Byakuya769
Member
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 a dinosaur.
Is that the joke?
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Feathered dinosaur tail found trapped in amber
- Thread starter AuthenticM
- Start date
- Status
That's not a dinosaur.
Is that the joke?
Seductivpancakes
Member
I can't tell who's trolling and who isn't.
BobTheFork
Member
We need Speilberg to "George Lucas" those Raptors.
I'd much rather see what Pratt looks like with feathers.
More closely related to us than dinosaurs for the non trolling posters reading the thread.
StopMakingSense
Member
Paleontologists have a general idea of which dinosaurs most likely had feathers and which ones likely didn't.
Let me guess according to you guys it's a bird
Comfort Jones
Banned
Just know they're both willfully shitting up a thread for absolutely no good reason.
A Fish Aficionado
I am going to make it through this year if it kills me
Muscular development of fibular reduction in birds and its evolution from dinosaurs
The whole nostalgia masturbation is gross.
The whole nostalgia masturbation is gross.
No, it's a mamal like reptile, being closer related to mammals than dinasaurs, though not our direct ancestor.
Okay? Monkeys used to be covered in hair and we're not
Just because birds come from dinosaurs doesn't mean dinosaurs had feathers
Audioboxer
Member
Checkmate atheists. Either master trolling, or the crumbling of history and Ken Ham's ark riding into the fucking sunset.
Humans are covered in hair. Just because most of it is fine doesnt mean it isn't there.
Comfort Jones
Banned
False, body hair didn't just get finer, it started disappearing
Educate yourself: http://mobile.nytimes.com/2003/08/19/science/why-humans-and-their-fur-parted-ways.html (NY times article)
Horror movie with that as the monster or bust. You will never laugh at funny looking fat birds ever again.
We need Speilberg to "George Lucas" those Raptors.
Jurassic World: Feathered Edition
Give the fans the option.
Yeah, his post below mine let me know he was trolling.
What's to educate? You said we aren't covered in hair. Barring genetic traits leading to total lack of body hair (and later in life baldness), every inch of your typical human is covered in hair. It's common sense that density varies.
No one has ever said that every feathered dino was as feathered as a sparrow.
CONFIRMED
T-Rex should be renamed Fat Chocobo and gets lots and lots of hugs.
Article literally points out how humans are no longer covered in body hair
Article just points out that we dont have monkey fur and gives some postulated reasons for that, along with a timeline.
Again, we are covered in hair. Most of it is sparse, and vestigial since it doesn't perform any of the functions that fur did, but the remnants of the fur coats are still there.
T-Rex might have been largely featherless, but probably had at least some vestigial covering like us or elephants.
Interesting didn't know we had any direct evidence which suggests t-Rex had feathers. Link please?
Based on previous posts, you don't believe in phylogentic inference, but feathered tyrannosaurs have been established.
https://www.wired.com/2012/04/yutyrannus-huali-feathers/
T-Rex (the species rather than the genus or family) itself hasnt yet. But almost all extinct mammals from >2-3M years ago lack direct evidence of fur as well. Fur and feathers dont preserve easily.
So there's no direct evidence? K ty
Coriolanus
Banned
...are you sure that you wanna talk about dinosaurs based solely on direct evidence?
Because that'd be hella stupid.
Boss Doggie
all my loli wolf companions are so moe
people lack imagination of they think dinos without feathers look lame
Comfort Jones
Banned
Look at his posts, look at his tag, look at his threads.
Living definition of a joke poster.
God Dayumm
Banned
titiklabingapat
Member
Some of them did have fur like coverings on them, or at least the later synapsids did who didn't have any sails
Dinosaurs with feathers is an amazing discovery. Whether they had thick downy covering or just sparse covering is an interesting question.
I'd love to think of the variation amongst some of the theropods, especially if they had enough feathers for sexual and defensive displays like we see in birds.
It's a shame we will never know what their behaviour was like, but knowing more about them is always more exciting than pretending they were like in some movie. The anti-scientific trolling in this thread is banal.
I'd love to think of the variation amongst some of the theropods, especially if they had enough feathers for sexual and defensive displays like we see in birds.
It's a shame we will never know what their behaviour was like, but knowing more about them is always more exciting than pretending they were like in some movie. The anti-scientific trolling in this thread is banal.
Dinosaur = deinos sauros = terrible lizard.
If dinosaurs are birds, then that shakes the very foundation of dinosaurs. They should be called dinopoultry (are they even still terrible?). Tyrannopoultry Rex. Brontopoultry. Stegapoultry. Triceratops is cool, that one can stay (unless you're gonna tell me that he never had three horns).
How could science get this wrong? If science lied to us about dinosaurs, what else has it lied to us about? Oh, that's right, Pluto. Science lied to us about the solar system. While science was laughing it's ass off about people who believed the Earth was flat or that the universe had a creator who sent a carpenter to save our souls, science was cramming falsehoods into our brains.
And if science was wrong about dinosaurs, and it was wrong about the solar system, what other "facts" is science still wrong about? Is it feathers? Science is wrong about feathers, isn't it? Science needs to stop acting so damn smug and own up to it's mistakes. It needs to quit pretending it's so much better than the people who grew up learning last year's gospel truth.
If dinosaurs are birds, then that shakes the very foundation of dinosaurs. They should be called dinopoultry (are they even still terrible?). Tyrannopoultry Rex. Brontopoultry. Stegapoultry. Triceratops is cool, that one can stay (unless you're gonna tell me that he never had three horns).
How could science get this wrong? If science lied to us about dinosaurs, what else has it lied to us about? Oh, that's right, Pluto. Science lied to us about the solar system. While science was laughing it's ass off about people who believed the Earth was flat or that the universe had a creator who sent a carpenter to save our souls, science was cramming falsehoods into our brains.
And if science was wrong about dinosaurs, and it was wrong about the solar system, what other "facts" is science still wrong about? Is it feathers? Science is wrong about feathers, isn't it? Science needs to stop acting so damn smug and own up to it's mistakes. It needs to quit pretending it's so much better than the people who grew up learning last year's gospel truth.
Snarfington
Member
This viral marketing for The Last Guardian is going a bit far.
Boss Doggie
all my loli wolf companions are so moe
Go blame very early taxonomy.
With that said they did have some foreseight, we did get the word raptor after all (which is more related to birds despite being used on certain dinosaurs).
Also smug science absolutism is pretty much just casuals or plebs thinking they know science when the very essence of science is fact-checking and changing established stuff because of new facts.
Some had feathers.
The Earth ain't older then 6'000 years old. Feathers are a prefabrication.
You also have to accept that Dinosaurs are an extant group, e.g birds.
Switch Back 9
a lot of my threads involve me fucking up somehow. Perhaps I'm a moron?
I saw the thread and thought "how did this get to 7 pages". I did not expect what I ended up finding.
You guys are crazy.
You guys are crazy.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked