Jurassic Thread: The All-Encompassing Thread For Dinosaur Fans!

Discussion in 'General Discussion' started by BeeOtch217, Mar 28, 2014.

  1. Aernaroth

    Aernaroth <b><font color=blue>I voted for Super_Megatron and Veteran

    Joined:
    Mar 27, 2004
    Posts:
    28,250
    News Credits:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    422
    Likes:
    +10,146
    Metacarpals are basically fingers (or at least a part thereof). They're the bone that branches off the wrist in humans (think your 'widest" fingerbone), and are considered part of the anatomy of basically any animal with "forelegs" that have digital bones in them as well. So yep, sounds about right, given the "dactyl" part of Pterodactyloid refers to "fingers".
     
  2. Galvatross

    Galvatross Dom Dom, Yes Yes Veteran

    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2013
    Posts:
    7,394
    Trophy Points:
    292
    Likes:
    +10,828
    No worries. I have seen descriptions of the Carnotaurus skin, but never any illustrations or photographs. Supposedly Stephen Czerkas used Carnotaurus skin impressions for his Allosaurus sculpture, but I've never seen that sculpture in person. I know he also made a Carnotaurus sculpture which I assume would have used molds from the Carnotaurus skin.

    I'm with you on Triceratops cranial variation. The same is true with skulls labeled as Torosaurus. Some look very different from Triceratops skulls, and others are very similar looking. The only two species of Triceratops that seem to be largely accepted these days are T. prorsus and T. horridus. It's good to be open on issues like the Torosaurs-Triceratops debate. I just have yet to be convinced that they are the same animal. I wouldn't call myself a lumper or splitter either way. I think each dinosaur taxon which may or may not be a growth stage of an already existing taxon needs to be examined on a case by case basis.

    By the way, I may in the minority, but I like all ornithischians just as much as theropods and sauropodomorphs. All dinosaurs are equally interesting in my book.

    Either way, good discussing with you.
     
  3. BeeOtch217

    BeeOtch217 Ha Ha You're a Mini-Con!

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2013
    Posts:
    4,104
    News Credits:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    202
    Likes:
    +53
  4. kaiserlisk

    kaiserlisk Squid Kid

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2011
    Posts:
    2,246
    News Credits:
    5
    Trophy Points:
    262
    Location:
    Behind you
    Likes:
    +1,962
  5. Aernaroth

    Aernaroth <b><font color=blue>I voted for Super_Megatron and Veteran

    Joined:
    Mar 27, 2004
    Posts:
    28,250
    News Credits:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    422
    Likes:
    +10,146
  6. seali_me

    seali_me RIP January 2018

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2007
    Posts:
    19,841
    Trophy Points:
    337
    Likes:
    +2,485
  7. BeeOtch217

    BeeOtch217 Ha Ha You're a Mini-Con!

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2013
    Posts:
    4,104
    News Credits:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    202
    Likes:
    +53
    I think that's appropriate. lol


    So what kind of Dinos do you guys want to see in Jurassic World?
     
  8. FoC Grimlock

    FoC Grimlock Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2013
    Posts:
    2,127
    News Credits:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    167
    Likes:
    +8
    I want them to all have feathers and be really colorful
     
  9. jestermon

    jestermon Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 10, 2006
    Posts:
    10,717
    News Credits:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    362
    Likes:
    +3,265
    I'd rather them not have feathers they don't really know if they were big bird looking reptile hybrids, I had never heard of any other group aside from the raptor branch having feathers.

    It would be odd if Pterodactyls and some dinosaurs both had feathers, also you think if there were packs of Velocirators and other larger theropods running around they would have found a lot more feathers laying around the good fossils they have of those types of dinosaurs.

    I don't think movie makers will ever make full on feathered dinosaurs the mass public doesn't care about the science they wouldn't think they looked very scary with the feathers.
     
  10. Bumblethumper

    Bumblethumper old misery guts

    Joined:
    Aug 19, 2007
    Posts:
    9,754
    News Credits:
    7
    Trophy Points:
    332
    Likes:
    +1,653
    They already said no feathers. In part they have to stay consistent with the previous films, which can be explained away as genetic mutations from incomplete DNA, rather than fully accurate dinosaurs. Although I think they could have it where they're developing new strains to correct that. If they want to throw in some new feathered dinosaurs, they could have a therizinosaur with those massive claws, or some Microraptors... because in JP style that becomes flying raptors. They're not just going to clone safe dinosaurs.

    I'd like to see more of the Triceratops, just walking around up close. Maybe a CGI Dilophosaurus (it was all animatronic before). JP3 had a few briefly glimpsed dinosaurs that could make repeat appearances. There was an ankylosaur in there.

    For variety they could add some other types of sauropods, maybe a dwarf sauropod like Nigersaurus, or something unusual like an Ampelosaurus or an Amargasaurus.

    They have fossil evidence for feathers or protofeathers on oviraptors, therizinosaurs, tyrannosaurs, and dromeosaurs. Tianyulong shows that feathers weren't just restricted to theropod dinosaurs.

    As to whether feathered dinosaurs can look scary, there are some fairly horrific looking birds out there.
     
