Wierd/Curios Books & Media

[stargatedalek]

no proof megatherium had fur either
yet do you see giant naked sloths?

really though, if yutyrannus is not enough proof for you, you are already to far gone to see through pop culture and find the real animal beneath

[HD-man]

really though, if yutyrannus is not enough proof for you, you are already to far gone to see through pop culture and find the real animal beneath

Not necessarily (See the Switek quote, which sums up my opinion on the matter until new evidence shows otherwise).

Quoting Switek ( http://www.nature.com/news/palaeontology-the-truth-about-t-rex-1.13988 ):

Thomas Carr, a palaeontologist at Carthage College in Kenosha, Wisconsin, argues, for example, that unpublished fossils with skin impressions from close relatives of T. rex show scaly skin. These findings suggest that even though some earlier tyrannosauroids had feathers, the subgroup called tyrannosauridae (which includes T. rex), seems to have undergone an evolutionary reversal from fuzz to scales.

[HD-man]

those parodies are awesome, I'm totally gonna share those (if thats ok?)

I think it's OK. They belong to Albertonykus ( http://albertonykus.deviantart.com ).

Almost forgot: There's also a JFC parody by TyrantisTerror ( http://tyrantisterror.deviantart.com ).

[stargatedalek]

really though, if yutyrannus is not enough proof for you, you are already to far gone to see through pop culture and find the real animal beneath

Not necessarily (See the Switek quote, which sums up my opinion on the matter until new evidence shows otherwise).

Quoting Switek ( http://www.nature.com/news/palaeontology-the-truth-about-t-rex-1.13988 ):

Thomas Carr, a palaeontologist at Carthage College in Kenosha, Wisconsin, argues, for example, that unpublished fossils with skin impressions from close relatives of T. rex show scaly skin. These findings suggest that even though some earlier tyrannosauroids had feathers, the subgroup called tyrannosauridae (which includes T. rex), seems to have undergone an evolutionary reversal from fuzz to scales.

possible, but I still think its a safe assumption they were feathered
there is more evidence for than against at this point

[Ultimatedinoking]

no proof megatherium had fur either
yet do you see giant naked sloths?

really though, if yutyrannus is not enough proof for you, you are already to far gone to see through pop culture and find the real animal beneath

Dried sloth skins... Complete with hair!

"Too far gone to see through pop culture?" What the...?

Yutyrannus was far enough removed from T. rex that feathers could have been lost.

Think of the wolly mammoth and the imperial mammoth. Yutyrannus could have lived in a cooler time than T. rex, thus like the wolly mammoth it needed a coat, while T. rex could be like the imperial mammoth, larger than  its relative, and lacked a coat due to its size and a warmer land. T. rex was the size of an elephant, and the late Cretaceous' heat was similar to Africa, a hairy/feathery animal weighting 8 tons would roast in that kind of weather.

[Yutyrannus]

Think of the wolly mammoth and the imperial mammoth. Yutyrannus could have lived in a cooler time than T. rex, thus like the wolly mammoth it needed a coat, while T. rex could be like the imperial mammoth, larger than  its relative, and lacked a coat due to its size and a warmer land. T. rex was the size of an elephant, and the late Cretaceous' heat was similar to Africa, a hairy/feathery animal weighting 8 tons would roast in that kind of weather.

Actually feathers do not have the same insulatory properties as fur. Feathers can also cool animals down, not just keep them warm.

EDIT: Also, there is no imperial mammoth, M. imperator was a synonym of the Columbian mammoth.

Not necessarily (See the Switek quote, which sums up my opinion on the matter until new evidence shows otherwise).

Quoting Switek ( http://www.nature.com/news/palaeontology-the-truth-about-t-rex-1.13988 ):

Thomas Carr, a palaeontologist at Carthage College in Kenosha, Wisconsin, argues, for example, that unpublished fossils with skin impressions from close relatives of T. rex show scaly skin. These findings suggest that even though some earlier tyrannosauroids had feathers, the subgroup called tyrannosauridae (which includes T. rex), seems to have undergone an evolutionary reversal from fuzz to scales.

