>>16770443
that's a rat

>>16770473
a big rat!!

>>16770443
>sludge

>>16770505
pretty small compared to bronto

File: era.png (61 KB, 493x765)

61 KB PNG

>>16770443
>sixty million years
6 million years after T-exes

>>16770443
What species are on the pic?

>>16770505
for you!

>>16770443

Dinosaurs are fake.

>>16770443
>Why did you lie to me, /sci/?
We didn't. Dr. Stephen Falken (aka Dr. Robert Hume) is who lied to you.

File: E5FE0E54-CD5A-488A-8CFD-B(...).png (1.82 MB, 1536x1024)

1.82 MB PNG

>>16770650
I think that it was a species of Repenomamus which were actually somewhat smaller than I remembered but actually did co-exist with non-avian dinosaurs (over 100 million years ago). As it turns out; I was actually thinking of Paraceratherium (pic related) which lived something like 30 million years after T-rexes.

>>16770443
How tf that fucking thing survived near T-rexes?

File: 05EBC3DB-9B5A-4787-AB1D-9(...).png (1.96 MB, 1536x1024)

1.96 MB PNG

>>16771074
I think that a lot of early mammals spent much of their time burrowed underground—which is probably why they fared better than the dinosaurs after the asteroid impact event. T-rexes were probably scavengers anyway, and wouldn’t bother with such small prey.

File: 773FD837-E05B-4372-B42D-6(...).png (992 KB, 1024x1024)

992 KB PNG

:)

>>16771065
>Paraceratherium with a nose horn and cat paws
Glad to see AI is still garbage at making animals

File: 91258B81-675C-4F11-812E-6(...).png (2.58 MB, 1536x1024)

2.58 MB PNG

>>16771461
Yeah that one came out lazily made so I called the AI out on it and it remade it for me but it took me a few hours to get it out of it here look

File: paraceratherium-JulioLacerda.jpg (285 KB, 1280x720)

285 KB JPG

>>16771466
Why would you waste a few hours trying to perfect slop that still comes out anatomically incorrect when you can just post an existing image

>>16771466
AI is not usable for stuff like this and won't be for some years unless you have a Lora and run StableDiffusion (but Loras for extinct mammals dont exist).

>>16770443
Do we come from them? Sorry, I'm not a smartass with a phd

File: FDD85F6B-D81F-414E-9354-F(...).png (1.97 MB, 1024x1024)

1.97 MB PNG

>>16771498
Yes that one looks very good but I feel that manmade CGI art tends to lack some of the ultra high-definition quality detail that some AI is (sometimes) capable of like in pic related. Here’s another attempt I made. I like the detail on the ground better in this one than yours but maybe I just have brainlet layman eyes.

File: F3F9C5E2-4FC6-4F28-8E84-8(...).png (2.43 MB, 1536x1024)

2.43 MB PNG

>>16771691
Probably.

Here’s an example of Plesiadapiformes—another probable ancestor that lived something like 10 million to 50 million years after the one in the OP.

>>16771077
>T-rexes were probably scavengers anyway
Still salty, Professor Horner?

>>16771498
>artistic renderings are so much more accurate than AI
Welcome to /sci/. Enjoy your visit.
Please come back soon!