Grimlock: Vertical or Horizontal?

Discussion in 'Transformers General Discussion' started by TheWarPathGuy, May 31, 2019.

?

Horizontal or Vertical?

  1. Horizontal (A more accurate T-Rex alt mode)

    49.0%
  2. Vertical (Classic G1 up straight Grimlock)

    51.0%
  1. TheSoundwave

    TheSoundwave Softy Crime Lord

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2013
    Posts:
    8,239
    News Credits:
    14
    Trophy Points:
    287
    Location:
    My Criminal Empire (Note: No Crime Allowed)
    Likes:
    +16,510
    I suppose I don't have a huge preference. But if I had to pick, I'd say vertical. They're always changing their theories about dinosaurs, which obviously begs the question of whether the current views are even accurate. Personally, I hate fiction that puts feathers on Velociraptors. I just think it looks goofy, after so many years of cool lizard-like Velociraptors in movies like Jurassic Park. Over the years they've gone back and forth from "scales", "fur", and "feathers" (I'm pretty sure I've even heard "porcupine quills" at one point), so at this point I'm not really convinced we know what kind of texture dinosaurs had. Unless we're certain, I'd prefer they just go with whatever looks not-goofy. As for Grimlock (an alien Dinosaur), I feel like preserving the iconic look is more important than remaining accurate to the current theories (which, again, could change in a few years). I'm mostly talking about G1 Grimlock here. For more modernized interpretations (like movie Grimlock), the horizontal Grimlock probably works better.
     
    • Like Like x 2
  2. SaberPrime

    SaberPrime Banned

    Joined:
    Apr 17, 2010
    Posts:
    11,053
    Trophy Points:
    312
    Location:
    The State of insanity.
    Likes:
    +4,163
    Personally I don't think we can ever have a 100% accurate depiction of a Dinosaur from just their fossils. There's always going to be something wrong about it as we try to fill in the blanks. Without a 100% intact specimen to study there's going to be some amount of guess work involved.

    I wasn't really convinced we knew what kind of texture they had even when it was consistent. I was always like how do you know this is what they would of looked like if no one has ever actually seen one alive. I kinda understand they came to that conclusion because of similarities with modern day lizards and then changed to the feather idea because they found out the bones were hollow like modern day birds. But that's the problem... we're just comparing them to modern day animals with similar traits which is not the same as actually knowing what those animals actually looked like.

    You could do the same thing with technology. In fact the same thing has been done with technology where people have believed they found evidence of time travel because they saw a woman holding her hand to her ear like a person holding a cell phone... totally ignoring the facts that...

    1. Cell phones wouldn't even work in the past even if time travel did exist because the cell towers haven't been built yet. You'd never be able to get a signal to ever make a phone call.

    2. Hearing aids were different back then and is a far more likely reason why a woman in that time period would be holding her hand to her head.

    But I think comparing extinct creatures to modern day animals causes us to jump to the same types of conclusions that makes people think they saw a woman on a Cell Phone in an old black and movie.

    He's not a alien dinosaur though. Depending on which origin for the Dinobots you go by. G1 Cartoon was designed to resemble Earth Dinosaurs after Wheeljack learned about them in an Earth history museum. Though being that Grimlock was designed in the 80's based on what we thought about Dinosaurs in the 80's then he should still remain an upright T-Rex. Modern interpretations based on modern beliefs updating the character for a modern audience I'm totally OK with making him fit what we currently think a T-Rex should look like. But any time they're making a G1 Grimlock design he should keep him the way he was then.

    I feel the same way about other characters. I seen someone make a modern version of Dinobot with feathers and thought it looked really dumb. I would be OK if it was designed to be a new interpretation of the character but if you're going to make BW Dinobot then he should still be a lizard not a bird.

    Now how do I like a post more than once.... cause I agree with pretty much everything in here... Just wanted to expand on this idea more.
     
    • Like Like x 2
  3. Triceradon

    Triceradon Sunbow Delenda Est

    Joined:
    Jul 22, 2009
    Posts:
    1,823
    Trophy Points:
    287
    Likes:
    +3,413
    Well, no, its settled that Tyrannosaurus walked in the horizontal position and that dromeosaurs (ie, raptors) were feathered. Thats not changing.

    Its true that theres debate over whether Tyrannosaurus was feathered; there were others within its family that were feathered, but they were also smaller and thus less likely to overheat.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  4. SaberPrime

    SaberPrime Banned

    Joined:
    Apr 17, 2010
    Posts:
    11,053
    Trophy Points:
    312
    Location:
    The State of insanity.
    Likes:
    +4,163
    How is it settled? Has anyone seen a live Tyrannosaurus walk? Back in the day they were upright because scientists at the time thought it would be impossible for them to stand horizontally as we depict them today. Velociraptors being feathered is just based on the observation that their bones are hollow like modern day birds, birds are feathered there for they must also be feathered... but again has anyone ever actually seen a live velociraptor? Nope. Then I guess it's not settled.

