Paleo Confessions

[Pliosaurking]

Second, I find the following uninteresting too:

1. Short-necked pliosauroids.

Sorry to anyone who likes any of these!

  well everyone has their own opinions

[Gwangi]

I guess my confession would be that I still like dinosaurs-as-monsters, as presented in the media. My username should already indicate that. I love dinosaur science, paleontology, and natural history, and reality is always more interesting than fiction which is why I love dinosaurs more than made-up monsters, like dragons. But I will always have a love for old stop-motion, guy in costume, tail dragging and living aside cavemen kind of stuff. I suppose that's what allows me to enjoy Jurassic World movies and Primal alongside something like Prehistoric Planet. Anyway, not a huge confession but in these parts an interest in pop culture or historically inaccurate dinosaurs is often frowned upon.

Maybe more damning, I never much cared for Walking With Dinosaurs or its spinoffs  . Even when it first came out I found most of the creature designs offputting, CGI shoddy, and the puppets goofy looking. The narration and pacing generally bored me. That said, I still apprechiate everything that the show accomphlished and I understand why people love it so much.

Since people are using this thread as an oppertunity to list animals they don't like I want to confess that I don't dislike any of them. Dinosaurs hold a special place in my heart but I am thrilled by paleonotlogy in general. A 400 million year old fossil bivalve is still a three dimensional snapshot of an organism from deep time and I will never look at the remains of any fossil organism and be bored by them or take their existence for granted. That I, a shelf aware ape, the product of 3.7 billion years of evolution, can look at a fossil shell and connect to this once living thing from so long ago is one of the most mind blowing concepts I can think of. They're all amazing. Invertebrates are amazing. Amphibians are amazing. Turtles are amazing. Life is amazing.

[Pachyrhinosaurus]

@Gwangi I came to make a similar point. I find prehistoric life as a whole to to be just as fascinating as dinosaurs. That's something I liked about the previous Smithsonian fossil hall-- that the dinosaurs were only a smaller portion of the entire exhibit, with mammals, invertebrates, and all kinds of other fossils well-represented instead of being pushed to the sidelines.

Also maybe not a dinosaur hot take, but definitely a Disney hot take-- Disney's Dinoland at Animal Kingdom is fantastic. It's a great mix of dinosaurs and nostalgic Americana, and I think it's too often dismissed by those who don't take the time to appreciate it.

[Faelrin]

So like I'm 31, and I'm not ashamed of still loving and watching Disney's Dinosaur or The Good Dinosaur from time to time. Hardly the best films, but they do have enjoyable score at least. And despite the anachronism, I do find the Disney's Dinosaur opening scene vastly more enjoyable to watch then JW Dominion's prologue.

I also enjoy watching TheGamingBeaver's JWE dinosaur battles. The dude has so much enthusiasm and goofiness that it brings a smile to my face, in a way that my depression can't even stop.

I have been to far too little museum's with prehistoric animals. Um, I guess there's the Boston Museum of Science that I went to on field trips as a kid, back when I lived in NH, and I've also been to the Smithsonian in DC, and to some place in Baltimore, Maryland, nearby the aquarium, that had some dinosaur skeletons, etc on display back in my senior year of high school in 2009. There was also the Gilboa museum in NY I got to go to back in 2019, only because of having extended family that lived nearby, and knew the people that ran it.

This one should be obvious i guess, but for the most part I do enjoy collecting Mattel's JW line. Granted, some of the latest releases just haven't interested me as much as previous years ones did. But things like the new Herrerasaurus sculpt brought back some of that excitement and enjoyment I felt earlier on.

I'm largely not interested in fragmentary animals, especially if I don't have much of an idea of what the real animal could have possibly looked like. There are however a few exceptions, like Cryolophosaurus, Spinosaurus, or the recently described Jakapil that have enough that give it features that help it stand out, such as Cryolophosaurus distinctive crest, Spinosaurus sail (and now the tail), etc. Granted time could look favorably upon them as what has happened with Deinocheirus, and even Spinosaurus (legs and tail, etc). In fact Deinocheirus is a good example of this, where it went from a pair of mysterious giant arms, to now being one of my favorite dinosaurs. Something like that may be lighting in a bottle though.

