!

This fake science for bored trust fund kids could not be any easier

File: file.png (336 KB, 500x370)

336 KB PNG

>>5129238

File: 200w.gif (773 KB, 200x200)

773 KB GIF

>>5138900

File: file.png (610 KB, 800x400)

610 KB PNG

>>5138911

File: Gubwpb9XsAA7fBx.jpg (243 KB, 708x1200)

243 KB JPG

>>5138880
Birds with no feathers look shrink wrapped and skinny.

>>5138880
pancake looking bastard.

>>5137276
Well that is just wrong. I cak think of a lot of vintage art where the T. rex is doing nothing

File: 534534.jpg (166 KB, 900x900)

166 KB JPG

>>5141967

File: 1658459360813065.jpg (127 KB, 828x900)

127 KB JPG

>>5142042

File: 1687549076680028.jpg (159 KB, 1263x900)

159 KB JPG

>>5142043

File: c-t-rex-charles-r-knight.jpg (287 KB, 1500x1159)

287 KB JPG

>>5142044

>>5126229
QRD on Nanaimoteuthis? How are the wear patterns on its beak different from those of animals that eat shelled prey?

>>5142628
From an archived thread.
>Frequent durophagous predation on hard-shelled prey causes wear of their jaw tips and jaw edges, which is absent in nondurophagous cephalopods such as squids
>This wear provides reliable evidence of durophagy, in a broader sense carnivory, in fossil cephalopods. The wear was found on adult jaws of Late Cretaceous Cirrata, but not on their juvenile jaws. It is also absent in co-occurring fossil squid jaws, including both juveniles and adults
>In the largest specimens of N. jeletzkyi and N. haggarti, the loss of jaw material caused by the accumulated wear reaches ~10% of the total jaw length, which is more severe than in modern durophagous cephalopods
>These wear patterns suggest that Late Cretaceous giant Cirrata were active carnivores that frequently crushed hard shells and bones. The long scratches distributed on wide areas of their jaw reflect the dynamic use of the entire jaw for dismantling prey. Asymmetric loss of the jaw edges suggests lateralized behavior, which has been linked to a highly developed brain and cognition
>This, in turn, suggests that the earliest octopuses already possessed advanced intelligence. Laterality is known in modern octopuses, whose high intelligence matches that of vertebrates
>so essentially the heavy wear on cephalopod beaks imply eating shellfish rather than fish. But in this case, there's extreme wear, up to 10% of the beak which is significantly more wear than modern shellfish eating cephalopods have. The fact that there are long scratches on the wide areas of the beak indicate the use of the beak to rip apart large animals, rather than just crushing shells. And the fact that bones are much thicker and tougher than shellfish shells explains why the beaks are proportionally worn down much more than modern shellfish eating cephalopods.

>>5144774
Seems like a bit of a reach to suggest it was preying on large vertebrates rather than just shelled animals because it has more wear than modern shell cracking cephalopods. Vertebrates are softer than shellfish, modern squid that feed on vertebrates don’t have that much wear on their beaks. They don’t need to crack bone because they can just eat around the bones. I’m not saying it’s impossible or even unlikely that it would hunt vertebrates, it’s just not very convincing proof

File: science.aea6285-f4.jpg (1.01 MB, 2100x2570)

1.01 MB JPG

>>5144794
also the mainsteam reported size is very misleading. The size estimates are a scale based on living cirrates scaled to match beak size and iirc it gives a size range between 7m and 18 meters. Not to imply a 7 m octopus is less terrifying but there has been this trend to style it as some giant mosasur eating superpedator.

>>5144794
>Seems like a bit of a reach to suggest it was preying on large vertebrates rather than just shelled animals because it has more wear than modern shell cracking cephalopods. Vertebrates are softer than shellfish, modern squid that feed on vertebrates don’t have that much wear on their beaks. They don’t need to crack bone because they can just eat around the bones. I’m not saying it’s impossible or even unlikely that it would hunt vertebrates, it’s just not very convincing proof
A pelagic superpredator is not going to have the luxury of picking and choosing what parts of a corpse it wants to eat. Even if the lower estimates are the truth, that is still a massive animal that would have a large calorie quota to fulfill. This is probably one of those situations where both sides are right. If the giant octopus had the opportunity to be durophagus it likely would do so, same for being osteophagus.

