Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]
Welcome to Carnivora. We hope you enjoy your visit.


You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free.


Join our community!


If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features:

Username:   Password:
Add Reply
  • Pages:
  • 1
  • 2
Argentinosaurus huinculensis
Topic Started: Jan 7 2012, 10:39 PM (6,971 Views)
JaM
Member Avatar
Heterotrophic Organism
[ *  *  * ]
Thalassophoneus
Nov 21 2017, 07:58 AM
JaM
Nov 20 2017, 07:54 PM
Thalassophoneus
Nov 17 2017, 01:35 AM

Quoting limited to 3 levels deep
Let me try to explain what I'm talking about.
There are Christian fanatics who believe the world is only 6 thousands years old (that is not me!!!!) Especially in the US where this reconstruction is.
A portion of THOSE Christian fanatics (again, not me) use the argument that all fossils and their interpretations are false, and that good Christians can go to museums and see that it is all fake.

Therefore, using a very obviously not real skeleton and then claim it is representative of the fossils supports their argument (in their mind, obviously).
In addition to that, people use this reconstruction - mostly based on no real fossil, and as such highly speculative, and potentially not very accurate anatomically, for basis of biomechanical study.

We have many other sauropods where we have almost the full skeletons represented, either by single or multiple specimens, they could have used those. Fact is, the biomechanical study is not based on real evidence, it's done the exact way those aforementioned fanatics claim that ALL Paleontology is done, fueling the idea that it's all false (again, THEIR belief). Maybe you have not seen this ongoing topic (I guess you have since you mention CAD), so you don't know what I'm talking about? Sure, a study of a real sauropod skeleton would likely have produced the exact same results, but that's not what I'm talking about here.

When you base a study on such a specifically speculative mount, it just becomes borderline science. There are many other sauropods with a similar build, so why exactly use THIS specimen, which is not real? We only have a few vertebrates and partial leg bones and a few other bones, that is all of Argentinosaurus there is. Some of the other Argentinian Titanosaurs are much more complete.

And finally, I don't claim that ALL mounts or studies of mounts are fake, only THIS PARTICULAR MOUNT, understand? This mount is a fantasy art object, trying to represent how big the animal was, but it is not an accurate representation suited for anatomical studies ESPECIALLY as there's this ongoing debate with doubters in science and fundamentalists who have political clout these days.
Ausar
Nov 17 2017, 01:53 AM

Quoting limited to 3 levels deepArgentinosaurus is largely incomplete and that, until more complete remains are found, that any attempts at reconstructing it are ultimately speculative (and that ultimately, the biomechanical model in Sellers et al. (2013) suffers from this). However, it's not like reconstructions of extinct animals known from incomplete remains are done by purely pulling things out of thin air. They're done by looking at the available material, trying to determine the phylogenetic affinities of the animal, looking at more complete remains of close relatives (if they exist), and then using that to try to fill in the blanks; more of a best guess than a complete fabrication as dinosaur deniers like to believe. Now, even at the first step interpretations can vary. But one of the properties of science is that the amount of stock we put into different ideas changes with our understanding, as well as that no one flat out claims that "so and so is absolutely correct".

So yeah, some skeletal restorations of fossil taxa are, at least in part, speculative (but as I've said above, there is some reasoning behind them). But then again, it's not like that fact is being hidden from people. They can see that fact for themselves (after all, you did) and they need to be smart enough to realize that scientists don't have the complete picture, only a best guess that a) they're not saying is definitive and b) is subject to change. If religious fundamentalists don't have the intelligence to understand even that, then that's on them.
You're right about that, but you have to see it in the context I wrote about, see my original reply or the one I just wrote above.
In any case, this is not a real skeleton based on real fossil evidence. There's a lot of conjecture involved in making this mount, and it is just a representation of the great size of the dinosaur, but not at all an anatomically correct representation other than some kind of overall shape. When you study the biomechanics of a dinosaur you have (in my opinion) to use one which has a good representation of fossil. Why use one which does absolutely not? Do you know how much variation is possible in the morphology of Argentinosaurus just based on the actual fossil? IF this reconstruction is made by scaling up OTHER fossils from OTHER sauropods, the why not use one of those specimens instead? If that is the case, then this is a proxy of a completely different sauropod. However, I cannot prove that it is incorrect, but just ask any real paleontologist who have seen the mount. It's not like the old mounts which was put together in the wrong way, it's based on sculpted bones which does not exist.

