Turkeysaurus Rex

You try getting up in the morning with lukewarm blood. It's not pleasant.

Also, reptile=/=lizard. By the broad definition given, birds are trchnically reptiles.

run out of excuses already?

All I'm saying is that dinosaurs (as we currently understand them) are not cold-blooded, but are more intermediate, being between warm and cold blood. The insulation would help them to "warm up" more efficiently than their distant squamate relatives who have to sun themselves.

Large, fanlike feathers like which Ostriches and Emus have are also very good at dissipating heat and cooling the body. So feathers like which T.Rex probably had could both cool and warm the animal.

That's not how evolution works dumbass, you don't just get what you "need"

Like stage 2?

t. was there when it happened

not who you're replying to, but that's not necessarily the case. The atmosphere was much thicker in that time, and global temperatures were colder on average. Also, dinosaurs had much bigger body mass than reptiles today, so exertion used a lot more energy and they gave off more heat. Being able to retain as much heat as possible was much more important to dinosaurs than it was to smaller reptiles.

Oh. I guess that makes sense.

Sure we know T-rex had feathers now but that doesn't make it any less of a badass

I would have replied to you that you we're talking out of your ass but I knew it wouldn't matter to someone like you.

At least I got to see someone else explain it to you though.

Here, have a creepy transitional form.

What about ceratopsians? Some are saying that it may be an omnivore.

>purpose

*they may be omnivorous.

Honestly looks better than the old, scaly one desu

I dunno, they still have a place in my heart, like dragons.

No arms at all?
Wrong.
It has tiny arms.
It's like japanese mafia... cutesy tattoos make them seem more insidious.
Tiny T Rex arms are the cutesy insidious tattoos of the dino world.

Bring back the arms or I'll shoot you.
With carpets.

They're just covered by the proto-feathers.

Dragons can be awesome and I don't blame you, but I find feathered dinosaurs to be pretty badass too.

...

There are zero bumps in the feathers and that's impossible.
There would have to be pockets for the arms to hid in, and there's no evidence to support that.
DON'T HOT POCKET MY DINOSAUR.

No, i meant I see scaly dinosaurs like I see dragons: inaccurate, but still imaginative.

Then there's the first dinosaur ever illustrated (from what I can gather).

It makes them harder to eat, because plucking the feathers slows the cavemen down.

>You have to be personally present for things to happen.
Are you actually fucking retarded?

...

>The atmosphere was much thicker in that time, and global temperatures were colder on average.
lol'd

The atmosphere was exactly the same density as now. To make it thicker would require drastically increasing gravity. Gravity wasn't magically higher in the Mesozoic.

The climate was warmer than present throughout the entire Mesozoic. At its coldest moments it got close to modern climates, but for the most part it was much much hotter.

I enjoyed your post, you're exactly wrong in every possible way. Funny stuff.

So are you saying we should genetically engineer turkeys back into T-rexs and farm em' for HUGE meat legs? This is the USDA, your idea has been funded.

that fucker looks so damn smug

[citation needed]!

I enjoyed your post, you're exactly wrong in every possible way. Funny stuff.

>the atmosphere was exactly the same density as now

gravity isn't the only factor in determining the characteristics of a planet's atmosphere, you nitwit. and a rather common theory, based on the preposterous size of pterosaurs, is that earth's atmosphere was likely as much as 5 times more dense during their evolutionary height.

>To make it thicker would require drastically increasing gravity
you wouldnt believe how complicated and seemingly chaotic atmospheres can behave

excellent example.
>80% the mass of earth
>90% the surface gravity
>92 TIMES the fucking atmospheric pressure

user. b.t.f.o.

considering there are two other dinosaurs and an extinct mammal in that picture, i kind of doubt its the first illustration.

>a rather common theory, based on the preposterous size of pterosaurs, is that earth's atmosphere was likely as much as 5 times more dense during
it's not a theory, it's a blog post by an idiot very much like you.
If you don't believe me, try to show me a scientific paper that says that.
here's the idiot that came up with it:
dinosaurtheory.com/thick_atmosphere.html
>
no citation available, your "theory" has never been published in a scientific journal because it's ridiculous and demonstrably untrue.
skeptics.stackexchange.com/questions/19073/what-was-the-density-of-prehistoric-earth-atmosphere-dinosaurs-buoyancy-theory

Esker was a laughingstock for his ideas, now nobody really remembers his bullshit.

He used to post on Veeky Forums defending his "theory."
Apparently he still does.

Marine reptiles and pterosaurs are not dinosaurs. Anyway, here's Richard Owen's megalosaurus.

And Gideon Mantell's iguanodon.

[citation needed]!

obligatory

Relevant

>purpose

You know what's funny? As a (6 y.o.) kid I always asked myself how they knew what dinosaurs really looked. I mean, all they had was the bones, for all I knew they could've been big amorphous balls of flesh (which isn't really true). But it was a funny thought to entertain nevertheless.

Ironic how it turned out.

feathers evolved as a means of getting rid of waste products their kidneys didn't process.

scales too. But feathers allowed the animal to dump more waste into integument than scales do.

so even if it had no obvious purpose it would have been likely to evolve in some form.

jesus christ...

It was probably based on reptiles or lizards. I always wondered, as a kid, how they knew exactly how to "mount" a dinosaur with only its bones.

I have a question.