>>5144801
It's not misleading, it is a wide range because they are scaling an invertebrate with limited material. Either extreme is equally possible because that is what can be found from the current evidence.

File: squid.jpg (24 KB, 650x428)

24 KB JPG

>>5144841
>A pelagic superpredator is not going to have the luxury of picking and choosing what parts of a corpse it wants to eat
That is exactly what they do though. Squid and octopus are notoriously messy eaters. A squid that is specifically targeting hard-shelled prey should have more wear on its beak than one that eats soft skinned vertebrates prey and maybe bites into a bone or two along the way, not less

File: images.jpg (23 KB, 516x387)

23 KB JPG

Is this the thread where people complain about interpretations of palaeontology that don't resemble their childhood dinosaur books?

>>5144842
Humboldt squids are the definition of voracious, they do not consume bone because they are physically unable to, not because they choose to. You are also comparing extant animals that are many times smaller, and thus require far less food to sustain themselves. A macropredatory octopus bigger than giant squids would absolutely be taking in every part of it's catch, bones included. Bones are also harder than shellfish shells, so an osteophagus cephalopod having higher beak wear than a durophagus one checks out.

>>5144847
>they do not consume bone because they are physically unable to, not because they choose to
That is completely false. Finding bone fragments in their stomachs isn’t unusual at all. They can even break human bones, let alone fish bones. A diver had his wrist broken in five places after being bitten by one
>A macropredatory octopus bigger than giant squids would absolutely be taking in every part of it's catch, bones included
That’s a pretty big assumption when cephalopods rarely completely consume large prey. It is more energy efficient to discard the more difficult to process parts and look for food elsewhere than to try eat every last piece
>Bones are also harder than shellfish shells
Large ammonite shells are way harder and thicker than most marine vertebrate bones, and they’re not wrapped up in a soft exterior. For a marine reptile to have bones that thick it would need to be way too large for the octopus to fully consume bones and all even if we go with the upper estimates for Nanaimoteuthis

>>5144862
>That is completely false. Finding bone fragments in their stomachs isn’t unusual at all. They can even break human bones, let alone fish bones. A diver had his wrist broken in five places after being bitten by one
Source? This article pretty much says the opposite. Humboldt squid live in an incredibly competitive environment, to the point where they regularly cannibalize each other. If they were capable of processing bone they wouldn't be leaving anything left.
http://www.nwf.org/nationalwildlife/article.cfm?issueID=72&articleID=1006
>That’s a pretty big assumption when cephalopods rarely completely consume large prey. It is more energy efficient to discard the more difficult to process parts and look for food elsewhere than to try eat every last piece
To be fair, I could say the same about assuming a cephalopod many times bigger than any modern one would function 1:1 to its extant relatives. And it is not always more energy efficient to discard part of a carcass if obtaining that carcass in the first place isn't easy. Dire wolves from La Brea frequently have broken teeth from regularly crushing bones, despite not being specialized bonecrushers. Animals are predisposed to making the most of what they currently have, unless they are sure they can procure more food.
>Large ammonite shells are way harder and thicker than most marine vertebrate bones, and they’re not wrapped up in a soft exterior. For a marine reptile to have bones that thick it would need to be way too large for the octopus to fully consume bones and all even if we go with the upper estimates for Nanaimoteuthis
Shells are made of calcium carbonate, they are not going to be "way harder" than the bones of large vertebrates.

>>5144876
Fucked up the link
https://web.archive.org/web/20070209064011/http://www.nwf.org/nationalwildlife/article.cfm?issueID=72&articleID=1006

>>5129231
>Carnotaurus
>one of the few dinosaurs we have a large number of skin impressions from, showing it was fully scaled
>covers it in feathers anyway
what a fucking retard holy shit

>>5144876
>Source?
https://www.scubadiving.com/article/news/video-diver-attacked-monster-squid
>If they were capable of processing bone they wouldn't be leaving anything left
Just because an animal can bite through any part of its prey doesn’t mean it’s going to completely consume it. Again cephalopods are messy eaters
>To be fair, I could say the same about assuming a cephalopod many times bigger than any modern one would function 1:1 to its extant relatives
We’re already assuming that the wear on Nanaimoteuthis’ beak follows a 1:1 pattern as modern squids and octopus though
>Shells are made of calcium carbonate, they are not going to be "way harder" than the bones of large vertebrates
They aren’t that different. Nacre has a Moh’s hardness of 4.5. Hydroxyapatite has a Moh’s hardness of 5. Also I think you’re vastly underestimating just how thick ammonite shells got

>>5126229
Dakotaraptor doesn't even exist though. It's a weird chimera of turtle shell, Oviraptorosaur and god only knows what.

