Tyrannosaurid skin impressions

[HD-man]

Here's another good writeup on the topic. I'm in agreement with Holtz and Brusatte, especially the latter's point about science journalists have largely failed to read the fine print and instead chose to use hyperbole.

http://www.eartharchives.org/articles/is-the-tyrannosaur-feather-debate-really-over/

2 things of note:

1) I'm guessing that Dickson didn't read Witton's article b-4 writing hers given that Witton covered most (if not all) of "the uncertainty" brought up by Dickson. I'm not saying that Witton's article is the last word, just that currently "there's no reason to be unduly suspicious of the the samples we have...Of course, the adage that 'absence of evidence is not evidence of absence' is always important when dealing with the fossil record, and it applies here as a sensible caveat. However, we shouldn't wield this phrase as a definitive counter-argument to reasonable interpretations of available evidence. Palaeontologists have to work with data, not suspicions or gut feelings, and the data we have does not include, or hint at, the presence of filaments."

2) While I agree that "science journalists have largely failed to read the fine print and instead chose to use hyperbole", it's ironic that Brusatte complained about that given how annoyingly hyperbolic (among other things) his popular science writing is. The following quotes are from Brusatte/Benton's Dinosaurs ( https://www.amazon.com/review/R3J1R5BYAZABGZ/ref=cm_cr_dp_title?ie=UTF8&ASIN=1847244173&nodeID=283155&store=books ) & Brusatte's Field Guide to Dinosaurs ( https://www.amazon.com/review/R1BHCV2E970BGY/ref=cm_cr_dp_title?ie=UTF8&ASIN=1849160066&channel=detail-glance&nodeID=283155&store=books ).

Quoting Brusatte/Benton:

In 1922 Andrews' team discovered a heavily crushed but remarkably complete skull of a small theropod. This skull was very similar to Brown's Dromaeosaurus, but found alongside was something paleontologists had never seen before: a giant, curved and dangerously sharp toe claw. Two years later museum scientist Henry Fairfield Osborn named this new animal Velociraptor, the 'speedy thief'. It was a nightmarish creature, a human-sized carnivore that could rip prey apart with its lethal claws and array of knife-like teeth.

Quoting Brusatte:

The colorful skull crest of Cryolophosaurus is a signal of doom to local plant-eating dinosaurs. For many prosauropods, this fan-like sheet above the nostrils is the last thing they will see before feeling the slicing jaws of death.

[John]

I have no problem accepting a mostly to even fully scaled Tyrannosaurus rex,as that is what the best evidence now points to.I agree with Mark Witton's take on this much more than I do Brian Switek.

[Simon]

Here's a new article from the earth archives about this topic:

http://www.eartharchives.org/articles/is-the-tyrannosaur-feather-debate-really-over/

[HD-man]

Here's a new article from the earth archives about this topic:

http://www.eartharchives.org/articles/is-the-tyrannosaur-feather-debate-really-over/

Suspsy beat you to it in the last comment of page 5. I commented on it in the 1st comment of this page.

[suspsy]

2) While I agree that "science journalists have largely failed to read the fine print and instead chose to use hyperbole", it's ironic that Brusatte complained about that given how annoyingly hyperbolic (among other things) his popular science writing is. The following quotes are from Brusatte/Benton's Dinosaurs ( https://www.amazon.com/review/R3J1R5BYAZABGZ/ref=cm_cr_dp_title?ie=UTF8&ASIN=1847244173&nodeID=283155&store=books ) & Brusatte's Field Guide to Dinosaurs ( https://www.amazon.com/review/R1BHCV2E970BGY/ref=cm_cr_dp_title?ie=UTF8&ASIN=1849160066&channel=detail-glance&nodeID=283155&store=books ).

Quoting Brusatte/Benton:

In 1922 Andrews' team discovered a heavily crushed but remarkably complete skull of a small theropod. This skull was very similar to Brown's Dromaeosaurus, but found alongside was something paleontologists had never seen before: a giant, curved and dangerously sharp toe claw. Two years later museum scientist Henry Fairfield Osborn named this new animal Velociraptor, the 'speedy thief'. It was a nightmarish creature, a human-sized carnivore that could rip prey apart with its lethal claws and array of knife-like teeth.

Quoting Brusatte:

The colorful skull crest of Cryolophosaurus is a signal of doom to local plant-eating dinosaurs. For many prosauropods, this fan-like sheet above the nostrils is the last thing they will see before feeling the slicing jaws of death.

That's a totally ridiculous comparison, apples and oranges. Using dramatic prose in a dinosaur book is not the same as blatantly misrepresenting the data from a paleontological study.

