>*peaks*

>*peaks*

It's All Fucked Shirt $22.14

CRIME Shirt $21.68

It's All Fucked Shirt $22.14

  1. 3 months ago
    Anonymous
    • 3 months ago
      Anonymous

      why is he like this

      • 3 months ago
        Anonymous

        Because liking T.rex is an alt right thing.

        • 3 months ago
          Anonymous

          troony moment

          • 3 months ago
            Anonymous

            We proud you finaly got out of your egg !

      • 3 months ago
        Anonymous

        Guess it comes from contrarianism against 'white-washed' ecology.
        Engh probably watched one of those documentaries where they show crocodiles death rolling wildebeest or orcas playing with seals as a child, and it permanently rewrote the structure of his brain vis a vis nature and brutality.

        So nature is good.
        But nature is good because it is grotesque and violent and nasty.

    • 3 months ago
      Anonymous

      You know I never noticed it because I try to ignore this fricking idiot, but Tyrannosaurus as a genus didn't even exist until Deinosuchus was extinct.

      • 3 months ago
        Anonymous

        Also there's no good reason for a large crocodile to go after predatory dinosaurs, when their entire hunting strategy is "wait in pool of water for large herd to come by, pick off the one not paying attention". A lone predator is going to be wary.

        • 3 months ago
          Anonymous

          Crocodilians will happily eat predators if they get their hands on them. And they eat far more than just large herd animals. I don’t see why a Deinosuchus would be any different.

          • 3 months ago
            Anonymous

            Obviously, but this isn't their hunting strategy for the exact reason I said - lone animals are more wary than ones in groups.

            • 3 months ago
              Anonymous

              The issue is you are wrong about their hunting strategy. Only really Nile Crocs regularly prey on enormous migratory herds of mammals. Most crocodilians have no trouble whatsoever hunting individuals, and many entirely hunt individual animals rather than herds. Saltwater crocodiles for example don’t have access to large herd animals in australia, and yet they are still the largest crocs in the world.

              • 3 months ago
                Anonymous

                Salties eat large birds and pigs.

              • 3 months ago
                Anonymous

                And dingoes, kangaroos, wallabies, possums, wombats, aboriginals, monitor lizards, snakes, and all sorts of aquatic life. My point is really just that crocodiles don’t primarily feed on herd animals.
                The also didn’t have access to pigs until 200 years ago.

              • 3 months ago
                Anonymous

                >The also didn’t have access to pigs until 200 years ago
                Are you sure about that?

              • 3 months ago
                Anonymous

                We’re talking about Australian salties here

          • 3 months ago
            Anonymous

            Obviously, but this isn't their hunting strategy for the exact reason I said - lone animals are more wary than ones in groups.

            The issue is you are wrong about their hunting strategy. Only really Nile Crocs regularly prey on enormous migratory herds of mammals. Most crocodilians have no trouble whatsoever hunting individuals, and many entirely hunt individual animals rather than herds. Saltwater crocodiles for example don’t have access to large herd animals in australia, and yet they are still the largest crocs in the world.

            The ISSUE is that it didn't fricking exist.

            • 3 months ago
              Anonymous

              The issue is that YOU don’t exist

      • 3 months ago
        Anonymous

        >Tyrannosaurus as a genus didn't even exist until Deinosuchus was extinct
        Good thing he said Tyrannosaur and not Tyrannosaurus then

        Also there's no good reason for a large crocodile to go after predatory dinosaurs, when their entire hunting strategy is "wait in pool of water for large herd to come by, pick off the one not paying attention". A lone predator is going to be wary.

        Obviously, but this isn't their hunting strategy for the exact reason I said - lone animals are more wary than ones in groups.

        Except they absolutely will eat lone predators and there are remains of theropods with deinosuchus bite marks on them. There's also plenty of videos of crocodiles snatching cheetahs, wild dogs, etc

  2. 3 months ago
    Anonymous
  3. 3 months ago
    Anonymous

    >37 million year ago
    kek kek kekkity kek

    Adaption != Evilution (fake ass science)

  4. 3 months ago
    Anonymous

    Holy shit you monkeys are still flinging shit at each other? Lol

    • 3 months ago
      Anonymous

      it's a paleoschizo thread, he's 90% of the posts

  5. 4 months ago
    Anonymous
  6. 4 months ago
    Anonymous
  7. 4 months ago
    Anonymous
  8. 4 months ago
    Anonymous
  9. 4 months ago
    Anonymous

    first time coming to Wauf in years, who is this paleoBlack person?