Evidence that it had scales does not prove I did not have feathers, Kulindadromeus shows that quite clearly. Also, they might not even be scales, they could simply be impressions of skin, similar to plucked bird skin.

[Ultimatedinoking]

Think of the wolly mammoth and the imperial mammoth. Yutyrannus could have lived in a cooler time than T. rex, thus like the wolly mammoth it needed a coat, while T. rex could be like the imperial mammoth, larger than  its relative, and lacked a coat due to its size and a warmer land. T. rex was the size of an elephant, and the late Cretaceous' heat was similar to Africa, a hairy/feathery animal weighting 8 tons would roast in that kind of weather.

Actually feathers do not have the same insulatory properties as fur. Feathers can also cool animals down, not just keep them warm.

EDIT: Also, there is no imperial mammoth, M. imperator was a synonym of the Columbian mammoth.

Not necessarily (See the Switek quote, which sums up my opinion on the matter until new evidence shows otherwise).

Quoting Switek ( http://www.nature.com/news/palaeontology-the-truth-about-t-rex-1.13988 ):

Thomas Carr, a palaeontologist at Carthage College in Kenosha, Wisconsin, argues, for example, that unpublished fossils with skin impressions from close relatives of T. rex show scaly skin. These findings suggest that even though some earlier tyrannosauroids had feathers, the subgroup called tyrannosauridae (which includes T. rex), seems to have undergone an evolutionary reversal from fuzz to scales.

Evidence that it had scales does not prove I did not have feathers, Kulindadromeus shows that quite clearly. Also, they might not even be scales, they could simply be impressions of skin, similar to plucked bird skin.

Ok, so the wooly mammoth and the Colombian mammoth.

[Yutyrannus]

Not that that had anything to do with what you said, I just thought I ought to point it out. Also, as I said that is a very poor comparison since feathers are different from fur.

[Roselaar]

Wow, you guys are going way off topic. There's nothing weird or curious about this heated debate, you'll find it in paleontology lecture halls too.

[Trisdino]

I think people are just sick of fanboys saying that rexes did not have feathers.


You have no problem accepting that gastornis has feathers, but we have no feather impressions on it, nor any relatives. The only reason you care about the rex is that you grew up with a scaly version, but really, boo hoo, just stop it, okay? Go watch godzilla.


Anyway, on topic, the clash of dinosaurs rex looks kinda... naked? Like, not just non-feathered naked, but as if it lacks any form of skin.

[Yutyrannus]

Roselaar: I agree, I'm actually surprised this conversation hasn't been moved to another thread yet.

Trisdino: You are exactly right.

[Ultimatedinoking]

I think people are just sick of fanboys saying that rexes did not have feathers.


You have no problem accepting that gastornis has feathers, but we have no feather impressions on it, nor any relatives. The only reason you care about the rex is that you grew up with a scaly version, but really, boo hoo, just stop it, okay? Go watch godzilla.


Anyway, on topic, the clash of dinosaurs rex looks kinda... naked? Like, not just non-feathered naked, but as if it lacks any form of skin.

I give up!

[tyrantqueen]

Think of the wolly mammoth and the imperial mammoth. Yutyrannus could have lived in a cooler time than T. rex, thus like the wolly mammoth it needed a coat, while T. rex could be like the imperial mammoth, larger than  its relative, and lacked a coat due to its size and a warmer land. T. rex was the size of an elephant, and the late Cretaceous' heat was similar to Africa, a hairy/feathery animal weighting 8 tons would roast in that kind of weather.

Actually feathers do not have the same insulatory properties as fur. Feathers can also cool animals down, not just keep them warm.

EDIT: Also, there is no imperial mammoth, M. imperator was a synonym of the Columbian mammoth.

Not necessarily (See the Switek quote, which sums up my opinion on the matter until new evidence shows otherwise).

Quoting Switek ( http://www.nature.com/news/palaeontology-the-truth-about-t-rex-1.13988 ):

Thomas Carr, a palaeontologist at Carthage College in Kenosha, Wisconsin, argues, for example, that unpublished fossils with skin impressions from close relatives of T. rex show scaly skin. These findings suggest that even though some earlier tyrannosauroids had feathers, the subgroup called tyrannosauridae (which includes T. rex), seems to have undergone an evolutionary reversal from fuzz to scales.

