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 (256,151 Views) | |
| stargatedalek | May 26 2016, 07:54 PM Post #5236 |
|
I'm not slow! That's just my moe!
![]()
|
"Rex" as a species name was being used long before dinosaurs were even a known group. |
![]() |
|
| heliosphoros | May 26 2016, 09:20 PM Post #5237 |
![]() ![]()
|
Speaking of names, the type species of Dyskritodon, D. amazighi, was named in honour of the Berbers that helped a paleontological expedition in 1988. I guess what annoys me is that people whine about "rex" being overused and don't rejoice on little heartwarming facts like this. |
![]() |
|
| Yi Qi | May 26 2016, 11:02 PM Post #5238 |
![]() ![]()
|
No they weren't colored like them, the only thing we know so far is that they were counter shaded, which means they their topsides were darker than their bellies. They could've been anywhere from this: To, well, check my sig... Edited by Yi Qi, May 26 2016, 11:02 PM.
|
![]() |
|
| CyborgIguana | May 26 2016, 11:05 PM Post #5239 |
![]() ![]()
|
With all due respect to your art skills, I find it unlikely that a 40+ foot long pelagic marine lizard would be quite so vividly coloured as the one in your sig. But that of course is aside from the point, it is indeed a rather grey area (no pun intended). Edited by CyborgIguana, May 26 2016, 11:06 PM.
|
![]() |
|
| Supersaur | May 27 2016, 11:30 AM Post #5240 |
|
Diabloceratops
![]()
|
I meant like dark on top and light under but I get where you are coming from. I was just referencing them as they are the closest thing to compare to. Also the fact that rex is overused is not correct I can only remember a few with rex in its name (t.rex,dracorex and raptorrex) Even then we arent to sure about dracorex. Also why dont people admire kulidromeus as much? I get that it might not be as cool as T-WRECKS but its a partially feathered ornithopod. Edit: By admire I mean by the scientific community Edited by Supersaur, May 27 2016, 12:53 PM.
|
![]() |
|
| Acinonyx Jubatus | May 27 2016, 12:51 PM Post #5241 |
![]()
I AM THE UNSHRINKWRAPPER!
![]()
|
Dracorex and Raptorex don't count. We're talking more like Othnielia rex and Nuralagus rex. Your point still stands, however- there's really only a very few nonfictional animals that have "rex" as a specific name. |
![]() |
|
| Supersaur | May 27 2016, 12:58 PM Post #5242 |
|
Diabloceratops
![]()
|
Didn't know that! Thanks for the info But if I may make a point about kulidromeus (which I probably butchered) I think it should be admired more as its a ornithopod not known for feathers, has them! This is traits from ancestors from the Triassic and basically this means that we have proof that even non-avian dinosaurs could have feathers.Hopefully next is pterasaurs closest relative (sort of like microraptor to birds) Also I recommend people here check out Saurian its a very accurate Hell Creek Simulator. Sadly its not out yet. |
![]() |
|
| Acinonyx Jubatus | May 27 2016, 01:09 PM Post #5243 |
![]()
I AM THE UNSHRINKWRAPPER!
![]()
|
Believe me, Kulindadromeus is about as famous as it's possible for a non-stock dinosaur to get and still be unrelated to Tyrannosaurus. Also, we're very much not sure if its an Ornithopod or not- thus far all we can pin down is that its basal to Ornithischia. (Also before Kulindadromeus there was Tianyulong. Why does no one remember Tianyulong anymore? It was all over the place, and then a certain upstart fluffball from Russia came and I haven't seen a reconstruction since.) Also we know about Saurian. Some of its biggest fans, right here in this community.
|
![]() |
|
| Supersaur | May 27 2016, 01:19 PM Post #5244 |
|
Diabloceratops
![]()
|
You know a lot more than me! I didn't know about any of those so you cant really blame me, But cool that people know about it. Edited by Supersaur, May 27 2016, 01:22 PM.
|
![]() |
|
| Acinonyx Jubatus | May 27 2016, 01:43 PM Post #5245 |
![]()
I AM THE UNSHRINKWRAPPER!
