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 (256,435 Views)
Similis
Member Avatar


This isn't even paleontology, It's, in order, Ignorance, Peters, Media hype and Conspiracy. xD
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Meerkatmatt2
Member Avatar


MrGorsh
Dec 7 2013, 02:33 AM
This isn't even paleontology, It's, in order, Ignorance, Peters, Media hype and Conspiracy. xD
Peters being a seperate category lols!
Personally I think he is probably a nice guy, but he is proof that geology knowledge is needed for serious paleontolgy
Also The fact that there is not a serious popular paleo only forum(Hell creek doesn't have many members) out there, however anti dumb dino fan-boy measures would have to be in place. also getting actual paleontologists to come over and interact with the paleontologists to be.

That and creationists vandalizing dinosaur track ways by carving human footprints into the rock, fortunately real paleontoligists can tell that they are fakes.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Similis
Member Avatar


He might undeniably be a nice guy but the fact that he got all pissed at other scientists for not accepting his 'fossil tracing' isn't really talking in his favor. While some people say that feather imprints in rocks are "Just how the rocks formed", he takes it to another side of the spectrum, interpreting every crack and scratch as evidence of soft tissue.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Megaraptorking
Member Avatar
I stand in the shadows waiting for you to return me to the light.

Out of all those articles there is one I cannot deny is possible but not how Peters has it portrayed in look. I mean yes it was peter's idea however I cannot say that it is not possible though, I mean really it is possible that it fed on blood at times along with insects while pecking on insects on sauropods. It has a high value of nutrients so why would it pass up blood that a tick was also drinking...
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
CyborgIguana
Member Avatar


Yes, anurognathids could've pecked blood out of the sauropods they were checking for parasites from time to time, but blood certainly didn't make up an important part of their diet, as Peters suggests.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Furka
Member Avatar


do we actually know if they fed on sauropods bodies like oxpeckers ? or is that just something made up for WWD ?
from what i remember, anurognathid were probably nocturnal, resembling more a bat or a swallow.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Megaraptorking
Member Avatar
I stand in the shadows waiting for you to return me to the light.

Still there is chances where it could have a relationship similar but not truly like a oxpecker, as such when a flock or swarm was hungry and a Sauropod had many many many parasites that would make a good meal for a hungry flock one would think it would be a good idea.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
CyborgIguana
Member Avatar


Yes, but he was asking if there was any direct EVIDENCE for that. I agree that it was more likely a nocturnal, bat-like insectivore.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Whalebite
Member Avatar


They look like modern nightjars, nighthawks, and poorwills, probably liver a similar life.

Here is another story of a fossil vampire, a vamp-cat
http://www.wired.com/wiredscience/2012/11/smilodon-the-vampire/

Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Megaraptorking
Member Avatar
I stand in the shadows waiting for you to return me to the light.

Still who says it has to be like a nightjar or such, their a extinct species of aerial species because some we cannot account for nor the fact that the biology as in that nightjars have normal avian walking which is a tad not possible in Pterosaurus because they walk awkwardly. Plus nightjars and the birds mentioned one do not have extremely large animals who have a constant insect problem nor do they have claws on their hands.

So it could have been similar for some of the time as a normal bird like creature while taking on some free, safe, and easy food on a lumbering behemoth. For example remora like on whale sharks and other not really preyed on species of animals like sharks so they get one protection and food while this is a single sided relation ship another is a poilet fish and sharks who the poilet fish clean the sharks and eat scraps for protection. Then the on land example which is always a double benefit is the Oxpecker and Oxen who the Oxpecker gets food, protection, and a resting spot, while the Oxen gets a bug free cover, similar to the possible relationship of a ideal pairing of Sauropods and smaller Pterosaurus.

I just wonder why it was more common to be small in the Jurassic than it is to be big in the Cretaceous for Pterosaurus though. I mean it is just a odd transition, from tiny little hellish cuties to giant dinoaur eating flying lizards.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
philly
Member Avatar


Megaraptorking
Dec 7 2013, 06:14 PM
I just wonder why it was more common to be small in the Jurassic than it is to be big in the Cretaceous for Pterosaurus though. I mean it is just a odd transition, from tiny little hellish cuties to giant dinoaur eating flying lizards.
I didn't get the first apart, but I disagree with this statement.

Pterosaurs - unlike commonly thought - weren't normally giant behemoths, just the Azhdarchidae were truly gigantic, and even among them only a minority goes over 5 meters.

Pterosaurs during the Late Jurassic already reached a two metre wingspan. Most early Cretaceous pterosaurs weren't much bigger.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Furka
Member Avatar


the size of the eye suggests it was a crepuscolar animal (and i don't see how the way they walked is relevant to the lifestyle, especially considering that both hunt preys in mid flight).
even then, however, nightjars often follow large mammals like cattles and such (since there are large mammals with parasite problems where they live too) to feed on the insects they attract, although they don't land on the animals.

just remembered, Anurognathus was found in the same environment as Archaeopteryx, which wasn't a habitat with large animals, right ?
Edited by Furka, Dec 7 2013, 06:51 PM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Jules
Member Avatar
Mihi est imperare orbi universo

I don't have it with me now, but I believe Witton said something about this. Could someone please quote it ?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Whalebite
Member Avatar


Megaraptorking
Dec 7 2013, 06:14 PM
Still who says it has to be like a nightjar or such, their a extinct species of aerial species because some we cannot account for nor the fact that the biology as in that nightjars have normal avian walking which is a tad not possible in Pterosaurus because they walk awkwardly. Plus nightjars and the birds mentioned one do not have extremely large animals who have a constant insect problem nor do they have claws on their hands.

So it could have been similar for some of the time as a normal bird like creature while taking on some free, safe, and easy food on a lumbering behemoth. For example remora like on whale sharks and other not really preyed on species of animals like sharks so they get one protection and food while this is a single sided relation ship another is a poilet fish and sharks who the poilet fish clean the sharks and eat scraps for protection. Then the on land example which is always a double benefit is the Oxpecker and Oxen who the Oxpecker gets food, protection, and a resting spot, while the Oxen gets a bug free cover, similar to the possible relationship of a ideal pairing of Sauropods and smaller Pterosaurus.

I just wonder why it was more common to be small in the Jurassic than it is to be big in the Cretaceous for Pterosaurus though. I mean it is just a odd transition, from tiny little hellish cuties to giant dinoaur eating flying lizards.
I am not saying they are identical,
But the more I think about it they are more similar than I thought,
Nightjars can hardly walk with their short legs,
And they have a habit of flying near large animals because of the bugs
The potoos evolved to get the bugs that went to ground sloth dung, and now do the same with sloths,
And if you can't find a good perch, you could use a sauropod.

Or maybe like some birds they rather get scraps of meat out of a predators mouth.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
CyborgIguana
Member Avatar


Megaraptorking
Dec 7 2013, 06:14 PM
Still who says it has to be like a nightjar or such, their a extinct species of aerial species because some we cannot account for nor the fact that the biology as in that nightjars have normal avian walking which is a tad not possible in Pterosaurus because they walk awkwardly.
Actually, that's a common misconception. The pterodactyloid pterosaurs could actually move quite well on the ground. Just look at any of Mark Witton's illustrations, his pterosaurs certainly do not walk awkwardly.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
4 users reading this topic (4 Guests and 0 Anonymous)
ZetaBoards - Free Forum Hosting
Fully Featured & Customizable Free Forums
Learn More · Sign-up for Free
Go to Next Page
« Previous Topic · Extinct Animals & Evolution · Next Topic »
Add Reply