    • 4 months ago
      Anonymous

      Is adamant that dinosaurs from Jurassic Park franchise are the most accurate and everything from the present paleontology is israelislop.
      Makes you think he's trolling but the amount of effort he puts into explaining things he preaches really makes you realize he is fundamentally moronic.

  10. 4 months ago
    Thread hidden

    >paleo"schizo" autism thread
    Thread hidden

  11. 4 months ago
    Anonymous
  12. 4 months ago
    Anonymous

    Crocodiles are evolving into turtles tho

    • 4 months ago
      Anonymous

      Noice.

  13. 4 months ago
    Anonymous

    >enjoyable thread
    >paleoschizo, instead of shooting himself, comes to shit it up
    damnit!

    • 4 months ago
      Anonymous

      *xerself
      Don't misgender now!

  14. 4 months ago
    Anonymous
  15. 4 months ago
    Anonymous

    [...]

    For your next trick, you'll scream "NO YOU EDITED THE IMAGE! NO YOU POSTED FROM TWO DIFFERENT DEVICES! THERE CAN'T POSSIBLY BE MORE THAN ONE PERSON DISAGREEING WITH ME!!"

  16. 4 months ago
    Anonymous
  17. 4 months ago
    Anonymous
  18. 4 months ago
    Anonymous

    [...]

    You have a very low IQ if you think I type like that.

  19. 4 months ago
    Anonymous
  20. 4 months ago
    Anonymous

    paleoshart thread? paleoshart thread

  21. 4 months ago
    Anonymous

    >chinese are adding feathers to dinosaurs in order to turn american kids gay
    Just how weak American kids are if their prehistoric reptilian stompy beasts being prehistoric avian stompy beasts is enough to turn Timmy, a true redblooded American patriot to be, into Triss, a porn-addicted troony degenerate who films himself jerking off in women's restrooms?

    • 4 months ago
      Anonymous

      >Wow let me just keep bashing this strawman I built
      Getting anywhere? Is he talking? Is he telling you where Hamas is holding the hostages (but not raping because they're ugly)?

    • 3 months ago
      Anonymous

      you speak English on an American website 🙂

  22. 4 months ago
    Anonymous

    [...]

    Nobody cares about your boogieman. Refute what I said or frick off.

  23. 4 months ago
    Anonymous

    I want to befriend an alligator.

  24. 4 months ago
    Anonymous
    • 4 months ago
      Anonymous

      Time is a flat circle. We're back to "dinosaur dumb, mammal smart" levels of reasoning again.

      • 4 months ago
        Anonymous

        Mostly we're getting away from the 'everything is a bird', stuff.
        Also getting away from the 'smart dino' meme. Where every time you found more than one skeleton of a species together, it meant they were complex pack hunters that'd make chimps and wolves look pathetic.

        Nowadays we're getting more heavy, crocodile-like or komodo dragon-like restorations, with lots of weight and mass.
        And most paleontologists are starting to agree that few if any dinosaurs expressed pack hunting behaviors. Like most of the time, your best example would be flocking during migrations in herbivores, or opportunistic gatherings of carnivores on dead or dying prey.

        • 4 months ago
          Anonymous

          So basically, time is a flat circle, we're going backwards, paleontologists have nothing new to talk about so they recycle garbage from the 19th century.

          • 4 months ago
            Anonymous

            Frick no. There's LOADS new in even just dinosaur studies. But most of the good information is being pushed out by bad "theory" and the field, like everything in modern society, is committing suicide for short-term profit.

            >So where are the feathered lizards and crocodiles? Why can crocodile scales NOT be turned into feathers,
            because they dont have the thing that turns scales into feather, can you read, moron.

