Support NeoGAF

[How About No]

Everytime I see naked raptors, I see this:

(These are modern day swans reconstructed using the shrink wrap method)

More here: (Scroll to the bottom for more examples)

http://io9.gizmodo.com/5965389/a-bo...-question-everything-you-know-about-dinosaurs

Also wow that Stegosaurus dong

 

[Bishop89]

Thank God Jurassic franchise has the whole "needs frog DNA to clone" or whatever.

Fuck these giant turkeys

 

[Comfort Jones]

This is disgusting. The ignore list is the result of science.

AND WHAT MADE THE MAN THAT MADE THE SCIENCE?

Spoiler

I don't believe in God tbh

Thank God Jurassic franchise has the whole "needs frog DNA to clone" or whatever.

Fuck these giant turkeys

Seriously why even post here man.

 

[TreIII]

#TeamFeathers, all the way.

Ever since I learned that my fave, the Triceratops, probably sported a mean set of quills to cover its tail, I've been enamored with the idea that Dinosaurs likely had feathers, quills and the like. It just makes them feel much more "complete".

 

[Xe4]

Ugh, I hate these so much. Yeah, it's easy to look back at some past science and mock it. In my opinion, it only makes you look like a douche.

Paleontologists were working with the information they had, doing their best with it. These animals were thought to be reptiles (thunder lizards). What does it look like if you take a modern reptile skeleton and "shrink wrap" it? Oh, that's right: it looks like the animal does.

They didn't "shrink wrap" mammals discovered during the same timeframe.

Might as well call Isaac Newton a moron because he didn't invent General Relativity.

I don't think that was what he was getting at. Rather, I think he was just saying even today paleontologist shrink wrap dinosaurs. Nothing wrong with it, but it should be made clear that's not the only way they can look. They also overstate their violent nature.

 

[YourMaster]

This thread makes me realize I really want to see more modern animals drawn based only on their skeletons. It looks so cool, I wish that featherless swan actually existed.

I love this hippo one:

In searching for that one, I also came across this cool beast:

Edit: Yes, it was the image below I liked. Thanks Xe4.

 

[Xe4]

I've seen a great one based on a hippo, but can't find it.

I did came across this cool beast:

 

[God Dayumm]

Ugh, I hate these so much. Yeah, it's easy to look back at some past science and mock it. In my opinion, it only makes you look like a douche.

Paleontologists were working with the information they had, doing their best with it. These animals were thought to be reptiles (thunder lizards). What does it look like if you take a modern reptile skeleton and "shrink wrap" it? Oh, that's right: it looks like the animal does.

They didn't "shrink wrap" mammals discovered during the same timeframe.

Might as well call Isaac Newton a moron because he didn't invent General Relativity.

I don't think the artist did those as a form of mockery. He just offered a different perspective with his drawings. Paleontologists do amazing work, they can theorize a lot of things from incomplete bones with their knowledge of taxonomy and evolution. It's only natural that some things are wrong, but there is no cause for mockery

 

[Tubobutts]

Ugh, I hate these so much. Yeah, it's easy to look back at some past science and mock it. In my opinion, it only makes you look like a douche.

Paleontologists were working with the information they had, doing their best with it. These animals were thought to be reptiles (thunder lizards). What does it look like if you take a modern reptile skeleton and "shrink wrap" it? Oh, that's right: it looks like the animal does.

They didn't "shrink wrap" mammals discovered during the same timeframe.

Might as well call Isaac Newton a moron because he didn't invent General Relativity.

It's less about calling them douches and more an examination of how incomplete our knowledge of prehistoric animals is and probably always will be.

 

[crazy monkey]

Lies

Exactly. Fuck feathers.

 

[Trumpets]

Why on earth would feathers evolve BEFORE the animals that used them to fly (birds)?

Surely the whole purpose of a feather is to be light yet strong enough to allow flight, that's why they evolved, and the ones on the picture look very similar to modern feathers.

Are all dinosaurs descended from feathered, flying animals? None of this makes sense.

 

[darscot]

What's the background scene from?

I think that is Doakes from Dexter?

 

[Raven117]

I agree. Trump will save us and set the world right. He will return us to the great featherless dinosaur lovers we were pre dirty commies.

What are you talking about? Dinosaurs never existed. Wasn't in the Bible.

Spoiler

joke

 

[thebeeks]

Why on earth would feathers evolve BEFORE the animals that used them to fly (birds)?

Surely the whole purpose of a feather is to be light yet strong enough to allow flight, that's why they evolved, and the ones on the picture look very similar to modern feathers.

Are all dinosaurs descended from feathered, flying animals? None of this makes sense.

But if feathers are solely to aid flight, why do flightless birds have feathers?

 

[EmCeeGramr]

Why on earth would feathers evolve BEFORE the animals that used them to fly (birds)?

