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 (256,460 Views)
extremos
Member Avatar
Where's Mr Pig?

Look Aardvark, by no means I want to offend you, but if you're just going to stay there not paying attention to our many valid arguments, keep talking about "how your professor told you something" or "how in your book there's something written that says" and offending Darwin (In your first post here and in this last one) by telling that his fabulous theory just can't be true then I please ask you to do something, please stop posting such things, not only because many people are already getting stressed because of them, but also because this is about what annoys you in Paleontology, and not about how evolution and Earth being Millions of Years Old are impossible. It's all I ask you ;)
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
MarxRaptor
No Avatar


This annoys the **** out of me.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Similis
Member Avatar


@extremos, I'm starting to feel like we're being a subject to the casual trolling, like it happens over YouTube over and over, where people are asked for evidence and then the evidence is dismissed without reading "nah, it's bullcrap" and the person pretends to emerge as a great defender of faith.

Which leads me to the conclusion that ignoring this is probably going to save people time they'd only waste on trying to help the person understand the world.

And going back to topic. What annoys me? Desperate clinging to old views as if something was too sacred to change it. Bald T.rex being one example. Ceratopsians using their headgear in fight with predators being other. Pack-hunting deinonychosaurs attacking animals dozens of times heavier. Near diplodocid-like restorations of titanosauriforms that are now proven to be more upright in posture. Mesozoic environments being shown as being either almost desert-like or tropical rainforest-like. And the fact that people forget that the first half of the Permian was actually quite cold after the post-carboniferous Ice Age.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Dr. Hax
Member Avatar


MrGorsh
Nov 5 2013, 01:52 AM
@extremos, I'm starting to feel like we're being a subject to the casual trolling, like it happens over YouTube over and over, where people are asked for evidence and then the evidence is dismissed without reading "nah, it's bullcrap" and the person pretends to emerge as a great defender of faith.

Which leads me to the conclusion that ignoring this is probably going to save people time they'd only waste on trying to help the person understand the world.

And going back to topic. What annoys me? Desperate clinging to old views as if something was too sacred to change it. Bald T.rex being one example. Ceratopsians using their headgear in fight with predators being other. Pack-hunting deinonychosaurs attacking animals dozens of times heavier. Near diplodocid-like restorations of titanosauriforms that are now proven to be more upright in posture. Mesozoic environments being shown as being either almost desert-like or tropical rainforest-like. And the fact that people forget that the first half of the Permian was actually quite cold after the post-carboniferous Ice Age.
I agree with most of this, except for two.
Quote:
 
Ceratopsians using their headgear in fight with predators

Quote:
 
Pack-hunting deinonychosaurs attacking animals dozens of times heavier

Now, I'm not trying to spark a giant controversy or anything, I just want someone to clue me in on this: When, exactly, was it decided that these two things were invalid? In almost every dinosaur documentary that features the animals, I've seen these two things all the time, and it always seemed really plausible to me, because of how the documentaries made it seem plausible. So, I ask, when exactly was it decided that out of the several hundred species of ceratopsians and dromaeosaurs, not even ONE of them gathered in packs to hunt prey roughly as large or slightly larger than them or used their fancy headgear to defend from attacks? Now, if you're referring to when deinonychosaurs take down prey that is several times larger than them and could easily kill them, Clash Of The Dinosaurs, featuring two Denonychus taking down a sub-adult Sauroposeidon, for example, I can understand, because that's unrealistic, but take for example, Velociraptor. Are you telling me that with their slender body build perfect for agile movements, large eyes, sharp teeth and claws, and cunning intelligence, that they exclusively fed on small animals and carcasses and stayed completely by themselves and only came together to mate? Doesn't it seem a little plausible that they would group together and take down sick or dying or otherwise vulnerable dinosaurs once in a while?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Furka
Member Avatar


- as for the ceratopsians, it was proven that some of them had horns that weren't adapted to fight off predators,because the structures would make them fragile. which doesn't mean they were defenceless, the horns can make a predator go away just because they look frightening.

- i don't see how sharpt teeth and claws (not so sharp, since they could only stab, not slash) make you a pack hunter, but there's plenty of smart and agile animals that hunt alone, like foxes, minks and hawks. of course they sometimes gather around the same food source, but that doesn't mean they were peaceful towards each other: the famous deinonychus found around the tenontosaurus had bitemarks from their ownkind on them.
and velociraptor seems even less likely to be a social animal to me, considering it lived in a harid environment with likely scarce resources.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Iben
Member Avatar
There'll be no foot-walking! Just air-flying!

