|
|
Post by sbell on Nov 23, 2008 14:50:06 GMT
Watch who you call an 'anti-feather' or ill-informed . I have fancy letters and a parchment to speak otherwise for the latter. In paleo no less. For the former, I have the eternal ire of Piltdown. I knew it, from the dino-bird paleo's point of view only people who have a degree in paleo have a right to an opinion or to be considered well-informed.  A) That was a tongue-in-cheek statement, but I am reluctant to use emoticons. B) This thread is discussing the merits of evidence in relation to T.rex integument. If you want to dredge up Archaeoraptor stuff, there is a thread for it. Plus, we all know how you feel about scientists. Keep near the topic. |
|
|
|
Post by [][][]cordylus[][][] on Nov 23, 2008 16:33:40 GMT
Watch who you call an 'anti-feather' or ill-informed . I have fancy letters and a parchment to speak otherwise for the latter. In paleo no less. For the former, I have the eternal ire of Piltdown. I knew it, from the dino-bird paleo's point of view only people who have a degree in paleo have a right to an opinion or to be considered well-informed. I love your new sig!  |
|
|
|
Post by Dinotoyforum on Nov 23, 2008 17:31:11 GMT
I knew it, from the dino-bird paleo's point of view only people who have a degree in paleo have a right to an opinion or to be considered well-informed. A) That was a tongue-in-cheek statement, but I am reluctant to use emoticons. why not, they come in very handy  ;D  see! |
|
|
|
Post by crazycrowman on Nov 23, 2008 17:50:18 GMT
"If having a paleo degree entails believing in 'feathered' dinosaurs [sic] or in the authenticity of the Liaoningsaurs like archaeoraptor then I'm better off without one."
So, I take it you no longer give your heroes Martin or Fedduca any merit, now that they are calling the maniraptoria nothing more then secondarily flightless birds ?
|
|
|
|
Post by sbell on Nov 23, 2008 18:02:37 GMT
A) That was a tongue-in-cheek statement, but I am reluctant to use emoticons. why not, they come in very handy ;D see! That's for yung'uns with their youtubes and Mp3s and ipods and things. In my day you couldn't tell sarcasm from serious, and we liked it that way! |
|
|
|
Post by bustosdomecq on Nov 23, 2008 19:59:41 GMT
I knew it, from the dino-bird paleo's point of view only people who have a degree in paleo have a right to an opinion or to be considered well-informed. A) That was a tongue-in-cheek statement, but I am reluctant to use emoticons. B) This thread is discussing the merits of evidence in relation to T.rex integument. If you want to dredge up Archaeoraptor stuff, there is a thread for it. Plus, we all know how you feel about scientists. Keep near the topic. You brought my name up, not the other way around and for the past few weeks I have deliberately kept a very low profile here. And as I also expected, apparenlty mods can derail a topic but not us plebes. |
|
|
|
Post by sbell on Nov 23, 2008 21:40:02 GMT
A) That was a tongue-in-cheek statement, but I am reluctant to use emoticons. B) This thread is discussing the merits of evidence in relation to T.rex integument. If you want to dredge up Archaeoraptor stuff, there is a thread for it. Plus, we all know how you feel about scientists. Keep near the topic. You brought my name up, not the other way around and for the past few weeks I have deliberately kept a very low profile here. And as I also expected, apparenlty mods can derail a topic but not us plebes. I simply mentioned your name when explaining myself as a feather...not-disagreer? I don't know the right term. Anyway, sorry, it was in context of the response, and not meant to actually insult. But it did bring you back--perhaps there are other, dino toy discussions you would be interested in engaging as well? |
|
|
|
Post by Ajax on Nov 23, 2008 22:08:26 GMT
Cool Pictures in that book, i loved the front-on pic of the Huayangosaurus and the picture of all the Protoceratops together. Was there a front-on version of the Stego? Im still looking for a worthy pic for a tatoo, now im even considering that Huayangosaurus pic.