Much is lost when it comes to how dinosaurs looked. This means stuff like protofeathers and cartilage are normally never found or known about. This also means the naked skin tight versions of dinosaurs we see in media could be as far from the truth as a baseball is to a starfish.

Is there artist conceptions of dinos with not just protofeathers, but also cartilage formations like big ears, noses, or other soft tissues that go wildly out of what is considered correct?

Another example.

...

...

would also like to see more of this.

How educated can our guesses on stuff like this even be?

soundcloud.com/fecshrooms/a666s

...

...

...

at this point pure and utter speculation I believe. We already have dinosaurs with soft tissue appendages preserved. I find it hard to imagine that we'd find such appendages at this point on most popular dinosaurs

That's Glyptodon osteoderms, not dinosaur.

We do have lots of dinosaur skin and osteoderms, that's just not it.

Looks pretty freaky in a positive way desu

It doesn't matter anyway, pop culture has 100 of millions of years of dinosaur evolution to cherrypick scaly dinos from.

we also have scales from T. rex, but we can pretend we don't if it makes everyone feel better.

eh, google lied. Darn them

...

retard

One theory is even... roosting.

To sit in a nest and keep eggs warm and undercover while asleep.

>purpose

Weird question...how much do we actually know about dinosaur penises? I just read the triceratops series by Chuck Tingle and I want to know how true-to-life it really is.

I think we can only make educated guesses based on birds, turtles and other animals

>skin impressions from a Tyrannosaurus rex specimen nicknamed "Wyrex" (BHI 6230) discovered in Montana in 2002,[36] as well as some other giant tyrannosauroid specimens, show at least small patches of mosaic scales,[37]

And I'm sure that they walked upright like us too.

not sure if you're trolling or not.

you do know we in fact have skin impressions from T. rex, right?

and that those skin impressions are covered in scales, correct? I try not to underestimate fanboy's ignorance, so if you're just being sarcastic you have to tell me.

I jest.
Which part of the body is it supposed to represent?

Cute

about a dozen patches from base of the tail, upper thigh and throat. Most of them are from the tail.

Dinosaurs weren't/aren't reptiles they were birds.

I think most agree that if it had feathers, it would be more like this, which seems to line up with those findings.

since that drawing was made AFTER the skin was found, it of course lines up.

they just stuck feathers on all the parts we don't have skin from.

when we find more skin they'll take feathers off that part too. Eventually it'll have one little patch of feathers on the left forearm and nowhere else and they'll pretend THAT'S accurate.

the feathers of the gaps.

>since that drawing was made AFTER the skin was found,
Are the drawings supposed to be baseless unscientific predictions? What the fuck? Generally agree with the rest of what you said, but what the fuck?

>ummmm but its not a clear positive trait.... why was it selected for then?.??.?

So you think putting feathers on an animal for which we have scale fossils is scientific?

I mean, yes, it could have both, but there's no evidence whatsoever that it did. We don't have feather fossils from any tyrannosaurid. Just lots of scales.

Phylogenetic bracketing only works if your phylogeny is correct. I'm not the first person to suggest that T. rex isn't related to Yutyrannus and Dilong. In fact the scales seem to indicate it isn't.

but even if we pretend tyrannosaurids are also tyrannosauroids, finding skin without feathers is very good evidence it didn't have feathers due to secondary loss.

The thing isn't some grand mystery though. Paleontologists know T. rex didn't have feathers. We just don't like to contradict big names like Tom Holtz. When he dies or retires his bullshit will come tumbling down.

>I mean, yes, it could have both,
thank you

youtube.com/watch?v=uM5JN__15-g

>thank you
it could also have a giant penis on its forehead and a trunk like an elephant.

just because something is possible doesn't mean it's true. And you'll notice it's not illustrated with a head-penis and trunk. Because that would be silly.

almost as silly as putting feathers on an animal we know had scales and that we have no evidence of feathers for.

it comes down to whether or not Holtz' Tyrannosauroidea is distinguishable from Allosauroidea. (i.e., are Yutyrannus and Dilong related to T. rex.)

Something that guy isn't qualified to comment on.

Why exactly couldn't it have feathers and scales when modern birds have both? Ostriches have feathers and scales.

scales on modern birds are confined to parts of the body we didn't find.

So basically we found random patches of skin that all had scales. If the animal was partially covered with feathers and partially covered with scales, what are the odds of finding 12 patches (or 3 locations if that's easier) that ALL have scales?

Look at all the not feathers on that leg. If you only found an impression of skin in that area on an ostrich fossil (and had no idea what an ostrich was) you'd think the thing was a scaly abomination.

1. that's skin, not scales
2. that's the calf, not the thigh

we found scales on the upper thigh, a part of an ostrich that has feathers. Also of course secondary loss of feathers in birds exposes skin, not scales.

there's also the problem that the protofeathers on Yutyrannus and Dilong cover the entire thigh, and scales aren't present.

so we'd have to pretend that not only did Tyrannosaurus lose the feathers on the upper thigh, but it also evolved new scales where they used to be. Which requires two novel evolutions- secondary loss of feathers and then development of scales.

The more parsimonious solution is that Tyrannosaurus isn't descended from feathered dinosaurs. That doesn't make it necessarily the correct answer, just more parsimonious and thus statistically more likely to be true.

Why do you want a scaly t rex so badly?

I don't.

my actual interest is in refining Tyrannosauroidea, it's currently a wastebasket taxon as it sits.

which is frustrating and wrong. It will have to be fixed at some point and I and others are working on fixing it now.