>>5126636
>Implying any paleontologist studies comparative anatomy
The funny thing is they all claim to study everything and be these interdisciplinarians, when everything that they've ever published proves they don't know shit about anything. People seeing palms and claiming snow was the norm or finding a bunch of plants and then claiming that the ecosystem was a desert supporting Sauropods somehow, people seeing theropod hands and not knowing how crocodilian hands are constructed. This shit never ends.

>>5127858
You're and idiot.

>>5127995
Daily reminder that most of those species were similar to species we do have records for. You lost, tranny. We have a very complete fossil record. Midwits don't like hearing that.

>>5128195
It's probably a CIA faggot.

>>5128519
Is that why the same Coelurosaur from the Morrison was named three different times and claimed to be a Tyrannosaur twice?

>>5128948
It's really not.

>>5129231
Lolwtf this is Sonichu tier

>>5129323
I see everyone took a field trip to the desert again for some reason.

>>5129568
Shows how stupid you are. We can tell all kinds of behavior from dinosaur tracks, from the habitats they're found in, which creatures they're found in association with, etc. Even dinosaur color could easily be unlocked if paleontologists would stop being lazy assholes and would actually dissect mummified skin to look for coloring organs.

>>5129578
There were no trannies like you. It was fucking great.

>>5129715
You literally don't know what words mean.

>>5130180
The paper was totally full of shit by the way. Its basic claims didn't match the fossil record. Dunkleosteus had similar dimensions to its relations and they were much more elongate, totally contrary to the paper's claims.

>>5130182
That pingu doesn't look right. Aquatic animals are almost always counter shaded.

>>5130215
He had it coming.

>>5130272
He's probably right. Saurischians don't seem to have had particularly mobile tongues, possibly no dinosaurs did since Ankylosaurs had hyoid apparatuses similar to alligators. When you actually study the fossils, you might learn things like this.

>>5130484
I HATE THE CIA
I HATE THE CIA

>>5130496
I'm literally gay and I'm to the point where I want to repeal gay rights because shitlibs like you are so fucking annoying.

>>5130498
You know why.

>>5130529
Did you know they had to change the proportions of the PNSO Mamenchisaurus toy to make it stand up?

>>5130534
That's gross. I would never say something that stupid. Retards trying to turn every dinosaur into a mammal-like pre-bird has nothing to do with studying comparative anatomy "too much". It's the total opposite.

>>5130543
Today I learned sea snakes are fat like balloons.

File: ThermalDaspletoFinal-Crop2Web.jpg (1.86 MB, 2861x1656)

1.86 MB JPG

>>5130582
Paleontologists are retarded faggots. They think everything is an endotherm. Brian engh literally illustrated Alligatorids as warm-blooded. Yes, I know he's not a paleontologist, but this was literally published in a paper.

>>5130752
The fossils we do have from the Eastern United States even from the late Cretaceous just all belong to the same families as Laramidia. And from the middle Cretaceous the same dinosaurs lived from coast to coast. I'm sorry but you're still wrong. There are very few surprises in the fossil record that aren't just open fraud.

>>5129572
>Claims actually the scalefags were wrong! T. rex had feathers!
>Literally offer zero evidence for why they claim this
>It's literally a chink
CIA got desperate people were breaking free of the dinosaur dark age. Got to keep that propaganda mill cranking out the bullshit.

>>5131769
So basically every single paleontology outlet? My favorite is your dinosaurs are wrong because they're so smug and yet they get shit wrong constantly.

>>5131867
>T. rex being proven to have no feathers literally chased a tranny out of the paleosphere
Pottery.

>>5132372
>brusatte
Appalling. Just make up your own fanfiction instead.

>>5137247
One of the most common tenets of the dinosaur dark age is to claim that everyone before you was an idiot and that they said shit that they never said so you can "correct" it. Dinosaur renaissance cultists have been doing this the whole time.