|
|
|
|
Post by stoneage on Nov 23, 2008 22:26:27 GMT
:)AsI understand it there have been 3 T-Rex skin impressions found. The best example was found by an inquiring 12 year old in Alberta. The professional paleontologist missed it because they were looking for bones. In all cases the impressions tend to look like Alligator skin. Phi Curry said" If you look for bones, you're likely to find bones. Not having the same prejudice that everyone else had in terms of looking at the bones she (Tess Owen) found the skin impressions. Our people missed it and I think professionals all around the world miss it all the time." There are skin impressions at the National Museum of Ottawa, and the museum of the Rockies in Boseman, Montana.  |
|
|
|
Post by stoneage on Nov 23, 2008 22:37:44 GMT
There are no feathers. A full grown T-Rex much like modern multi-ton animals such as Elephant, Hippopotamus and most Rhinoceros have a lack of insulatory body covering. This is because at their size such insulation would trap in to much heat making them overheat. T-Rex feathers mostly owes itself to the dinosaur Dilong which is a primitive Tyrannosauroid. It existed in the Early Cretaceous (128-125MYA) in China (of course). It was only 5 feet long. This is why some people think that T-Rex infants may have had feathers, although I think it is a streach to conclude this. Do any animals today have feathers in their youth and lose them when they become adults?
|
|
|
|
Post by stoneage on Nov 23, 2008 23:29:43 GMT
While educational degrees are certainly a plus as shown above there not everything. Remember the pot hole fossils. To me an unqualifed viewer they just looked like pot holes. But to geologist (educated with degrees) they were dinosaur tracks from 4 species. Why is it no one wants to back Dr. Mary Higby Schweitzer T-Rex DNA? She says"The vessels and content are similar in all respects ro blood vessels recovered from Ostrich bone." She can also tell that T-Rex's closest relative is the chicken. So far Mary and her colleagues have kept most of their 48,000 pieces of spectrum data under wraps. They have already retracted three of the proteins for not being statistically significant. Why are they hiding all of this data when it would prove that their conclusions are relevant. Especially when people are releasing articles that say that it is slime. It has been a number of years now what are they waiting for? If in fact this Dinosaur DNA turns out to be biofilm (a layer of bacterial growth) then would that mean that the biofilms closest living relative is a chicken? Or maybe she was eating fried chicken in the lab while she was doing her experiments. ;D
|
|
|
|
Post by Tyrannax on Nov 24, 2008 0:03:26 GMT
There are no feathers. A full grown T-Rex much like modern multi-ton animals such as Elephant, Hippopotamus and most Rhinoceros have a lack of insulatory body covering. This is because at their size such insulation would trap in to much heat making them overheat. T-Rex feathers mostly owes itself to the dinosaur Dilong which is a primitive Tyrannosauroid. It existed in the Early Cretaceous (128-125MYA) in China (of course). It was only 5 feet long. This is why some people think that T-Rex infants may have had feathers, although I think it is a streach to conclude this. Do any animals today have feathers in their youth and lose them when they become adults? Yes, penguins lose their down feathers as they grow older, but do not lose their feathers completely...so...somewhat. |
|
|
|
Post by sbell on Nov 24, 2008 0:30:01 GMT
There are no feathers. A full grown T-Rex much like modern multi-ton animals such as Elephant, Hippopotamus and most Rhinoceros have a lack of insulatory body covering. This is because at their size such insulation would trap in to much heat making them overheat. T-Rex feathers mostly owes itself to the dinosaur Dilong which is a primitive Tyrannosauroid. It existed in the Early Cretaceous (128-125MYA) in China (of course). It was only 5 feet long. This is why some people think that T-Rex infants may have had feathers, although I think it is a streach to conclude this. Do any animals today have feathers in their youth and lose them when they become adults? Mammoths had fur--they were large mammals. Young seals start with fur, then lose it in favour of subcutaneous blubber. Birds in even the hottest places continue to have insulating feathers--because insulation can also keep heat OUT; and the chicks of ostriches start out with far more feathers (down) then they will have as adults. So in fact, large animals can have coverings. And there are examples of integument change--not really all that uncommon. |
|
|
|
Post by stoneage on Nov 24, 2008 3:23:54 GMT
