Dinosaurs

>No feathers

Other urls found in this thread:

dailygalaxy.com/my_weblog/2016/02/a-9th-planet-does-it-exist-in-a-10000-year-orbit-in-the-outer-reaches-of-our-solar-system-weekend-fe.html
twitter.com/NSFWRedditImage

Why did they change their name from Dino Vengers?

Feathers are not EXTREME.

>falling for the nuscience feathers meme

Much as it pains me to admit, we recently found full skeletons and fossil remains confirming that they probably had feathers, at least at one point.

What we know about dinosaurs has really changed a ton over the past 20 years.

>N-NO FEATHERS REEEE

Stay mad you fucking neckbeard.

"They" meaning which species, exactly? You can't mean all of them. Apatosaurus? Triceratops? Stegosaurus?

Velociraptor in particular.

My favorite dinosaur has always been anklyosaur personally.

>dinosaurs suddenly lost all coolness
Unironically accidentally said something correct.

Are you retarded? The image you posted is the opposite of the content in your post.

I can deal with raptor birds. I can't deal with feathery giraffe dinosaurs and a feathered ankylosaur would be an insult to it.

Besides, they're called terrible lizards, not terrible birds. I refuse.

>Besides, they're called terrible lizards
Based on new info maybe we should rename them too.

Too late for that. At this point it's tradition.

So was calling Pluto a planet.

Science often axes traditions.

Why does being small mean Pluto isn't a planet anymore? Is a person with dwarfism not a person?

Do you name each and every asteroid in the asteroid belt as a planet?

Actually, they had proto feathers.

It's more like calling each individual sperm a person.

Correct.
But the "wrong" depiction of dinosaurs is cooler looking than the scientifically accurate one.

Asteroids are bare rocks, planets are much more smoothly rounded and come in many colors for several different reasons.

That's fucked. A dwarf planet is a planet. A gas giant is a planet.

Sauropods didn't had feathers. It was probably a carnivorous trait.

If you think that's weird, nasa just discovered a planet that appears every ten thousand years on our solar system. It's called planet x

>Sauropods didn't had feathers
Actually there are a few Sauropods that they found with protofeathers, which means there's a possibility that it was a trait at one point or another.

I strongly disagree. Feathered raptors and T-rexes are much cooler and look more threatening and dangerous, probably because it makes them feel so much more plausible and physical.

Wron't again satan. They did not have their bodies covered in feathers but had manes and the tip could harness feathers. We know for exemple that the t-rex from asia had red feather on his head and back neck.

That's cool as shit, glad Planet X was real. Wonder where it goes the rest of the time? Another solar system?

Velociraptor was the size of a turkey.

Imagine that only fully feathered. You might actually mistake it for one.

That's not new.

>We know for exemple that the t-rex from asia had red feather on his head and back neck.
How can we know this much? That does sound cool, though

>If you think that's weird, nasa just discovered a planet that appears every ten thousand years on our solar system.
This has been theorized for a while now.
Kinda neat though that it's been confirmed.

>but had manes and the tip could harness feathers
So you're saying t-rex was a queen that wore a bright red feather boa?

Woah... Feathers are so... Cool...

Yes, and that's cool. Nature is cool.

Basically, Jerry, there are other heavenly bodies that are roughly the size of Pluto. I think Pluto's shape and orbiting pattern play into it too.

fear the turkey.


the ones that are dangerous are utahraptors. they were alpha predators and had scythe like claws.

this post made me want beth to dom me while spouting off scientific facts that I stubbornly reject because they challenge the worldview I grew up with

It's not real, numbnuts. Planet X is an invention of Zacharia Sitchins that called himself a Sumerian translator though didn't actually knew the language and said Nibiru was the name of the 10th planet beyond Pluto, that hid behind the sun. It's fiction written by a retard.

Wasn't that Deinonychus?

>Yes, and that's cool.
No, I don't think it is.

>fear the turkey.
Velociraptor wasn't the apex predator it was depicted as. Sorry. It also wasn't a super genius.

>the ones that are dangerous are utahraptors.
Velociraptor in the movies were based on a completely different species, the deinonychius (sp?)

I've heard they were each 6-7 feet tall, respectively. The hell?

user is likely talking about the theorised ninth planet, way out in the Kuiper Belt, that would exist on a 10,000- to 20,000-year-long orbit (which is different, incidentally, from "appearing every ten thousand years in our solar system").

dailygalaxy.com/my_weblog/2016/02/a-9th-planet-does-it-exist-in-a-10000-year-orbit-in-the-outer-reaches-of-our-solar-system-weekend-fe.html

>It also wasn't a super genius.
I mean, we really don't know anything about how smart they were. Brain/body quotients would help give a some sort of guess but it wouldn't be totally reliable.

This just proves hammonds theory that the park bred monsters, not dinosaurs.. They never had a pure strain to begin with.

Nope.
Adult Velociraptor was about 15 KG, 500 centimeters high and 2 meters long tail to nose.

Far from the monster in the films.

probably

I bet a chicken could beat it.

Probably not.

Teeth > beak usually.

But velociraptors were oviraptors. They stole and ate eggs.

Pic related

>500 centimeters
I think you slipped an extra zero in there.

>everything cool about dinosaurs is fake
good riddance

>I think you slipped an extra zero in there.
I think I did.

The Orange one must have been a complete monster back in his days.

This looks cool as fuck, I don't get why neckbeards are so detached from reality that anything resembling nature is bad.
It's the opposite, good design have basis on concepts well known to humans, so our brains fill in the blanks.

>velociraptor
>part of the oviraptor family
No sir.

Oh, it's a family?
I thought it was based on a diet.

