Because they grew up with the alternative. They don't appreciate their giant, killing machine fantasy lizards being turned upside down on them. If they don't like them thats fine. I love birds, and I'd be happy if every single 'dinosaur' had feathers but I appreciate the old school raptors too in the same way I do dragons and unicorns. Not just talking about scales vs feathers either but dexterity, almost prehensile tails, wrong posture but it still looks cool, etc.
>>2045387 I've not seen that happen nearly as often I have seen "Science killed dinosaurs, why isn't pluto a planet any more" type bitching because some of what people learned as kids has been proven false and childhood memories are somehow more important than actual fact.
Tyrannosaurus didn't have feathers They'd be too big for them due to the environment they lived in! Their young PROBABLY did I just hate people just assuming ALL tyrannosaurs had feathers just because of yutyrannus
>>2045439 >They'd be too big for them due to the environment they lived in! A buddy of mine was arguing this point with Tom Holtz the other day and he reminded us that the environment they lived in spanned clear from mexico to halfway through Canada.
not that I disagree with you, but he has a point. They lived in a lot of different climates including some cold ones.
also if Nanotyrannus is a juvenile Tyrannosaurus then they didn't have feathers when they were young.
>>2045452 dinosaur body coverings probably varied wildly depending on their environment, like modern animals. a tyrannosaurus species in a warmer climate probably had no feathers at all, given its size and how easily it could overheat. Could easily see one with a light coating in chillier parts of the world.
>>2045424 >you didn't read, but just watched cartoons & shit This. I am a half-decade older than him yet I remember (used, and therefore even older) Dino field guides talking about feathers and warm-bloodedness.
>>2046401 What year? I read everything my town had on dinos from 97-99, but only a handful of books speculated on feathers, most didn't mention them at all or only in reference to archaeopteryx. Most did include a mention of warmbloodedness though.
>>2046454 >Don't know why they called them velociraptor probably because that's what they were called in the books and the first screenplay, both of which were written several years BEFORE UTAHRAPTOR WAS DISCOVERED.
>>2046535 >Unless feather are an insurmountable hindrance they would be.
The mechanics of cooling an animal of that size in a hot climate are staggering. As adults they presumably weren't warm-blooded anymore because they'd overheat and cook. Environmental heat and heat from normal metabolism would've been more than enough to keep them way too hot.
perhaps they only moved around at night, spending the hottest part of the day in the shade or near water. But even then their sheer size would've been enough to kill them. It's a problem.
Very few dinosaurs had feathers, they had proto-feathers. Somewhere between feathers and scales. The problem is there's not way to really predict what awesome scale adaptations dinosaurs could have had. Downy fur like feathers were probably prevalent too. Just putting bird feathers on shit is stupid.
>>2043753 I grew up on scaled dinos and I fuckin love feathered dinos too. I loved the JP Velociraptors but I love the real turkey sized featherball that is the actual Velociraptor more. Some people however seem to have trouble liking feathers on certain/most dinosaurs, especially those in the Tyrannosauridae family.
>>2046542 >But even then their sheer size would've been enough to kill them. Not even close. Tyrannosaurus would have been fine. We had sauropods which were a fuckload more massive that were apparently pretty active animals and they did okay.
>>2046369 Utahraptor wasn't yet discovered at the time the movie was being made. The JP raptors are based on Deinonychus. Michael Crichton chose to call them Velociraptor in the original novel because he thought it was a coole... err, I mean "more dramatic" name.
>>2047085 >Why do you think that Tyrannosaurus was diurnal? no particular adaptations to nocturnal activity. >What would be the maximum body temperature, less than the air temperature in the daytime during summer over much of its range.
probably not over 100 F. Most likely much lower just to reduce the risk of overheating.
>>2046679 Yes, but iirc they would have needed to be eating so they must have been moving around a lot. I'd assume something as enormous as a titanosaur would hold in much more heat than even a thickly feathered tyrannosaurus, but it seemed to exist just fine.
