TFW there will never be a scientifically accurate dinosaur cartoon

>TFW there will never be a scientifically accurate dinosaur cartoon

Other urls found in this thread:

journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0032623
bbc.com/news/science-environment-17192624
youtube.com/watch?v=r-YzuWHiyn0
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ichthyoconodon
twitter.com/NSFWRedditGif

>dinosaur cartoons in 2018

good
reptiles > chickens

dinotrux?

Keep is SFW this time

>Ywn have a pet T-rex

>a scientifically accurate dinosaur cartoon

there wouldn't be much of a plot

they would just be like hunting and eating and shitting

I know, I want to see actual dinosaur cloacas in my dinosaur cartoons.

Forget about dinosaur cartoons, there will never be a scientifically accurate dinosaur DOCUMENTARY
>inb4 BBC with their 25-metres long leupleurodon

IDK I feel like I'd be more scared of an Ostrich than I would a Komodo Dragon.

>there will never be a scientifically accurate dinosaur cartoon
because they still don't make up their mind about it
its just one idiot cientist saying they have feathers, then another one saying they didn't, then another one saying they did but the big ones just had a little at the neck base and tail
just a bunch of retards trying to have their name somewhere in history
like the retard with the
>hurr triceratops never existed, its just a juvenile torosaur
that got btfo later

Here's your dinosaur

>Walking With Dinosaurs movie
>they IDIOTICALLY felt the need to put shitty voice acting because muh kids will get bored
>movie has 4 characters, so they talk CONSTANTLY
>movie sucks
whoever let that happen deserves death

Eh, my Uncle in eastern Germany farms them for a living. You can usually survive them rather easily if you behave correctly but they also can really fuck you up if you do something wrong, it's not more dangerous than being an electrician.

>hurr triceratops never existed, its just a juvenile torosaur
that got btfo later

that was Jack Horner, AKA "Muh obligate scavenger T. rex" who is considered a joke by most Paleontologists, he is wrong CONSTANTLY

so you agreed with me or somehow think I didn't mean that?

good, feathers are for fags

just play MtG, Ixalan is full of that shit

I was agreeing with you

I think the only way they could make a science-accurate documentary is if it was about the history of paleontology. Like go from the quadrupedal megalosaurs and nose-horned iguanodonts all the way up to the current time and show off multiple interpretations of dinosaurs instead of sticking to just one. But even then, by the time they'd release it, it would be outdated already.

T. rex a Dinosaur in Hollywood is kinda like that, the full doc is on youtube

looks gay af

I used to feed emu when I was like 7 or 8. Those things are fucking scary. They basically tell you when you go into the cage to feed them not to look them in the eye, not to run, and not to act scared because they will absolutely fuck you up if they think they can.

Actually, Horner came in later. John Scannella first make the assertion. And that never got "btfo later", it's still being debated. There literally hasn't been any evidence tossed into the debate that actually sways it harshly in the direction of being false. The closest anyone has gotten is pointing out that Torosaur fossils are incredibly rare compared to Triceratops fossils. But that could honestly just mean they had a very low chance of survival into their Toromorph phase.

Also, because this is the only reason people bring this up, Torosaur will eventually ceased to exist as a classification. Triceratops will become the name of both, you scared fucking children.

>thinking dinosaurs are real or ever existed
>OH NO, OH NO NO NO NO NO AHH HAHA HA HA HAHA HAHAHA HAHAHAHA

Yeah, "historically accurate" means shit when the theories change every other year.

Tbh I'm just glad leading theory is that adult t rexes didn't have feathers.

Shut up Sup Forums, nobody likes you.

>being a hornerfag

Enjoy having your guy be the butt of every joke in paleontology.

I liked Dinosaur Train

If I'd been a kid when it came out I'd have been obsessed since I was a Thomas fanatic

Also, just to add insult to injury here, I guess. Horner wasn't the one who first suggested the T-rex was a scavenger it was Lambe in 1917. And it's never been definitively proven true or false. It's been an ongoing debate since the early 1900s and has a lot of evidence and theories under it's belt. It's about a 50-50 debate, and more people believe it's possibly (not that it's necessarily true, but that it's possible) than people believe it's 100% impossible.