;D There are no feathers. A full grown T-Rex much like modern multi-ton animals such as Elephant, Hippopotamus and most Rhinoceros have a lack of insulatory body covering. This is because at their size such insulation would trap in to much heat making them overheat. T-Rex feathers mostly owes itself to the dinosaur Dilong which is a primitive Tyrannosauroid. It existed in the Early Cretaceous (128-125MYA) in China (of course). It was only 5 feet long. This is why some people think that T-Rex infants may have had feathers, although I think it is a streach to conclude this. Do any animals today have feathers in their youth and lose them when they become adults? Mammoths had fur--they were large mammals. Young seals start with fur, then lose it in favour of subcutaneous blubber. Birds in even the hottest places continue to have insulating feathers--because insulation can also keep heat OUT; and the chicks of ostriches start out with far more feathers (down) then they will have as adults. So in fact, large animals can have coverings. And there are examples of integument change--not really all that uncommon. What you are saying is true but T-Rex lived in a sub-tropic enviornment like elephants and not like Mammoths. There are no multi-ton birds today. Sure young animals can change as they reach adulthood. There is no evidence of feathers on T-Rex or their young. Is it possible, yes but I believe unlikely. What is your opinion on Dr. Schweitzer. Good point Tyrannax! ;D |
|
|
|
Post by crazycrowman on Nov 24, 2008 6:05:34 GMT
"There are no multi-ton birds today." Do you think the terror birds (possibly up to 880lbs with Brontornis) and demon ducks (possibly up to or over 1,100lbs with Dromornis stirtoni) were covered with feathers ? These are not multi ton animals, maybe, but they are very large. We do know that the moas (1,000lbs for Aepyornis maximus) had feathers.  (Modern elephants BTW are fuzzy as babies, and loose this as they age. Adult elephants are sparsely covered in hairs.) "Our people missed it and I think professionals all around the world miss it all the time." Indeed. The same exact thing can be said for feather impressions. |
|
|
|
Post by stoneage on Nov 25, 2008 0:34:00 GMT
"There are no multi-ton birds today." Do you think the terror birds (possibly up to 880lbs with Brontornis) and demon ducks (possibly up to or over 1,100lbs with Dromornis stirtoni) were covered with feathers ? These are not multi ton animals, maybe, but they are very large. We do know that the moas (1,000lbs for Aepyornis maximus) had feathers. (Modern elephants BTW are fuzzy as babies, and loose this as they age. Adult elephants are sparsely covered in hairs.) "Our people missed it and I think professionals all around the world miss it all the time." Indeed. The same exact thing can be said for feather impressions. I think that terror birds and demon ducks may have had feathers. They only weigh about a 1/2 ton. An adult T-Rex probably weighed at least 3 tons. I don't believe that the birds you have mentioned are the direct decendence of T-Rex. The skin impression that have been found show that T-Rex had skin similiar to an alligator or hadrosaur. What do baby alligators show us? |
|
|
|
Post by Tyrannax on Nov 25, 2008 2:05:18 GMT
3 tons? Thats one anorexic adult Tyrannosaurus. 7 tons is much better.  But you said at least, so....yeah. lol. Anyway, no bird is the direct descendant of any Tyrannosaurid. Birds are much closer in relation to Dromeosaurids, and they aren't even direct descendants of those! Since some dinosaurs (theropods) are the cross between reptiles and birds, it is safe to say that some may have had feathers (All through there lives or as babies) and some may have not had any feathers at any point in there lives. |
|
|
|
Post by Libraraptor on Nov 25, 2008 11:15:04 GMT
Hey, admin, how about starting a new category "books". We could talk about so many great books there such as Robert T.Bakkers "The Dinosaur Heresies" or W.J.D. Mitchells "The Last Dinosaur Book. Life and Times of a cultural icon". The latter one would be quite interesting for it touches our crazy hobby - collecting dinosaurs. What unconcious need is behind this urge? How is dinosaur palaeontology embedded in and connected with the culture and the era it tahes place?
Would be great if you thought about a new "books" category.
|
|
|
|
Post by Dinotoyforum on Nov 25, 2008 11:19:00 GMT
Hey, admin, how about starting a new category "books". We could talk about so many great books there such as Robert T.Bakkers "The Dinosaur Heresies" or W.J.D. Mitchells "The Last Dinosaur Book. Life and Times of a cultural icon". The latter one would be quite interesting for it touches our crazy hobby - collecting dinosaurs. What unconcious need is behind this urge? How is dinosaur palaeontology embedded in and connected with the culture and the era it tahes place? Would be great if you thought about a new "books" category. There is a 'what are you reading' thread already. You mean a whole category on a par with 'collections' or 'dinosaurs'? If so, 'books' is a bit specific... |
|
|
|
Post by Libraraptor on Nov 25, 2008 11:29:41 GMT
Didn´t know about that "What you are reading right now" - thread. Okay, this would fulfill my need to talk about books perfectly. On the other hand, a "palaeontology book" section (nor books in general) would be quite appealing,
wouldn´t it?
|
|
![[][][]cordylus[][][] Avatar](http://files.sharenator.com/Troll_Face_U_MAD_RE_wrestling_1-s407x405-126802.jpg)
;D 
see!
But you said at least, so....yeah. lol.