| 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: |
| Sooo, dinosaurs have officially turned into birds | |
|---|---|
| Tweet Topic Started: Nov 3 2012, 08:13 AM (10,704 Views) | |
| Godzillasaurus | Nov 3 2012, 08:13 AM Post #1 |
|
Reptile King
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Not in the evolutionary sense, but in the sarcastic sense. Dinosaurs used to be large, scaly, beasts. Now, everyone thinks they all (yes, including sauropods) had feathers. If there have been countless dinosaur skin-impressions, and only a couple feathered non-ceoulosaur theropods, I guess that just puts feathers on every dinosaur, even when the evidence states otherwise. Anyone else bothered by this?
|
![]() |
|
| FireCrown | Nov 3 2012, 08:17 AM Post #2 |
|
Felines,Ursids,and Canid
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
I am cause it's so confusing |
![]() |
|
| SpinoInWonderland | Nov 3 2012, 02:21 PM Post #3 |
|
The madness has come back...
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
It's all Sciurumimus' fault...and it was actually a coelurosaur, that was thought to be a megalosaur! |
![]() |
|
| Jinfengopteryx | Nov 3 2012, 06:05 PM Post #4 |
![]()
Aspiring paleontologist, science enthusiast and armchair speculative fiction/evolution writer
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Have you read the comments under your blog entry? It's not that likely that Sciurumimus was a Coelurosaur. All you have is a blog entry, where he showed the possibility that it MAY have been a Coelurosaur, while we have a sciensifitic paper stating it to be a Megalosaur. Really, it is sharing lot's of similarities with Meglosaurs. Read Rauhuts ******** paper! P.S. Godzillaman, I love how much you show ignorance to the counter arguments to the scale impresson argument. For the last time, it doesn't prove anything, because it's just an impression and there are no fine details. If you have skin impressions of an elephant, do you think you will have fur on it? Now debunk it, otherwise I won't take this argument seriously anymore. I honestly don't believe anymore in feathers outside theropods, but the ignorance feather haters are showing is getting boring. "mammalising". Seriously? P.P.S. Sorry for all the rudeness in my comments, but you guys are acting like it's 100% impossible that they had feathers and ignore even the slightest indicators. I too don't believe in feathered Sauropods anymore, but stop acting like it's 100% proven that they had none! |
![]() |
|
| theropod | Nov 3 2012, 07:11 PM Post #5 |
|
palaeontology, open source and survival enthusiast
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
jingoferx, those guys do simply have a strogn psychological problem with their scaly reptiles not being that scaly and reptilelike at all. they think it would somehow make them less cool. For the very last time, we have evidence for feathers or quills in many more dinosaurian taxa than we have skin imprints in, and even then those do not prove complete lack of feathers, just reduction, which fits the circumstance that the skin impressions are all from large animals aroud alephant sized. On the other hand, from a biological perspective there is currently absolutely NOTHING suggesting scales should be preferred over feathers when reconstructing the integument of tetanurans, and we have many more indications in ornithischians and even theropods which do show that the common ancestor of dinosauromorpha and pterosauria was probably covered in filaments. How some guys are able to turn all this evidence into "dinosaurs are becoming giant chicken without evidence because we have found skin impression in a few dinosaurs and we only have several times as many feather impressions!"Just stop it, OK? From a scientific perspective feathers are an ancestral trait to ornithodirans (Thomas Holtz wrote that on the page of the university of Maryland if you can remember), this is by far the most straight evolutionary line considering the evidence for filaments in so many dinosaurs. actually I should be the one who is upset, I´ll have to redraw hundrets of images... Edited by theropod, Nov 3 2012, 07:12 PM.
|
![]() |
|
| Godzillasaurus | Nov 3 2012, 11:26 PM Post #6 |
|
Reptile King