>people who don't like what I like are neckbeards.
brainy thinky, posty stinky.

It's a name of group of dinosaurs that look like that one
The first specimens were often found around eggs so they thought that they were egg thieves
Turns out the eggs belonged to the oviraptor and it was just protecting its nest when it died. The name stuck though

No, everything about dinosaurs is fake. Their skin color hearts, they were warm blooded, feathers behavior. lies alll lies. The goverment lied.!
The truth neo, is that dinosaurs were taking their first steps in becoming the rulers of the planet if not by the meteor sacrificing themselves to save us mammals.

Because when they think feathers the first thing they think about is chickens and not birds of prey.

Real answer:
Because you just shitposted with, literally,
"They dont' like what I like, so they're neckbeards, and also, they must hate EVERYTHING that resembles nature!"

You should feel ashamed at this egregious logical faux pas.

Reminder that fully grown theropods probably didn't have feathers.
We have skin impressions of some species
Lots of scales.

Only dromeosaurs had complete feather coverage. But those were flightless birds anyways and not really dinosaurs.

Neckbeards are objectively the most descriptive and fitting term for the circle of people that got mad about the feathers findings. I was around them during the time and I can attest it well.

You should feel bad about posting this.

Oviraptors in sense of being egg eating jackoffs

Look, friend, you can well have aesthetic opinions, but to get mad at scientific findings and propose anti-scientific ideals to suit your 90's nostalgia perspective is absolutely neckbeardy.

>I don't like science because it doesn't agree with my predetermined conceptions of how things should be

Literally no better than creationists.

Everything ate eggs
They're jam packed with everything you need to grow a body

>Look, friend, you can well have aesthetic opinions
That is entirely the issue here.

>but to get mad at scientific findings and propose anti-scientific ideals to suit your 90's nostalgia perspective is absolutely neckbeardy.
No one here is doing this.

You continue to misrepresent what is right in front of you simply to sling insults at people for having different opinions.

Did I quote your posts or anyone else's for that matter?
You're projecting and being defensive because I made a blanket statement. It was never directed at anyone in particular.
That's entirely on you.

>You're projecting and being defensive because I made a blanket statement.
Why shouldn't people object to being erroneously covered by a blanket statement that clearly covers people it shouldn't, as explained.

You think there were vegan theropods with sidecut plumes that tried to get the other predators to try their organic cycad and algae smoothies?

>It was never directed at anyone in particular.
Everyone who enjoys cheese is a fat sack of worthless shit.

But it's ok. It wasn't directed at anyone in particular, so if you're bothered by that then clearly it's your fault.

Because of the vague and generalized nature of that kind of statement already makes it valueless by itself?

Anyone who doesn't like feathered dinosaurs are nostalgiafags. Also, birds are fucking cool.

Now you're backpedaling.

If it's valueless then the person making the statement is by definition wasting time and effort and making a statement of no meaning.

But it had a biting insult, which isn't exactly valueless, now, is it?

Never said anything about liking or disliking. Do you have an active objection of the feathered depiction, though?

>Never said anything about liking or disliking.
This is a complete denial of what you said, explicitly and implicitly.

>shit talking cheese

It isn't, bruv. You're just baiting at this point.
Ain't my fault you have shittaste, enough derailing.

You literally said everyone who didn't like the way they looked was a neckbeard.

Scroll up and read. This isn't bait, this is just what you said. Unless you're admitting you're baiting.

No no, it's ok.
I didn't direct it at anyone in particular. So that means it's YOUR fault if you're bothered by my retard tier comment.

It was in response to the hypothetical notion of someone saying that, so don't worry

I spend a lot of time on /ck/

>here's your feathered dinosaur

I know, I honestly love cheese.
But not everyone does or has to.

What's wrong with that?

it's literally a turkey

That's a vulture

yeah, a turkey vulture

You do know they're not turkeys right?
No more than a sea horse is a horse.

I'd say a bird is a bird much more than a fish is a mammal.

Sure but that doesn't mean a vulture is a turkey because of its name

Turkey Vultures don't look like that.

>plebeian taste in dinos
get out normies
reeee etc.

That's a crocodile

That's not even a dinosaur, you imbecile.

>feathered ankylosaur would be an insult to it
>to it
>it meaning my own ankylo headcanons
oh no, what will user do with all his fanfiction?

>Pleb

Move over true pleb
Actual royalty coming through
Only species that defy physics can be said to be GOAT

Whose tradition? Do you have any idea how self-absorbed and asinine you sound? According to chronology, aka the only thing whose tradition matters, your """tradition""" is a fad.

>Dinosaur thread
>Bitching about feathers
>Someone will try to make unsourced armchair paleontology claims about how "t rex only had feathers as a juvenile and lost them as an adult"
>Someone will claim that it's impossible for large animals to have skin coverings because they would spontaneously combust or something
>Someone will cite Carnotaurus skin impressions as "proof" of no threopods having feathers
>399 posts of autistic screeching of "not muh dinosaurs"
>And then we will do it all over again

HOT DOG A DINOSAUR THREAD!

Crocodile MIMIC

>What we know about dinosaurs has really changed a ton over the past 20 years.
Feathered dinosaurs were first speculated back in the 18th century
They were highly believed to be feathered by the 70's
Some species were confirmed to be by the 90's and in the late 90's even more were
This isn't new, it's just pop culture is always lagging greatly behind science you still have people thinking the pyramids were built by slaves and that evolution has some kind of predetermined goal.

Early shared dinosaur ancestors had feathers according to some evidence, there is precedence to believe they may have all had some type of feathers, whether or not they kept them throughout their entire lineages isn't known, but at least some did.