>watch dinosaur movie >the dinos don't have feathers

>>2358598
I don't remember there being significant proof of dinos having feathers until just a couple of years ago, but then again humans are known to be fucking illogical

>>2358598
It is far preferable to think of dinosaurs as some mythical, reptilian super animals that no longer exist, than to acknowledge that they still exist in some degenerated form, as fragile, harmless looking birds that get torn up by our pet cats, and destroyed by shitty little bb guns.

Dinosaurs are skeletons.

>>2358616
>He hasn't seen a cassowary
>he hasn't heard a cassowary's call

>watch movie
>expect scientific accuracy
>tricked again

Curses!

File: Really rumbles my tumbls.jpg (86KB, 501x747px) Image search: [Google]

86KB, 501x747px

>>2358598
>watch fictionalized media
>expect scientific accuracies
>there are scientific inaccuracies

Really makes you think

>>2358635
>le reddit meme bird
fuck off

>>2358672
What does Reddit have to do with a bird.
Stop blaming everything on "le bogeymans"

File: mfw someone buys another copy of sgt pepper.jpg (23KB, 279x337px) Image search: [Google]

23KB, 279x337px

>>2358672
>le 4chan lingo everythin is wut i say it is looooooooool cuz my opinion is le hivemind opinion if i spam it hard enough

i hope you develop SARS

>>2358598
it's a meme you dip

>>2358598
>What can society not understand about this?
https://www.theguardian.com/science/2015/jun/03/most-dinosaurs-had-scales-not-feathers-fossil-analysis-concludes

>>2358702
>the guardian
spotted the scaly-dino shill

>>2358741
>Biology Letters
spotted the scientifically illiterate.

>>2358672
are you retarded?

It's happening, but on a slow, gradual pace. Give it time, OP; I have a feeling that we will reach that point in the future someday

>>2358635
>>2358672
in case anyone was wondering anyway
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4dcQO6Zb8Eg

>>2358635
Aren't cassowaries and other big flightless birds like ostriches and emus descended from smaller flying birds though?

I'm fairly sure their resemblance to non-bird dinosaurs is just a coincidence/example of convergent evolution.

File: anzu-wyliei.jpg (138KB, 660x515px) Image search: [Google]

138KB, 660x515px

>>2358808
it's a demonstration of Dollo's Law and the constraints of a bauplan.

Just like whales aren't going to evolve gills and bats won't be evolving hooves.

Because once you do something drastic like lose your front legs and most of your toes you're pretty much stuck with being a biped. They can't go back. This isn't convergence.

they look like non-avian theropods because they evolved from non-avian theropods and some parts of them couldn't change.

>>2358811
Avians are bipeds too, they just have winged forelimbs. But the overall bodyplan of ratites isn't the same as theropod dinosaurs, a quick glance at their upper limbs will show that quite readily.

Dollo's law doesn't apply to this. See:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dollo%27s_law_of_irreversibility
"The statement is often misinterpreted as a less stringent hypothesis regarding the likelihood of regain of lost structures or organs, which are unlikely to reappear in the (loosely defined) 'same form.'"

Birds like penguins and emus had ancestors that could fly. Just because those flying ancestors had ancestors in turn that did not fly does not constitute a violation of the law.

>>2358863
>Just because those flying ancestors had ancestors in turn that did not fly does not constitute a violation of the law.
You're confusing a behavior with an organ.

whales swim, that doesn't mean they have gills. One is a behavior, the other is an organ.

>>2358863
>the overall bodyplan of ratites isn't the same as theropod dinosaurs
this is a simple matter for morphometrics to deal with.

is an ostrich morphologically more similar to a maniraptoran theropod or to a lizard or an elephant?

the maniraptoran theropod is more similar overall. Which isn't surprising since an ostrich is a maniraptoran theropod.

>>2358680
(You)

>>2358875
Are you really going to consider non-winged forelimbs an organ? It's way too general of a term. The forelimbs of theropod dinosaurs are more similar to birds than they are to ratites.
>>2358878
>the maniraptoran theropod is more similar overall. Which isn't surprising since an ostrich is a maniraptoran theropod.
I never denied this, I simply stated that the evolutionary path of ostriches and ratites went from theropod dinosaurs that did not have the ability to fly -> avian birds -> flightless birds like ratites

>>2358900
>Are you really going to consider non-winged forelimbs an organ?
you were discussing flight, which isn't an organ.

