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 (256,413 Views)
Similis
Member Avatar


T-shirt is a T-shaped shirt. T-rex is by no means T-shaped king. xD
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
CyborgIguana
Member Avatar


When retro paleo-art is frowned upon simply because it is outdated. "Charlz Nite was stoopid becuz Rex didnt stand lik kangaroo". Such reconstructions may not reflect our current knowledge of paleontology, but they are still beautiful and inspiring portrayals of prehistoric life, and dinosaurs may not be what they are today without them.
Edited by CyborgIguana, Feb 2 2014, 05:12 PM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Sheather
Member Avatar
Thank you for the set, Azrael!

CyborgIguana
Jan 23 2014, 08:04 PM
Your restoration of Spinosaurus is possibly the best I've ever seen, Sheather.
It's a derived spinosaurid, not Spinosaurus.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
CyborgIguana
Member Avatar


I was prepared to be corrected as to what it was. xD
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Megraptor
No Avatar


I think something that bugs me is both feathers and no feathers.

I'm not a fan of the "fluffy dinosaur that's completely covered in poofy veined feathers, right up to it's snout". This doesn't seem like it would work, because most feathered dinosaurs ate meat. This would mean that face feathers would get covered in gore, and probably contribute to infection. Also, veined feathers all over a dinosaurs body makes me kinda sad, because not even Archeopteryx had veined feathers all over its body. Also, why the "poofy cute" raptors? Not a fan of trying to make a raptor cute and fluffy. More like sleek and predatory looking.

Tyrannosaurs with "winged" arms bug me. Why would they have those? Their arms are tiny. That would waste so much energy to keep veined feathers on such tiny little arms.

But naked raptors do bug me, as with them having funny, wrong hands.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
CyborgIguana
Member Avatar


Megraptor
Feb 4 2014, 12:35 AM
I think something that bugs me is both feathers and no feathers.

I'm not a fan of the "fluffy dinosaur that's completely covered in poofy veined feathers, right up to it's snout". This doesn't seem like it would work, because most feathered dinosaurs ate meat. This would mean that face feathers would get covered in gore, and probably contribute to infection. Also, veined feathers all over a dinosaurs body makes me kinda sad, because not even Archeopteryx had veined feathers all over its body. Also, why the "poofy cute" raptors? Not a fan of trying to make a raptor cute and fluffy. More like sleek and predatory looking.

Tyrannosaurs with "winged" arms bug me. Why would they have those? Their arms are tiny. That would waste so much energy to keep veined feathers on such tiny little arms.

But naked raptors do bug me, as with them having funny, wrong hands.
Eagles, hawks, falcons, kites, and owls eat meat today, and yet they have just as many feathers on their faces as on the rest of their bodies. Sleek and predatory-looking raptors can be chalked down to personal preference, rather than what a dinosaur MUST look like in paleo-art (remember that dinosaurs were just ordinary animals, not monsters). I do agree that primaries on tyrannosaur arms aren't especially likely, but I can still accept them sometimes. However, I don't understand how keeping feathers on their arms would waste anymore energy than you do keeping your hair on your head. What annoys me is folks who are stuck to the template of what their vision of a "perfect" dinosaur is, unwilling to accept new information.
Edited by CyborgIguana, Feb 4 2014, 01:06 AM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Similis
Member Avatar


Megraptor
Feb 4 2014, 12:35 AM
Also, why the "poofy cute" raptors? Not a fan of trying to make a raptor cute and fluffy. More like sleek and predatory looking.
Posted Image

Posted Image

Posted Image

Keep offending predatory birds. In the end, they exist with extensive feathering and don't give a damn about human opinions whether feathers make them look predatory or not.