Evidence that it had scales does not prove I did not have feathers, Kulindadromeus shows that quite clearly. Also, they might not even be scales, they could simply be impressions of skin, similar to plucked bird skin.

Ok, so the wooly mammoth and the Colombian mammoth.

I have a hard time believing you're 19 as you say in your profile. We have younger members on the board who act more mature than you do. Sorry, but it's true..

[HD-man]

Like others here, I don't want to get too far off topic, so I'm just going to say the following & leave it at that.

Evidence that it had scales does not prove I did not have feathers, Kulindadromeus shows that quite clearly.

Again, not necessarily. To quote Hone ( http://www.theguardian.com/science/lost-worlds/2014/jul/24/kulindadromeus-feathers-dinosaur-birds-evolution-siberia-russia?CMP=twt_gu ), "It cannot be said right now that any of the various filaments seen in Kulindadromeus are genuinely feathers in the sense that they share a single evolutionary origin back at the very origin of the dinosaurs and before the ornithischians split from the theropods and sauropodomorphs." Personally, I like that the "raggedy scales" idea is being brought back for non-bird reasons.

As for the the relationship between scales & feathers, see "The feather-scale dichotomy" for what Evo-Devo currently tells us (& yes, it does cover the issue of feathered feet): http://reptilis.net/2012/07/23/feathers-on-the-big-feathers-on-the-small-but-feathers-for-dinosaurs-one-and-all/

Also, they might not even be scales, they could simply be impressions of skin, similar to plucked bird skin.

Assuming your referring to Currie's original interpretation, it was exaggerated & the tyrannosaurid skin impressions "do have mosaic scales, but these are smaller than those on typical hadrosaurid or ceratopsid skin" ( http://dml.cmnh.org/2001Jul/msg00243.html ).

[Ultimatedinoking]

Think of the wolly mammoth and the imperial mammoth. Yutyrannus could have lived in a cooler time than T. rex, thus like the wolly mammoth it needed a coat, while T. rex could be like the imperial mammoth, larger than  its relative, and lacked a coat due to its size and a warmer land. T. rex was the size of an elephant, and the late Cretaceous' heat was similar to Africa, a hairy/feathery animal weighting 8 tons would roast in that kind of weather.

Actually feathers do not have the same insulatory properties as fur. Feathers can also cool animals down, not just keep them warm.

EDIT: Also, there is no imperial mammoth, M. imperator was a synonym of the Columbian mammoth.

Not necessarily (See the Switek quote, which sums up my opinion on the matter until new evidence shows otherwise).

Quoting Switek ( http://www.nature.com/news/palaeontology-the-truth-about-t-rex-1.13988 ):

Thomas Carr, a palaeontologist at Carthage College in Kenosha, Wisconsin, argues, for example, that unpublished fossils with skin impressions from close relatives of T. rex show scaly skin. These findings suggest that even though some earlier tyrannosauroids had feathers, the subgroup called tyrannosauridae (which includes T. rex), seems to have undergone an evolutionary reversal from fuzz to scales.

Evidence that it had scales does not prove I did not have feathers, Kulindadromeus shows that quite clearly. Also, they might not even be scales, they could simply be impressions of skin, similar to plucked bird skin.

Ok, so the wooly mammoth and the Colombian mammoth.

I have a hard time believing you're 19 as you say in your profile. We have younger members on the board who act more mature than you do. Sorry, but it's true..

Who updated my age? I just turned 19 a month ago!

All I did was correct my mistake about the imperial mammoth.

[tyrantqueen]

Think of the wolly mammoth and the imperial mammoth. Yutyrannus could have lived in a cooler time than T. rex, thus like the wolly mammoth it needed a coat, while T. rex could be like the imperial mammoth, larger than  its relative, and lacked a coat due to its size and a warmer land. T. rex was the size of an elephant, and the late Cretaceous' heat was similar to Africa, a hairy/feathery animal weighting 8 tons would roast in that kind of weather.