Dollo's law applies to organs, not behaviors like flight.

try to keep up, you're disappointing me again.

>>2358918
>you were discussing flight, which isn't an organ.
I mean I'm not the one who brought up Dollo's law.

Tell me, how does Dollo's Law counter the claim that flightless birds like emus are descended from flying birds and not directly from flightless theropod dinosaurs, as some people would imply based on their superficial (but not necessarily biological) similarity to organisms like the theropod posted in OP.

>>2358931
>Tell me, how does Dollo's Law counter the claim that flightless birds like emus are descended from flying birds and not directly from flightless theropod dinosaurs
you're the only person that said it did.

it doesn't, and you only think it should because you're mistaking organs for behaviors.

Dollo's law makes no comment on flight or flightlessness. It doesn't apply. That is your mistake.

>>2358937
I wasn't trying to argue that ratite evolution was a violation of Dollo's Law, I misunderstood this post I think >>2358811 and interpreted that as a claim that Dollo's Law refuted the notion ratites evolved from flying birds.

So, it's just my bad for misunderstanding.

>>2358946
I was thinking more that they can't become quadrupeds or plantigrade walkers or whatever. The overall body plan has closed off thousands of evolutionary options, to paraphrase Gould.

no matter how they evolve it's going to look pretty much like a bipedal, digitigrade, long-necked, short tailed, beaked theropod. These things are extremely unlikely to be reversed.

File: 1461853963850.jpg (35KB, 445x604px) Image search: [Google]

35KB, 445x604px

>look at a reconstruction of a non-avian dinosaur
>it has flight feathers

>>2358672
what the fuck does that have to do with reddit?

>>2358702
obviously most had scales you retard. it was certain theropods that had feathers and nobody is claiming otherwise (I hope)

File: 1490397287198.png (291KB, 521x645px) Image search: [Google]

291KB, 521x645px

>>2358672
>Cassowary is a Reddit bird
I can't stop laughing. The fucking insult has lost it's meaning.
How the fuck is a species of animal "Reddit"?!

>>2358598
I thought this was a work safe board.

File: tmp_17693-WEB_HR_170075178-2059837299.jpg (227KB, 630x498px) Image search: [Google]

227KB, 630x498px

I thought feathers were a theropod thing among the non-avians though?

>>2359623
Those literally have a beak.

>>2359580
It's a bone, not genitalia

>>2359401
triggers the fuck out of me too.

>>2359645
So do Squids, what's your point?

>>2359669
squids have feathers

>>2359647
Further back.

File: remastered_by_a_different_studio.jpg (43KB, 1237x645px) Image search: [Google]

43KB, 1237x645px

Personal favorite.

File: Tyrannosaurus_rex_Large_by_Peter_Schouten_lead.jpg (103KB, 680x498px) Image search: [Google]

103KB, 680x498px

>>2360031
Here, have an unironically good feathered Rex.

>watching a dinosaur movie
>they all have feathers
>even ones proven to be solely scaled

When will this meme die? Not everything needs to be fluffy.

>>2360052
why would you want something to be gross and scalie when it can be fluffy and cute?

>>2360054
>reality
>what you want
pick one

File: scaleson.jpg (193KB, 1280x683px) Image search: [Google]

193KB, 1280x683px

>>2358598
Scales just look cooler on vertebrates.

File: 18DINO-master768.jpg (153KB, 768x512px) Image search: [Google]

153KB, 768x512px

>>2358598
>>2358604
Protofeathers are still not feathers.

Stop calling them "feathers".

File: expert.png (289KB, 1200x600px) Image search: [Google]

289KB, 1200x600px

>>2359498
When something gets shared on Reddit a lot, that means it's a Reddit thing among else.

But Reddit is very large and shares a lot of things in different subreddits, so there is invariably a lot of stuff that is genuinely interesting, funny, or whatever, which also happens to be a thing on Reddit.

In this case, the fact that the thing is also a Reddit thing is of course irrelevant, but a person who *cough* browses Reddit a lot *cough* may be led to believe that bashing that thing on 4chan is going to give him or her cool-points.