[Pliosaurking]

Here's my confessions:

I love the jp series
And as such collect Mattel's Jurassic world line
I'm also a huge sucker for nanmu
I care more for prehistoric crocodyliforms and pliosaurs than most dinosaurs as well as other prehistoric animals
I'm going to be honest I don't find ornithopods very interesting
I also quite like retro dinosaurs even though they were way before my time
Oh and I went to 2 museums in my life ( although this is due to me having only travelled twice, with no museums were I live)

[Sim]

!!!!? WHAT PREHISTORIC ANIMAL DO YOU LIKE, THEN!!!? You mentionned almost everything that existed back then here!!?

Hehe!  I still like quite a lot.  I like herrerasaurids, Coelophysis, dilophosaurids, Ceratosaurus, Carnotaurus, megalosauroids excluding Spinosaurus, Yangchuanosaurus, Allosaurus, Acrocanthosaurus, Neovenator, Sinraptor, tyrannosauroids excluding Tyrannosaurus and the ones with large crests, ornithomimosaurs, therizinosaurs, dromaeosaurids, troodontids, unenlagiines, birds excluding anchiornithids, thyreophorans, Chasmosaurus, Styracosaurus, Pentaceratops, Utahceratops, Pachyrhinosaurus, Anchiceratops, Iguanodon, Mantellisaurus, Parasaurolophus, Muttaburrasaurus, Zalmoxes, bipedal sauropodomorphs, long-necked plesiosaurs, long-tailed pterosaurs excluding Dimorphodon, Cymbospondylus, Temnodontosaurus, metriorhynchoids, prestosuchids, Euparkeria, Champsosaurus, Edestus, Orthacanthus, Xenacanthus and basilosaurids.

Second, I find the following uninteresting too:

1. Short-necked pliosauroids.

Sorry to anyone who likes any of these!

  well everyone has their own opinions

Oh, sorry!  Although I'll always like some prehistoric animals more than others, sometimes what I like changes so it's possible I'll like short-necked pliosauroids again at some point.  There was a period where I didn't like tyrannosauroids, allosauroids and ceratopsians at all, but now some are among the dinosaurs I like.  And even with how I currently feel towards pliosauroids I still would like one from Beasts of the Mesozoic.

[BlueKrono]

I think Andrewsarchus had hooves rather than paws.

What an odd coincidence, I've been reading about mesonychians all morning.

Then you probably know that Andrewsarchus wasn't one, rather being related to entelodonts, hippos and the whale lineage, right?

[Newt]

I think Andrewsarchus had hooves rather than paws.

What an odd coincidence, I've been reading about mesonychians all morning.

Then you probably know that Andrewsarchus wasn't one, rather being related to entelodonts, hippos and the whale lineage, right?

Or a triisodontid, possibly even synonymous with Paratriisodon. That whole area of the mammal cladogram is still hazy, and how Triisodontidae, Mesonychia, traditional Artiodactyla, and Cetacea fall out relative to one another is highly dependent on taxon sampling and no study has great support for its findings. That plus the incomplete nature of Andrewsarchus leads to its status being still ambiguous. There's still just the one skull, and its teeth (the most important part for mammal taxonomy) are worn-down nubs.

More complete fossils of Andrewsarchus and of the raoellids would be helpful. Somebody get on that!

[BlueKrono]

I think Andrewsarchus had hooves rather than paws.

What an odd coincidence, I've been reading about mesonychians all morning.

Then you probably know that Andrewsarchus wasn't one, rather being related to entelodonts, hippos and the whale lineage, right?