As a single person, the religious fanatic means nothing, it is as a movement it becomes relevant, via people like Mike Pence, via people like him they get political clout and this is just a strong support of their argument that Paleontology is false. Via mounts like this, THEIR argument becomes stronger, their nonsense becomes more widely accepted, because they say like this "if this is false, then we assúme everything else is false as well", and the falseness of mounts has been a strong argument of theirs lately, in debates.
Don't worry, I've seen the mostly real Berlin mount, I understand that sometimes real bone is fragile and cannot be mounted, I don't ignore all the real mounts just because a single mount is mostly sculpted, but that does not mean that people with political clout and the people who believe them accept or understand this.
And I repeat, their goal was to simulate the locomotion of a huge sauropod. The parts that are not known from Argentinosaurus are the neck and the tail. The body and the legs are the most important.
I explained the reason behind what I wrote, and you ignored it all and talk about whether it is appropriate for the simulation?

In any case, there are a few vertebrates, sacrum, very fragmented leg bones (not a whole leg) so relevant info such as relative leg length is completely unknown - compare Giraffatitan with Diplodocus if you don't get why such knowledge is relevant. There are OTHER titanosaurs which are much more complete. Why use such a fragmented specimen? There's even a drawing above which illustrates the lack of bones, you posted that yourself. Sure, the skeleton is an educated guess, but most of it is made to impress visitors to whatever museum it's in, like Fernbank. You choose to ignore how little of the animal's fossil we know, look at the drawing, there's almost nothing, but what there is is of great size.

The reconstruction is a sculpted representation of the dinosaurs size, it is not in any way an accurate depiction, because most of it is unknown. It doesn't mean that I personally think it's completely wrong, only in the context of the ongoing issues with people like CAD, as you mention, and biomechanical analysis of a sculpture, rather than a known fossil.

Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Thalassophoneus
Member Avatar
Pelagic Killer
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
JaM
Nov 21 2017, 08:35 PM
Thalassophoneus
Nov 21 2017, 07:58 AM
JaM
Nov 20 2017, 07:54 PM

Quoting limited to 3 levels deep
Argentinosaurus
And I repeat, their goal was to simulate the locomotion of a huge sauropod. The parts that are not known from Argentinosaurus are the neck and the tail. The body and the legs are the most important.
I explained the reason behind what I wrote, and you ignored it all and talk about whether it is appropriate for the simulation?

In any case, there are a few vertebrates, sacrum, very fragmented leg bones (not a whole leg) so relevant info such as relative leg length is completely unknown - compare Giraffatitan with Diplodocus if you don't get why such knowledge is relevant. There are OTHER titanosaurs which are much more complete. Why use such a fragmented specimen? There's even a drawing above which illustrates the lack of bones, you posted that yourself. Sure, the skeleton is an educated guess, but most of it is made to impress visitors to whatever museum it's in, like Fernbank. You choose to ignore how little of the animal's fossil we know, look at the drawing, there's almost nothing, but what there is is of great size.

The reconstruction is a sculpted representation of the dinosaurs size, it is not in any way an accurate depiction, because most of it is unknown. It doesn't mean that I personally think it's completely wrong, only in the context of the ongoing issues with people like CAD, as you mention, and biomechanical analysis of a sculpture, rather than a known fossil.

Your reason is simply "I find it too fragmentary". But the truth is that we have a pelvis, a tibia, an important part of the femur and several dorsal vertebrae and the forelimbs can be restored based on other titanosaurs. This is enough for them to simulate the walking cycle of Argentinosaurus.

Their goal was to simulate the walking cycle of a huge sauropod. No other sauropod of that scale is complete enough to be used for a walking simulation.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
moldovan0731
Member Avatar
Heterotrophic Organism
[ *  *  * ]
Posted Image

Finally we have a decent art about this guy.
Edited by moldovan0731, Apr 18 2018, 12:31 AM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)
« Previous Topic · Dinosauria Species profiles · Next Topic »
Add Reply
  • Pages:
  • 1
  • 2

Find this theme on Forum2Forum.net & ZNR exclusively.