Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]






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:

Username:   Password:
Add Reply
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 (256,296 Views)
CyborgIguana
Member Avatar


The best we'll ever be able to get is an approximate and basic idea of what these animals looked like, as there are so many details lost to the process of fossilization that will most likely never be recovered. But of course, that's all part of the mystery that makes paleontology so exciting. :)

Anyway, back on topic.
Edited by CyborgIguana, Oct 15 2014, 12:25 PM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
stargatedalek
Member Avatar
I'm not slow! That's just my moe!

the fact this is easily the most active topic in the paleo section kind of annoys me :P
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
CyborgIguana
Member Avatar


Because ranting is just too much fun. :P
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
stargatedalek
Member Avatar
I'm not slow! That's just my moe!

oddly enough its where some of the most intelligent conversations stem from
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Yi Qi
Member Avatar


It annoys me that people keep portraying Dimetrodon as a scaly lizard like creature when we not only know the thing was closer to mammals but we have impressions of it that show that most of its skin was leathery like a rhino and not scaly like a lizard, with some scutes covering their bellies similar in appearance to those found in the tail of rats.

Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Brach™
Member Avatar
hi

I wasn't aware of that actually. Are there any artistic representations showing it like that, BF?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Similis
Member Avatar


Austroraptor
Oct 15 2014, 11:33 PM
It annoys me that people keep portraying Dimetrodon as a scaly lizard like creature when we not only know the thing was closer to mammals but we have impressions of it that show that most of its skin was leathery like a rhino and not scaly like a lizard, with some scutes covering their bellies similar in appearance to those found in the tail of rats.

The scaly "pelycosaur" trope stems from the "mammal-like reptile" term that is still firmly embeded in the minds of many people. Just like restoring theropods with scales only because "ancestors to birds, not birds" seems to be such a great justification to not give them feathers or naked skin :P It's unpleasant, but it won't go soon unless there's somehow a gigantic spike of interest in synapsids among general public.
Edited by Similis, Oct 16 2014, 12:53 AM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Brach™
Member Avatar
hi

MrGorsh
Oct 16 2014, 12:48 AM
Austroraptor
Oct 15 2014, 11:33 PM
It annoys me that people keep portraying Dimetrodon as a scaly lizard like creature when we not only know the thing was closer to mammals but we have impressions of it that show that most of its skin was leathery like a rhino and not scaly like a lizard, with some scutes covering their bellies similar in appearance to those found in the tail of rats.

The scaly "pelycosaur" trope stems from the "mammal-like reptile" term that is still firmly embeded in the minds of many people. Just like restoring theropods with scales only because "ancestors to birds, not birds" seems to be such a great justification to not give them feathers or naked skin :P It's unpleasant, but it won't go soon unless there's somehow a gigantic spike of interest in synapsids among general public.
Someone write Permian Park. We'll say Michael Crichton's ghost wrote it through a seance.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
CyborgIguana
Member Avatar


People who think Dimetrodon is a dinosaur. It's even worse than thinking pterosaurs or marine reptiles are dinosaurs, at least those are still sauropsids.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Yi Qi
Member Avatar


Rhodedicut
Oct 16 2014, 12:35 AM
I wasn't aware of that actually. Are there any artistic representations showing it like that, BF?
curiously, no there aren't even tough its known for quite a long time.

Now Gorsh, thing is, atleast there are accurate theropod reconstructions out there, i've yet to see ONE dimetrodon that wasn't a scaly/lizardy thing.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
CyborgIguana
Member Avatar


I'll be sure to draw one at some point, maybe post in my art topic if it turns out well. :P

Any pics of the skin impressions I could possibly use for reference?
Edited by CyborgIguana, Oct 16 2014, 02:02 PM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Okeanos
Member Avatar


Austroraptor
Oct 16 2014, 01:58 PM
Rhodedicut
Oct 16 2014, 12:35 AM
I wasn't aware of that actually. Are there any artistic representations showing it like that, BF?
curiously, no there aren't even tough its known for quite a long time.

Now Gorsh, thing is, atleast there are accurate theropod reconstructions out there, i've yet to see ONE dimetrodon that wasn't a scaly/lizardy thing.
Just a quick search of dA comes up with this xD
Spoiler: click to toggle

(Not saying the above are accurate, just that they aren't scaly)

Unfortunately scaly Dimetrodons still far outweigh any type of non-scaly Dimetrodon (and often it's hard to tell if people are portraying it scaly but without many details, or with leathery skin)
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
CyborgIguana
Member Avatar


To be fair, Dimetrodon still may have looked fairly reptilian since it was a very primitive synapsid, but I agree about portraying them as scaly when the fossil evidence proves otherwise.
Edited by CyborgIguana, Oct 16 2014, 03:03 PM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Yi Qi
Member Avatar


@Okeanos: Those are stil wrong, Dimetrodon predates the evolution of fur by atleast a few good million years and the impressions we have of it show a leathery, not furry animal, think of a rhino not a muskrat.

altough by far, those are FAR better than the scaly deciptions, idk why people just keep portraying it as scaly when we have good evidence otherwise.

EDIT: Oh just seen the small note behind the spoiler, nvm stupid me xD

Anyway:

http://www.cracked.com/article_19136_8-terrifying-skeletons-adorable-animals.html/?utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=fanpage&utm_campaign=new+article&wa_ibsrc=fanpage

This is why skinwrapping is wrong
Edited by Yi Qi, Oct 16 2014, 04:41 PM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
stargatedalek
Member Avatar
I'm not slow! That's just my moe!

when "news sites" hold scientific papers at ransom for outrageous prices
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
4 users reading this topic (4 Guests and 0 Anonymous)
Go to Next Page
« Previous Topic · Extinct Animals & Evolution · Next Topic »
Add Reply