[Neosodon]

I'm not aware of anyone misrepresenting data except for maybe the media. The scientific articles have all been pretty accurate. Yeah the media may have blown things out of proportion but seriously what else would anyone expect. People like TREY the Explainer and Brian Switek who have been, well not to happy about this find just seem to be taking out their frustrations on the media.

The media can be used as a scapegoat for just about anything. Bashing the media seems to be the easiest way to get people to listen to your side of the strory. But that only detracts from the truth. Just ignore the "fake news" and read the scientific articles. I would rather they just discused what the actual scientists said than getting distracted by every bogus claim made by the media.

[HD-man]

That's a totally ridiculous comparison, apples and oranges. Using dramatic prose in a dinosaur book is not the same as blatantly misrepresenting the data from a paleontological study.

1stly, claiming that Brusatte uses "dramatic prose" is "totally ridiculous". Bakker/Stout/Martin/etc use "dramatic prose". Brusatte uses annoying hyperbole. What's next, claiming that JFC used "dramatic prose"?

2ndly, popular science books & popular science articles are not "apples and oranges", but the same basic kind of knowledge ( https://books.google.com/books?id=mOUmDAAAQBAJ&pg=PA62&dq=%22popular+science+books+and+articles%22&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjtgL3T0dLUAhVIHT4KHS8iB1Q4ChDoAQhIMAY#v=onepage&q=%22popular%20science%20books%20and%20articles%22&f=false ). The fact that many popular science books are collections of popular science articles (E.g. "Science Times Books series": http://www.goodreads.com/series/166362 ) is a good indication of that.

[suspsy]

That's a totally ridiculous comparison, apples and oranges. Using dramatic prose in a dinosaur book is not the same as blatantly misrepresenting the data from a paleontological study.

1stly, claiming that Brusatte uses "dramatic prose" is "totally ridiculous". Bakker/Stout/Martin/etc use "dramatic prose". Brusatte uses annoying hyperbole. What's next, claiming that JFC used "dramatic prose"?

Ah, so it's only annoying hyperbole when you personally don't enjoy it?

2ndly, popular science books & popular science articles are not "apples and oranges", but the same basic kind of knowledge

No, they really are not, especially given that many of the misleading or exaggerated articles regarding this study are not written by actual scientists. I fear you have completely missed the point. There is a vast difference between dramatically but accurately describing a theropod in a book and erroneously claiming that the debate over feathered tyrannosaurids has been settled.

[stargatedalek]

This whole "oh boohoo anyone can just blame everything on the media" argument is extremely dangerous. Suspy is right, these articles are spreading misinformation around for profit and it's disgusting, that's very different than someone being very slightly dramatic.

Media articles like these can be dangerous. No, people misunderstanding the subtleties of the situation regarding Tyrannosaur feathers isn't going to cause World War 3, but similarly false articles have done horrible things. Many of them spread harmful hate fueled propaganda and some target hard working people who are easy targets which can absolutely destroy livelihoods (see current Youtube situation surrounding adds). These articles are just the tip of the iceberg of how truly disgusting modern journalism can be, and to compare them to a few dramatic lines of text from kids books is not only ridiculous as an argument but actively dangerous.

[Neosodon]

I'm was only referring to this specific scenario. I'm not saying you should just except the crooked media but to make a fuss over what they say only detracts from what the real scientists are trying to say and gives the media more attention. If you don't like the media just read the scientific articles or use more trustworthy sources. If Trey and Brian had not brought them up I would have probably never even noticed. If you truly despise the dishonest media ignoring them is the best thing to do.

The media has reeked havoc on politics but fortunately the same thing has not happened to science because people interested in science usually ignore the media and read the real scientific articles. So let's keep it that way.

[HD-man]

Ah, so it's only annoying hyperbole when you personally don't enjoy it?

Not sure if you're asking for real or just trying to get a reaction out of me. Giving you the benefit of the doubt, there's a big difference btwn "dramatic prose" & annoying hyperbole. I thought that was clear in my previous comment (I.e. I provided several examples of "dramatic prose" users as a basis for comparison). If not, TyrantisTerror's "Jurassic Fight Club Formula" should help w/that (Compare the 2nd panel to everything that happens after): http://tyrantisterror.deviantart.com/art/Jurassic-Fight-Club-Formula-136354754

No, they really are not, especially given that many of the misleading or exaggerated articles regarding this study are not written by actual scientists. I fear you have completely missed the point.

Then you should re-read my 1st comment of this page. I clearly said that I agree w/the sentiment being made. All I did after that was point out & provide evidence that 1 of the ppl making that sentiment was being hypocritical. I fear that you're not only making a bigger deal of that than need be, but doing so regardless of evidence (E.g. You completely dismissed Treem/Leonardi 2016, a peer-reviewed source, without providing any counter evidence for doing so).