Surely the whole purpose of a feather is to be light yet strong enough to allow flight, that's why they evolved, and the ones on the picture look very similar to modern feathers.

Are all dinosaurs descended from feathered, flying animals? None of this makes sense.

Feathers probably did not evolve for flight.

 

[Comfort Jones]

Exactly. Fuck feathers.

You genuinely think this shit is just made up?

This thread is depressing.

Why on earth would feathers evolve BEFORE the animals that used them to fly (birds)?

Surely the whole purpose of a feather is to be light yet strong enough to allow flight, that's why they evolved, and the ones on the picture look very similar to modern feathers.

Are all dinosaurs descended from feathered, flying animals? None of this makes sense.

We have flightless birds ffs. You've clearly never dove that deep into this subject yet you want to claim the experts aren't making sense.

 

[SkyOdin]

Why on earth would feathers evolve BEFORE the animals that used them to fly (birds)?

Surely the whole purpose of a feather is to be light yet strong enough to allow flight, that's why they evolved, and the ones on the picture look very similar to modern feathers.

Are all dinosaurs descended from feathered, flying animals? None of this makes sense.

Feathers need to come from somewhere. There is a massive difference between a scale and a feather, and all of the thousands of tiny steps in that evolutionary process had to have happened one at a time across millions of years.

Feathers didn't evolve for the specific purpose of flight. At their most basic, they are just a means of covering a creature's body, just like hair. So they serve that same purpose: keeping a creature warm and protecting the body from rain and snow. Since feathers trap more air than scales, they are superior at insulation. The evolution of feathers might be linked to the change from cold-blooded reptiles to warm-blooded dinosaurs and birds.

 

[YourMaster]

Why on earth would feathers evolve BEFORE the animals that used them to fly (birds)?

Surely the whole purpose of a feather is to be light yet strong enough to allow flight, that's why they evolved, and the ones on the picture look very similar to modern feathers.

Are all dinosaurs descended from feathered, flying animals? None of this makes sense.

Sure it makes sense. This is not new information, they just found some cool evidence in amber. Look at it the other way around:

Only some flying dinosaurs survived the extinction event, and we've come to call their descendants birds. Birds are dinosaurs.

Our modern day dino's or birds or whatever you want to call them, still have their dino genes, you must find this article interesting, where they broke the process that grows a beak for a chicken embryo and got the dinosaur mouth to form.
We also know that reptiles and birds are genetically very closely related and that unlike lizards and like birds dinosaurs were warmblooded.

But if you want a fact that will most likely blow your mind: A salmon is genetically closer to a human than to a shark.

 

[titiklabingapat]

Ugh, I hate these so much. Yeah, it's easy to look back at some past science and mock it. In my opinion, it only makes you look like a douche.

Paleontologists were working with the information they had, doing their best with it. These animals were thought to be reptiles (thunder lizards). What does it look like if you take a modern reptile skeleton and "shrink wrap" it? Oh, that's right: it looks like the animal does.

They didn't "shrink wrap" mammals discovered during the same timeframe.

Might as well call Isaac Newton a moron because he didn't invent General Relativity.

I actually didn't expect a serious reply so thanks for that. The author, I think, was largely making fun of the art side of paleontology. Like it or not, artists have a great influence on how the public perceives these things. Just look at all the Jurassic Park jokes in this thread alone. Even the subtitle of the book says that the book is only speculative and subjective itself.

 

[titiklabingapat]

Feathered dinosaurs are cool in my opnion. Even T-rex can be done right:

That said, people should remember it is probably only theropods who had feathers, guys like Triceratops were probably scaly.

Some in the ceratopsian family might have had quills on their back, kinda like porcupines. That's hell cool.

 

[BudokaiMR2]

Everyone is missing the big picture here. This obviously proves that this has been known for decades and the lizard-people in power have been destroying the evidence.

I mean it's not like birds went extinct right? Then how could dinosaurs aka the lizard people?

I knew Trump's resemblance to BP Richfield wasn't just a coincidence. Think about it people. That's one of the few jokes Trump HASN'T had a tantrum about on Twitter.

Think about it.

 

[Wag]

So does everything taste like "T-Rex" now?

 

[Iksenpets]

Why on earth would feathers evolve BEFORE the animals that used them to fly (birds)?

Surely the whole purpose of a feather is to be light yet strong enough to allow flight, that's why they evolved, and the ones on the picture look very similar to modern feathers.

Are all dinosaurs descended from feathered, flying animals? None of this makes sense.

I mean, look at the feathers on that tail. They're not your rigid wing feathers, they're soft downy things. More like on a baby chick. It's just insulation and covering. More rigid feathers evolve from there, first to help dinos balance using their tails and flapping their arms, then gliding, then flying.

 

[Gleethor]

Two sure-fire ways to get gaffers to question science:

A: tell them dinosaurs had feathers

B: tell them that squirting is mostly pee

 

[tuxfool]

So does everything taste like "T-Rex" now?

