News:

Poll time! Cast your votes for the best stegosaur toys, the best ceratopsoid toys (excluding Triceratops), and the best allosauroid toys (excluding Allosaurus) of all time! Some of the polls have been reset to include some recent releases, so please vote again, even if you voted previously.

Main Menu

You can support the Dinosaur Toy Forum by making dino-purchases through these links to Ebay and Amazon. Disclaimer: these and other links to Ebay.com and Amazon.com on the Dinosaur Toy Forum are often affiliate links, so when you make purchases through them we may make a commission.

avatar_DinoToyForum

Sciurumimus albersdoerferi

Started by DinoToyForum, July 02, 2012, 09:09:14 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

Gwangi

Quote from: amargasaurus cazaui on July 03, 2012, 06:54:52 AM
ding the other day and there was a paleo writer that commented that Spinosaurus is one of the more ridiculous dinosaurs to date, as there is not even enough evidence at this point to speculate beyond it having been some form of crocodile, by actual known evidence.  I do find it odd there is not more fossil evidence for such a widely accepted animal.

I would be interested in reading that if you could provide a link. The reason we can reliably reconstruct Spinosaurus is because we have material from related animals like Baryonyx and Suchomimus. I mean sure, we cannot be certain without more fossil material but we at least know what is was related to and that it wasn't a crocodile.

QuoteA feathered Megalosaurid? Wow! Guess we can really kiss the scaly Theropods goodbye soon. For some odd reason I now want someone to draw a feathered Earl Sinclair....

You know, a feathered Earl Sinclair was the first thing that came to my mind when I read about this.


amargasaurus cazaui

Quote from: Gwangi on July 03, 2012, 02:35:09 PM
Quote from: amargasaurus cazaui on July 03, 2012, 06:54:52 AM
ding the other day and there was a paleo writer that commented that Spinosaurus is one of the more ridiculous dinosaurs to date, as there is not even enough evidence at this point to speculate beyond it having been some form of crocodile, by actual known evidence.  I do find it odd there is not more fossil evidence for such a widely accepted animal.

I would be interested in reading that if you could provide a link. The reason we can reliably reconstruct Spinosaurus is because we have material from related animals like Baryonyx and Suchomimus. I mean sure, we cannot be certain without more fossil material but we at least know what is was related to and that it wasn't a crocodile.


Just google or reference online to the dinosaur and the relatively tiny amount of material that has ACTUALLY been found, post Romer. Then get a book that shows what material he used for his reference. It is shocking how little material has been recovered and used to suggest the animal existed at all. His reconstruction is possibly incorrect. And yes the majority of what has been found are elements of the skull, none of which preclude the likelihood of this animal being a form of crocodile.
   As for the comment I posted , i read it in a book that I have here. When i return from work this evening I will track down the exact title, page and quote if at all possible for you. I know it was a paleo-artist referring to how he chooses what to illustrate and that he had refused to even attempt a Spinosaur based on the flimsy evidence the dinosaur even existed, and was quite possibly a crocodilian. I will do my best to get you the exact reference.
Authors with varying competence have suggested dinosaurs disappeared because of meteorites...God's will, raids by little green hunters in flying saucers, lack of standing room in Noah's Ark, and palaeoweltschmerz—Glenn Jepsen


SBell

Quote from: Metallisuchus on July 03, 2012, 04:01:27 AM
Quote from: Gwangi on July 03, 2012, 03:27:11 AM
Quote from: SBell on July 02, 2012, 10:21:39 PM
I'm more confused about the name--Squirrel mimic? Okay then...

But the feathered thing is cool. I look forward the BANDits getting huffy over this one...

I think squirrel mimic because of the bushy tail perhaps? Odd choice though.

If this is indeed a feathered megalosaur than the odds that all theropoda had some type of feathering is pretty good, even for spinosaurs. Megalosaurs are about as far from coelurosaurs as you can get while still being a theropod. Actually, Tyrannosaurus itself is more closely related to birds than it is to any megalosaur. As difficult as it is to imagine it looks like people are going to need to come to terms with a good portion of their favorite dinosaurs being feathered. I'm nothing but excited about all this.

Seriously, Tyrannosaurs are THAT far removed from Megalosaurs?

They're pretty much basal theropods as far as the majority of theropds goes, so yes, finding a feathered megalosaur has implications for pretty much the whole theropod group.  Of course, it depends in its specifics on how individual workers have dealt with it, but overall megalosaurs are 'primitive'.

Now if someone can just find a Herrerrasaurus or Eoratpor with feather-ish integument, we'd really be onto something!

Arioch

Still no consensus on Otto being a megalosaur though. Mickey Mortimer and Cau think that it might be a coelurosaur, and I can´t wait to read Darren Naish take on this...

ZoPteryx

Quote from: Arioch on July 04, 2012, 02:39:17 AM
Still no consensus on Otto being a megalosaur though. Mickey Mortimer and Cau think that it might be a coelurosaur, and I can´t wait to read Darren Naish take on this...

I'd like to see what Naish's got to say too.  I must admit, my first thought when I saw the photos was: "looks like Sinosauropteryx".

Sharptooth

Quote from: Arioch on July 04, 2012, 02:39:17 AM
Still no consensus on Otto being a megalosaur though. Mickey Mortimer and Cau think that it might be a coelurosaur, and I can´t wait to read Darren Naish take on this...

Yep. After reading the paper, well, i'm more on Mortimer & Cau's side... Not denying that non-coelurosaurs theropods could have had feathers, but i'd still wait to give a fuzzy coat to Torvosaurus & company.


"I am the eyes in the night, the silence within the wind. I am the talons through the fire."

Brontozaurus

Quote from: Gryphoceratops on July 03, 2012, 02:24:21 AM
Wow interesting.  Its still a big stretch to say for certain every theropod had feather structures in some form but it looks to be heading in that direction.  Feathered Spinosaurus....Yeah let that image sink in nice and good... :o

Don't we have theropod skin impressions that show scales?
"Uww wuhuhuhuh HAH HAWR HA HAWR."
-Ian Malcolm

My collection! UPDATED 21.03.2020: Dungeons & Dinosaurs!

Gryphoceratops

Quote from: Brontozaurus on July 12, 2012, 03:36:11 AM
Quote from: Gryphoceratops on July 03, 2012, 02:24:21 AM
Wow interesting.  Its still a big stretch to say for certain every theropod had feather structures in some form but it looks to be heading in that direction.  Feathered Spinosaurus....Yeah let that image sink in nice and good... :o

Don't we have theropod skin impressions that show scales?

We do.  But that doesn't mean they couldn't have had feathers in some form as well. 

SBell

Quote from: Gryphoceratops on July 16, 2012, 01:21:30 AM
Quote from: Brontozaurus on July 12, 2012, 03:36:11 AM
Quote from: Gryphoceratops on July 03, 2012, 02:24:21 AM
Wow interesting.  Its still a big stretch to say for certain every theropod had feather structures in some form but it looks to be heading in that direction.  Feathered Spinosaurus....Yeah let that image sink in nice and good... :o

Don't we have theropod skin impressions that show scales?

We do.  But that doesn't mean they couldn't have had feathers in some form as well.

Like birds with scaly feet?  There is a lot we don't know about skin covering, and likely we'll never know even a little for most species.

Gryphoceratops

Yes like birds with scaly feet.  Even birds with feathery feet still have scales between those feathers like owls.