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 (256,459 Views) | |
| Similis | Nov 5 2013, 07:55 AM Post #616 |
![]() ![]()
|
Because people tend to go full fanboy only on the dangerous theropods, thus it's mostly them that are getting the attention. |
![]() |
|
| Jules | Nov 5 2013, 08:04 AM Post #617 |
![]()
Mihi est imperare orbi universo
![]()
|
But.. but... How can one not like these ?![]() ![]() |
![]() |
|
| Tyranachu | Nov 5 2013, 08:07 AM Post #618 |
|
Nerdasaurus
![]()
|
Because they have childish tastes. |
![]() |
|
| Furka | Nov 5 2013, 08:11 AM Post #619 |
![]() ![]()
|
Hesperornis must have been a cool animal when alive: a giant flightless shag with teeth
|
![]() |
|
|
|
Nov 5 2013, 08:27 AM Post #620 |
![]()
|
I stand corrected then. But still, few things annoy me more than people whining that Abelisauroidea might hav had feathers. |
![]() |
|
| Furka | Nov 5 2013, 08:30 AM Post #621 |
![]() ![]()
|
well, they may have had. we don't have proof of feathers on ceratosaurs yet, and carnotaurus fossil shows us a scaly side, but maybe they still had some small feathered areas, like ornamental feathers on the head or similar, nothing like maniraptorans however. |
![]() |
|
| Similis | Nov 5 2013, 08:34 AM Post #622 |
![]() ![]()
|
To be honest, we can't be perfectly sure abelisauroidea or ceratosauria in general weren't feathered at all. Scales are present, but they were also present in ornithischians, yet, we also have fuzzy ornithischians coming out of the closet. |
![]() |
|
| CyborgIguana | Nov 5 2013, 09:08 AM Post #623 |
![]() ![]()
|
While they could've been feathered, I must admit that I have trouble imagining a feathered Carnotaurus. |
![]() |
|
| TyrantTR | Nov 5 2013, 03:27 PM Post #624 |
![]() ![]()
|
No that's not what you said, you said that they could not use them in any form other than a threatening display. And I have shown how not only is this not necessarily true for all ceratopsians, but we indeed have evidence to the contrary. Either you misspoke, or you are not being honest to your position. And you aren't honest to mine either, I even explicitly mentioned that a rhino style charge is not likely. Again, if the question is what are the horns used for it depends from ceratopsian to ceratopsian, in triceratops at-least (and I am sure it is not alone) the only real fossilized evidence for a use of the horns is combat. This is not to say they did not have a secondary use of display, I am sure they did, but all the fossilized evidence present points to not just combat, but a very rough and physical form of it. With fellow ceratopsians, and with predators. Ceratopsians also have a massive range of motion in their heads, its pretty much a big ball and socket joint. But of-course jabbing is a full body motion, not just a head motion, so even if they didn't it would be irrelevant. |
![]() |
|
|
|
Nov 5 2013, 03:42 PM Post #625 |
![]() ![]()
|
Lemme guess, that article is saying that Nano didn't exist? |
![]() |
|
| Similis | Nov 5 2013, 03:46 PM Post #626 |
![]() ![]()
|
Me saying there's nothing pointing towards the usage of horns as a form of defense doesn't equal me saying we have undeniable proof they were unable to do so. I just pointed out which parts of the popular depiction of the ceratopsian charging at the predator and relentlessly jabbing it and slicing with their head are based only on wild speculations with no solid backup. And still, I was all about the rhino-like fight from the beginning since this is the source of my disagreement about the horn usage. I double-read my pre-previous post on this and nowhere did I say the horns were impossible to use in combat. The pre-pre-previous was about the rhinoceros-like charges aswell, since they're the popular view on how those animals defended themselves. Edited by Similis, Nov 5 2013, 03:49 PM.
|
![]() |
|
| TyrantTR | Nov 5 2013, 03:59 PM Post #627 |
![]() ![]()
|
You cannot see what this implies? If you were indeed discussing the rhino charging you should have clarified at a couple of points there. A ceratopsian "charging" is much different then it using its horns for defense or combat. Being that it does not appear specifically adapted for one, and does appear specifically adapted for the other, and even shows evidence of such on the fossils themselves. You didn't imply they were impossible to use for combat, you just implied it was unlikely, which again I have shown is not the case. The horns of triceratops were used explicitly for combat, not only against each-other but against predators. Irregardless now that we have reached common ground, regardless of your initial or current intentions, I fear we will merely be talking past each-other here. So long as you accept the evidence at hand, I have no problem. |
![]() |
|
| Similis | Nov 5 2013, 04:09 PM Post #628 |
![]() ![]()
|
I should've worded the first one more specifically to avoid this kind of situation. As said previously, intraspecific combat doesn't force an animal to use the horns for active defense (well, offense really) when it comes to predator-prey interaction, unless of course the recovered trike skulls possess damage done because the animal tackled the tyrannosaurid, not the other way. It all falls to the speculation in one or the other way depending on how we perceive a few tons of predator's weight interacting quite violently in not very organized manner with animal's skull. |
![]() |
|
| CyborgIguana | Nov 5 2013, 04:10 PM Post #629 |
![]() ![]()
|
Well, "didn't exist" makes it sound like the Nano fossils are fake or something. It's simply a controversy as to whether or not the Nanotyrannus specimens represent a distinct genus or an adolescent Tyrannosaurus. |
![]() |
|
|
|
Nov 5 2013, 04:23 PM Post #630 |
![]()
|
Hasn't it already been proved that nanotyrannus was its own species, if not a genus. |
![]() |
|
| 4 users reading this topic (4 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













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. 



