Zegh's Dinosaur Thread

Discussion in 'General Discussion Forum' started by zegh8578, Jan 23, 2017.

  1. MutantScalper

    MutantScalper Dark side in da houssah

    Nov 22, 2009
  2. zegh8578

    zegh8578 Keeper of the trout Orderite

    Mar 11, 2012
    Quick check on wiki dates extinction of Moa to around 1300-1400s and Elephant birds to only a couple of centuries earlier, 1000-1200 AD.

    (Moa are New Zealandic, Elephant Birds restricted to Africa. They all are ratites or paleognathids, a group encompassing emus, rheas, cassowaries, ostriches, kiwis and tinamous. The extinct lithornithids are the sparrow-looking tweety-birdy ancestral forms of all these, in case it was ever tempting to imagine ratite birds as "more dinosaur" than other living birds :D)
     
    • [Rad] [Rad] x 1
  3. MutantScalper

    MutantScalper Dark side in da houssah

    Nov 22, 2009
    New study about the Meg is being made. Pretty amazing just to think those things were swimming around in pretty large numbers. There had to have been a lot of them since they keep finding so many of those teeth.

    https://graduatedivision.ucmerced.e...n-massive-ancient-shark-be-explored-nsf-grant

     
  4. zegh8578

    zegh8578 Keeper of the trout Orderite

    Mar 11, 2012
    There wouldn't be any more than say orcas or such. Most likely, at any given time, there were probably less Megalodons swimming around than Great Whites today, simply because the larger any given animal, the fewer the individuals tend to be

    The number of teeth is due to the overall collected number of individuals that existed in total, across time - and the fact that they all would lose teeth regularily, and grow new teeth, for then to drop them as well.

    Teeth are typically abundant in the fossil record. Many important hominids, human ancestors, are known from teeth. Dinosaur teeth are SO common, it is considered "bad form" to attach a names to them, rendering them "pointless" tooth-taxa (didn't stop Danish researchers from naming Dromaeosauroides bornholmensis -.-, based on two teeth... )
    In the past, dinosaur teeth were often given names, and they are today considered "nomina nuda", as in - names that no longer have any scientific significance. For example, there's no way you can say that Trachodon (hadrosaurid teeth) are in reality just another Edmontosaurus, Anatotitan, Hadrosaurus, Parasaurolophus - or any other similar dinosaur with identical teeth.

    A large ammount of Mesozoic mammals are known solely from teeth, and milk-teeth at that, since mammals tend to keep their teeth firmly attached for most of their lives
     
  5. Crni Vuk

    Crni Vuk M4A3 Oldfag oTO Orderite

    Nov 25, 2008
  6. zegh8578

    zegh8578 Keeper of the trout Orderite

    Mar 11, 2012
    ^I was discussing "borb" with someone recently, the "bird-orb" concept, as in, a bird (or theropod) SO fluffy, it becomes like a rounded little ball of yarn

    I've been been pondering, and came to the conclusion that most of the roundest borb-effect we see in passerines (song birds + crows) or close relatives (such as psittacines, parrots)
    "borb"-ing also occurs outside this group, but it requires the most compact of all bird skeletons, as well as a short (yet very flexible) neck, that can be curled right up into the chest

    While that tyrannosaur-drawing is obviously a joke, many paleo-artists wants to draw at least small dino-birds as "borbs", but I personally think they're trying to force something that wasn't necesarily all that common. Borbing could have been a feature not present in birds untill the development of passerine forms, which happened after the (non-avian) dinosaurs were gone.

    :'(
     
    Last edited: Oct 20, 2018 at 3:35 PM
    • [Rad] [Rad] x 1