Dr. Hax
Nov 4 2013, 06:17 PM
MarxRaptor
Nov 4 2013, 06:07 PM
Crookedjaw
Nov 4 2013, 05:22 PM
All clues point towards a feathered T. rex. First, its ancestry ;) Coelurosaurs were feathered, and feathers are not lost when the animal moves to a warmer climate, as they are beneficial as an isolant. Secondly, as I just said, there is no reason for it to lose it's feathers - unlike fur, feathers can not make an animal overheat.
You are forgetting that they have found T.rex scales.
Yes, but that doesn't mean that rex couldn't have had some feathers on the top of it's body.
Here you go Marxraptor. As you can see, the scales found on T.rex were mostly from other places than it's body. However two specimens were found of the body.

A naked skin part, much like naked chicken skin and Sereno mentions that he has a T. rex specimen in his lab which preserves naked skin, and suggests that these areas could have bore feathers in life.

Just because some naked skin was found doesn't mean that the animal automatically never had feathers. Fossilize a naked chicken, either burned or plucked by men, and people will think chickens were bald. Fossilize an ostrich and make sure the feathers don't fossilize. Due the skin imprints on the legs, you'll assume that ostriches aren't feathered.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Meerkatmatt2
Member Avatar


I compare raptors to cats, about the same sizes, both carnivores, most species would probably be solitary, but deinonychus would be an exception, but even then, a tenontosaurus would be like an elephant to a pride of lions in terms of difficulty.
About the snowing in the Permian thing, did it snow as far south as the Texas red beds? the snowing bit make the WWM part about dimetridon much more awesome.
Also, How many of us take any interest in paleobotony or invertebrate paleontology, anyone?
Another thing that angers me, people who think dinosaurs never existed :implode:
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Similis
Member Avatar


Dr. Hax
Nov 5 2013, 02:21 AM

Now, I'm not trying to spark a giant controversy or anything, I just want someone to clue me in on this: When, exactly, was it decided that these two things were invalid?


The 'evidence' for pack hunting in dromaeosauridae was mostly drawn from the find of the multiple Deinonychus skeletons alongside the Tenontosaurus skeleton. Turns out the predators were actually eating eachother too, so the educated guess could be it was a predator trap or simply a carcass that attracted competing animals to it and they were desperate enough to fight over it. I mentioned it multiple times, as far as I recall, at least once to you, it won't change if you keep asking "but who said it's wrong?".

The 'evidence' for ceratopsians using their frills for defence is reasonably oscilating around the point of zero since these structures were display organs, not armour. There's also nothing pointing towards them using their horns to defend themselves in any other way than form of threatening display. Could predators actually stab themselves if they charged a ceratopsian head-on? Of course. Were those horns used as rhinoceros horns? No. Ceratopsian skulls weren't built for such purpose and chances are they'd break their necks or shatter skulls if they attempted to charge the predator and impale it. Not to mention that the predator falling on the animal's head would likely cause severe, if not lethal damage.

Dr. Hax
Nov 5 2013, 02:21 AM

In almost every dinosaur documentary that features the animals, I've seen these two things all the time, and it always seemed really plausible to me, because of how the documentaries made it seem plausible.


Depends what do you count as a documentary and how much in the documentary is fantasy speculation and how much is speculation based on actual evidence.
Dr. Hax
Nov 5 2013, 02:21 AM

So, I ask, when exactly was it decided that out of the several hundred species of ceratopsians and dromaeosaurs, not even ONE of them gathered in packs to hunt prey roughly as large or slightly larger than them or used their fancy headgear to defend from attacks?


I point towards my first reply, no proof of dromaeosaurids being pack hunters, no ceratopsian horn marks found on predatory species bones (like stegosaurian thagomizer puncture wounds on theropod skeletons), and ceratopsian frills were simply too fragile to be used for defense. Most evidence points towards it being for recognition between species, not weaponry. And afaik, there's a trike skull with a horn being partially bitten off by a tyrannosaurid. So well...

Dr. Hax
Nov 5 2013, 02:21 AM

but take for example, Velociraptor. Are you telling me that with their slender body build perfect for agile movements, large eyes, sharp teeth and claws, and cunning intelligence, that they exclusively fed on small animals and carcasses and stayed completely by themselves and only came together to mate? Doesn't it seem a little plausible that they would group together and take down sick or dying or otherwise vulnerable dinosaurs once in a while?


What I'm saying is that organized, almost lion- or wolf-like pack hunting is a no-no for all we know about those animals. Dromaeosaurids weren't even built for speed, that's troodontid part of the Deinonychosauria. They were built to catch slower prey (smaller) or wrestle it down (their or slightly larger size), but by no means were they built to tackle an animal that weighed 20 times as much as they did. It's like a leopard trying to take down the adult buffalo, only worse. They were lightweights among the dinosaurs while the 'hapless' ornithischians that are often portrayed as dumb and fragile prey were actually quite powerful and bulky.

