Re: Feathering proof

[Yutyrannus]

Honestly, I think we should just stop arguing with this guy, no matter how much evidence goes against what he says he just refuses to let go of the "birds are completely  different from dinosaurs" idea.

[Ultimatedinoking]

Why?

Because they are too distantly related to glorified dinosaurs to have them.

How do you know that?

Look around at the mammals living on Earth today. Shrews, bats, elephants, horses, lions, humans, rabbits, deer, wolves, sea lions. They all have hair to some degree. In some it is thick and shaggy, in others sparse. Is it really so hard for you to believe the same could have been true for dinosauria? That feathers are to dinosaurs what hair is to mammals? The only reason you oppose it is because it conflicts with your imagined image of what a dinosaur should be. Now I'm not saying I think sauropods and stegosaurs had feathers. We need more evidence. But as time goes on the likelihood that they may have has only increased. We don't have enough evidence to say one way or the other at this point and to take a stance on it like you're doing completely goes against what science is all about. Science is about following the evidence wherever it may go, not about picking and choosing what ideas you like.

Why would an animal with large plates for display, and is the size of an elephant, need feathers for? I think you bird lovers just want to stick feathers on non theropod dinosaurs just to say your studying dinosaurs and not bird watching.

[Trisdino]

How is that relevant?


Look, there is no clear distinction between birds and other theropods, in fact, the line is so blurry and arbitrary, yes, arbitrary, that in some cases, it is almost impossible to tell. Is archeopteryx a bird? I would say no, but it shares enough traits to be passed off as one, what about microraptor? That is not a bird... or is it, I mean, it had feathers, was small, was closely related to birds, and could glide, maybe even fly, but it is not within the last common ancestor of birds, so technically, it is not a bird, even though had one been seen today, most people would probably have called it a bird, remember this:

NOT A BIRD:


NOT A BIRD:


NOT A BIRD:




Can you see a clear difference? I can not, but the top picture is Anchiornis, which is either a troodontid, or closely related to basal birds, while the second picture is Microraptor, which is a dromeosaur, and the third picture is mononykus, which is an Alvarezsaur. Only the bottom picture is actually a bird, and in many ways, it looks less birdlike than some of the above.

[stargatedalek]

Yet do orcas moo? No, would tyrannosaurus chirp, no.

orcas are not descended from cows, and as for tyrannosaurus chirping you seem to have evolution literally backwards

Why would an animal with large plates for display, and is the size of an elephant, need feathers for? I think you bird lovers just want to stick feathers on non theropod dinosaurs just to say your studying dinosaurs and not bird watching.

I knew it (in fact I called it) this isn't even about dinosaurs to you anymore, its just hating on birds

[Trisdino]

Here is a picture of velociraptor, it is rather speculative with the amount of feathers, but also rather accurate. Tell me, what exactly is wrong with it in your opinion? Why is it unrealistic?

[Ultimatedinoking]

Yet do orcas moo? No, would tyrannosaurus chirp, no.

orcas are not descended from cows, and as for tyrannosaurus chirping you seem to have evolution literally backwards

Why would an animal with large plates for display, and is the size of an elephant, need feathers for? I think you bird lovers just want to stick feathers on non theropod dinosaurs just to say your studying dinosaurs and not bird watching.

I knew it (in fact I called it) this isn't even about dinosaurs to you anymore, its just hating on birds

I know, I was meaning that it would be like taking a trait of a descendant and giving it to an ancestor just to "soften" the image of tyrannosaurus or other theropods, the same with coating them under inches of fluff, as seen from some of the art on the forums.

I guess saying do ungulates have blubber would have been a better analog.

[Yutyrannus]

Actually that's a Jeholornis.

[Gwangi]

If you went out to Nevada and looked at lizards, would it tell you about snakes?

If snakes were extinct would I have any other option? And are lizards and snakes similar enough that I could formulate a hypothesis on snake behavior based on what I found in lizards if snakes were extinct? The answer is yes. I would have no problem telling that both snakes and lizards are lepidosaurs in the sub-class squamata. That would tell me that snakes probably have overlapping scales like lizards. I could probably figure out that given how closely related they are that like lizards, snakes were cold-blooded and required warmth to function at high levels. I could conclude that like lizards, some snakes probably laid eggs while some gave live birth. That they probably displayed only limited parental care. That males reproduced with a pair of hemipenis, only using one at a time. I could probably conclude that like lizards, snakes could smell with their tongue and probably had a Jaconson's organ.