Actually feathers do not have the same insulatory properties as fur. Feathers can also cool animals down, not just keep them warm.

EDIT: Also, there is no imperial mammoth, M. imperator was a synonym of the Columbian mammoth.

Not necessarily (See the Switek quote, which sums up my opinion on the matter until new evidence shows otherwise).

Quoting Switek ( http://www.nature.com/news/palaeontology-the-truth-about-t-rex-1.13988 ):

Thomas Carr, a palaeontologist at Carthage College in Kenosha, Wisconsin, argues, for example, that unpublished fossils with skin impressions from close relatives of T. rex show scaly skin. These findings suggest that even though some earlier tyrannosauroids had feathers, the subgroup called tyrannosauridae (which includes T. rex), seems to have undergone an evolutionary reversal from fuzz to scales.

Evidence that it had scales does not prove I did not have feathers, Kulindadromeus shows that quite clearly. Also, they might not even be scales, they could simply be impressions of skin, similar to plucked bird skin.

Ok, so the wooly mammoth and the Colombian mammoth.

I have a hard time believing you're 19 as you say in your profile. We have younger members on the board who act more mature than you do. Sorry, but it's true..

Who updated my age? I just turned 19 a month ago!

All I did was correct my mistake about the imperial mammoth.

It updates itself automatically when you input your year of birth.

[Ultimatedinoking]

Think of the wolly mammoth and the imperial mammoth. Yutyrannus could have lived in a cooler time than T. rex, thus like the wolly mammoth it needed a coat, while T. rex could be like the imperial mammoth, larger than  its relative, and lacked a coat due to its size and a warmer land. T. rex was the size of an elephant, and the late Cretaceous' heat was similar to Africa, a hairy/feathery animal weighting 8 tons would roast in that kind of weather.

Actually feathers do not have the same insulatory properties as fur. Feathers can also cool animals down, not just keep them warm.

EDIT: Also, there is no imperial mammoth, M. imperator was a synonym of the Columbian mammoth.

Not necessarily (See the Switek quote, which sums up my opinion on the matter until new evidence shows otherwise).

Quoting Switek ( http://www.nature.com/news/palaeontology-the-truth-about-t-rex-1.13988 ):

Thomas Carr, a palaeontologist at Carthage College in Kenosha, Wisconsin, argues, for example, that unpublished fossils with skin impressions from close relatives of T. rex show scaly skin. These findings suggest that even though some earlier tyrannosauroids had feathers, the subgroup called tyrannosauridae (which includes T. rex), seems to have undergone an evolutionary reversal from fuzz to scales.

Evidence that it had scales does not prove I did not have feathers, Kulindadromeus shows that quite clearly. Also, they might not even be scales, they could simply be impressions of skin, similar to plucked bird skin.

Ok, so the wooly mammoth and the Colombian mammoth.

I have a hard time believing you're 19 as you say in your profile. We have younger members on the board who act more mature than you do. Sorry, but it's true..

Who updated my age? I just turned 19 a month ago!

All I did was correct my mistake about the imperial mammoth.

It updates itself automatically when you input your year of birth.

Oh, ok.

[stargatedalek]

Relatives returned from Scotland with lots of things for my parents and I. Scleich parrot rex and bearded dragon, some books, some rather interesting chinastore animals, and absolutely mountains of sweets not available for purchase here in New Scotland (he-he).

The 'Spot 50 Dinosaurs' book is definitely a piece of intrigue. Some of the reconstructions are very recent, and include things such as quilled psittacosaurus, but there are also some dated ones such as naked broken wrist deinonychus.

[Takama]

Well have you ever looked on a internet serch engine and find these Stock Dinosaurs





Well here is the source of those images

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DPOIOw4HM-8&list=PLM1CUnmT_bTNv_0KMxdRP784n3lvhjaDz&index=27

[Patrx]

Not quite. Those models were made and sold by Raul Lunia. They're very detailed and affordable, making them quite popular with low-budget dinosaur productions like "Jurassic June." When properly rendered and animated, they can look pretty convincing, but unfortunately the animations in that trailer are, well, kinda wonky.