>>2047476 Im basing that statement on andrea cau saying that a 2 ton elephant had a lower surface/mass ratio than a tyrannosaurus, now i might have misinterpreted, but as far as i see, a megatherium is much more "built like a brick" than a tyrannosaurus and might have handled fur just fine, so why couldnt a tyrannosaurus have feathers without overheating?
>>2047707 No reason to think it was a giant scavenger, there is direct evidence for it preying on other animals, so the scavenger hypothesis is way off.
And while it likely ran a bit faster or slower than a olympic sprinter, its prey base wasnt very fast either. Also, predator doesnt need to be faster than its prey to catch it, komodo dragons prey on deer just fine, even though the deer can outrun it.
But tyrannosaurus likely fed on carcasses when given the chance, its good sense of smell might have helped finding corpses, so presuming it was in some ways akin to vultures is not unreasonable.
Heres the post im referring to: http://theropoda.blogspot.com.br/2010/06/motivazione-teorica-per-la-presenza-di.html
So a 2 ton elephant has a ratio of 55 square cm per kg and an tyrannosaurus has a ratio of 93.
And here it says the estimated weight for megatherium is 4 tons: http://www.app.pan.pl/archive/published/app46/app46-173.pdf
Shouldnt the more "compact" megatherium have a lower surface/mass ratio than a tyrannosaurus?
Even if its ratio was lower, i dont see why a tyrannosaurus should overheat with feathers if something the size of megatherium could handle having large amounts of fur. As far as im aware feathers can also cool down a animal, though i dont have any idea how they do it.
>>2048190 >Care to explain why its incorrect? main problem is he grossly underestimated the mass of T. rex. 9 tons is an accepted figure.
other than that his source for surface area of an elephant isn't actually a source so we don't know if it counted ears and tail and such, and his method of determining the area of T. rex is crude, a mistake of even 1 cm is going to have huge affects when multiplied by 900.
>>2048190 >Shouldnt the more "compact" megatherium have a lower surface/mass ratio than a tyrannosaurus? no >Even if its ratio was lower, i dont see why a tyrannosaurus should overheat with feathers if something the size of megatherium could handle having large amounts of fur. depends on the climate and activity level of the animal. If rex stands by a tree and eats leaves all day it will probably be fine. >As far as im aware feathers can also cool down a animal, though i dont have any idea how they do it. If you read the study on that you'll find they don't. Animals cool down by exposing or shading skin using feathers. The feathers themselves don't cool the animal. The bare skin does.
>>2047213 No. Crichton got that from one of Greg Paul's notions that Deinonychus was a junior synonym of Velociraptor. Considering that Greg Paul is a paleoartist and not a paleontologist, this wasn't exactly the most well-founded supposition.
>>2045439 You seem to be forgetting that T. rex was a derived coelurosaur and second-cousin to the maniraptors.
All of its closest relatives are groups which include members known to be fully feathered. While Tyrannosaurus skin impressions exist which show mosaic tuberculate scale coverage, they're all from either the ventral surface of the tail or the ankles. This is consistent with more recent integument models based on Kulindadromeus and various feathered theropods. Feathers on the dorsal and lateral surfaces of the neck, back, body, and thighs, reticulata on the tail and lower legs.
As for that bull-wack about "being too big," feathers wouldn't impede one bit with T. rex's ability to regulate its temperature. Considering the range of environments that sexy rexy inhabited (dry savannah, grasslands, desert scrub, temperate rainforest, etc.), having a dorsal coat of feathers to block sunlight and shed rain would be incredibly advantageous.
tl;dr, learn something about physiology and phylogenetics before shooting your mouth off.
>>2050091 it's still in play, just like synonymizing Tarbosaurus and Tyrannosaurus. Or Horner's stuff with a number of species and genera.
This stuff goes through fads where one generation names all these new taxa and the next generation synonymizes them. Brontosaurus has recently been resurrected, so you can tell which part of the cycle we're currently in. There will probably come a day when Deinonychus is once again called Velociraptor.