So the over-use of "le reddit meme [thing]" is likely tied in part to anons who browse reddit a lot and want to virtue-signal their 4chan sekrit club board culture adherence when they come here, by pointing out that random things that are being posted on 4chan are also a thing on Reddit, when in fact this doesn't concern anyone on 4chan to the least most of the time.

Sorry about my autism.

>>2360137
I'm going to call them feathers intentionally because I know it makes you butthurt now

>>2360062
They really don't and you people are LARPing furries (inb4 furries interject and pretend scales aren't furry) in deep denial.

>>2360183
Dragons look cooler than furry flying things.

File: rob-palmer-bald-eagle.jpg (50KB, 800x547px) Image search: [Google]

50KB, 800x547px

>>2358635
>tiger food
overhyped and overrated.Here's an actually impressive bird

>>2360200
>m-m-muh draggins

Is this really what this is all about? God furries are the worst type of ""human"" """"being"""" on Earth.

>>2360208
Just curious, how do you know they are a furry?

>>2360209
>implying 100% of this board isn't furfags or latent furfags or zoophiles

Furry detected

>>2360208
>>2360183
maybe if you didn't constantly look at furshit, you wouldn't have to associate them with it

>>2360212
>believing the memes
If you honestly think that everyone who posts on this board is a furry or a zoophile than you are so far gone that all logic and reasoning would be completely lost on you, and in no way worth the effort of a simple conversation.
Believe what you want, just fuck off as well, because you are the cancer that's infected this board.

>>2360216
Spotted the triggered furfag.

>>>/trash/

>>2360214
Maybe if you animal fuckers got off my board, you wouldn't clog it up with retarded HURR MUH SCALES MUH CHILDHOODS MUH JURASSSIC PARK MUH FETUSHES MUH FEELINGS """arguments""".

File: 1491242122095s.jpg (3KB, 125x125px) Image search: [Google]

3KB, 125x125px

>>2360223

File: Angel.jpg (88KB, 583x800px) Image search: [Google]

88KB, 583x800px

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9W2Sa7JNXq8

Those things are genetic monstrosities, not dinosaurs

>>2360208
>furries
The correct term is scaly, i said scales look cooler on vertebrates not sexier you idiot.

>>2358598
In my opinion the reptile version of dinosaurs without feathers look much better ad more primitive than this new feathered trend. So I prefer to think about the the old way that I learned since I was a child. I prefer to picture the T-Rex as a tyrant dragon than a giant chicken...

Also, there's no definitive proof that all dinosaurs were feathered, or that it was even common, according to what I'ce searched about this topic they found a fossil in Siberia that hints all dinosaurs were probably feathered? how ca they deduce that from one fossil they found? Maybe it's my stubborn human nature, but I'm skeptical about it

>>2360348
Cooler and sexier are the same fucking thing to your depraved """brain""", as well as the brains of anyone else who clings to scales solely for feels > reals.

>>2358598
The idea of Dinos having feathers make them less intimidating to people.

>>2360424
>how ca they deduce that from one fossil they found?
Because they have a pretty good idea of where that fossil is on the dinosaur evolutionary tree. If two organisms both have feathers and they are on far separated branches of the tree, then it follows that their common ancestor probably also had feathers. Furthermore it's reasonable to assume that most of the other organisms that evolved from that common ancestor had feathers as well.

>>2358672
get the fuck out you normie shit. stick to minion posting on fb. 4chan isn't your god damned meme palace, much less fucking /an/ of all boards. that aside, cassowaries scare the ever loving shit out of me.

>>2358672
>Being this autistic
"Lol my fellow Channers XD look at this GOOFY normo LMAOO what a PLEEEEBIAN. Get fuckin rekt you normo scum, go back to 9Gag or one of those other non awesome sites, like Reddit or the Chan4, I don't know why those awesome dudes at Reddit don't team up with you g- u- us.. Don't team up with us n' knock these normolormadingdongs outta the park X3"

File: Albertosaurus-maxilla5-772x1000.jpg (101KB, 772x1000px) Image search: [Google]

101KB, 772x1000px

>>2360654
>find feathers in 2 branches of the dinosaur tree
>infer feathers are present in all branches
>test inference by looking for feathers in all branches
>find most branches lack feathers
>discard inference and instead infer that feathers evolved convergently in 2 branches
isn't biology fun?

