Paleofails

[E.D.G.E. (PainterRex)]

Have any of you seen the blog called Paleofail? If not here is a link http://palaeofail.tumblr.com
It showcases all of the things people say, media shows, and other such things about prehistoric animals.....that are, sometimes, painfully wrong. As such I wish to do the same here. I would like to post once every other day, a paleofail. I would suggest that if anyone else finds one to add them here. I will also add the paleofails one by one from their blog here. I will probably post an explanation given by this blog as to why the thing in question is inaccurate, etc. So let us get this thing started!

(18/Sept/2015)


Quoted:Dinotopia's "mosasaurs"

Quoted Explanation: Mosasaurs were not crocodiles. Their heads should be longer and skinnier. The body should be vaguely whale-shaped with smooth skin. There's no evidence of osteoderms on their backs. Mosasaurs had flippers! Mosasaurs did not have sprawling legs! And (although you can't see it) there should be a fluke on the tail, although that wasn't discovered until some time after this movie was made. Mosasaurs were not crocodiles.

Mosasaurs were not crocodiles.

Mosasaurs were not crocodiles.
Mosasaurs were not crocodiles.
Mosasaurs were not crocodiles.
Mosasaurs were not crocodiles.

Mosasaurs were not crocodiles.

Mosasaurs were not crocodiles.

MOSASAURS WERE NOT CROCODILES

[tyrantqueen]

Dinotopia is a fantasy though. Some of the dinosaurs talk if I recall correctly.

[Newt]

Well that's unfortunate. The Dinotopia books are so good; I haven't seen the film/miniseries/whatever that is, but it's a shame they didn't maintain the creator's commitment to portraying the animals accurately.

TQ - It's fantasy, yes, but good fantasy establishes its rules and sticks to them. In the Dinotopia books, Mesozoic dinosaurs exist unchanged in modern times, they are intelligent, and some can speak - but that's as far as the fantasy goes. The dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures are otherwise portrayed as realistically as possible. Gurney would certainly not have been so lazy as to paint some vague pseudocrocs and call them mosasaurs. In fact, that's pretty much antithetical to the whole spirit of the book.

I just don't understand these sorts of decisions by filmmakers. If you want to make a film based on a pre-existing property, do it properly. If you don't care to do so, then make an original film and call it something else. It doesn't even make business sense; we're not talking about Harry Potter or something that would draw in huge crowds by name appeal alone. Blecch.

[E.D.G.E. (PainterRex)]

Yes, you are both right.....

Maybe I will just post another one from the same miniseries



Quoted Response: According to the Dinotopia miniseries, this is a Dimorphodon.

Quoted Explanation: Dimorphodon is not a bird. Its wings should be clawed and membranous, not feathered. It shouldn't have feathers at all, but pycnofibres (which could potentially be a type of feather but for the time being they're generally considered different). It should have a long, body tail with a vane at the end. It should have teeth. It shouldn't have a beak. The nostrils should be at the end of the nose. It should walk on all fours. It should have a long toe that supports a membrane from one foot to the other. Dimorphodon was not a bird.

Dimorphodon was not a bird.

Dimorphodon was not a bird
Dimorphodon was not a bird
Dimorphodon was not a bird
Dimorphodon was not a bird

Dimorphodon was not a bird

Dimorphodon was not a bird

DIMORPHODON WAS NOT A BIRD

[Newt]

What an ugly parrot...

[stargatedalek]

Actually there is a film and a miniseries, I haven't seen either in quite some time but I do recall that they were not connected.

[Ceresiosaurus]

And a really bad game boy advance game that my gf gifted me for my last bday 

As a (soon to be) historian, I have to deal with things people make up without good reasons in a daily basis. I have the feeling I like getting annoyed by made up stuff, because the same happens with my second love, paleontology.

I always wonder what's the point of making up stuff when, usually, the actual things are awesome and cool enough.

[Sim]

I always wonder what's the point of making up stuff when, usually, the actual things are awesome and cool enough.

I agree.  I find people deliberately changing prehistoric animals to try to make more appealing 'versions' sad and nonsensical.  These made up 'versions' are nowhere near as cool or awesome as the real animals.  Prehistoric animals aren't monsters, they're real animals that once lived.  If people want to use them in stories instead of fictional creatures because unlike the latter they're real, why change them from the real animal so that you end up with another kind of fictional animal?  Even worse is how when these deliberately altered prehistoric animals are shown to so many people, many of them then think that is what the animals were like.  And how some toy companies shamelessly copy these made up designs and produce toys that don't really look like any real dinosaur.  What a waste!

As a palaeontologist once said, if people didn't go making up things about prehistoric animals (in this case they were referring to the JP films), instead of spending time telling others Tyrannosaurus's vision wasn't based on movement and how other made up things aren't true, palaeontologists could instead be using that time to tell people the really interesting things that are true about these animals.  I can't remember which palaeontologist said that, it was linked to in a Jurassic World thread on this forum.

At this point, a part of me would like to see dromaeosaurids get reclassified as birds to show just how absurd the JP franchise "Velociraptors" and other 'modern restorations' of dromaeosaurids are.  I wonder how much people who create these made-up versions of prehistoric animals like these animals?  After all, they're changing them since they don't think the animals are good enough.  It seems quite disrespectful towards the prehistoric animals.  I feel the JP Velociraptors are an especially good example of this.  They have always been one of the main dinosaurs and characters in the JP franchise.  However, instead of honouring Deinonychus which is what Michael Crichton said the JP Velociraptors were in all but name, or honouring Velociraptor which is what they are called, the JP dromaeosaurs aren't Deinonychus or Velociraptor anatomically even ignoring the lack of feathers.  Their anatomy is closer to Deinonychus's while they are called Velociraptor.  Yet they are neither of the two.  And it's this JP character that has been copied by too many for their non-JP products as though it can actually be a Velociraptor!