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Can you tell me what the point of feathers on something like a sauropod would be? Living in a warm climate, they are huge and would be exhausted from the heat with feathers. |
![]() |
|
| Kurtz | Nov 3 2012, 11:34 PM Post #7 |
|
Kleptoparasite
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
your signatur is fantastic. Golden eagle is by far cooler than t rex Edited by Kurtz, Nov 3 2012, 11:35 PM.
|
![]() |
|
| theropod | Nov 4 2012, 12:34 AM Post #8 |
|
palaeontology, open source and survival enthusiast
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
what is the point of fur on an elephant? what´s the point of tiny remains of hair in some cetaceans? they would reduce feathers undoubtedly, maybe so far that they wouldn´t be externally visible. nevertheless the normal state among dinosaurs is to be feathered, not the other way around. |
![]() |
|
| Jinfengopteryx | Nov 4 2012, 02:14 AM Post #9 |
![]()
Aspiring paleontologist, science enthusiast and armchair speculative fiction/evolution writer
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
For the last time, I don't believe in feathered Sauropods, my problem is that you acted like it's proven that they had no feathers. Edited by Jinfengopteryx, Nov 4 2012, 04:58 AM.
|
![]() |
|
| theropod | Nov 4 2012, 02:56 AM Post #10 |
|
palaeontology, open source and survival enthusiast
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
you mean disproven I wonder what excuse you (not you jingoferx) guys have for the existence of Tianyulong confuciusi I hope it´s not the "those are not real feathers, those are quills"-and after I ask where they see the difference-"because they developed in a different evolutionary line"-which is the exact thing they want to prove with the argument-excuse (thus my longest excuse-name) |
![]() |
|
| Fragillimus335 | Nov 4 2012, 03:16 AM Post #11 |
|
Omnivore
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
They are quills-like structures, not feathers, that is all. Do you think porcupines have highly derived feathers? The structures are not homologous, feathers evolve from scales and quills can also evolve from scales, just like hands can become flippers, or wings, one does not have to lead to the other.
Edited by Fragillimus335, Nov 4 2012, 03:26 AM.
|
![]() |
|
| Godzillasaurus | Nov 4 2012, 06:05 AM Post #12 |
|
Reptile King
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Elephants evolved from animals with fur. Feathers evolved in more advanced dinosaurs. Dinosaurs evolved from archosaurs, which did not sport feathers. |
![]() |
|
| Jinfengopteryx | Nov 4 2012, 06:22 AM Post #13 |
![]()
Aspiring paleontologist, science enthusiast and armchair speculative fiction/evolution writer
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Well, if Ornithopods really had feathers, it's likely that the ancestors of dinosaurs already had them, maybe the ancestor of dinosaurs and pterosaurs had them. I still have my doubts ffor Ornithopods, so I limit them at the moment for theropods. BTW, dinosaurs may have been more advanced than tought. |
![]() |
|
| Godzillasaurus | Nov 4 2012, 07:21 AM Post #14 |
|
Reptile King
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Feathers in ornithopods doesn't necessarily mean that their ancestors had feathers. The feathers in ceoulosaurs and advanced ornithopods could have evolved along the same lines, making it so that feathers in ornithopods, like earlier theropods, only existed in the more advanced forms. |
![]() |
|
| Jinfengopteryx | Nov 4 2012, 07:27 AM Post #15 |
![]()
Aspiring paleontologist, science enthusiast and armchair speculative fiction/evolution writer
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
So they evolved them differently? Doesn't look very logical to me that Ornithodira evolved body cover 3 times individually, but it is possible. |
![]() |
|
| 1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous) | |
| Go to Next Page | |
| « Previous Topic · Debate & discussion of dinosaur related topics. · Next Topic » |
| Theme: Dinosauria light | Track Topic · E-mail Topic |
9:43 AM Jul 11
|
Powered by ZetaBoards Premium · Privacy Policy


)


![]](http://z4.ifrm.com/static/1/pip_r.png)




because we have found skin impression in a few dinosaurs and we only have several times as many feather impressions!"
9:43 AM Jul 11