Re: Feathering proof

[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!

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

Maybe if it wasn't so generic looking... And was so fat/feathered that you can't see the shape of the head.

[Yutyrannus]

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?

Alright, go ahead .

[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....

Maybe if it wasn't so generic looking... And was so fat/feathered that you can't see the shape of the head.

Well of course it is, you almost certainly wouldn't see the shape of the skull on the actual animal.

[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!

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

Maybe if it wasn't so generic looking... And was so fat/feathered that you can't see the shape of the head.

Well of course it is, you almost certainly wouldn't see the shape of the skull on the actual animal.

You would maybe have seen a faint outline of the head. It wouldn't be so smooth.

[Trisdino]

Yes.



It would.

[Ultimatedinoking]

It's the feathers that obscure the head, have you seen a bald chicken, or a vulture?

[Gwangi]

Stop quoting the picture over and over people, we've all seen it.

Jeholornis was once classified as a bird, in reality it appears to have been a troodontid. Don't bother arguing about if it had feathers or not. We know it had feathers because it was preserved with feathers.

[stargatedalek]

It's the feathers that obscure the head, have you seen a bald chicken, or a vulture?

oh wow, you were complaining about a reconstruction with feathers

my votes in, hes a troll and we stop replying to him

[Trisdino]

I still really want a response on this, by him:

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]

It's the feathers that obscure the head, have you seen a bald chicken, or a vulture?

oh wow, you were complaining about a reconstruction with feathers

my votes in, hes a troll and we stop replying to him

I was saying that I couldn't tell it wasn't a velociraptor because I couldn't see its head shape.

[tyrantqueen]

*Adds thread to ignore list*

[stargatedalek]

Tris, don't bother, he knows he'll loose if he takes that bait

[Yutyrannus]

It's the feathers that obscure the head, have you seen a bald chicken, or a vulture?

oh wow, you were complaining about a reconstruction with feathers

my votes in, hes a troll and we stop replying to him

I was saying that I couldn't tell it wasn't a velociraptor because I couldn't see its head shape.

Actually it was very obvious, anyway just reply to Trisdino's post, would you show it with feathers, yes or no?

[Yutyrannus]

Tris, don't bother, he knows he'll loose if he takes that bait

Possibly, but I still want to see his response to that.

[Ultimatedinoking]

Tris, don't bother, he knows he'll loose if he takes that bait

just admit there's no concrete proof of feathers in large theropods, then we all walk away without injury.

[Yutyrannus]

There's no proof of any large theropods not having feathers either.

[Trisdino]

Let me introduce you to my little friend, his name is Yuty-bloodyfeathers-rannus, and he is a 10 meter long tyrannosaurid covered in fuzz, now shut up and answer my question:

[Ultimatedinoking]

I still really want a response on this, by him:

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?

First off  this is clearly a glorified dinosaur, was it feather, possibly. I can't tell how small it is. My aurgument is that large theropods were not feathered. As for small ones, it would depend on environmental factors.

[Ultimatedinoking]

Let me introduce you to my little friend, his name is Yuty-bloodyfeathers-rannus, and he is a 10 meter long tyrannosaurid covered in fuzz, now shut up and answer my question:

Is that all it's known feathers? How do we know that this isn't a remnant tail tuft? Your basing feathery large theropods on a single fossil? This could just be left over baby fuzz.

[Yutyrannus]

I still really want a response on this, by him:

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?

First off  this is clearly a glorified dinosaur, was it feather, possibly. I can't tell how small it is. My aurgument is that large theropods were not feathered. As for small ones, it would depend on environmental factors.

One: stop saying glorified dinosaur, it's quite annoying. Two: there is no environment that would prevent a dinosaur from having feathers.