Scavenger t-rex is actually one of the more interesting theories out there, and one of the easiest ones to toss out if you want to find people in a crowd who care way too much about their Hollywood dinosaurs.

Dinosaurs are shit compared to what else our world has offered us.

...

...

>It's about a 50-50 debate

The vast majority of paleontologists agree to T. rex being a predator, even Jack Horner conceded and said "i never actually believed it lol". We have many instances of healed bite marks on triceratops and edmontosaurus.

It's a fringe minorty of paleontologists that even remotley think it's a possibility and I'm sick of retards like you pretending it's the prevailing theory that at least half of paleontologists believe

It's better with scales instead of feathers. 99% of people like it better that way. /thread

The only way for a vertebrate to be a full time scavenger is by flying. And even then, vultures still kill living prey.

>There literally hasn't been any evidence tossed into the debate that actually sways it harshly in the direction of being false
except for young torosaur fossils and aged triceratops fossils that basically proved that each one are their own thing?
and
somebody else make the archive links of this articles
journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0032623
bbc.com/news/science-environment-17192624
Scannella just came back again with Horner agreeing as some kind of validation
fuck ESL on a phone is hard, no idea how phoneposters usually do this shit

...

Oi nah, fuck that, whoever was filming that had balls of steel. Fuck Cassowaries man, cunts are terrifying.

>We have healed bite marks
>the closest to actually going back in time and seeing how a T. rex fed
>we have ecology studies showing that it would be impossible for a full grown tyrannosaurus to sustain itself on carcasses alone
>there are still people that pretend that it being an obligate scavenger is the only conceivable explanation

Synapsids are my shit, mate.

Feathered dinosaurs are cool as shit, and you have shit taste if you believe inaccurate scaled monstrosities are better in any way.

>hornerfag getting BTFO

beautiful

>/threading yourself
Pathetic

>There are people, in this thread, who are legitimately arguing in defense of inaccurate dinosaurs because they don't want to lose their childhood interpretations, even though they were wrong even at the time.

You JP fuckers are worse than Tail Draggers. Neck yourselves, you're bringing science down with you for your stupid fucking nostalgia. You're as bad as creationists.

...

I'm still perplexed by how mammals came to be. Shame we lack so much information

...

Are you referring to those arguing with hornerfag or the scalies?

BTW here is undeniable proof of predatory behavior in T. rex. A tooth with healing marks in the bone around it found in the tail of an edmontosaurus

Why? We have a pretty well documented variety of synapsids leading to modern mammals.

Well the pelycosaurs like Dimetrodon were around during the early Permian before they were replaced by Therapsids during the late Permian. And comparing the phsiology of these guys with early Triassic mammals, you can kind of see where evolution was heading.

But the idea that feathers were on every dinosaurs is laughable.

...

Bearded Vultures are fucking gorgeous.

Yes, but do we have any knowledge about when/how warm blood was evolved?

Well we think Dimetrodon and a bunch of other creatures at the time used their sails to regulate heat. Later synapsid variants, like Gorgonopsids lacked a sail, as did most other Therapsids that inhabited the Late Permian, indicating they didn't need it anymore. So when the survivors of the Permian Mass Extinction began to evolve into ancient mammals, they could very well have evolved some early form of body heat regulation.

I dunno, I could be pulling this out of my ass, I'm no paleontologist, but that seems like a fair train of logic to follow.

I'm mostly curious because it's a rare thing in evolution. It's a direct upgrade.

...

...

...

is that a swimming bat
what the fuck

where is this from?

What the fuck happened?

You should be scared of both m8

>its just one idiot cientist saying they have feathers, then another one saying they didn't,
It's been known for a fact that at least some species of dinosaurs had feathers since at least the 1970's.
The only ongoing debate is which specific species had them and which did not.
By claiming otherwise you just sound like creationists that insist that there is debate withing the scientific community as to whether or not evolution is real.
Yes there are occasionally retarded pet theories that certain scientists try to push that are later on proven to be false but that doesn't mean that nothing is known at all.