    There's not enough evidence to conclusively say anything about how they moved or what they looked like. We have a pretty good idea based on circumstantial evidence that this is a likely possibility but you can't really have any conclusive answers without a live specimen to study and those don't exist anymore.

    You know why scientist prefer to study apes, wolves, and other such animals alive in their natural habitat? Studies done entirely on the dead often turned out to be wrong. Animals thought to be purely herbivores for example we later found out will occasionally eat meat just as an example. Studies done entirely in captivity have also shown different results than studies out in the wild.

    So how can any conclusion be "settled" if you require a live specimen to settle it? It seems to me like the idea of a T-rex standing vertical or horizontal are both just as likely. Raptors having scales or feathers are both just as likely. They could even have fur for all we know. You can't make any definitive conclusions based on the evidence we have because comparing an extinct species from billions of years ago to modern animals is an inherently flawed system that will most likely lead to entirely wrong conclusions.

    Velociraptors being that the only thing they have in common with birds is hollow bones other than that they're about as different from birds as modern day lizards and birds. The pterodactyl is the only dinosaur that is really similar to a bird that I could see possibly having feathers. Saying that thing has hollow bones and this other thing also has hollow bones is about as conclusive as saying Dolphins have fins, fish have fins, dolphins must be fish. Which would be totally wrong. Or how about deer have hooves, horses also have hooves... they must be the same thing right?

    Yeah sorry no, it doesn't work that way. One thing it has in common with birds is not enough to prove it is a bird. Show me a dinosaur feather. They don't exist. Things like feathers would have decayed long before we could ever find one. So there for this is always going to be up for debate... unless someone makes a real life Jurassic Park... but that sounds terrifying.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  5. Triceradon

    Triceradon Sunbow Delenda Est

    Joined:
    Jul 22, 2009
    Posts:
    1,823
    Trophy Points:
    287
    Likes:
    +3,413
    I’ll admit I’m not the best person for this, you’d be better off talking to a certified paleontologist like board’s own @GWolfv2 , but this is just too flagrantly ignorant to let pass.

    A basic Google and Wikipedia search would prove you dead wrong on both counts. Apologies, I’m on mobile.

    Feathered dinosaur - Wikipedia

    Basically, we have loads of evidence for feathered dinosaurs. Sediment impressions, anchor points on bones, and the like. Not just hollow bones, which to the best of my knowledge they actually didn't have.

    https://www.quora.com/Why-was-the-T...-figured-out-correctly-up-until-so-many-years

    Tyrannosaurus - Wikipedia

    Again, Tyrannosaurus posture is a settled matter. In order to assume the old-school pose, it would have had to dislocate its hips and severely damage its spine, if not outright sever it.

    I can’t say I understand where this weird historical nihilism you have is coming from. Paleontology isn’t guesswork, its based on data, and its not dependent on whether or not someone thinks its cool.

    Also, pterodactyl wasn't a dinosaur.
     
    • Like Like x 3
  6. Feralstorm

    Feralstorm Good Morning, Weather Hackers! TFW2005 Supporter

    Joined:
    Jun 26, 2003
    Posts:
    20,126
    News Credits:
    4
    Trophy Points:
    442
    Location:
    Birthplace of Aviation
    Likes:
    +6,617
    "Me Grimlock stand whichever way Me Grimlock damn well please!!"
     
    • Like Like x 3
  7. SaberPrime

    SaberPrime Banned

    Joined:
    Apr 17, 2010
    Posts:
    11,053
    Trophy Points:
    312
    Location:
    The State of insanity.
    Likes:
    +4,163
    I didn't say it was entirely guesswork as you seem to be implying just that some amount of guesswork has to be involved when there's insufficient evidence to come to a definitive conclusion. Yes it's based on data but the date itself is incomplete. And I never suggested it was based on if someone thinks it's cool.

    The simple fact is no one has ever studied a live specimen because they're extinct. So unless you want to go clone one there will always be some scientist at some point in the future who will eventually find new evidence that goes against what is currently believed. If that were not the case then we would of had 100% accurate Dinosaur depictions back in the 80's and would not now have discovered evidence contradicting what scientists believed back then. In fact they wouldn't even be called Dinosaurs in the first place since I believe if I remember correctly the word Dinosaur means Giant Lizard.