  11. SHINOBI03

    SHINOBI03 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 17, 2012
    Posts:
    17,359
    Trophy Points:
    337
    Likes:
    +18,243
    Any Australians/ New Zealanders out there can tell us if wild emus or casuaris are scary or not?
     
  12. kaiserlisk

    kaiserlisk Squid Kid

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2011
    Posts:
    2,246
    News Credits:
    5
    Trophy Points:
    262
    Location:
    Behind you
    Likes:
    +1,962
    ^hell, even a plain ol' goose is frightening when provoked.
     
  13. Noideaforaname

    Noideaforaname Pico, let's go up to Zuma

    Joined:
    Jul 14, 2010
    Posts:
    10,576
    News Credits:
    4
    Trophy Points:
    312
    Location:
    New Jersey
    Likes:
    +13,677
    In the Jurassic Park trilogy, they go thru great pains to make the dinos as realistic as possible and to tie them with modern birds. "No feathers" with the sequel is just plain hypocritical.
     
  14. SHINOBI03

    SHINOBI03 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 17, 2012
    Posts:
    17,359
    Trophy Points:
    337
    Likes:
    +18,243
    Unless they pull the "We engineered them the way people know them better" card in the movie as in the novel then I don't see a good reason to keep them the traditional scaly looks. And I can see it already. I can see the average moviegoers who are not up to date in their dino facts complain about the feathered looks because that's not the way they're used to know the same way G-whiners complain on any modernized Transformer that looks far from the original G1 designs they used to know.
     
  15. Bumblethumper

    Bumblethumper old misery guts

    Joined:
    Aug 19, 2007
    Posts:
    9,754
    News Credits:
    7
    Trophy Points:
    332
    Likes:
    +1,653
    the director is already on record about 'no feathers'.

    These films have always been entertainment first, science second. They could've been feathered right from the start. The book Predatory Dinosaurs of the World was certainly a big influence on Jurassic Park, influencing both Michael Crichton as well as the artists that worked on the film. The author Greg Paul was reconstructing Velociraptor and other dinosaurs with feathers in the 1980s.

    The only issue I have with putting feathers on dinosaurs in the new film is purely for the sake of continuity with the previous films. Like a herd of indian elephants isn't going to suddenly evolve into wooly mammoths over a few generations. Inaccurate dinosaurs don't gradually become more accurate over time. I can accept it if it's handled correctly, they can introduce previously unseen feathered dinosaurs, or new genetically altered variants of old dinosaurs.
     
  16. Noideaforaname

    Noideaforaname Pico, let's go up to Zuma

    Joined:
    Jul 14, 2010
    Posts:
    10,576
    News Credits:
    4
    Trophy Points:
    312
    Location:
    New Jersey
    Likes:
    +13,677
    They've already been changing the dinosaurs the whole time, though. The Raptors went from grey to tiger-striped to females being pale and spotted while the males were brown with stripes down the sides and having quills on their heads.

    I know these movies aren't the most scientific, and there's been some real stupid mistakes (i.e. giving teeth to an animal who's name literally means "it had no teeth"*), but they've been pushing and pushing the connection to birds --even nixing an early idea where the Raptors had forked lizard tongues-- that it doesn't really make any sense that they'd suddenly draw a line at feathers.
    *Pteranodon, look it up. "-nodon" = "no teeth"
     
  17. Bumblethumper

    Bumblethumper old misery guts

    Joined:
    Aug 19, 2007
    Posts:
    9,754
    News Credits:
    7
    Trophy Points:
    332
    Likes:
    +1,653
    those are still variations on a theme. Putting quills on their heads was a really minor concession to science considering what we know about feathered dinosaurs, even in 2001. They still looked like JP Raptors. I'm not against feathering them in principle, but if they're going to do it, they should go all the way and it's going to look like a completely different animal. In terms of keeping the series consistent, they should try to work in an explanation if they go that route.

    One of the big changes to consider if they want to go for accuracy is changing the wrists on all the dinosaurs. For whatever reason, they've been articulating them the wrong way from day one.

    If they'd really been so progressive about it, they'd have been feathered all along. Check out this nerdy t-shirt Darren Naish made for the premier back in 1993.

    Their approach all along has been that while they were in touch with all the latest thinking on dinosaurs, they basically pick and choose from the science depending on what they think has the best dramatic possibilities in terms of making a monster movie.
     
  18. nobleboivin

    nobleboivin Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 4, 2012
    Posts:
    14,143
    News Credits:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    322
    Likes:
    +8,177
    I wouldn't mind some feathers on the dinosaurs.
    Oh man I just thought of something.

    Feathered Grimlock.
     
  19. kaiserlisk

    kaiserlisk Squid Kid

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2011
    Posts:
    2,246
    News Credits:
    5
    Trophy Points:
    262
    Location:
    Behind you
    Likes:
    +1,962
  20. SHINOBI03

    SHINOBI03 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 17, 2012
    Posts:
    17,359
    Trophy Points:
    337
    Likes:
    +18,243
    Closest image so far for a feathered T-Rex

    [​IMG]