File: 1445277976960.jpg (140KB, 960x640px) Image search: [Google]

140KB, 960x640px

>>2358598
This is a BIG hypothetical, but since many types of birds have the ability to ((speak)) human languages, what's the plausibility that any Dinosaurs had similar vocal capability?

>>2360816
>implying there are any fossils of high enough quality to show feathers

Prove that those dinos didn't have feathers, I dare you. Seems more likely they just didn't get fossilized.

File: Distribution_of_feathers_in_Dinosauria.jpg (22KB, 350x286px) Image search: [Google]

22KB, 350x286px

>>2360847
ah, does science make you mad?

>>2360851
That looks like half of the tree has feathers to me. More if you count filaments.

Scale-shills BTFO

>>2360854
>That looks like half of the tree has feathers to me.
that's because you're silly enough to think each taxon pictured has the same number of species in it.

which is retarded, but perhaps you're just distraught and not thinking straight with your anger and all.

>>2360856
Hahahahaha

Don't you know why birds are the ones that survived?

Probability. There were way more birdlike dinosaurs than non-birdlike. You literally don't know jack shit

>>2360858
>predators outnumbered prey
boy are you in for a surprise when you get to 8th grade science.

File: screencap.jpg (33KB, 353x425px) Image search: [Google]

33KB, 353x425px

>>2360860
>birdlike dinosaurs were all predators

ahahahahahahhahahahaha

>>2360862
>theropods were all herbivores
>dinosaurs lived in the garden of eden
>sharp teeth were for cracking nuts
>god gave adam and eve tyrannosaurs to ride
tell me more

>>2360821
impossible to know, the Syrinx does not fossilize so its impossible to tell where and when in the avian family try it evolved

>>2360865
>wwwwwwwaaahhh why isn't reality like MUH JURRASSIC PARK FILLED WITH LE CARNIVORES LOOL EDGEWOORRLLDD BLOOD AND GUTS

you people are subhuman

File: 1456210468666.png (20KB, 390x470px) Image search: [Google]

20KB, 390x470px

>>2360865
>>2360860
>>2360856
>>2360851
>>2360816
What a fuckin retard

>>2360875
That sucks,
It's a pretty amusing premise

>>2361256
he's retarded, we know exactly which birds can mimic speech so we know quite accurately where and when the ability evolved by examining where and when those species split from other related ones that can't mimic speech.

>>2360865
I know you are being sarcastic but every one of those are right except for the last one, it's not practical enough.

>>2360062
but synapsids don't have scales

>>2360424
scales are cooler, but you're still stupid.

File: teach.png (6KB, 300x300px) Image search: [Google]

6KB, 300x300px

>>2361281
What do you make of fossilized dinosaur shit with chunks of bone in it? Fakes made by clever paleontologists? Or rocks invented by the devil to lead people from god?

>>2361290
now this is my kinda bait

File: Pangolin_Keith%20Coleen-Begg-2.jpg (684KB, 1000x800px) Image search: [Google]

684KB, 1000x800px

>>2361286
many of them did.
some still do.

>>2360816
>some dude hires an unholly amount of whores to pose with dinosaur related objects

>>2361123
/aq/fag does this shit in every dinosaur thread, he thinks he is UBER 1337 AQUARIUM KEEPER-PALEONTOLOGIST-ORNITHOLOGIST because he can copy paste some Google Scholar links. The typical 4chan wannabe """renaissance man"""

File: Welcome-to-museum3.jpg (185KB, 700x545px) Image search: [Google]

185KB, 700x545px

>>2361294
he's a pretty funny guy

>>2361297
I can't make you look stupid, only you can do that.

>>2361299
>angry pseudo-intellectual can only spam NO U when threatened

How does it feel knowing people more successful than you are outside doing real science while you sit around trying to "correct the record" on a Nigerian dambe forum?

>>2361293
none in the pic you posted do. scutosaurus has scales, but it's a parareptile. pangolins and armadillos aren't
"many" either.