There is a vast difference between dramatically but accurately describing a theropod in a book and erroneously claiming that the debate over feathered tyrannosaurids has been settled.

Except that a lot of Brusatte's annoying hyperbole isn't accurate. I thought that was clear in my 1st comment of this page (I.e. I provided links to my Brusatte-related reviews). If not, Tomozaurus's "Dinosaurs Have Feelings Too" should help w/that: http://tomozaurus.deviantart.com/art/Dinosaurs-Have-Feelings-Too-480569518

[suspsy]

I fear that you're not only making a bigger deal of that than need be, but doing so regardless of evidence (E.g. You completely dismissed Treem/Leonardi 2016, a peer-reviewed source, without providing any counter evidence for doing so).

I fear you have failed to take your own advice about making a bigger deal out of minutiae. It doesn't matter how many examples you present; the fact of the matter is that Brusatte's choice of writing style has absolutely zero bearing on the topic at hand. And that is my final word on that, as I am finding this exchange boring and pointless. Let's all get back to discussing integument.

[Sim]

There is a vast difference between dramatically but accurately describing a theropod in a book and erroneously claiming that the debate over feathered tyrannosaurids has been settled.

Except that a lot of Brusatte's annoying hyperbole isn't accurate. I thought that was clear in my 1st comment of this page (I.e. I provided links to my Brusatte-related reviews). If not, Tomozaurus's "Dinosaurs Have Feelings Too" should help w/that: http://tomozaurus.deviantart.com/art/Dinosaurs-Have-Feelings-Too-480569518

The nightmarish creature part with the crying Velociraptor is very funny!  As for Velociraptor being human-sized, I guess it is if its length is compared to a human's height.

[stargatedalek]

As for Velociraptor being human-sized, I guess it is if its length is compared to a human's height.

Exactly, say if one were to describe a mid-sized alligator, would "man-sized" not be a common point of comparison?

[Derek.McManus]

I'm staying out of this argument but enjoying the discussion...lol 😉

Regards Derek

[HD-man]

I fear you have failed to take your own advice about making a bigger deal out of minutiae. It doesn't matter how many examples you present; the fact of the matter is that Brusatte's choice of writing style has absolutely zero bearing on the topic at hand. And that is my final word on that, as I am finding this exchange boring and pointless. Let's all get back to discussing integument.

You're right about 1 thing: It IS boring & pointless discussing science w/someone who ignores evidence. That someone probably shouldn't be participating in science forums, but there's nothing I can do about that, so I'll just ignore them. Consider yourself ignored.

The nightmarish creature part with the crying Velociraptor is very funny!  As for Velociraptor being human-sized, I guess it is if its length is compared to a human's height.

I figured as much, but that just makes the quote misleading at best (I.e. Human size is measured in terms of weight/mass & height, not length, so saying that Velociraptor is human-sized implies that it's similarly heavy &/or similarly tall) & stupid at worst (E.g. By that logic, a 2 lb corn snake is human-sized). Point is, Brusatte's popular work is full of similarly misleading/wrong/stupid things.

[Sim]

I figured as much, but that just makes the quote misleading at best (I.e. Human size is measured in terms of weight/mass & height, not length, so saying that Velociraptor is human-sized implies that it's similarly heavy &/or similarly tall) & stupid at worst (E.g. By that logic, a 2 lb corn snake is human-sized). Point is, Brusatte's popular work is full of similarly misleading/wrong/stupid things.

I think the overall size of an adult Velociraptor is only similar to the overall size of adult humans on the smaller end of the spectrum.  So I agree that calling Velociraptor human-sized is misleading and not a good choice, since a lot of adult humans would overall be larger than Velociraptor, and since adult human size can vary a lot meaning that calling something human-sized generally seems quite unhelpful.

[HD-man]

"The return of the scaly T. rex to modern paleo-art": http://reptilis.net/2017/06/19/the-return-of-the-scaly-t-rex-to-modern-paleo-art/

[Faelrin]

Okay that was an interesting post, but then I went and read Duane Nash's post on this issue afterwards: http://antediluviansalad.blogspot.com/2017/06/an-issue-of-scale.html

The more I read on these patches (aside from looking at the images of them) the more I take issue with them being scales, or at least scales in the traditional sense. I just want more data to be honest, though I suppose that will take a lot of luck in finding more specimens of this nature. Quite frankly I'm not really sure what to think what these patches are, or even what T. rex possibly looked like at this point, beyond its skeleton. Thankfully I'm not too terribly emotionally invested in any particular speculative reconstruction, etc, in case any new data does come to light (which is the same approach I have currently in regards to the data on these patches).

[John]

Whoops,I posted to the wrong thread!!!