Given that Crocodile and Alligator meat has the texture of chicken (if not quite the same flavour), I'll go on a limb and say that this picture isn't that off the mark.

 

[All Possible Ways]

Some in the ceratopsian family might have had quills on their back, kinda like porcupines. That's hell cool.

Oh I didn't know that, cool!

 

[kswiston]

This thread is depressing.

People think they are hilarious when they repeat the same decade(s) old joke for the thousandth time.

Shit-posting in science threads is typically not cracked down on, so you have to wade through pages of joke and troll posts. Especially in "childhood ruining" science topics like this one.

 

[Akainu]

"There it is," would have been more appropriate but A for effort.

Screw the people that only like the idea of dinosaurs. This stuff is always awesome to learn.

 

[Nikodemos]

Oh I didn't know that, cool!

Psittacosaurus is confirmed to have had porcupine-like quills on its tail.

An unrelated dinosaur, Tianyulong, had its back covered by long bristles (simple feathers), resembling those of a wild boar. In fact, it belonged to a family of beaked dinosaurs which sported tusks during adulthood. Yeah, they had a bird-like beak with tusks poking out the sides.

 

[Fulminator]

feathers on dinos are a hoax created by the chinese

What if the Chinese are a hoax created by feathered dinos though?

 

[Eusis]

What if the Chinese are a hoax created by feathered dinos though?

No, that's the dodo, not the Chinese.

 

[Zocano]

Another victory for science.

 

[Zombine]

I look forward to the day when we find out people had feathers too.

🤔

 

[nny]

That's just marketing for the Last Guardian, pay no mind to it.

 

[Rest]

wtf, so we thought dinosaurs didn't have feathers for all this time, now that we think they do we find proof like a year later

The feathers thing has been known for at least ten years...

 

[valkillmore]

CONFIRMED

I just fucking laughed out loud

 

[EVOL 100%]

It's hilarious that it's hard to tell who's serious or not anymore

Spoiler

Actually, no, it's fucking infuriating and depressing. This thread is a symptom of one of the reasons that this world going down the shitter

 

[a916]

Yes, I can see the resemblance.

That's not what I was thinking about... maybe I'm thinking Gamecube

This doesn't look good.

 

[Stallion Dan]

why do people hate dinosaur feathers exactly?

Because it makes the Turkeysaurus kid right.

what if some of the dinosaurs we recreate with the bones have had their bones mismatched and we've done it all wrong

This has happened, getting long necks and tails messed up is relatively common.

 

[CrudeDiatribe]

Two sure-fire ways to get gaffers to question science:

A: tell them dinosaurs had feathers

B: tell them that squirting is mostly pee

You're not wrong.

 

[Pop-O-Matic]

CONFIRMED

Alright, Hollywood, where's my animated movie with this cute fella as the protagonist?

 

[Silent Chief]

When I was a kid dinosaurs did not have feathers.

I distinctly remember a book on dinosaurs with feathers, in the 70s.

 

[Cow Mengde]

Two sure-fire ways to get gaffers to question science:

A: tell them dinosaurs had feathers

B: tell them that squirting is mostly pee

Have you ever been squirted on?

Spoiler

Not that it matters

 

[Silent Chief]

Why on earth would feathers evolve BEFORE the animals that used them to fly (birds)?

You're confusing evolution with intelligent design.

 

[99Luffy]

Why is it assumed that if a few tiny dinosaurs have feathers then every dinosaur in jurassic park would of had feathers?

No freaking way this dinosaur had feathers.

 

[Patterbits]

I think eagles sound pretty cool.
A giant eagle would sound pretty badass. They were so big I doubt the word we would use to describe hearing one would be honk.

Also. That was one ancient bird they found. Not a dino. Lots of maybes thrown around in that article.

I've got some bad news for you about eagles... The sound you usually hear for eagles is actually that of a red tailed hawk.

 

[SciencePilot]

Getting the public to accept the fact that many dinosaurs likely had feathers will be an interesting study in how truth disperses through society.

Even in the face of strong scientific evidence, people just believe what they want to believe. Much like how many people don't accept global warming or evolution. I bet the popular image of scaly dinosaurs persists for a long, long time.

 

[Tubobutts]

Why is it assumed that if a few tiny dinosaurs have feathers then every dinosaur in jurassic park would of had feathers?

No freaking way this dinosaur had feathers.

It's not a dinosaur though.

 

[kswiston]

Why is it assumed that if a few tiny dinosaurs have feathers then every dinosaur in jurassic park would of had feathers?

No freaking way this dinosaur had feathers.

That's not even a dinosaur

 

[thebeeks]

Why is it assumed that if a few tiny dinosaurs have feathers then every dinosaur in jurassic park would of had feathers?

No freaking way this dinosaur had feathers.

You're absolutely right, Dimetrodon did not have feathers.

Dimetrodon is not a dinosaur.