>>2050068 >You seem to be forgetting that T. rex was a derived coelurosaur and second-cousin to the maniraptors you seem to be putting a lot of faith in something that changes every time a researcher dies.
>they're all from either the ventral surface of the tail or the ankles. no they're not.
even ignoring the new ones from last year which you seem to have missed, only about half of the wyrex skin comes from the dorsal surface (tail) and none of it comes from the ankles.
when you have to lie and make stuff up to support your view, you might very well be wrong.
>>2050099 >Brontosaurus has recently been resurrected, so you can tell which part of the cycle we're currently in Not even remotely similar. Brontosaurus' taxonimic resurrection is because of a MASSIVE and extensive anatomical assay of apatosaurine sauropods. The species in question, [Brontosaurus/Apatosaurus] excelsus, was never dubious; science just wasn't sure whether or not it warranted a new genus or not until now.
Brontosaurus' type specimen has always represented a new species, and now we're positive it represents a new genus.
>>2050108 >The species in question, [Brontosaurus/Apatosaurus] excelsus, was never dubious it was synonymized for most of 30 years, of course it was dubious.
>Brontosaurus' type specimen has always represented a new species which has also been synonymized on occasion since the differences are considered by some to be purely size-related or normal variation.
>>2050111 Larson, Neal L. (2008). "One hundred years of Tyrannosaurus rex: the skeletons". In Larson, Peter; and Carpenter, Kenneth, editors. Tyrannosaurus Rex, The Tyrant King. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press. pp. 1–55.
>>2051319 The thing I like about feathered raptors is that they somehow look more real. They don't look like movie monsters anymore, but like actual animals, as they were. It's somehow more profound and cooler to me that way.
>>2050254 Does Yutyrannus huali not count? I'm not a dinofag so I don't care either way but is in that family. I like seeing dinos with or without feathers as long as they at least try to get the placement right.
>>2050103 >you seem to be putting a lot of faith in something that changes every time a researcher dies. No, the Coelurosaurian classification is pretty damn solid. You might want to read something about this subject you're pretending to know about. Like, literally the first and most basic thing. >the new ones from last year Can you be more specific?
>>2051505 >the Coelurosaurian classification is pretty damn solid. The diagnostic traits are either size-related, normal derived traits in all theropod lineages, or absent in Tyrannosaurids. Or all of the above. >Can you be more specific? sure, but for someone suggesting I go read up on coelurosaurs I'd expect you to be aware already.
>>2051565 >we already know tyrannosaurids lacked feathers Again, from. fucking. what. All you've done is make some halfassed mentions of "skin impressions" without so much as a link, pic related, or even a mention of the area of the body the skin impressions are attributed to aside from "ventral tail" and "not ankles."
As for your "T. rex wasn't a coelurosaur" schtick, please tell me where Tyrannosauroidea allegedly rests.
Other anons and I have asked you to put your money where your mouth is and all you've done so far is mumble about it being in your other pants.
http://english.ivpp.cas.cn/ns/es/201306/P020130614511958187570.pdf And I quote: "Suspicions dog any specimens from the fabulous fossil fields in northeast China's Liaoning province"
>>2051487 >Says someone who thinks the entire Archosaur line has been accurately mapped Eat shit, dumbfuck.
Again, featherfags are the worst. You're just a bunch of credulous, idiot trendy hipsters who want to hop on yet another trend's dick. Some Dinosaurs were feathered, MOST WERE NOT. Get the fuck over it already.
>>2051565 >phylogenetic bracketing only works if your phylogeny is accurate. This.
>>2051580 Everyone has with every featherfaggot. Featherfaggots are always going to believe that T-Rex was a hairy Emu chick because it's "different" and they think it makes them special. You're never going to convince them otherwise. If we literally brought a T-Rex through a hole in time and taught it fucking English and it testified in person that none of its species ever had feathers, featherfaggots would claim the T-Rex didn't know what it was talking about.
