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 (256,141 Views)
TheNotFakeDK
Member Avatar
200% Authentic

Well, if you look at other ceratopsids in the news, there's usually two things they all have in common: an artistic reconstruction and photos of an at least mostly complete skull (e.g. Regaliceratops, Spiclypeus). And if they don't have a mostly complete skull, what they have is of merit because of spectacular/bizarre horns and/or frill (e.g. Coahuilaceratops, Machairoceratops). Sinoceratops didn't have an artistic reconstruction made for its publication, and the material consisted only of the roof of the skull and braincase. Furthermore, its horns and frill weren't all that spectacular either, it was a fairly standard looking centrosaurine, with the most unusual feature being that the epoccipitals (which weren't that big) curved forwards a bit. There also wasn't a mount being but up in an American or Canadian museum to be publicised (e.g. Wendiceratops, "Ava").

In terms of what would make an interesting news article, Sinoceratops didn't really bring anything to the table. That said, it did get a bit more coverage locally on Chinese news sites, probably by virtue of being from China itself, but here in the west, there just wasn't much of a fanfare.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Posted Image Guat
No Avatar


PrimevalBrony
Jul 24 2016, 05:17 AM
How underrated and forgotten Sinoceratops is. I mean come on, it's the first true ceratopsid from Asia, this was groundbreaking stuff, and what did it get? 0 media coverage and next to no artwork.
Do you really have to say this again? There are various underrepresented extinct animals and not all are dinosaurs. Before you start complaining that one dinosaur is underrated and forgotten maybe consider that there are many other extinct creatures that are even more underrated and forgotten, for example Volaticotheriids.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Incinerox
Member Avatar
Āeksiot Zaldrīzoti

I never understood where they managed to get this look for Deltadromeus from:
Posted Image

Especially those elaborate hornlets over the eyes.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
heliosphoros
Member Avatar


It probably had a beak like Limusaurus.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Acinonyx Jubatus
Member Avatar
I AM THE UNSHRINKWRAPPER!

The lack of high-quality orthographic Eryops skeletals, despite it being a fairly well-known animal. Top view would be especially nice.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Incinerox
Member Avatar
Āeksiot Zaldrīzoti

heliosphoros
Jul 24 2016, 05:12 PM
It probably had a beak like Limusaurus.
Not sure if sarcasm or not.

If in the case it isn't: Two papers that came out this month disagree. Keep up!

@Acinonyx: There are a surprising amount of well known animals that lack a skeletal. It bothers me too.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
TheNotFakeDK
Member Avatar
200% Authentic

Incinerox
Jul 24 2016, 05:09 PM
I never understood where they managed to get this look for Deltadromeus from:

Especially those elaborate hornlets over the eyes.
I think what gets me more is that they went and put very prominent hornlets on Gualicho:
Posted Image

There's no basis for that other than that totally speculative Deltadromeus skull reconstruction.

Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Jules
Member Avatar
Mihi est imperare orbi universo

Incinerox
Jul 24 2016, 05:46 PM
@Acinonyx: There are a surprising amount of well known animals that lack a skeletal. It bothers me too.
Or the fact that the only skeletals are made by David Peters.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Acinonyx Jubatus
Member Avatar
I AM THE UNSHRINKWRAPPER!

Jules
Jul 24 2016, 06:29 PM
Incinerox
Jul 24 2016, 05:46 PM
@Acinonyx: There are a surprising amount of well known animals that lack a skeletal. It bothers me too.
Or the fact that the only skeletals are made by David Peters.
Even Peters has somehow missed Eryops. And, shocking to think as it is, Peters' skeletals are not always horrible- Take his Edaphosaurus, for instance.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
TheNotFakeDK
Member Avatar
200% Authentic

Acinonyx Jubatus
Jul 24 2016, 06:35 PM
Even Peters has somehow missed Eryops. And, shocking to think as it is, Peters' skeletals are not always horrible- Take his Edaphosaurus, for instance.
It's also pretty much identical to this one apart from the spines.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Acinonyx Jubatus
Member Avatar
I AM THE UNSHRINKWRAPPER!

TheNotFakeDK
Jul 24 2016, 06:49 PM
Acinonyx Jubatus
Jul 24 2016, 06:35 PM
Even Peters has somehow missed Eryops. And, shocking to think as it is, Peters' skeletals are not always horrible- Take his Edaphosaurus, for instance.
It's also pretty much identical to this one apart from the spines.
Posted Image

There are differences. Perhaps they're based off the same specimen.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
TheNotFakeDK
Member Avatar
200% Authentic

I don't doubt he individually drew the skeleton, but the positioning of almost every bone (again, minus the spines) is nearly identical.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Acinonyx Jubatus
Member Avatar
I AM THE UNSHRINKWRAPPER!

What's your point?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
TheNotFakeDK
Member Avatar
200% Authentic

All I'm getting it is that he must have used it as some sort of reference, which is why his Edaphosaurus is a pretty decent skeletal, whereas his other skeletals produced entirely from his own interpretation of the fossils are of the quality we're used to.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Denomon3144
Member Avatar
Pick a god and pray!

Posted Image
Posted Image
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