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 (256,430 Views)
Whalebite
Member Avatar


I will probably see Walking with Dinosaurs,
It was probably intended to be more of a kids program
It is annoying that the dinosaurs are narrating it though.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
CyborgIguana
Member Avatar


When people call any prehistoric animal a dinosaur. They claim "whatever, mere technicality" but it's NOT! It's the equivalent of calling every tetrapod a mammal!!!
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Fluffs
No Avatar
Pull my finger!

Furka
Dec 10 2013, 08:36 AM
Megaraptorking
Dec 10 2013, 07:14 AM
That some dinosaur names or even modern animal names are named from some random thing or person like a spider named after a singer or a dinosaur named after the child of the paleontologist.

However contradicting myself most other dinosaurs without proper seeming naming like Lythornax actually have pretty cool names and with great meaning. I just kinda feel sorry for the animal that will be named after Justin beiber......
Justin Bieber jokes aside, I don't see what's wrong with naming dinosaurs like that: I think people should be honoured, and I actually prefer something in the line of Furkasaurus longicollis than some stupid name like Lythornax, which looks like it was made by one of those M***n kids who think dinos are Kewl because they always fight everything like characters from animes or mangas.
Bistahieversor. God, that name. Just, what was the person who named it smoking?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
CyborgIguana
Member Avatar


I'm more annoyed by the huge number of dinosaur names that suggest an ever-fighting, monstrous nature in dinosaurs. Teratophoneus, meaning: MONSTROUS MURDERER!!!! Just...why??? Yes, it sounds cool, but I don't suspect it reflects the animal's real-life biology at all! :/
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
DinoBear
Member Avatar


Eh, Loxodonta sounds stupider to me.

While calling something "gore king" (Lythronax) is going a little overboard, it's better than "different lizard" (Allosaurus), IMO.

@ CyborgIguana:
I don't know about that, after all, it was a carnivore. The ''murder" part is going a bit overboard, though.
Edited by DinoBear, Dec 14 2013, 08:44 PM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
CyborgIguana
Member Avatar


Loxodonta isn't even a dinosaur. It's the generic name of the elephant.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
DinoBear
Member Avatar


CyborgIguana
Dec 14 2013, 08:42 PM
Loxodonta isn't even a dinosaur. It's the generic name of the elephant.
I know that, just saying that cool modern animals have stupid generic names, too. Also, that was back when I thought that it was just how the generic name sounded annoyed people, not the actual meaning.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Meerkatmatt2
Member Avatar


The fact that geology related courses are needed to get into paleontology.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
CyborgIguana
Member Avatar


Agreed. It seems my school doesn't want me to have a future, as it refuses to teach geology. >:(
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Sheather
Member Avatar
Thank you for the set, Azrael!

On a related note, I'm annoyed that birds are -by the general public at least, and a lot of the scientific community- considered to be their own class of aves just because they can fly and have feathers. Birds are really just highly derived reptiles and considering the other extant group of archosaurs is still considered to be reptilian, it makes no sense that people deny that birds are reptiles especially since we can consider their ancestors -often just as feathered as they were - to be reptiles, and these animals differ in no fundamental ways (shorter tails, atrophied hands, and no teeth are about the only things). I imagine were pterosaurs extant today, they'd also have been given their own group, because furry warm-blooded animals surely don't look like reptiles... similarly, if birds were extinct, there would probably be no question they were reptiles. All of them are; birds, lizards, pterosaurs, crocodiles. It's almost like if we reassigned bats into their own group because they can fly.

--

It's also annoying on a similar note that only animals believed to have derived after Archaeopteryx are considered avians when there were even more small theropods just as much if not more so bird-like present before Archaeopteryx existed.


Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
CyborgIguana
Member Avatar


I think the only reason they're still in their own class is because the public thinks reptiles are slimy and gross, so they would cry and beg for a different classification if their favourite little feathery cuties were classified as evil scaly monsters.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
caviar
Member Avatar


Actually we shouldn't call birds, dinosaurs.

We should call dinosaurs, birds.

Because after all wich group was named first.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
CyborgIguana
Member Avatar


I don't think that works, since "bird" is just a common name, not a taxon. Plus only some dinosaurs were closely related to birds, others are too distant to be included in the same group.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
caviar
Member Avatar


Aves or whatever you want :P

And an elephant and a monkey are pretty different and we still call them both mammals
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Megaraptorking
Member Avatar
I stand in the shadows waiting for you to return me to the light.

Yeah I still will never understand human logic, nor will I understand my logic. Yet when it comes to animals being placed in a group such as mammals, reptiles, or otherwise, it is because mankind currently never made these groups in present time, people in past created these groups, named these animals, and other things in which we have no control over.

Therefore it has become a habit of keeping the names of species like aves, reptiles, and otherwise separate.

It's quite idiotic yet somewhat normal in the case of mankind to follow on older traditions and repeat themselves.
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