File: 1761341077432197.png (1.38 MB, 1681x810)

1.38 MB PNG

>>5146361
>We have a very complete fossil record.
You'd have to be a total fucking moron to think this.
Look at a modern map of sediment accumulating basins, and then compare that to Earth's biodiversity.
Shit. We're just missing an entire continent for most of the Mesozoic - Eastern North America is critically understudied and we simply lack any decent fossils from the majority of its range.

>>5146385
>>5146396
We also see trace evidence of substantially different fauna.
For example, evidence of late surviving Carcharodontosaurs while Tyrannosaurs all appear far more gracile.
And just having the same general types of fauna, doesn't mean anything regarding their unique diversity. East Asia and Western North America also share a lot of the same groups, but the individual expression of them is very disparate and lacking one would substantially affect our modern perception of dinosaurs. Imagine if the Hell Creek and Morrison were never excavated and we just had Mongolia to teach us.
The idea that Eastern North America is uninteresting because we have fragments that indicate it shared the same general groups as Laramidia in the Late Cretaceous, is just completely stupid. What about the area during the hundreds of millions of years before that point?

>>5146356
It does exist though. The Dakotaraptor holotype definitely contains giant dromaeosaur elements even if a few pieces are from other animals. The teeth and giant sickle claw in particular stand out

File: 184728.jpg (20 KB, 320x320)

20 KB JPG

>>5146384
>Brian engh literally illustrated Alligatorids as warm-blooded
That isn’t what it’s depicting. A reptile that has been basking will be warmer than its surroundings. This has been explained to you before. You’re retarded

>>5146361
>We have a very complete fossil record.
The sheer arrogance of this statement is absolutely astounding to me.

>>5146419
Your profound ignorance is the only reason you don't understand this. You have paleontology 101 education.

>Hurr 99% of the fossil record is gone forever

You're too stupid to understand that this is completely fucking irrelevant, because the fossil record that we do have creates an almost unbroken story of life on this planet. There are definitely gaps, ghost lineages, etc but those are not the majority of the fossil record. You don't know this because you don't actually study the subject. You're a reddit tier midwit that gets all their paleontological information from jewube videos and reddit comment sections. I bet you unironically say shit like "non-avian dinosaur" and constantly try to tell people that whales are fish.

>>5146412
Imagine trying to defend engh, literally the biggest contrarian shit poster in all of paleontology.

>>5146410
Your mom's fat ass stands out.

>>5146397
>For example, evidence of late surviving Carcharodontosaurs while Tyrannosaurs all appear far more gracile.
So exactly what would be expected given what we already know. How is this proving your point and not mine?

You're annoying and stupid. The worst kind of annoying and the worst kind of stupid.

>>5146396
>Everything is a desert
Lol you reetees still don't understand why the paleobotanical record BTFOs you every single fucking time. You retards literally believe in witchcraft and think it's science. You could never pass a Turing Test.

>>5146489
Literally 100% of your post (which is 90% your assumptions about me and 10% the actual topic at hand) is incorrect. Very impressive.

>>5146373
Claiming an animal didn't have x feature is just as speculative as claiming it did, absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. The "conservative" skin and bones reconstruction of a fossil is every bit as speculative as the one that gives it soft body parts for which there is no evidence for or against.

>>5146496
How would you describe the environment of Western Australia or the Sahara?

>>5146490
There’s nothing to defend, you’re crying about something non existent

>>5146397
There were late-surviving carcharodontosaurs in Appalachia? Any examples?

>>5130496
Get woke, go broke. When shitlibs fly the rainbow flag the rest of us just go elsewhere and move on with our lives. Normal people can keep truckin' on no matter how much you sperg out and try to cancel em. Stay mad forever. You'll never win.

>>5132372
No, read literally anything by Bakker instead. At this point I'm convinced he just has esoteric knowledge from beyond the fold because he keeps being right even when he's seemingly just guessing.

>>5139421
What part of that other than the wings looks skinny and shrunken

>>5146841
No he just makes shit up and is wrong all the time. But he keeps getting boosted by the CIA. Like how the moron believes that everything from dinosaurs to ammonites went extinct because of a disease. Or how he claimed near the beginning of the so-called dinosaur renaissance that predator prey ratios of dinosaurs were like mammals, not like reptiles. Which he never substantiated with any kind of evidence and which turned out to be completely false.

