Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'General Discussion Forum' started by zegh8578, Jan 23, 2017.
I remember that from the Jurassic Park Tresspasser game!
Scientists have solved the puzzle of the so-called "Frankenstein dinosaur", which seems to consist of body parts from unrelated species.
A new study suggests that it is in fact the missing link between plant-eating dinosaurs, such as Stegosaurus, and carnivorous dinosaurs, like T. rex.
The finding provides fresh insight on the evolution of the group of dinos known as the ornithischians.
The study is published in the Royal Society journal Biology Letters.
This is actually quite interesting, but as always, I cringe at the simple-media-speak replacement of scientific terminology
Here's the jist - for centuries, Dinosaurs have traditionally been seen as TWO main groups, splitting further into three:
| |-Theropoda (including birds)
|---Ornithischia (all other herbivores, such as Stegosaurus, Ankylosaurus, Triceratops, Iguanodon)
Over time, it has been discovered that very basal forms, as in - ancestor theropods, ancestor sauropods and ancestor ornithischians, all are *very* similar, no wonder, they all descend from stem-dinosaurians, and would have been closely related.
Studying these, it was recently discovered that we - since always - have understood the "core" of dinosaur relations wrongly, and the tree looks more like this:
| |-Theropoda (including birds)
Some have pragmatically suggested to move Sauropoda outside of Dinosauria as well, but this has not been met with a lot of agreement.
The dinosaur in the article (Chilesaurus) was found fairly recently, but before the re-understanding of core dinosaur relationships, and showed both Theropod and Ornithischian features. If you look at the traditional tree, it is understandable how confusing this would be, since there is a large evolutionary gap between them. Chilesaurus retrospectively sort of confirms Ornithoscelida as proposed grouping.
Now, first of all a pet peeve: People should stop talking about "missing links", it is misleading, and makes evolution look like creation. *ALL* organisms link their ancestors with their descendants, period.
Secondly, Chilesaurus would *not* be a missing link *either way*, since it is instead a "living fossil" - a late surviving descendant of basal Ornithoscelidans.
Chilesaurus is to Theropods and Ornithischians sortof what Chimpanzees are to humans, they are not our ancestors, because they are living alongside us, but they look a lot like our ancestors once did, and their anatomy helps us understand our own past.
1v1, against a velociraptor, what chance would a grown man with nothing but clothes have of killing it?
They's like, the size of a large turkey though.
And being dinos of that size, lightly built.
Yeah, a turkey with racersharp teeth and claws that eats flesh though.
GOBBLE GOBBLE MOTHERFUCKER!
Of course, but a good punch could break its bones, or stomp it, etc.
Humans can beat heavier, stockier dogs with their fists.
And the the actor who's playing the Mountain in Game of Thrones could probably beat a chimp in a close combat fight.
But I would say the number of humans that can actually beat dogs, is rathe a minority. They are used by the police as attack dogs for a reason.
And it is believed that Raptors also defended them self from heavier and bigger creatures as well. So I don't think it would would be an easy fight to pick for the average person.
Atom is right, a Velociraptor has been found locked-and-dead with a Protoceratops, showing an affinity for quite large prey, considering most current predators V's size tend to go for large rodents
Velociraptor was specialized for larger prey, and would make short process using rapid kicks to slice open their victim. The claws of the above mentioned fossil, was indeed found jammed in the neck area of Protoceratops, and the only reason they both died was a sand-storm surprised them.
Deinonychus, the size of wolves, are known, from teeth-marks and associated fossils, to have downed Tenontosaurus, which were three times bigger, and unlike wolves (who down moose), it was very probably not a matter of attrition, but again, resorting to rapid kicks, while grabbing on with their hands.
I think ThatZenoGuy is just looking for excuses to hump a Raptor.
*Eyes dart right and left*
Say if this raptor had its legs binded...
"Bite force research reveals dinosaur-eating frog
Scientists say that a large, now extinct, frog called Beelzebufo that lived about 68 million years ago in Madagascar would have been capable of eating small dinosaurs.
The conclusion comes from a study of the bite force of South American horned frogs from the living genus Ceratophrys, known as Pacman frogs for their characteristic round shape and large mouth, similar to the video game character Pac-Man. Due to their attractive body colouring, voracious appetite, and comically huge heads, horned frogs are very popular in the international pet trade.
Published today in the Nature journal Scientific Reports, the scientists from University of Adelaide, California State Polytechnic University – Pomona, University of California – Riverside and UCL, University College London found that living large South American horned frogs have similar bite forces to those of mammalian predators. ..."
btw Beelzebufo is an awesome name. Bufo is the typical suffix for frog-names, and simply means "toad" in latin, the common toad is Bufo bufo
Love how so many creatures we know from today were monstrous and huge millions of years ago.
But were they 'monstrous and huge'?~
How did giant dinosaurs lay eggs?
I mean like diplococus and stuff, surely they cannot lower enough to stop the egg from going 'splat' right?