>>2361306
Thank you for correcting the record :)

>>2361305
>How does it feel knowing people more successful than you are outside doing real science while you sit around trying to "correct the record" on a Nigerian dambe forum?
I don't really have any feelings about that.
>>2361306
>none in the pic you posted do.

I didn't post the pic or even look at it.

>pangolins and armadillos aren't "many" either.
>some
ftfy

>>2361306
Pelycosaurs had belly scales.

>>2361298
>>2360816
This guy's website is hilarious. Just when I think I've seen everything.

>>2361293
Did any dinosaurs have scales like this

>>2361511
No. they had feathers

>>2361279
We can't determine which of their extinct ancestors did though

>>2361511
only one that I know of, and it only had them on the tail.

>>2361514
true, but the ability has evolved at least 6 different times independently in modern birds so it's pretty likely some of them could.

>>2358808
Yes, but the anon's point was that being feathery and looking like a bird doesn't equate to being fragile or harmless, as evidence by the cassowary.

>>2358811
Then how did non-avian theropods evolve in the first place? Cassowaries are bipeds because being a biped is good enough, not because it's impossible for them to evolve to be quadrupeds.

>>2361599
>how did non-avian theropods evolve in the first place?
selective pressure favoring cursorial locomotion
>Cassowaries are bipeds because being a biped is good enough, not because it's impossible for them to evolve to be quadrupeds.
Unlikely considering the huge number of terrestrial quadrupeds. Bipedalism is almost never "good enough."

>>2361823
It was good enough for man, faggot. Quadrupedfags get fucked.

>>2361599
>not because it's impossible for them to evolve to be quadrupeds.
They've lost most of the bones of the front limb.

they're literally more likely to evolve completely new front limbs than change to use what they have. They'd be the first six legged vertebrates.

this isn't impossible, it's just so fucking unlikely the planet will be destroyed by the expansion of the sun before it could happen.

>>2361826
Yeah, it's a normal bias to think "I do it so it must be common or superior."

in real life cursorial bipedality is extremely rare in nature.

>>2361829
>angry cat detected

Bipeds dominate the Earth. Get fucked.

>>2361830
>Bipeds dominate the Earth.
bacteria dominate the earth. Always have.

File: fig2[1].png (1MB, 2163x1240px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 2163x1240px

>>2361833
>Always have

Nuh-uh

File: 1444755430249.jpg (20KB, 306x306px) Image search: [Google]

20KB, 306x306px

>It's a prehistoric/dinosaur episode
>they put species from late jurassic and late cretaceous living at the sames times.
>they pretend pterosaurs are dinosaurs.
>they pretend just after the dinosaurs extinction the "ice age" came immediately with mammoths, cavemens, smilodons n sheit.
>THEY PUT PREHISTORIC HUMANS AND DINOSAURS ON THE SAME TIMES OUTSIDE A COMEDY CONTEXT.
>THEY PUT DAT FUCKING DIMETRODON FROM PERMIAN ON DINOSAUR TIMES!
>LE REGULAR T REX APPAREANCE
>T-Rex has long arms and three fingers.
>T-Rex has the size of a skyscraper and groar
>Also the eternal stegosaurus, apatosaurus, triceratops and pteranodon.
>APATOSAURUS IS CALLED "BRONTOSAURUS" AND HAS A VERTICAL NECK.
>Carnivorous dinosaurs are bad but herbivorous are obviously friendly and gentle.
>they pretend plesiosaurs, ichtyosaurs, pliosaurs or mosasaurs are "marines dinosaurs".
>Loch Ness monster joke
>Sometimes they confound it with simple Sauropods on water.
>SOMETIMES WITH DELPHINES OR FUCKING FISHES.
>all dinosaurs are american species

>>2361844
>APATOSAURUS IS CALLED "BRONTOSAURUS"
They changed that one while you were away.

Brontosaurus is a thing again.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brontosaurus

File: IMG_6229.jpg (213KB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

213KB, 1280x720px

>>2361839

File: IMG_0831.jpg (56KB, 320x320px) Image search: [Google]

56KB, 320x320px

>>2360165
>Reddit spacing
>Cringeworthy text
You DEFINITELY have to go back

>>2361900
I'm angry about this

>>2362022
lots of people angry at science itt

>>2360031
>triggered