    Swoop would like to have a word with you. They may not be classified as Dinosaurs anymore but they were indeed Dinosaurs. Why else would we have a pterodactyl as a Dinobot? Not to mention some other Dinosaur themed teams that typically included pterodactyls...

    Though maybe we should ignore that one since they also had a Woolly Mammoth and a Sabertooth Tiger on their team which actually were never considered to be Dinosaurs. Some people incorrectly used Dinosaur as a catch all term for extinct species but as far as I know that was not the case for Swoop.
     
  8. SouthtownKid

    SouthtownKid Headmaster

    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2011
    Posts:
    26,059
    News Credits:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    357
    Likes:
    +10,558
    To be fair, I don't think Tryp is based on a t-rex. He seems to be based on a godzillasaurus.
     
  9. GWolfv2

    GWolfv2 Deathsaurus - A name you can trust for peace

    Joined:
    May 23, 2009
    Posts:
    2,480
    News Credits:
    9
    Trophy Points:
    262
    Likes:
    +1,589
    Not so fictional anymore. Brontosaurus was reinstated as a valid dinosaur late last year/early this year. 2 species.

    They’re part of a group called archosaurs which includes crocs and dinosaurs/birds but they’ve never been classified as dinosaurs. They’re a frequent inclusion due to pop culture in the 1900s kinda pumping everything in. Same with plesiosaurs (not remotely related) and Dimetrodon (an early mammal relation). Basically it was easier for sci go to go omg all these things in the Lost World book are reptile dinosaur things than break down the specific differences and it’s become part of the collective consciousness

    Also we’ve got dozens of fossils of of pterosaurs with “fuzz” (maaaaybe precursors to feathers maaaaaybe). One has a name that translates into Fuzzy Devil.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Jun 3, 2019
    • Like Like x 1
  10. Razzy

    Razzy Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2017
    Posts:
    835
    Trophy Points:
    172
    Location:
    Warsaw
    Likes:
    +877
    Ebay:
    Horizontal ask the way, vertical just looks silly.

    Alas, there's not much guesswork in T-Rex's horizontal posture. We have mostly or fully complete skeletons and scientists went over then many times to determine with 99% probability that assuming a vertical pose would've been impossible for a T-Rex. It's not nearly comparable to deducting an animal's diet, which indeed involves more guesswork since it often leaves no physical evidence and leaves us guessing by the shape and setup of the teeth, shape of the body, etc.

    Going by a toy analogy, if you found a Gundam's inner frame in pieces and no manner of fiddling with it while reassembling it allowed the knees to bend forwards, would you keep insisting that if we found the test of the model and assembled it, it'd be able to do just that?

    Cya
    Raziel-chan
     
    • Like Like x 2
  11. GWolfv2

    GWolfv2 Deathsaurus - A name you can trust for peace

    Joined:
    May 23, 2009
    Posts:
    2,480
    News Credits:
    9
    Trophy Points:
    262
    Likes:
    +1,589
    Feathers and integument is based on us finding feathers and integument. We’ve found several raptors and raptor like dinosaurs that have full feather coverings. We’re even able to identify color in a few cases. Other cases we have skin impressions or fossilized skin. It’s actually why there’s a debate now about T. rex. Recent skin doesn’t show attachment points for feathers or quills, is is making people ask if they lackedfeatherw in life or if adults lost most of them. And then there’s archaeopteryx of course. The quill argument comes from remains of several species, in particular Psittacosaurus where we found its tail is covered in elongated quills.

    The bird connection has gone well past theory and more into very difficult to argue. Also means dinosaurs are the most common land animal Alice today. Which is cool.

    Also in order to do the Godzilla pose in theropods like T. rex you literally have to break their tails. They actually used to do that in museums, break the bones in the tail when they put skeletons on display.

    Also. Hollow bones with extending airsacs is indeed a strong indicator that birds are surviving dinosaurs but it’s far from the only one. Skeletal anatomy alone is a very strong indicator. Genetics shows that crocodiles are the closest living relatives to birds and thst makes sense when you stick dinos in the middle. He’ll weve even evidence that having something like feathers and being warm blooded is the default state for the group and modern crocodiles (not really that representative of crocodiles as a whole) Lost both due to becoming amphibious static ambush predators.

    I’m also totally for realistic alts. Partly because if I he’s a dinosaur make him look like one and partly because it’s more marketable. Particularly Grimlock because looking from one side of an aisle with him and the other filled with Jurassic world is bizarre. Remember modern kids teens and young adults NEVER grew up on the upright stance. It’s there 100% because of G1 callback...another thing I’m tired of tbh
     

    Attached Files:

    Last edited by a moderator: Jun 3, 2019
    • Like Like x 3
  12. Venixion

    Venixion Its always the middle of the night in Moonside

    Joined:
    Sep 28, 2013
    Posts:
    25,660
    News Credits:
    4
    Trophy Points:
    362
    Location:
    California
    Likes:
    +41,436

    :lol : Love it!
     