When I started writing this post I didn't think I'd end up writing this much!  Hehe!

[E.D.G.E. (PainterRex)]

(19/Sept/2015)

Quoted Response: Supposedly Velociraptor, from a christian theme park.
Quoted Explanation:That......looks nothing like a Velociraptor. Velociraptor was about 2 metres (6 feet) long. I'm not going to explain everything wrong anatomically with it. I have better things to do with my life. Here, have a picture.

[Rain]

Christian theme park?  I thought many (hardcore) Christians don't "believe" in dinosaurs since they're not directly mentioned in the bible.

[Halichoeres]

Christian theme park?  I thought many (hardcore) Christians don't "believe" in dinosaurs since they're not directly mentioned in the bible.

They vary. There are some who think that fossils were planted by Satan to deceive us, but very few. There are others who think that they died in the Flood of Genesis. The particular sect my parents belong to teaches that dinosaurs were created long before humans and destroyed when they had finished preparing the earth for humankind (by stomping rocks into soil and fertilizing it). That sounds like pretty bad theology (and even worse biogeochemistry), but yeah, there's a hilarious diversity of explanations for dinosaurs.

[E.D.G.E. (PainterRex)]

(20/Sept/2015)

Quoted Explanation:Sure, I'll give this some leeway for being a fictional species. However, that doesn't excuse the shrink-wrapped, skinny arms-they should be muscular and surrounded by air sacs. The three fingers also do not form their independent hand, but were connected to the wrist next to the wing finger. It seems to be missing the pteroid bone coming off of the wrist. The wingtips should be rounded, and the wings shouldn't connect to the elbow like that, but at or around the leg. Pterosaurs did have have stiffening fibres inside the wing, but not a styliform like in Yi. The body ilso too thin, and it seems to lack a tail.

Also, not only does that skull not match the illustration at all, it's actually Caulkicephalus.

[SpartanSquat]

I dont think we should post ark survival evolved creatures in paleofails due alien origins are out of paleoaccuracy. And yes, the developers said never wanted to be accurate.

[Mamasaurus]

Christian theme park?  I thought many (hardcore) Christians don't "believe" in dinosaurs since they're not directly mentioned in the bible.

There are many belief systems and denominations who are known as "Christian", some take the words of the Bible in a literalist sense. How people figure dinosaurs into a world that they believe is 10,000 years old is a bit mind boggling to me, but that is simply because I don't know enough of what they truly believe to say anything about it.  There are many other "hardcore" Christians that believe that science and religion do not contradict each other at all, and the truths of science (which includes the existence of dinosaurs) simply reveal truths about the reality of God. Such as intelligent design in the form of evolution. But I suppose the truth of that statement would depend on what one means when one says "hardcore Christian".  I think in this case most people mean the "young earth" variety.  I would like to think that a "hardcore Christian" is someone who truly follows the teachings of Christ with zeal, and that passion is obvious in that person's love and compassion for others.  Or at least someone who is genuinely trying their best to meet His high standards.  But what do I know? . And I do not intend to start anything off topic with this anyway. .

I guess what I am trying to say is that "Christian" does not automatically mean a denial in the existence of dinosaurs, or people who blindly follow faith instead of science.  "Young earth" Christians are actually a very small percentage in the grand scheme of things.

That said, I find these paleo fails very entertaining indeed. The Dinotopia fails made me laugh out loud 

I never knew about mosasaurs until I saw Dinotopia. After watching the movie I looked them up and discovered the real, much more interesting animal. So movies are great for throwing names and cool ideas out there to inspire further research.  But like others have said, it really is a wasted opportunity when the real animal is ten times more interesting than the fabricated monstrosity.

[alexeratops]

I dont think we should post ark survival evolved creatures in paleofails due alien origins are out of paleoaccuracy. And yes, the developers said never wanted to be accurate.

They did make the Spinosaurus on 4 legs though...

[Balaur]

Oh my god... The Dimorphodon.... The mosasaurs. This is blasphemy!

[E.D.G.E. (PainterRex)]

(20/Sept/15)

Quoted Response:Actual Jurassic World Dimorphodon toy.

(20/Sept/15)

Quoted Response:Supposedly Archaeopteryx.
Quoted Explanation: This....thing has a lot of anatomical issues. First of all, its head is too large in comparison to its body size. Archaeopteryx probably wouldn't have had a beak, and it definitely had teeth. It has a severe case of glued-on hands-actually, it seems to have hands coming off of its hands. The wing feathers should be coming off of the second (middle) finger, and should be longer. The wing should have a lot more.....structure to it (seriously, the berlin specimen shows very nicely what they should look like). The perspective is a bit off with the model, but the torso seems rather broad to me. The legs might need to be longer, too, but that might just be a consequence of the fat body.

[HD-man]

I dont think we should post ark survival evolved creatures in paleofails due alien origins are out of paleoaccuracy. And yes, the developers said never wanted to be accurate.

They did make the Spinosaurus on 4 legs though...

Which is evidence of what RolandEden said.

[Rain]

That Dimporhadon is a part of the "Hero Mashers". They're supposed to look crazy and nonsensical

[E.D.G.E. (PainterRex)]

That Dimporhadon is a part of the "Hero Mashers". They're supposed to look crazy and nonsensical

Yeah....but still