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 (256,252 Views)
Yi Qi
Member Avatar


Incinerox
Jan 21 2015, 04:58 PM
Pebbly scales on the tail and hind legs, says Compsognathus and Juravenator.

But I was wrong. Sinosauropteryx and Sinocalliopteryx WERE completely feathered. It varied among the compies. But up until those guys, nothin' at all.
Compy's tail scales were lately found out to be sedimentological artifacts.

Quote:
 
Some relatives of Compsognathus, namely Sinosauropteryx and Sinocalliopteryx, have been preserved with the remains of simple feathers covering the body like fur,[9] promoting some scientists to suggest that Compsognathus might have been feathered in a similar way.[10] Consequently, many depictions of Compsognathus show them with coverings of downy proto-feathers. However, no feathers or feather-like covering have been preserved with Compsognathus fossils, in contrast to Archaeopteryx, which are found in the same sediments. Karin Peyer, in 2006, reported skin impressions preserved on the side of the tail starting at the 13th tail vertebra. The impressions showed small bumpy tubercles, similar to the scales found on the tail and hind legs of Juravenator.[11] Additional scales had in 1901 been reported by Von Huene, in the abdominal region of the German Compsognathus, but Ostrom subsequently disproved this interpretation;[12][13] in 2012 they were by Achim Reisdorf seen as plaques of adipocere, corpse wax.


in short, those have been disproven time after time again, and the newest studies sugest those scales are actually corpse wax.

This holds truth to jura tough, which likely had scales running up to its stomach. In short, basal, non maniraptoriform coelurosaur integument had no discernible "pattern" whatsoever, we have things like juravenator which shows a mid coat of feathers and an entirely scaly underside ,Sinosauropteryx and some tyrannosaurids with some traces of scales on the pubic area and under thebase of their tails, as you previously mentioned, yet you have aberrations like Sinocalliopteryx who is feathered up to its feet.

There is a but simple explanation to this however, basal coelurosaur nomeclature is a huge cluster****, in short, "Compsognathidae" is as paraphyletic as theropods get, with things such as juravenator being more closely related to ornitholestes and coelurus (and to tyrannosaurs) than to compsognathus, wich is likely not that closely related either with things such as Sinosauropteryx,Huaxiagnathus and Sinocalliopteryx who likely form a clade amongst themselves.

and thats why our dinosaur taxonomies need updates, BADLY.
Edited by Yi Qi, Jan 22 2015, 07:13 PM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
the dark phoenix
Member Avatar
King of wonderlandia

Care to know one thing that annoys me?

Wars and politics preventing more fossil finds. They blow the places up and then its a miracle if we find even a toe or tooth.

Private fossil hunters that don't share.

And stupid people that find them and ground them up for "Dragon potions" or some other hogwash.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Yi Qi
Member Avatar


the dark phoenix
Jan 21 2015, 06:25 PM
And stupid people that find them and ground them up for "Dragon potions" or some other hogwash.
Fun fact, our legends of griffons might very well have come from Protoceratops bones brought on from the east by the silk roads on ancient roman times.

Posted Image
Edited by Yi Qi, Jan 21 2015, 06:49 PM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Incinerox
Member Avatar
Āeksiot Zaldrīzoti

the dark phoenix
Jan 21 2015, 06:25 PM
Care to know one thing that annoys me?

Wars and politics preventing more fossil finds. They blow the places up and then its a miracle if we find even a toe or tooth.

Private fossil hunters that don't share.

And stupid people that find them and ground them up for "Dragon potions" or some other hogwash.
YES!

THIS!

This is why we barely have anything from the Middle East. It remains almost completely unexplored, and I have a hunch that it's got A LOT of potential going for it paleontologically.
Edited by Incinerox, Jan 21 2015, 08:25 PM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Posted Image Narukota
Member Avatar
blah

Austroraptor
Jan 21 2015, 06:49 PM
the dark phoenix
Jan 21 2015, 06:25 PM
And stupid people that find them and ground them up for "Dragon potions" or some other hogwash.
Fun fact, our legends of griffons might very well have come from Protoceratops bones brought on from the east by the silk roads on ancient roman times.

