Shoot a firework rocket ~ Winners!Make a forum zoo! |
| Welcome to The Round Table. We hope you enjoy your visit. You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free. Join our community! If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features: |
| What annoys you about paleontology?; Rant on about moronic theories, complaints, or just animals that annoy you. | |
|---|---|
| Topic Started: Sep 28 2013, 05:04 PM (256,481 Views) | |
| TyrantTR | Oct 14 2013, 05:32 PM Post #286 |
![]() ![]()
|
Well if it is the case that all scales are examples of undeveloped feathers, then yes. Technically all theropods are feathered. Even Carnotaurus, but strictly to a layman they would understand these features as scales. |
![]() |
|
| CyborgIguana | Oct 14 2013, 05:36 PM Post #287 |
![]() ![]()
|
I think fully-formed feathers were probably only found in maniraptors, all other theropods had proto-feathers or scales in my opinion. |
![]() |
|
| Sheather | Oct 14 2013, 05:42 PM Post #288 |
![]()
Thank you for the set, Azrael!
![]()
|
I believe fully-formed feathers could be found on others too; a feather is still considered a feather even if it's downy - the breast feathers or a goose or the plumage on a kiwi are still feathers. |
![]() |
|
| CyborgIguana | Oct 14 2013, 05:47 PM Post #289 |
![]() ![]()
|
I do think tyrannosaurids had feathers, but I must admit that when it comes to depictions in media I prefer scaly tyrannosaurs to feathery ones. |
![]() |
|
| Sheather | Oct 14 2013, 05:51 PM Post #290 |
![]()
Thank you for the set, Azrael!
![]()
|
I personally think all dinosaurs look a lot more interesting with feathery pelage. |
![]() |
|
| CyborgIguana | Oct 14 2013, 06:00 PM Post #291 |
![]() ![]()
|
More interesting, certainly, just not necessarily better. |
![]() |
|
| Jules | Oct 14 2013, 06:01 PM Post #292 |
![]()
Mihi est imperare orbi universo
![]()
|
I just prefer my dinosaurs as cute balls of fluff. |
![]() |
|
| Sheather | Oct 14 2013, 06:04 PM Post #293 |
![]()
Thank you for the set, Azrael!
![]()
|
I think a feathery sauropod would be epic; in my opinions feathers make everything better but even so, some animals just didn't have them so my opinions don't really matter. I do feel most groups did though - probably almost everything except sauropods (maybe even them - some bristles or something) had some sort - even if it was just "scales" or a light fuzz. I agree probably only maniraptoriformes and maybe some related groups had fully-formed ''flight'' feathers like modern birds. |
![]() |
|
| CyborgIguana | Oct 14 2013, 06:06 PM Post #294 |
![]() ![]()
|
I think some dinosaurs look better with fluff (raptors for example. Even before I knew they were feathered I thought something looked off about lizardy skin on that extremely bird-like body). Others I prefer scales on, it really just depends on the dino for me. |
![]() |
|
| Sheather | Oct 14 2013, 06:25 PM Post #295 |
![]()
Thank you for the set, Azrael!
![]()
|
My very first experience with dinosaurs was Dinosaur Planet and it's feathery raptors when I was about 6, so I never even saw bald raptors until I saw Jurassic Park years later and thought they just looked horrible. |
![]() |
|
|
|
Oct 14 2013, 06:28 PM Post #296 |
![]() ![]()
|
Yeah, that's the gist of it, based on recent evidence. |
![]() |
|
| CyborgIguana | Oct 14 2013, 06:47 PM Post #297 |
![]() ![]()
|
Yeah, even the DP maniraptors were somewhat underfeathered.
|
![]() |
|
| Sheather | Oct 14 2013, 06:50 PM Post #298 |
![]()
Thank you for the set, Azrael!
![]()
|
But they got the point across, and it was certainly the most up-to-date and accurate portrayal at that time. |
![]() |
|
| Similis | Oct 15 2013, 01:09 AM Post #299 |
![]() ![]()
|
I, so far, prefer not to follow the conclusion of the completely feathered theropod/dinosaurian/metatarsalian ancestor - even if it makes much sense and gets me hyped up. Yet. When something more is written about it being valid, I'll probably be extremely happy. Though, I was referring mainly to the coelurosaurian branch of theropods - we actually don't get to see a single line of them that gains scales over the feathers, thus my conclusion of the feather development rather than going scaley. If we are to pick another clade... well, once more info on the siberian ornithopod is out, it'll be apparent that these animals were going more scaly the bigger they were, due to factors unknown. After all the hadrosaur integument we know is purely scaly with some scutes (though still not rough - small smooth scales). In the end I'm still looking forward to seeing some feather evidence material from T.rex just so there is undeniable proof of it having them (as if the clear evolutionary line wasn't enough, geez), but I guess if it's not going to be whole animal imprint - people will say that feathers were only present on a tiny patch of skin. |
![]() |
|
|
|
Oct 15 2013, 01:36 AM Post #300 |
![]() ![]()
|
I personally think the idea of any feathered dinosaur that's not a Coelorosaur, whether theropod or not, to be impractical and pointless. I can accept that coelorosaurs, at least 80% percent of them, were feathered, but due to the fact that most other dinosaurs, including hadrosaurs, ceratopsians, sauropods and pachycephalosaurs, to be impractical and highly unlikely, due to the fact that non-coelorosaur dinosaursn were closer to crocodiles than birds. (Correct me if I'm wrong). Unless you count quills on pachycephalosaurs and ceratopsids (Which they might not have even had outside of Psittaccosaurus), the spikes running along the tails of diplodocids, and the scales that all dinosaurs had (Which technically are a specially adapted/evolved form of feathers), there's no logically valid reason why non-coelorosaurs may have had feathers. Then again, I'm just restating the obvious. |
![]() |
|
| 4 users reading this topic (4 Guests and 0 Anonymous) | |
| Go to Next Page | |
| « Previous Topic · Extinct Animals & Evolution · Next Topic » |

FAQ
Search
Members
Rules
Staff PM Box
Downloads
Pointies
Groups












