That guy doesn’t know what a dinosaur is.
That guy cannot comprehend the existence of Elasmosaurus.
As someone who considers himself as a palaeontology aficionado, I cannot comprehend the existence of Mamenchisaurus. Like, that body shape doesn't compute me lol.
Yeah... I get that.
Those guys were in The Lost World!
The Jurassic Park one was a skinny diplodocid. Mamenchisaurus is basically a neck sitting in four chubby legs. Even Brachiosaurus be like "yeah, that guy is weird".
YES.
Well, off to the 3rd game I guess.
Lovecraft story but the horrors beyond comprehension is literally just meminchisaurus and it's weird ass body plan
Ew thanks
😂😂😂
Elasmosaurus the almighty
Well Elasmosaurus is the reason we know Allosaurus and Stegosaurus and so many more dinosaurs, like over a 100 (Bone Wars reference). Hence we must be grateful to the beast with 71 cervical vertebrae.
It’s not in the bible so it’s not real /s
Lol
You can just say "scientists say" in a comment and redditors will scurry and upvote you.
That guy said nothing of substance but got 12 upvotes from fruit flies
I once made a point about history with examples from ancient, middle, and modern history; dude responded saying that I'm wrong and all historians agree with him, I asked for evidence of his point and he said that historians agreeing with him is evidence while not pointing out any historians that agree 🤔
Once I had an argument with a guy on supposedly 50 foot long orcas existing.
He backed up by saying "Shientist sayz..." And posted a blue link which was enough to get me downvoted and him upvoted.
Despite the link leading to an article about a much smaller porpoise showing size variation which isn't seen in orcas.
Fortunately people call out his bullshit later cause he apparently was also causing trouble in the whale sub and a guy who was also tired of him from there chimed in that the fool was simply an insane orca fanboy.
With history comments going to.
Two orcas can kill a meg.
Orcas killed a 100 ton blue whale (they didn't, the adult blue whale killed was a pygmy blue whale which is no where close to that size)
Orcas have a 80000 psi bite force
A few years ago there was also a single guy who was so insanely dedicated to proving lions are stronger than tigers that he compiled fake quotes as evidence into a Wattpad post of all things and basically spammed it all over the internet for years. Like I've seen this guy, I'm sure it's the same guy cause no one else would use Wattpad as a repository in a youtuber called hood nature posts where hood nature said tigers would destroy lions.
Like I swear if we start a tiger vs lion post again and it gets even remote traction the dude will come here too.
People with ulterior motives or simply being fanboys are notorious spreaders of misinformation.
The kind of nonsense that happens in [dedicated to animal subgroup] forums wth
Wait so what's the general consensus on tiger V lion? That's a crazy amount of dedication lmao
General consensus: tigers are generally bigger, stronger, more agile, so tigers probably would win, but lions have a better chance of pulling a W than smth like a leopard since they’re actually somewhat close to tigers in size
Some people with some relevant knowledge have tried but it's a rather passionate subject so it's always swarmed by children and adults who act like children who will heckle and berate any answer.
From history
-people who work in circuses have a lion bias because lions are easier to work with in circuses while tigers are a pain in the ass.
-roman colloseum usually have more skewed fight but it depends on the crowd, some like the lion because it's more familiar while some prefer the tiger because of it's more exotic nature.
-animal hunters generally have a tiger bias because tigers are much more dangerous in the habitats they exist as they are more secretive than lions and have much more explosive force.
Each group and relevant experts tied to these groups have their own biases, also there is a western versus eastern issue where western nations are more lion favoured due to association with emblems and image and the same for eastern nations who are more familiar with the explosiveness of a tiger.
And all these lion and tiger fights you here about are unfair.
Circuses are automatically a fat L since some animals are so mistreated that they aren't even at any good physical condition while star animals are better fed and stronger.
Zoos are also disqualified since some animal individuals generally become more passive and less confrontational
And every fight I here about us always like, adult male lion versus teenage tiger, two lions versus tigers, large tiger versus medium size lion, tiger female versus chained male lion.
There's also half assed claims which try to peddle a picture of these animals being just reskins of each other so the fight could go either way which is wrong.
Just look at the frontal view of a lion and a tiger and tell me if they are the same shape or does one look noticeable more muscular and chonky than the other.
On a broad skeletal level, tigers and lions are not too dissimilar. But when you actually look into the details, the tiger is superior in nearly every facet. Then you add back on the muscle and flesh and tigers come out so far ahead. 1v1 I back the tiger every time
I've seen some tigers in pictures taken in Indian national parks that look closer to jaguars in musculature
Are the sambar or wild boar laced with steroids or something
Today I learned there’s a Pygmy blue whale. Thanks, must look it up.