Advanced feathers on tyrannosaurids are the only point I can remotely agree on - as long as we don't find the evidence that they had more derived feathering than more primitive tyrannosauroids, we're better off with lower stages of feather development on these animals.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
CyborgIguana
Member Avatar


And frankly, extensively-feathered dinosaurs are far more natural-looking. The tar-and-feathered reconstructions just don't look like anything you'd ever find in nature. Deinonychosaurs were essentially flightless birds, it goes almost without question that they were feathered to a full extent.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Iben
Member Avatar
There'll be no foot-walking! Just air-flying!

Megraptor
Feb 4 2014, 12:35 AM
Not a fan of trying to make a raptor cute and fluffy. More like sleek and predatory looking.
Feathers don't work that way though. They aren't glued on like this. We know this from looking at birds today. It's not just a theory or a preference, it's just a plain fact.

And indeed, as Mat and Cyborg already mentioned, the feathers on the face thing is solely based on vultures with naked heads. That's because they literally dive into carcasses of much larger animals. Other animals, like owls, are quite feathered on their faces, and seem to be doing fine. Vultures are the exception, not the rule.
Edited by Iben, Feb 4 2014, 04:55 AM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
CyborgIguana
Member Avatar


Agreed. Why can't everyone just accept changing ideas about how dinosaurs looked and behaved rather than clinging to their childhood fantasies?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Stan The Man
Member Avatar
Honorary Party Member

1. What you find cute or amazing I might find ugly or downright strange. This use of opinion words is turning things awry.
2. Do note that predatory birds, as any other bird, have beaks which are obviously absent of feathers. Maybe Megaraptor is trying to say that dromaeosaurines and velociraptorines wouldn't have full-fledged feathers to the tip of their snouts, just up to the beginning of the snout. After all, those animals would probably stick their whole mouth into something like, for example, a ceratopsian, which would make any full-fledged feathers all dirty and the sort had they have been on the snout. I would say such deinonychosaurs would have downy feathers or something of the type if any feathers on their snouts. However it seems likely that microraptorines (Is that right?) had larger sorts of feathers... wait, would those be too large on such a small animal's face? I dunno, but I think they were likely insectivores, thus it wouldn't be such a mess. Feel free to notify/correct me on anything I mentioned.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
CyborgIguana
Member Avatar


I honestly don't understand how anyone could dislike this:

Posted Image

But to each his own, I suppose.
Edited by CyborgIguana, Feb 4 2014, 02:21 PM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Similis
Member Avatar


It's actually more likely that the feathers reached to cover the snout on the fenestrae than them ending abruptly right before the snout starts. The snake-face deinonychosaurs like those of WWD3D are even less likely. Troodontids likely hunted smaller prey so their snouts wouldn't get all bloody and messy (when you're a carnivore, you want your food in your stomach, not over your face for decoration) and dromaeosaurids didn't hunt prey so large that they'd have to dig their faces deep into the carcass to eat (like below sauropod's thick layer of skin). Are vulture-like feather amounts possible? Certainly they are. Are eagle-like feather amounts possible? Of course. Snakeface raptors are just remnants of the time when people were overcautious with feathering their maniraptorans, leaving half-lizard atrocities like these to rule paleoart.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
CyborgIguana
Member Avatar


Megaraptor and MrRabbid's arguments are also seemingly based on the erroneous notion that deinonychosaurs were pack-hunting big-game predators. While this may have been partially true of Utahraptor and similar super-genera, I imagine the majority of dromaeosaurids and troodonts to have been more like secretary birds or ground hornbills in habits: terrestrial stalkers of small mammals and reptiles. Scavenging and nest-raiding aren't out of the question either, but I highly doubt they would've been the ninja-esque iguanodont hunters that the media loves to cast them as.
Edited by CyborgIguana, Feb 4 2014, 04:39 PM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Jules
Member Avatar
Mihi est imperare orbi universo

Posted Image
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
4 users reading this topic (4 Guests and 0 Anonymous)
ZetaBoards - Free Forum Hosting
Free Forums. Reliable service with over 8 years of experience.
Learn More · Register for Free
Go to Next Page
« Previous Topic · Extinct Animals & Evolution · Next Topic »
Add Reply