  13. Deathcatg

    Deathcatg Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 26, 2006
    Posts:
    12,968
    News Credits:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    362
    Likes:
    +21,662
    Ebay:
    Facebook:
    Twitter:
    Instagram:
    YouTube (Legacy):
    I love vertical Grimmy for nostalgic G1 specifically, but for anything else, I'll take modern horizontal T-Rex mode anytime, so voted for that.
     
  14. Aernaroth

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

    Joined:
    Mar 27, 2004
    Posts:
    28,619
    News Credits:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    422
    Likes:
    +11,084
    I'm not familiar with the idea that feathers would be something that would be lost as part of the life cycle, would there be an evolutionary reason for that, or would it be just a product of senescence? Are there any species today that show something similar? The only thing that's coming to mind for me now is the hoatzin, but is this more akin to how baby birds go from downy to immature plumage to their adult appearance?

    I know we've been finding some amazing samples of fossilized skin, is there a reason the 'pores' or attachment points or whatever the proper term is would be preserved, but not the feathers (or a part of them) themselves?

    I'm guessing turtles, another survivor from prehistory, are more similar genetically to crocodilians than birds (because both are fully 'traditional' reptiles) but that most turtles represent more of a divergence from ancient ancestors than crocodilians do, because they've changed/evolved more dramatically than crocodiles have?
     
  15. Scoff

    Scoff Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2018
    Posts:
    707
    Trophy Points:
    162
    Likes:
    +1,589
    I remember seeing a theory for it but I don't remember if it was from a paleotologist or just someone on the internet. It was the theory that a juvenile tyrannosaurus rex might have had feathers because it was smaller than its adult counterpart who wouldn't need feathers because its body was so big it didn't need to worry about losing heat.

    As the tyrannosaurus rex grew into adulthood, it would lose its feathers because they became redundant.
     
  16. SouthtownKid

    SouthtownKid Headmaster

    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2011
    Posts:
    26,059
    News Credits:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    357
    Likes:
    +10,558
    Great news. Now just let me know when Pluto is a planet again.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  17. Scoff

    Scoff Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2018
    Posts:
    707
    Trophy Points:
    162
    Likes:
    +1,589
    It's a dwarf planet. Does that count?
     
  18. combaticonsfrvr

    combaticonsfrvr Lusus Naturae

    Joined:
    May 5, 2014
    Posts:
    2,501
    Trophy Points:
    202
    Likes:
    +199
    An excavator shovel can't drive vertically, so Grimlock has to be horizontal

    In all seriousness, I don't really care. I guess I kind of prefer horizontal. Much more intimidating imo. I like the vertical, just not as much.
     
  19. Novaburnhilde

    Novaburnhilde クインテッサ星人

    Joined:
    Oct 13, 2013
    Posts:
    25,568
    News Credits:
    45
    Trophy Points:
    362
    Location:
    Quintyxia
    Likes:
    +54,540
    Either I'm okay with, though admittedly I'd like to see them use the horizontal one a bit more, rather than the Godzilla-like stance his G1 model had.
     
  20. GWolfv2

    GWolfv2 Deathsaurus - A name you can trust for peace

    Joined:
    May 23, 2009
    Posts:
    2,480
    News Credits:
    9
    Trophy Points:
    262
    Likes:
    +1,589
    The theory goes that hatchlings would have down and like birds shed them as they grow they would get their adult integument, in this case at least a partially bald covering. Like how a vulture looses its neck down. We do have a large tyrannosaurid (Yutyrannus) which has a full feather covering, so it's not likely a size issue. The evolutionary evidence is that t. rex lacking full covering is a secondary not primary condition (the base state is feathers and t.rex lost them).

    I think it's super cool Hoatzins loose their fingers.

    Some dinosaur skin has a pebbled structure comparable to bare bird skin, and less well defined scales

    Turtles are a WHOLE other group called testudines. We're not really sure what their closest relatives are. True or traditional reptiles...don't really exist if we are honest. Crocodiles are more closely related to birds then they are to any other living animal, they're the archosaurs. Lizards and snakes are a group that includes mosasaurs. And turtles are off on their, so unusal it's hard to classify them. And tuataras which are unique. What we call reptiles is a very old definition that's undermined by current genetics and morphology. There's also a problem of ordering i won't get into.