However, in their defense I also recall reading / hearing a story not long ago saying that Orcas did kill a blue whale. If it were a Pygmy then I guess the news people realized it’ll be more sensational to make it a normal one.
Scientists say that me dic big, source: the scientists bro
“Scientists say…”
It's the equivalent of when the news says "according to experts" then don't tell you who the experts are.
"According to an anonymous source" almost always equals "here's something I made up before we went live"
I'm wasting so much fucking time properly citing my papers. I need to start doing this.
"The artifact was dated to 25ka¹"
1 Scientist et al., A journal, idk, 2005, probably
'Fruit flies' is such a great term I'm stealing it.
Scientists say that you should give me all your money.
Source?
Science
Drossophila
Quetzalcoatlus has entered the chat
Well, since it's a flyer, hollow bones make all too much sense, even its giant head.
Exactly pneumatic bones have entered the chat
Also giraffe, so funny giraffe pterosaur reference
Plus its mouth is big enough to swallow a full grown human whole (and it probably could... pelican vibes).
Reminds me of the new irritator. Like the beak pouch thingy?
I mean its beak was large enough but its body tracts and cavities would have been nowhere large enough to swallow a human. Their entire torso was "tiny" In comparison.
do we know Quetzalcoatlus definitely flew?
It had a 60 foot wing span. You tell me.
It had a 60 foot arm span, do we know they had wing membranes on those arms?
Some evolutionary pressure made them big, there's no reason to assume there was also an evolutionary pressure to make their wings small. Perhaps they were used for mating display.
What you're telling me is we don't know we just assume.
.... mating display how? To see which male could stumble onto the ground the "fanciest"?
And it's highly unlikely those unweildy "spikes" could be used effectively as weapons or protection.
And I "assume" because any birds that were strictly terrestrial eventually have their wings atrophied (terror birds, ostritches, cassowaries, dodos), or lose them altogether (moas, emu), or be repurposed into practicality (penguin flippers)...
If Quetzalcoatlus was strictly terrestrial, those wings would've evolve back into arms/forelegs.
Yes, those rods at the end of their hands were meant for it to fly like a passenger plane... or a giant glider.
Also to further add, the redditor who said they couldn’t fly didn’t account the other quetzalcoatlus species, q. lawsoni. It was significantly smaller, around an estimated 20kg, and yet the fossils found of its forearms had the near same proportions as that of q. northropi. This implies the body of q. northropi was already efficient to haul itself airborne.
HELL TO THE YES!! FACTS!!
If Quetzalcoatlus was strictly terrestrial, those wings would've evolve back into arms.
Only if there is selective pressure to do so.
To see which male could stumble onto the ground the "fanciest"?
perhaps the wings had markings on them, perhaps they used them for fighting. i don't know.
What i do know is that big birds like Albatross can fly long distances, but Quezalcoatlus has only been found in a relatively small region of north America
Ok then, then YOU need to get us skin pigmentation samples to prove your theory. We've found an ankylosaurid that did have preserved skin pigmentation that showed us it WAS rust brown...
Now YOU need to do the same!
Cont'd
If you CAN'T prove to us that it has some wonky skin pigmentation or pycnofiber coloration on those humongus "dactyloids" at the end of their arms, then you're just talking from your ass.
I'm not trying to prove anything, I'm just saying that if we don't have direct evidence they could fly then i don't want to just assume they could fly. Everything i was saying was purely hypothetical as an alternative reason for them retaining a large wing span.
There’s literally no reason to assume they couldn’t fly
I'm not trying to prove anything...
LIES! By saying "how do you know it flew?" And "Maybe it used them as mating displays?", you're TRYING to PROVE A HALF-ASSED HYPOTHESIS, BASED ON NOTHING!!!
We have direct evidence that they flew because ALL OTHER PTERASAURS HAVE THE SAME BODY PLAN, INCLUDING THE WINGS!!!
While I don’t think you are right per se, I also think this idea is quite amusing. Like… maybe those big wing membranes were for thermal regulation? Hahaha
Just like some people (me) have chosen to believe that Nessie is the ghost of a plesiosaur, I want to choose to believe this in lew of all the facts just as a fun treat for myself.
While many animals do have exaggerated features they use in mating displays, retaining the wing fingers in other pterosaurs in a proportion similar to what we'd expect in a flying animal as a mating display alone is unlikely at best.
Every structure on an animal's body comes at a cost. It costs calories, proteins, and minerals to build them, and to maintain them. Non-functional structures tend to diminish or otherwise are less expensive to maintain than functional ones. A peacock's tail feathers are a lot less resource-intensive than a muscular tail that length would be.
The physical costs of maintaining a skeletal feature like the wing finger on Quetzalcoatlus will in and of themselves act as a selective pressure against maintaining it in the state it's found in if it weren't used for flying.