>>2047715 well also theres no other big carnivores to steal from in rexes environment Dakotaraptor and (maybe) Nanotyrannus where far too small to tackle the likes of Triceratops and Edmontosaurus so unless those two suffered a lot of sudden heart attacks rex would go hungry if it didn't actively hunt
>>2043753 >MFW modern crocodilians have dormant feather-building genes >Not "genes that could be reworked into forming feathers perhaps," GODDAMNED FEATHER GENES Crocodilians and birds share certain beta-keratin genes. In the linked study, early beta-keratins were immunolabeled and tracked through various stages of development While other studies show that bird feathers retain this immunolabeling in their feathers throughout development, this one shows that alligators do not. This indicates that alligators START developing FUCKING FEATHERS, then the process goes "oh, shit, wait a minute," HALTS, then makes scales.
>>2051817 >So the crux of your argument is that Dinosaur phylogeny is completely wrong...because...reasons...okay no, specifically my argument is that both Coelurosauria and Tyrannosauroidea are wastebasket taxa for reasons you lack the education to grasp. If you'd like we may discuss those reasons, but I sincerely doubt anyone here has the knowledge of dinosaur anatomy to know if what I'm saying is true.
so you're left either accepting it or rejecting it on faith or perhaps by democratic vote.
which is fine. For the moment most dinosaur paleontologists probably suspect what I say is true, several of them have said it outright, but most aren't going to make a big deal of it for the moment because 1. the people that made the mistakes leading to this situation are beloved and respected, and 2. nobody really has anything better to offer at this time, we just know the current arrangement is wrong.
>>2053499 not for very long. Just like body heat leaks out over time, environmental heat leaks in. There is no perfect insulator.
>>2053499 You seem to be failing to grasp the problem though.
An animal as large and as active as T. rex is going to be HOTTER than its environment 99% of the time. The reason climate matters ISN'T because the air temperature is going to make the animal hotter, it's because an animal has more difficulty losing heat when the air is hotter.
feathers just make that even more difficult. Any help they provide by blocking heat out is useless to T. rex, because almost all of the time he's trying to lose heat, not worrying about gaining it.
>>2053783 I read it before you posted it. we've been over this several times on /an/.
barb cells aren't feathers.
and no dinosaur paleontologist will sign off on your interpretation because it would mean pennaceous feathers are ancestral and thus the "feathers" of Kulindadromeus, Dilonng, Yutyrannus and others AREN'T RELATED TO THE FEATHERS OF BIRDS.
This is a pretty big problem, it destroys the current theories about feather evolution from simple fibers to branched ones.
But anyways, I can try to translate the study for you if you like. Nowhere does it say that feathers develop, and the fact that alligators don't retain immunolabeling means feathers DON'T develop.
Essentially the opposite of how you seem to have interpreted it.
>>2050099 The most obvious problems with synonymizing Deinonychus and Velociraptor are that they lived almost 40 million years apart (on separate (though sometimes connected) continents) and that their skulls are significantly different from each other.
>>2054168 Yes, but dinosaur genera last a few million years at best. Genus vs species is arbitrary, so giving things different names to emphasize differences can be unavoidable. If I were an expert I could probably list all of the detailed differences between Deinonychus and Velociraptor. Trying to combine the two was just one of Paul's weird little pet hypotheses, like oviraptorosaurs being birds.
>>2054171 >Yes, but dinosaur genera last a few million years at best. not really. rock units containing dinosaurs record a few million years each at best. >If I were an expert I could probably list all of the detailed differences between Deinonychus and Velociraptor. you don't have to be an expert. every paper on an animal will list the differences between it and closely related animals.
for those two it probably comes down to 2 or 3 actual differences.
if you'd like we can hunt the papers down and see. I think I have the original 1800's velociraptor stuff on my computer.
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.
This is a 4chan archive - all of the shown content originated from that site. This means that 4Archive shows their content, archived. If you need information for a Poster - contact them.
If a post contains personal/copyrighted/illegal content, then use the post's [Report] link! If a post is not removed within 24h contact me at email@example.com with the post's information.