It also sounds plausible that they'd form temporary communities where everyone sticked together for a break but hunted alone. But truth is, we don't have much proof for that either.
The only proof of dromaeosaurids actually fighting with bigger prey is the case where Protoceratops was tearing off the Velociraptor's arm before they were buried to death and left for humans to discover. Go figure.
Edited by Similis, Nov 5 2013, 04:30 AM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
TyrantTR
Member Avatar


Quote:
 
The 'evidence' for ceratopsians using their frills for defence is reasonably oscilating around the point of zero since these structures were display organs, not armour. There's also nothing pointing towards them using their horns to defend themselves in any other way than form of threatening display. Could predators actually stab themselves if they charged a ceratopsian head-on? Of course. Were those horns used as rhinoceros horns? No. Ceratopsian skulls weren't built for such purpose and chances are they'd break their necks or shatter skulls if they attempted to charge the predator and impale it. Not to mention that the predator falling on the animal's head would likely cause severe, if not lethal damage.

I hate to keep pointing this stuff out, but I really do not see any reason for you to be professing this with such confidence.

Before I explain why you are wrong, it is fair to say that this is the problem with blanket statements like "ceratopsians used their horns for combat". It would be akin to saying "Dinosaurs had lips" It really is not as simple as that, nature rarely tends to be so black and white. And I will explain why this is relevant soon enough.

There is actually plenty of published evidence for triceratops specifically regarding intraspefic combat. Now here is where it gets interesting, this study evaluated bone damage as evidence of intraspecific combat in ceratopsians, it studied two. Centrosaurus and Triceratops and found that while it was very likely triceratops used its head ornamentation in a very physical way, centrosaurus likely did not. The scars paint a very clear picture of not just the act of fighting but even how they fought. It really isn't a matter of rhino or nothing. While ceratopsians show no sign of real charging power, they do seem relatively well adapted for thrusting pushing and gouging power.

We also know at-least some ceratopsians likely met head on with predators, as there is even some triceratops specimens with horns that appear to have been bit clean off. Pointing to the notion that tyrannosaurs clashed with the business end of a triceratops often.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Similis
Member Avatar


Intraspecific combat doesn't necessarily mean using their headgears as often depicted in media - rhino style, just as I said. And still we have cases of tyrannosaurs having the upper hand when it comes to tackling the ceratopsian's head. Though for one, I liked how the CoTD depicted triceratops losing an eyebrow horn but the other horn damaging tyrannosaur's face - it portrays well that a head-on clash had high chances of being all-or-nothing situation. I'd rather bet my money on these structures being used to scare the predator off early on or, as I said already, last resource of defense, not an actual charging weapon, and from what I've gathered, the range of motion of ceratopsian heads didn't allow them to take quick 'jabs' upwards aswell.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Mathius Tyra
Member Avatar
Rat snake is love... Rat snake is life

Maybe Ceratopsians use their horns to tackle smaller predator? Especially when they are trying to protect their youngs. Gazelles do that so many time though their horns are not designed for combating as well.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Meerkatmatt2
Member Avatar


Jurrasic MT, they could just trample the smaller ones, or bite them.
what also annoys everything is feathering everything!
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Mathius Tyra
Member Avatar
Rat snake is love... Rat snake is life

I mean something like Full grown trike attack Nanotyrannus or Pachyrhinosaurus attack something like an Alaskan Troodon.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Similis
Member Avatar


*Gently places some feathers over Meerkatmatt2's face*

You were saying.

Also, so Nanotyrannus fans are annoyed:

http://tyrannosauroideacentral.blogspot.co.uk/2013/09/q-iii-nanotyrannus-my-turn-in-hot-seat.html
Edited by Similis, Nov 5 2013, 07:34 AM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Meerkatmatt2
Member Avatar


MrGorsh
Nov 5 2013, 07:32 AM
*Gently places some feathers over Meerkatmatt2's face*

LOLs, I was meaning doing every dinosaur, I support feathers on any tetsnuraen, (Spinosaurs, carnosaurs, coelursaurs)
And quills, bristly or furlike on any cerotpsians, pachephosaurs, hypsilophodonts or Herodontsaur just not on everything.
Also Fur on the following non dinos, pterosaurs, Therocephalians, Cynodonts or gorgonopsid and of corse mammals.

New problem, Why do prehistoric avians not get enough love?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
4 users reading this topic (4 Guests and 0 Anonymous)
Go to Next Page
« Previous Topic · Extinct Animals & Evolution · Next Topic »
Add Reply