![]()
|
Well, I have been obsessing over palaeontology since I was six. But thank you! Its really quite amazing how quickly things like Saurian and Beasts of the Mesozoic got funded. A LOT of people clearly wanted accurate dinosaurs, and game developers and toy manufacturers just haven't clued in. Let this be a lesson to everyone who's trying to make money off the umpteenth Jurassic Park ripoff. |
![]() |
|
| Mathius Tyra | May 27 2016, 01:45 PM Post #5246 |
![]()
Rat snake is love... Rat snake is life
![]()
|
I know another dinosaur with "rex" as specie name...![]() The majestic B. rex! But well, we are talking about the extinct ones anyway... |
![]() |
|
| CyborgIguana | May 27 2016, 07:24 PM Post #5247 |
![]() ![]()
|
I'm officially calling shoebills "B. rexes" from now on. Also, I'm personally hoping JPV will take notice of projects such as those mentioned by AJ and see that they CAN in fact make money off of accurate dinosaurs. Or maybe that's a bit too optimistic of me, I dunno. |
![]() |
|
| Yi Qi | May 27 2016, 07:32 PM Post #5248 |
![]() ![]()
|
You would be surprised on knowing that i based it on a very real, and very large marine predator. essentially it may be vividly colored, but the countershading works just the same, the greenish blue areas on it's back blend in with the color of the ocean, while the bright yellow blends with the sunlight, so while it may look vivid out of context, it makes absolute sense when you think about how sunlight works in the water. See how it blends with the water around, despite being so vibrantly colored: ![]() See i do like to try on crazy designs, but i never go beyond the realm of reason.
That's what i keep asking myself, why does everybody talk about kulindadromeus and forget how awesome heterodontosaurs like Tiyanulong are. Edited by Yi Qi, May 27 2016, 07:37 PM.
|
![]() |
|
| stargatedalek | May 28 2016, 01:23 AM Post #5249 |
|
I'm not slow! That's just my moe!
![]()
|
Not that I want to keep this going, but dolphin fish colours only work because they hunt at the surface. They wouldn't work for anything significantly larger than them or with a different hunting technique. |
![]() |
|
| Yi Qi | May 28 2016, 02:35 AM Post #5250 |
![]() ![]()
|
They actually work because they hunt in the photic zone of shallow seas, I.E where sunlight reaches with enough force that their yellow parts melt and hide them within the glaring sunlight. The western interior seaway was a large, tropical shallow sea much similar to the habitat today inhabited by the dolphinfish, being a particularly shallow sea (it wasn't much deeper than 700m), it also had a large photic zone way up to its bottom, and considering thge fact that tyrlosaurines would've likely be hunting on the photic zone where larger fish and bellemites (as well as the occasional marine reptile) are, it does make sense to assume that they could likely sport a similar hunting strategy to that of modern day dolphinfish. ![]() Also size doesn't matter in that case, sunlight works the same on a 2 or 12m animal, it really has more to do with the coloration of the water around them and how it is affected by the tropical sun than anything to do with its size, my point is, to us this tylosaurus may look glaring, but from a fish looking down from below or above, it becomes nearly invisible. ![]() ![]() Fish like the dolphinfish and the marlin and the sailfish are the closest analogues to how Tylosaurus hunted because they are also fast pelagic predators that prey on the photic zone, and the two groups also exhibit quite obvious patterns of countershading, which was also present in mosasaurs. the thing about countershading is that it uses the sunlight itself to hide the animal rather than its pigmentation on itself, it's colors don't mean jack as long as they blend with the patterns of sunlight that are coming from above, and on a shallow sea, where sunlight can go pretty deep, this presents an ideal form of hiding the animal's body from its potential prey. It'd be speculation? Yes, but so is most paleoart, it only becomes a problem when it actually contradicts known evidence, and right now, what we know about tylosaurus really puts pelagic fish as some of the best models for its behaviour. Edited by Yi Qi, May 28 2016, 02:58 AM.
|
![]() |
|
| 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












Some of its biggest fans, right here in this community.