Posted Image
WELL, THANKS A LOT. :catz:
You just made my mind explode. :catz:
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
CyborgIguana
Member Avatar


How many of the dinosaur articles on Wikipedia still display shrink-wrapped reconstructions. Because I guess according to Wikipedia policy, non shrink-wrapping would be "too speculative". :roll:
Edited by CyborgIguana, Jan 21 2015, 10:05 PM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Posted Image Narukota
Member Avatar
blah

Realizing that Humposaurus maximus doesn't exist depressed me. ._.
Edited by Narukota, Jan 22 2015, 01:44 AM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Incinerox
Member Avatar
Āeksiot Zaldrīzoti

CyborgIguana
Jan 21 2015, 10:05 PM
How many of the dinosaur articles on Wikipedia still display shrink-wrapped reconstructions. Because I guess according to Wikipedia policy, non shrink-wrapping would be "too speculative". :roll:
They removed my Thalassodromeus because "it's head is too small". I have since solved that problem and still not back.

It makes me angry... >:C
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Brach™
Member Avatar
hi

CyborgIguana
Jan 21 2015, 10:05 PM
How many of the dinosaur articles on Wikipedia still display shrink-wrapped reconstructions. Because I guess according to Wikipedia policy, non shrink-wrapping would be "too speculative". :roll:
It's not and it shouldn't be. Not unless they want to use pictures of emaciated lions for their lion article it isn't.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Yutyrannus the second
Member Avatar


Forget Wikipedia.
The german one failed to mention Yutyrannus feathers on the T.rex article over 3 years.
So, on Wikipedia, there still is that nonsense that T.rex can´t have feathers because it´s to big....
And yes, we even have a Yutyrannus article in the german Wikipedia -.-
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Yi Qi
Member Avatar


Yutyrannus the second
Jan 23 2015, 05:57 AM
So, on Wikipedia, there still is that nonsense that T.rex can´t have feathers because it´s to big....
Theres another thing that annoys me, the fact that people still use that arguemnt even tough its been consistently proven to be bullshit over and over again.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
CyborgIguana
Member Avatar


It also clearly demonstrates lack of knowledge about feathers. Feathers don't trap heat in the manner of mammalian hair, so they're useful both for warming up the animal and cooling it down.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Iben
Member Avatar
There'll be no foot-walking! Just air-flying!

CyborgIguana
Jan 23 2015, 01:16 PM
It also clearly demonstrates lack of knowledge about feathers. Feathers don't trap heat in the manner of mammalian hair, so they're useful both for warming up the animal and cooling it down.
Even if it worked like mammalian hair, shouldn't we be portraying Megatherium with naked skin if this was true ? ;)

Besides, even in current mammals there are ways to get rid of warmth using hairs, elephants do this with their hairs. :)
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
CyborgIguana
Member Avatar


Exactly, thank you for making my point.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Yi Qi
Member Avatar


Iben
Jan 23 2015, 01:23 PM
CyborgIguana
Jan 23 2015, 01:16 PM
It also clearly demonstrates lack of knowledge about feathers. Feathers don't trap heat in the manner of mammalian hair, so they're useful both for warming up the animal and cooling it down.
Even if it worked like mammalian hair, shouldn't we be portraying Megatherium with naked skin if this was true ? ;)

Besides, even in current mammals there are ways to get rid of warmth using hairs, elephants do this with their hairs. :)
And people misunderstand why elephants and rhinos are hairless.

it is not because they're "big" its because their ancestors were semi aquatic creatures, plus they often start regrowing fur whenever things get a little colder.

and talking about sloths, which are similar sized, we have many ground sloth skin material and they're by average WOOLIER THAN MAMMOTHS even tough the species we have fur of lived at places such as...

Posted Image
Posted Image

the northeastern Brazilian caatinga:

Posted Image

or the Mojave desert:
Posted Image

see, theres many reasons animals lose integument and size isn't one of them

Edited by Yi Qi, Jan 23 2015, 01:54 PM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
4 users reading this topic (4 Guests and 0 Anonymous)
ZetaBoards - Free Forum Hosting
ZetaBoards gives you all the tools to create a successful discussion community.
Go to Next Page
« Previous Topic · Extinct Animals & Evolution · Next Topic »
Add Reply