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 (256,159 Views)
Posted Image Flish
Member Avatar


the idea that they are muscle attachment points is not very valid, as there is no muscle that would realistically attach where the bumps are located on Concavenator, unless it was doing something weird with its arms, and that's pretty unlikely considering there isn't really anything else abnormal about them, and they aren't particularly large, either.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
stargatedalek
Member Avatar
I'm not slow! That's just my moe!

One issue with that assessment. We only have quill knobs from a select few species of modern birds, they are far from the norm among feathered animals and typically they represent that something unusual is going on with those feathers on the surface. Typically quill knobs are found in birds that put their feathers under high stress, such as fast mid-air turning, or using their wings to fight.

It's also important to note that in quill knobs the feathers don't anchor into the bone. Rather the quill knobs are anchors for specialized ligaments, which anchor a muscle, which anchors the feathers.

*edit* Flish beat me to the punch, although his post makes my second paragraph more relevant.
Edited by stargatedalek, Apr 17 2016, 01:53 PM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
CyborgIguana
Member Avatar


Guess it makes sense that we have quill knobs from dromaeosaurids then, since there's evidence that they were regularly doing the things you say quill knobs evolved for.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
stargatedalek
Member Avatar
I'm not slow! That's just my moe!

CyborgIguana
Apr 17 2016, 02:04 PM
Guess it makes sense that we have quill knobs from dromaeosaurids then, since there's evidence that they were regularly doing the things you say quill knobs evolved for.
Yup, holding onto prey and balancing/beating it with flapping motions is exactly the kind of behavior they would be associated with. Moorhen are probably the best comparison for quill knobs in reference to non-avian dinosaurs, they are present because of the wings beating so during fights.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
CyborgIguana
Member Avatar


People who think the discovery of a living non-avian dinosaur would disprove evolution.

By that logic ANY of the numerous Lazarus taxa we already have should disprove evolution.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Incinerox
Member Avatar
Āeksiot Zaldrīzoti

To be fair, they'd have to be idiotic to even make that train of thought their first after such a discovery, regardless of whether one chooses to listen to reason.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Tyranachu
Member Avatar
Nerdasaurus

Posted Image

A new raptor and the reconstruct it this way.

It even says in the caption that they're eating a Triceratops.

Lord why
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
PrimevalBrony
Member Avatar
Youtuber. Combat robotics fan

Tyranachu
Apr 18 2016, 12:56 PM
Posted Image

A new raptor and the reconstruct it this way.

It even says in the caption that they're eating a Triceratops.

Lord why
Because no layman knows Pachyrhinosaurus or Einiosaurus or literally any ceratopsian that isn't Triceratops or Styracosaurus. THAT is what bugs me
Online Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Furka
Member Avatar


Actually I'm pretty sure that IS a Pachyrhinosaurus, although not reconstructed in the best way.
Edited by Furka, Apr 18 2016, 01:29 PM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Okeanos
Member Avatar


PrimevalBrony
Apr 18 2016, 01:26 PM
Tyranachu
Apr 18 2016, 12:56 PM
Posted Image

A new raptor and the reconstruct it this way.

It even says in the caption that they're eating a Triceratops.

Lord why
Because no layman knows Pachyrhinosaurus or Einiosaurus or literally any ceratopsian that isn't Triceratops or Styracosaurus. THAT is what bugs me
Funny you say that, I'd say more people are likely to be able to name Pachyrhinosaurus because of the recent WWD film, I can't recall any recent dinosaur film that has a Styracosaurus and actually names it ... (latest would be Disney's Dinosaur, which doesn't name it at all)

Regardless, the ones you named have all been in popular media already, not very obscure by ceratopsian standards (but hey, it's not a competition - often animals are well known because they are interesting)
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
CyborgIguana
Member Avatar


When people think fossils are some incredibly rare thing that can only be uncovered in the most remote areas of the planet. No, you can find them LITERALLY anywhere! In fact, you've probably seen them before without knowing what they were.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
BossMan, Jake
Member Avatar
Son of God

Thats true! Why (True story by the way) our school rival Boone Grove (If that rings a bell) found remains of a Mastodon skeleton underneath what would become their baseball field back in the 90's

The article may still be around to!
Edited by BossMan, Jake, Apr 19 2016, 02:35 PM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Incinerox
Member Avatar
Āeksiot Zaldrīzoti

The fact that we lack Cretaceous bone beds from Sub-Saharan Africa.

It's all fine and dandy that we have beds for Niger, Algeria, Morocco and Egypt, but they're all coastal swampy places. What was continental Africa like back then?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
PrimevalBrony
Member Avatar
Youtuber. Combat robotics fan

It annoys me that Siamotyrannus is still reconstructed as a tyrannosaur. I mean it's been a metriacanthosaurid for...14 years?
Online Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Acinonyx Jubatus
Member Avatar
I AM THE UNSHRINKWRAPPER!

Incinerox
Apr 19 2016, 03:14 PM
The fact that we lack Cretaceous bone beds from Sub-Saharan Africa.

It's all fine and dandy that we have beds for Niger, Algeria, Morocco and Egypt, but they're all coastal swampy places. What was continental Africa like back then?
I heard somewhere that a giant Maastrichtian Abelisaurid was found in Kenya. Not sure how reliable that is, though, and I don't know any other details.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
3 users reading this topic (3 Guests and 0 Anonymous)
Go to Next Page
« Previous Topic · Extinct Animals & Evolution · Next Topic »
Add Reply