Or a triisodontid, possibly even synonymous with Paratriisodon. That whole area of the mammal cladogram is still hazy, and how Triisodontidae, Mesonychia, traditional Artiodactyla, and Cetacea fall out relative to one another is highly dependent on taxon sampling and no study has great support for its findings. That plus the incomplete nature of Andrewsarchus leads to its status being still ambiguous. There's still just the one skull, and its teeth (the most important part for mammal taxonomy) are worn-down nubs.

More complete fossils of Andrewsarchus and of the raoellids would be helpful. Somebody get on that!

I seriously want to go on a fossil-hunting trip to Mongolia for that exact reason. The specimen was discovered just across the border in Inner Mongolia, China, but they don't allow any export of fossils.

[Halichoeres]

Ha ha @Sim well it does seem like the overwhelming majority of prehistoric life is of no interest to you, so maybe we need a term narrower than 'paleo-enthusiast'

[Sim]

I don't like the name Brontosaurus.  It doesn't sound like a real name to me because it reminds me of the Italian word brontolare which means to grumble or complain.  So Brontosaurus sounds like it means "grumbling lizard" to me.

I think Nanmu, W-Dragon and REBOR are worthless.

[Halichoeres]

Well, those three companies have almost nothing to do with paleontology, so I don't think that affects one's paleo-enthusiast status one way or another.

As for my confession, there are certain prehistoric animals whose fan clubs I find so objectionable that I start to dislike the perfectly innocent animal.

[Sim]

They've all made attempts at non-pop culture models though, so I think it is appropriate for this thread...  Not the best reason though, sure.  I think IToy is worthless too.

[GojiraGuy1954]

I find a lot of prehistoric animals uninteresting.  Notable ones are:

1. Invertebrates in general.

2. Synapsids in general.

3. Amphibians.

4. Fish excluding Edestus, Xenacanthus and Orthacanthus.  I find Dunkleosteus particularly boring.

5. Heterodontosaurids.  They look almost like mammals and I find the general mammal look very unappealing.

6. Ornithopods in general.

7. Sauropods in general.

8. Oviraptorosaurs.

9. Anchiornithids.

10. Spinosaurus.

11. Tyrannosaurus.

12. Concavenator, actually all carcharodontosaurids except for Acrocanthosaurus.

13. Halszkaraptor.

14. Nasutoceratops.

Sorry to whoever likes any of these!

So you're saying that you are a fan of fossilised Ginkgo leaves?

[Sim]

Fossilised ginkgo leaves are awesome!  I have a ginkgo in my garden and it's wonderful.  But I think you're not really asking whether I'm a fan of those leaves, I think you're attempting a silly insult.  Since it's clear there are a lot of prehistoric animals I find interesting.

[Lynx]

This is a little more odd confession but
I am a huge fan of the belly sliding spinosaurus theory, it sounds a little stupid at its premise but I think, personally, it makes a ton of sense for the creature itself.

[Pachyrhinosaurus]

I prefer When Dinosaurs Roamed America over Walking with Dinosaurs.

[Dynomikegojira]

I subscribe to the theory of Silesauridae being a paraphylectic grouping of ornithischians because I find the lack Triassic ornithischians baffling plus it would stretch dinosaurs back to Middle Triassic.
Never liked lumping the Imperial Mammoth into the Columbian Mammoth and god do I miss the Songhua River Mammoth.

[Stegotyranno420]

I prefer When Dinosaurs Roamed America over Walking with Dinosaurs.

Thou shalt remain silent, O heathen!

In actuality though, I can respect and understand why one will think that. I haven't seen much of WDRW, but I like the sound design more, and the overall feel is often more calm opposed to the grandiose parts of WWD

[Bread]

I prefer When Dinosaurs Roamed America over Walking with Dinosaurs.

Thou shalt remain silent, O heathen!

In actuality though, I can respect and understand why one will think that. I haven't seen much of WDRW, but I like the sound design more, and the overall feel is often more calm opposed to the grandiose parts of WWD

It's an excellent documentary. It's available on youtube for free. Of course it is now outdated by today's standards, but it's entertaining and voiced by John Goodman.