Omg, yes! You get it!
Quetzalcoatlus had pneumatic bones. In ratites, their bones have evolved significantly denser as a result of their terrestrial lifestyle. If quetzalcoatlus, or any large azhdarchid, had evolved flightlessness we would have most likely have seen denser bones as a result of a grounded lifestyle.
Edit: Forgot to mention that flightlessness had evolved separately at least three times in the ratite lineage. Cassowaries, emus, ostriches, rheas, and kiwis all have dense bones which means this trait is often convergent with flightlessness. Also worth mentioning penguins equally have these denser bones, though this trait most likely evolved so their bones would work more like a scuba diver’s weight belt rather than from losing the ability to fly.
This too! Facts!
Azhdarchids seem to have evolved in the early Cretaceous, indicating a common ancestor moved across continents to get to a place where it could evolve. Europe was already a bunch of islands, meaning it had to have flown across some body of water.
Exactly!
Emus and Ostrich are both flightless birds that live on different continents and yet have a common ancestor that could fly, so the fact "cousin" species are found in multiple continents doesn't necessarily prove that they could fly.
Ffs. How long ago was this divergent evolution? Use facts!
The distribution of fossils and varying environments they were found in suggest that it could cover very long distances.
Hatzegopterix is lot more debatable as they've only found fossils on a single island and it's a bit bulkier so it may have been fully terrestrial.
Pneumatic skeleton has entered the chat
Logic has left the metaphorical chat that is that man’s brain
Average "When you want to be silly and not fact-check information before posting them" moment
First I'm hearing about that but it sounds cool as hell, wanna elaborate?
Its the presence of empty spaces within the bones, wich are filled with air-sacs (tmk extensions of the lungs), and wich are hypothesized to greatly improve respiratory efficency, as well as sort of reduce the overall weight of the animal. This may be one of the traits that helped sauropod dinosaurs to achieve such enourmous sizes.
usually, anyone who says their proof is "the math" without actually providing any math is an idiot.
Right, and that also implies your math accurately reflects the question too.
Simply “doing the math” implies you perfectly understand the forces of anatomy, physics, and adaptations that that animal may have had…which, most people don’t-at least not without having done a shitload of intensive research on real fossils while also quantifying it somehow. Most paleontologists are utilizing or building specialized computer models that can take years to get right.
I mean, they aren't fake, but for nuances sake they have a point in that paleontologists have indeed had quite the internal debate about how animals that large work.
Too often people act like science is a giant courtroom of judges and they unanimously agree on all things (99% of all climate scientists agree....etc)
In reality science is a process of constantly re evaluating what you believe to be true. Sauropods were thought to be semi aquatic for this reason. Then we realized that was wrong, and decided another route. More recently it's been air sacs.
The point is that dinosaurs are extremely ancient and EVERYTHING we think we know about them is a constantly evolving guess.
4 out of 5 doctors agree that this toothpaste works better than lube
I think the 5th doctor was asked a different question
Well what’s that 5th doctor saying
Doesn't use lube
They responded by asking what it was being used for.
For what purpose?
It's obviously true that scientists usually don't agree on how exactly something worked, happened, etc.
The problem is that this statement of fact is misrepresented by the non-academic public. In academia, "disagreement" means "we can't agree which explanation is true, but the truth is inside a very narrow spectrum of possible explanations". What the public hears is "Scientists have no clue, so it might as well have been aliens, for all we know. Also, they're probably making shit up about climate change and vaccines too".
Science communication is important, is what I'm trying to say.
I know one of the size debates was about their feet being able to support their weight. Studies were showing, though, that in order for their feet to support them, that they needed pads under their heels like elephants. So, they did find a solution to that issue.
Yeah, some """"""scientists"""""" still argue that nanotyrannus was a thing LOL LMAO
Both Holtz and Hone agree that there are valid points to the latest paper, and they say that a proper response should be written as well. That's how science advances. I am sure that when they're brushing their teeth before bed they'll be like "lol that Nano debate is bullshit" but they still treat as an actual scientific debate, and I like that approach.
It's like the millionth paper saying that vaccines and autism are unrelated. Sure, we know that by now, but it's always useful to tackle the debate from another point of view to yet again confirm that we have extremely high certainty over a fact.
Okay but one of these is literally the most stupid, braindead concept ever introduced by a lying moron and the other is the vaccine debate AYOOOOOO
Okay I'm joking but I get your point, but it was also funny to take another shot at the nano debate
Arm (foreleg) and shoulder strength is what keeps that neck upright.
Brachiosaurus = Arm Lizard
Most other sauropods AREN'T built like a brachiosaurus (forlegs are just as long as the hind legs and sometimes shorter... THIS is why MOST sauropods are "long" but Brachiosaurus is "tall, not long").