Yo, so hold up....were theredifferent types of Tyrannosauruses or what? I mean, I know most people think there's only one type, but I hear that it's a type of species that have changed/evolved on its own, too (for example, a Trexes in europe were smaller while some in America were fatter?). Any paleofriends care to explain this to me?

didn't even remember creationist is a thing till it was mentioned, what I mean is that instead of having a consensus dumb shit is allowed to even be considered
why is the consensus now that they had just on some parts of the body like neck and tail instead of the first full feather ones till the "popular" part rejected it? I'm supposed to believe that the current one is just something out of pressure or the real deal? and if its real why was the full feathers one from the begining even allowed to reach any kind of mainstream level when it was so weak that just saying "I don't like it" was enough to reconsider? I probably suck at writing this in english but whatever

>Ceratopsian fossil imprint with very clear feathers.
Get over it, all dinosaurs had feathers.

>there is a debate that dinosaurs had feathers
>there is a debate whether or not torosaurus and triceratops were the same
>there is a debate about the feeding habits of Tyrannosaurus Rex

any more I should add to the list of shit retards believe?

chronologically and geologically accurate dinosaurs?

no dinos from the triassic, jurassic and cretaceous interacting at the same time.

tyrannosauridae is the family that dinosaurs that are your pic are in. If you want t. rex than it's Tyrannosaurus, saying Tyrannosaur is talking about the family

>eviscerates you
>heh nothing personal kid

be cool scooby doo made an episode about egyptology being exactly like that.

What big discoveries do you guys think will happen this year in paleontology?

Maybe not a cartoon, but would you be ok with a game?

youtube.com/watch?v=r-YzuWHiyn0

so what about the direct opposite of that?

when will the next scientifically inaccurate but cool dinosaur cartoon come out?

...

oh yeah Saurian

It certainly looks exactly like it intends to be! It's still pretty early in development, though; I think most people will wait until they put the playable T-Rex in or until the game officially releases complete

...

And that's the dinosaur they will be making playable last

fuck

guess I'll wait for Anzu and Ankylosaurus

I thought only four where going to be made playable? I heard the order is Dakotaraptor, Pachycephalosaurus, Triceratops, Tyrannosaurus

If dinosaurs are just old birds why not just use terrorbirds instead, they're way more recent and maybe early man had to actually face them.

Terror birds aren't well known enough by the normos

No one believes that. Sauropods are featherless and only hacks believe otherwise.

one of their Kickstarter things was "if we get $X, then there will be TWO MORE playable dinosaurs"

The backers could vote between Anzu, Ankylosaurus, Euoplocephalus, and Edmontosaurus, and they chose Anzu and Ankylosaurus!

Stretch goal was 2 more species and those guys won the backer poll

oh fug ok so I completely butchered what the choices were

sorry

I want this reality.

>not watching dinosaur train

Fucking Skeksis looking son of a bitch...

It's a cinereous vulture, they're apparently quite large.

Dinosaur Balls

This is far from the only proof by the way.

>.... (for example, a Trexes in europe were smaller while some in America were fatter?)

T.Rexes were native exclusively to the Americas, weren't they? Have they found fossil evidence elsewhere now?

Hmmmmmmmmmmm

fossil evidence of stan lee being there when the dinosaurs went extinct.

That the dinosaurs had conservative values

T.Rexes are just found in America (unless you consider Tarbosaurus a T.Rex subspecies) but Tyrannosaurs are found all throughout the world (but mainly Asia)

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ichthyoconodon

Long story short, its a mammal whose tooth was found in what was once sea, with signs of little transporation. Given that its closest relative was a glider...

Oh, ok, so Tyrannosaur is the name of the group, and in it are Tyrannosaurus Rex, Tarbosaurus, and so on? Is that about right?