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 (256,168 Views) | |
| CyborgIguana | Mar 9 2016, 06:18 PM Post #4981 |
![]() ![]()
|
That most people I know still think the entire clade of Pterosauria was a single species called "pterodactyl" (and it was, of course, a dinosaur).
Edited by CyborgIguana, Mar 9 2016, 06:19 PM.
|
![]() |
|
| PrimevalBrony | Mar 10 2016, 03:07 AM Post #4982 |
|
Youtuber. Combat robotics fan
![]()
|
Those that still refuse to accept that birds are dinosaurs. Instead they say "They descended from dinosaurs, but they aren't dinosaurs." *facepalm* |
![]() |
|
| Imperator Furiosa | Mar 10 2016, 02:17 PM Post #4983 |
![]()
Chaos Theory
![]()
|
That's nothing compared to the people who say "lizards/crocodiles are descended from dinosaurs" or "dinosaurs were giant scaly lizards". It's amazing how some people still insist this despite strong evidence to the contrary. |
![]() |
|
| Denomon3144 | Mar 10 2016, 10:09 PM Post #4984 |
![]()
Pick a god and pray!
![]()
|
|
![]() |
|
| CyborgIguana | Mar 10 2016, 10:13 PM Post #4985 |
![]() ![]()
|
Looks like something one might see on a particularly nasty acid trip.
Edited by CyborgIguana, Mar 10 2016, 10:13 PM.
|
![]() |
|
| PrimevalBrony | Mar 11 2016, 03:42 AM Post #4986 |
|
Youtuber. Combat robotics fan
![]()
|
How coincidental. I just finished an Iguanodon drawing today |
![]() |
|
| Zoo Tycooner FR | Mar 12 2016, 04:39 PM Post #4987 |
![]()
#Lithopédion
![]()
|
''Avatar 2'' - What did you smoke Spielberg ?
Edited by Zoo Tycooner FR, Mar 12 2016, 04:40 PM.
|
![]() |
|
| Incinerox | Mar 12 2016, 05:55 PM Post #4988 |
![]()
Āeksiot Zaldrīzoti
![]()
|
How is Avatar 2 paleontologically related? |
![]() |
|
| BossMan, Jake | Mar 12 2016, 06:17 PM Post #4989 |
|
Son of God
![]()
|
Was he even involved in the film? I think your confusing him with James Cameron |
![]() |
|
| Zoo Tycooner FR | Mar 12 2016, 06:35 PM Post #4990 |
![]()
#Lithopédion
![]()
|
I was comparing the Iguanodon , to one of the creatures present in Avatar . But yeah , I admit it was confusing . @Bossman : Right . |
![]() |
|
| Imperator Furiosa | Mar 13 2016, 12:26 AM Post #4991 |
![]()
Chaos Theory
![]()
|
Nah, I think it looks more like something you'd see in the Burton adaptation of Alice in Wonderland. It could be a friend of the Dodo. |
![]() |
|
| DinoBear | Mar 13 2016, 12:57 AM Post #4992 |
![]()
|
One thing that gets on my nerves is when names get used incorrectly. Specifically, Titanosaurus being used instead of titanosaur when referring the new giants like Notocolossus (*cough*ARKandNewsWebsites*cough*). It is a really easy mistake to make, but it is a rather large error.
Edited by DinoBear, Mar 13 2016, 12:57 AM.
|
![]() |
|
| BossAggron | Mar 13 2016, 05:05 AM Post #4993 |
|
Formerly Dilophoraptor
![]()
|
wait what? an Iguanodon in Avatar? |
![]() |
|
| Mathius Tyra | Mar 13 2016, 05:58 AM Post #4994 |
![]()
Rat snake is love... Rat snake is life
![]()
|
He joked that the green "Iguanodon" earlier from The Beeg One's post was likely from some kind of Avatar spin-off...
Edited by Mathius Tyra, Mar 13 2016, 05:59 AM.
|
![]() |
|
| Incinerox | Mar 13 2016, 07:08 AM Post #4995 |
![]()
Āeksiot Zaldrīzoti
![]()
|
Anyway, moving on. You know what I find really annoying? Paleobotany. You'd think for something as important as determining the very environment in which all our favourite extinct creatures lived in would be pretty damn important. But because of the way plants fossilised, paleobotany's means of classifying plant species can only be described as archaic. I made this massive rant about it on ZTV about how they have to give every leaf morphotype, every ovulate organ, every flower, every piece of bark or tree stump its own genus name based entirely on what those individual organs look like. I was researching a Triassic/Liassic plant called Dicroidium, which is only known from leaves which look like small, V-shaped fern fronds. That's literally it. There's like a dozen species of this leaf, and as it turns out, one belongs to a superficially ginkgo like seed-fern known from a fossilised trunk called Jeffersonoxylon, and another ended up belonging to a more tree fern-like plant stem called Rhaexoxylon. One might turn out to be a climber. It's as well thought out as any ichnogenus, which are equally annoying. Eubrontes, for example, is any large three toed footprint with even slight theropod affinities from the Liassic of North America. This would be fine, except for a lot of its range, we KNOW the track makers to be Dilophosaurus. So why don't they reassign them as Dilophosaurus tracks? |
![]() |
|
| 3 users reading this topic (3 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