>>5146588
Bitch more, you little fucking liar. The fraudster game is up in paleo shit. You had a fun little run. That's done now. People have had enough. It's not cool anymore. You're not special.

>>5146545
Bitch, what the fuck are you talking about? Neither of those environments has any bearing on pretty much any dinosaur containing formation. Djadochta is one of the only true desert formations known to contain dinosaurs at all. I literally can't think of another one. We know that's a desert because we have a full soil profile preserved and multiple dinosaurs covered by sand dunes. Now compare that to somewhere like the Morrison, where every single piece of evidence we have indicates that it was significantly more lush than typically depicted. The most common plant is a fern that lives only in wetlands or in forest understories, the most common dinosaur is tree associated. Even formations that are considered to be dryer like the Kayenta aren't. What little floral information we have indicates it was very similar to the Morrison. Ischigualasto, the beds that contain the Elgin reptiles, all of these are considered to be desert or desert like. None of them actually are. And none of them make any fucking ecological sense if they are. I am beyond fucking tired of seeing paleoart of titanosaurs running around on sand. What the fuck do you think they were eating? You think animals the size of fucking blue whales that lived on land lived in an environment with no fucking plants?

>>5146534
Ah, my mistake. You're clearly retarded. Please enjoy the rest of your day.

>>5148233
>no response
I accept your concession.

File: upboat.gif (414 KB, 480x270)

414 KB GIF

>>5130496

>>5148228
Speak English seething monkey

>>5148227
>Or how he claimed near the beginning of the so-called dinosaur renaissance that predator prey ratios of dinosaurs were like mammals, not like reptiles
You’ve been throughly BTFOd on this multiple times. T. rex was not 25% of Hell Creek’s fauna

>>5150008
Then why is that what the measurements show? And you have been informed of this before as well. It's not just Hell Creek. Allosaurus is 14.5% of the identifiable dinosaur fauna at Morrison - and that's if you exclude all of its likely synonyms and also doesn't include the other predators. Velociraptor is the second most common dinosaur at Djadochta. This is a universal. Now compare this to something like the Serengeti where all megafaunal predatory animals combined account for less than 1% of the population. Dinosaurs were cold-blooded. Deal with it. Bakker made this shit up out of thin air, like all dinosaur renaissance cultists do. Just like ostrom made a bunch of shit up before him, like lying about Compsognathus not having scales or inventing the shape of Deinonychus' retroverted pubis.

>>5151457
>And you have been informed of this before as well
And you’ve been informed that these numbers exist because of preservation bias
>It's not just Hell Creek
Yeah, in other formations like Lance and Two Medicine large predators make up a much smaller portion of the fauna
>Dinosaurs were cold-blooded
And like you’ve been told before, being cold-blooded isn’t enough to justify predators being 25% of the fauna. Modern reptilian predators like crocodilians, Komodo dragons and even snakes don’t come anywhere near those numbers relative to their prey

>>5151479
>And you’ve been informed that these numbers exist because of preservation bias
In every single formation that contains dinosaurs? At some point even you have to realize how stupid that sounds. Not only would these kinds of ratios not even be possible with warm blooded animals, but in multiple of these formations the apex predator's the largest animal or within like the top two or three. Even an extremely large at Edmontosaurus is only barely larger than a Tyrannosaurus. You know everything that I'm saying is correct, because I know it doesn't take that much mental energy to try to imagine a situation where the Serengeti is populated by carnivores the size of elephants appearing in proportions that are completely out of control. It immediately reveals how clownish your and all dinosaur renaissance cultists' mentality is on the subject. Like all cultists, you're just an asshole.

File: fabrizio-de-rossi-iguanod(...).jpg (277 KB, 1920x1080)

277 KB JPG

I like iguanodon a lot and I'm glad it doesn't look retarded. safe from rage baiting papers and so on

it stabbed animals with the thumb and could walk on four or two legs. good enough for me

>>5151496
>In every single formation that contains dinosaurs?
It isn’t
>Not only would these kinds of ratios not even be possible with warm blooded animals
They aren’t possible with cold blooded animals either

>>5126229
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RCrfiNsqFbk

>>5151540
>Br*tish dinosaur