So yes, I could learn a lot about snakes by looking at their relatives. Obviously with snakes still alive I don't need to but if they weren't, I would not have any other option and at least that window could tell me something. In fact, I would probably skip over Nevada all together and go observe some of the legless lizards that live over in California.

[Trisdino]

Actually that's a Jeholornis.

You were not supposed to point that out...

[Yutyrannus]

Oh well, as I was saying there is just no point arguing with this guy. It's just a waste of time.

[Trisdino]

I believe in educating people, we can not have unknowledgeable folk running around all over the place

[Yutyrannus]

So do I, but there is no point in doing that with this guy, he won't let go of his feather-hatred no matter what you do.

[Ultimatedinoking]

Here is a picture of velociraptor, it is rather speculative with the amount of feathers, but also rather accurate. Tell me, what exactly is wrong with it in your opinion? Why is it unrealistic?

Do we have proof that Mongolia was a jungle? Why is it eating a ginkgo pod? When did theropods get such extensive cheeks? Why is its thumb so short compared to the other finger? Why doesn't the head have the distinctive velociraptor notch? There's no sickle claw!

[tyrantqueen]

What's "trolling"?

We have lots of myotis here, and June beetles. Tons of June beetles in the summer.

I'm sorry, I like theropods, but I find bats more interesting than glorified dinosaurs.

How can you be 19 years old and not know what a troll is?

[Yutyrannus]

Here is a picture of velociraptor, it is rather speculative with the amount of feathers, but also rather accurate. Tell me, what exactly is wrong with it in your opinion? Why is it unrealistic?

Do we have proof that Mongolia was a jungle? Why is it eating a ginkgo pod? When did theropods get such extensive cheeks? Why is its thumb so short compared to the other finger? Why doesn't the head have the distinctive velociraptor notch? There's no sickle claw!

That's because it is not a Velociraptor and that is very obvious ! Seriously....

[Gwangi]

Why would an animal with large plates for display, and is the size of an elephant, need feathers for?

It might not have them for no reason in particular. Who knows. It is about evolution and what is selected for or against. If the first dinosaurs were small feathered animals that passed that trait on to its decedents then Stegosaurus may have had them simply because its ancestors did. It's not like it makes a choice on the matter. Why did it have plates? We don't even know that! Though display seems likely. Why do elephants still have hair? Because they're mammals, that's why.

I think you bird lovers just want to stick feathers on non theropod dinosaurs just to say your studying dinosaurs and not bird watching.

What difference would that make? Birds are still dinosaurs regardless on whether or not non-theropods had feathers. Nothing can change that birds are dinosaurs, get over it man. Stegosaurus does not need feathers to validate that.

EDIT: Here is your feathered Velociraptor. That's probably what it looked like, get over it. Why you hate birds but love dinosaurs is something you'll have to get over.

[Yutyrannus]

What's "trolling"?

We have lots of myotis here, and June beetles. Tons of June beetles in the summer.

I'm sorry, I like theropods, but I find bats more interesting than glorified dinosaurs.

How can you be 19 years old and not know what a troll is?

I know, I'm way younger and I know that.

[Trisdino]

Can I at least just try? I suppose the best way would be to simply make him realize how silly this whole thing is, so here it goes. This here is an Alvarezsaurid, more specifically, a hapennasaurid, by the name of Stulturiomimus:




As you can see, it is quite similar to birds in many ways, but also has a few things that sets it apart. For one, it has large teeth in its jaws, also has a very distinctive overall body shape. It is from the mid cretaceous. Would you really claim that this animal should not be portrayed with feathers? Its ancestors had feathers, its cousins had feathers, so why should Stulturiomimus not have feathers?

[Ultimatedinoking]

What's "trolling"?

We have lots of myotis here, and June beetles. Tons of June beetles in the summer.

I'm sorry, I like theropods, but I find bats more interesting than glorified dinosaurs.

How can you be 19 years old and not know what a troll is?

Because I've never come across them before.

[Yutyrannus]

Why would an animal with large plates for display, and is the size of an elephant, need feathers for?

It might not have them for no reason in particular. Who knows. It is about evolution and what is selected for or against. If the first dinosaurs were small feathered animals that passed that trait on to its decedents then Stegosaurus may have had them simply because its ancestors did. It's not like it makes a choice on the matter. Why did it have plates? We don't even know that! Though display seems likely. Why do elephants still have hair? Because they're mammals, that's why.

Exactly.