Post the best animals from your favorite geological period
I myself have to go with the Permian. There is no beating a world where weird mammal/reptile synapsids fuck shit up on a desert Pangaea. Gorgonopsids were GOAT.
I can't even imagine what life would look like if the great dying didn't fuck over most synapsids.
I'm a fan of the classic Archaeopteryx myself
Do we know for sure if they had sprawling legs?
Because with the amount of straight-legged gorgonopsids I don't know if it's just a bad representation or has some real evidence behind.
I think it might just be the position of that certain skeleton. As far as I know they had straight legs, especially compared to earlier synapids like Dimetrodons. Maybe their legs splayed out just a little more than true mammals but less than reptiles.
Why are artist representations of prehistoric mammals always so weird and wrong looking? It's like they go out of their way to give everything this angry, prehistoric, violent beast look regardless of what it is. Most of the time it looks like they just stretched rubber over a skull with no attention to muscles whatsoever.
Most professional paleoartists are biologists.
the main problem is probably that you guys don't actually know what animals look like so you think the interpretation is wrong.
also there's the familiarity thing. Most of the animals we have today are fucking bizarre but you don't notice because you're familiar with them. You don't actually see hell boars running around today so you think they're weird looking no matter how they're drawn.
the final problem is just Dunning Kruger effect.
You guys think you're somehow qualified to judge how anatomists illustrate anatomy. You're not. Unless you've actually studied anatomy for 4 or 5 years you're not really qualified to make any meaningful criticisms, and this is reflected in the shallow and general nature of your discourse on the subject.
no insult intended, you're completely ignorant of the subject and there's nothing wrong with that.
because you are used to seeing modern animals so when you see their skull you don't recognize how much it looks like their face.
your brain magnifies subtle differences in things you're familiar with. Same reason people of your race all look different while people of other races all look the same.
also fur. Most of the animals you give a fuck about are disguised in fur.
>when you see their skull you don't recognize how much it looks like their face
to someone that's studied osteology that just looks like a hippo.
Also I can't look at a person's face without seeing their skull underneath.
it's just a matter of you being completely unfamiliar with bones. Education fixes that problem.
>Why don't modern animal skulls look similar to the animal, but most interpretations of prehistoric animals look exactly like them?
Probably because you're comparing mammals to dinosaurs.
also, animals without fur, feathers and/or scales always look a bit weird and wrong
Make way for the most OG apex predator of all time
Who /CambrianExplosion/ here?
>im pretty sure when some paleoart starts showing animals with visible fenestrae they stop being accurate.
that's because you've never studied anatomy.
what are modern fenestrae full of? what were dinosaur fenestrae full of?
They used those two appendages on their heads to crush trilobites and ate them with a jawless mouth underneath their heads
> Implying Anomalocaris couldn't absolutely smoke its pussy filter feeding descendants
No but seriously that's fucking crazy I had no idea that was a thing. Cool how early large filter feeders evolved.
but modern reptiles don't have that shrink wrapped look, either
look at this shit
The problem is, we have no goddamn idea what sort of bells n whistles prehistoric animals had in their soft tissue for the most part, so no matter what we'd add to a reconstruction there would be a baseless assumption.
So we go bare bones with it, bone, muscle, little bit a fat sometimes, and skin. theres a good chance it looked a little bit more elaborate than that, sure, but in what way? who would decide? without some soft tissue imprints or something, we could only assume.
That iguana looks just like it's skull, aside from the cheeks (which most other lizards don't have) and dewlap.
It's pretty much guaranteed some dinosaurs had weirdass display structures like that but we obviously shouldnt assume all of them have huge jowls or something.
But theres tissue in that skull, sure you can tell the general shape of the skull by looking, but the animal doesnt look as if its starving.
Even among crocodiles that dont have so much tissue in the skull compared to mammals, the animal doesnt look as shrink wrapped as some old dinosaur/synapsid paleoarts.
Btw, if shrink wrapping wasnt a issue in paleoart, most paleoartists wouldnt complain about it, today most of them avoid the shrink wrapped look because its just wrong.
>if shrink wrapping wasnt a issue in paleoart, most paleoartists wouldnt complain about it,
assuming it's not a fad to do so.
>today most of them avoid the shrink wrapped look because its just wrong.
or because it's a fad to do so.
Oh, yeah I wasn't arguing against the retarded trend of people making dinosaurs look like they were mummified, I just meant there probably wasn't the extreme differences like you see with a lot of mammals.
thickest swamp bug comin through
Eurypterids are the truly the most boss arthropods
Spinosauridae are love
Spinosauridae are life
the crocodile above isn't shrink wrapped either.
I politely suggest you go read what Naish meant by shrink wrapped. He explains it quite thoroughly in his blog and his book.
if you'd like I'm sure I can link the blog page for you.
Sorry for the late reply, im kinda lazy. I have nothing against you providing me links btw, feel free to do that or correct me if im wrong.
But im still sure that suchomimus is shrink wrapped, the fenestrae are way too visible, the tail isnt thick enough and the spines too apparent.
Scott hartman takes minimum soft tissue in reconstructions, as far as im aware of it at least, his suchomimus is sightly beefier than the one in that painting and thats without taking extensive soft tissue in account.
Anyway, when i think of shrink wrapping i mostly think about the love in time of chasmosaurs blog posts about old paleoart books: http://chasmosaurs.blogspot.com.br/2013/01/vintage-dinosaur-art-odyssey-in-time.html
While i dont think that suchomimus is as shrink wrapped as some of the dinosaurs in that post, there are still some similarities and thats why it looks shrink wrapped for me.
Archaeopteryx is a badass. Is it a lizard? Is it a bird? Is it a motherfucking BIRD LIZARD? I DON'T KNOW AND I DON'T GIVE A SHIT. It's a flying badass bird thing with motherfucking TEETH, and TALONS. Jesus Christ, I feel sorry for any mother fucker that crosses this badass, it must have been fucking GIGANT- ...oh.