You guys ever look at the comments on any Facebook or Instagram posts about dinosaurs and just die a little inside?
Also the conspiracy videos on TikTok. I don't watch them directly, I just let Miniminuteman's youtube shorts debunking them show me. The most painful one was the one about dinosaurs not being real because "The original scientist that started giving these names to dinosaur bones, he was making them up as he went along..." Apparently we are now to start doubting the concept of names. Someone pass me a Ryncol to numb the pain.
It’s usually anti-evolution people who think dinosaurs didn’t exist or fossils were planted by scientists. I always ask how those scientists seem to get to places like 40 feet under the ground to perfectly place these fossils, without somehow disturbing the earth.
I always ask what the heck they’d gain from that. It would be a very expensive conspiracy, and for what?
Oh I thought they said fossils were planted by Satan. Lol.
Satan, space aliens, giants…if working with the public taught me anything, it’s that people will believe some truly wild shit 😂
They got air sacks and hollow bones, wonder what they could use that for ? And there’s also the fact that they’re very structurally balanced, and their legs were literally build like pillars, hmmmm wonder how they could support all that weight ???
Sometimes I think the pseudoscience/conspiracy crowd infiltrate these communities and spread nonsense just to confuse people in an attempt to decrease the public’s faith in actual proven science.
I think you're VERY MUCH 100% correct. It's the exact reason why most science pages on facebook die off.
They’ll promote any idea that deviates from the known scientific consensus, even if it doesn’t necessarily correlate with their worldview. Creationists have been doing this for forever.
What is that lad smoking💀🙏
I can't help but think of bill cipher
"Its funny how dumb you are"
Like this dude has zero clue what is being spoken, they were real, they existed, big deal
Bill Cipher is such an underrated villain. I love his shtick!
by several magnitudes
So, like...from 40 tons to 4 kg?
This is that vibe when you’re smart enough to follow along to a certain point but dumb enough to think you understand the rest. I feel like these folks always hyper-focus on one detail they understand and then totally botch the rest of it around that
His favorite dinosaur is Pterodactyl
Obviously a random reddit comment speaks pure facts
Doesn't matter what scientists say about it's mass it still existed
Sokka-Haiku by Optimal-Map612:
Doesn't matter what
Scientists say about it's
Mass it still existed
Remember that one time Sokka accidentally used an extra syllable in that Haiku Battle in Ba Sing Se? That was a Sokka Haiku and you just made one.
Air sacs, a sizeable tail and skeletal pneumaticity were all enough to keep them on their toes.
This is the correct answer
Chat, remove his balls.
Two words: air sacs.
Big if true. Err I mean uhh appropriately heavy if correct
Nope.
It's just another conspiracy theorist trying to make the world smaller and less interesting so they can feel clever.
i’d bet $20 that this person doesn’t believe dinosaurs were real in general
Alright, so hear me out. You know that hypothesis about the air sacks? Well what if they were actually filled with hydrogen, and brachiosauruses actually flew?
What's up with people referring to commenters as 'chat' these days. Are we just letting Twitch brainrot become the norm in every forum of discussion?
This made me laugh lol I could imagine my high school teacher saying this
Isn't the biggest thing that allowed dinosaurs to get so big the fact that there was more oxygen in the air? The more oxygen, the bigger something can get right?
Haha. No.
Is this from a creationist subreddit? Lmso
Reddit is such a cesspool
air sac air sac
I’m dumb. But I just don’t understand the question: justify their necessary body weight with that neck, it means what?
The fact sauropods had legs like stone pillars probably helps with supporting their body
Neck tiers S: Tanystropheus, Green Heron, Arambourgiania A: Mamenchisaurus, Elasmosaurus, Quetzalcoatlus B: Brachiosaurus, Plesiosaurus, Hatzegopteryx C: Giraffe, Gigantoraptor, Therizinosaurus D: Olorotitan, Amargasaurus, Nothosaurus F: Mastodonsaurus, Titanoboa, Cotylorhynchus
wait till bro learns about the air sacks
This man probably denies the existence of Dinosaurs despite proof of their existence. Hell, he probably thinks the Earth was made some 10,000 years ago by some magical man in the sky despite evidence disproving this. “Fakest of the fake dinosaurs” is all I need. Second guy has a huge point, we barely know anything about the Dinosaurs or how they functioned and likely will never unless backwards time travel is invented.
No, it isn’t true. Dinosaurs are very different animals from mammals like giraffes. They evolved to be able to get big, or rather had the adaptations for it, such as pneumatised skeletons and efficient respiratory systems. Dinosaurs were lighter than they looked like.
Also…chat? What?
This guy doesn’t know what he’s talking about.