            No. It's because they don't have feathered ancestors. The way feathergays are claiming feathers work and have evolved is pure pseudoscientific fricking gibberish. The reason bird feet scales can be turned into feathers is because their body scales ALREADY DID, but they kept the scales on their feet because they're useful for keeping clean. It's very likely that there is a whole-body signal that says "If any scale is detected, convert it to a feather", but another one that says "Block any attempt to convert feet scales to feathers". That's why fricking with the hormones and gene expression with bird feet scales can turn them into feathers, but NOTHING can turn bird feathers into scales. Or crocodile scales into feathers.

        • 4 months ago
          Anonymous

          >Mostly we're getting away from the 'everything is a bird', stuff.
          Why were paleopseuds ever doing this shit to begin with? Right from the beginning we were SCREAMING at them that this was derailing the field and was factually wrong.

          >with lots of weight and mass
          Which is extremely wrong. Crocodilians are an odd case in reptiles because they're semi-aquatic and their abdomens are "squishy" which makes idiots think they're "fat". The anatomically rigorous reconstruction technique is absolute fact. This "everything is fat" is moronic. Reptiles aren't mammals. They don't hoard fat like Wal*Mart shoppers.

          • 4 months ago
            Anonymous

            Look at large reptiles like Monitor lizards.
            They're extremely massive and heavy.
            That doesn't mean they're fatty. It means they're full of tissue and muscle.

            • 4 months ago
              Anonymous

              https://i.imgur.com/nds9Xfm.jpg

              Even smaller ones are extremely fleshy.

              That's not fat, buddy. That's muscle. And you're posting sprawling lizards. Not erect archosaurs. The mechanics are slightly sloppier in lizards because of this so they look just a tad "doughier", though it's somewhat of an illusion.

              • 4 months ago
                Anonymous

                >That doesn't mean they're fatty. It means they're full of tissue and muscle.
                I'm aware its not all body fat.

                There's no reason to think that any large non-avian dinosaur would be any sleeker.
                Their closest living relatives are all extremely robust and fleshy.
                Crocodiles, lizards, snakes. All follow the same pattern of getting extremely 'meaty' as they grow in size.
                So too would any hadrosaur, tyrannosaur, or any other non-avian lineage.
                Avian dinosaurs would be gracile, but they'd also be smaller, and would thicken up as they grew in size, like we see with Utahraptor and other large Dromaeosaurs.

                Lean or slim large dinosaurs don't fit with any of the data we have about how they'd most likely look.
                They'd be large and heavily set.

              • 4 months ago
                Anonymous

                >Their closest living relatives are all extremely robust and fleshy.
                Are they? Because this is what an erect archosaur actually looks like and it's NOTHING like how brian engh and his kin who SWEAR dinosaurs are just birds look.

              • 4 months ago
                Anonymous

                That's because Engh is a contrarian and only cares about his personal cuture "war" with imaginary rightoid boogiemen. Picrel is made by someone who, understanding that while birds are technically Therapods, understands that the VAST majority of extinct Therapods were wildly different and most likely didn't resemble them much outside of minor postural similary.

              • 4 months ago
                Anonymous

                *similarities

              • 4 months ago
                Anonymous

                All the fat and folds there does mimic 'modern paleoart' fairly well.
                The only thing lacking are the greeblies that weirdos like Engh add to everything that make them look cancerous.

              • 4 months ago
                Anonymous

                There isn't much fat on that bird. And keep in mind, birds are not dinosaurs. They're warm-blooded, which means they're likely to store more fat to begin with. Birds also have bizarre anatomy adapted to flight so they have odd proportions and parts of their bodies look "unfinished" without feathers because their feathers are literally taking up room that flesh would be in other animals.

              • 4 months ago
                Anonymous

                I would've at least tolerated you if you were such an absolute homosexual towards birds.

              • 4 months ago
                Anonymous

                >And keep in mind, birds are not dinosaurs.
                >They're warm-blooded
                So you don't know what taxonomy is

              • 4 months ago
                Anonymous

                Cladism isn't taxonomy, sweaty. It doesn't even pretend to be. It can't be because it has no concept of a ranking system.

              • 4 months ago
                Anonymous

                you have no idea of what you are talking about

              • 3 months ago
                Anonymous

                How the frick do you expect me to take your arguments seriously when you have not a single clue what taxonomy even is.

              • 4 months ago
                Anonymous

                Doesn't modern evidence point to theropod dinosaurs being semi-warm blooded?

              • 4 months ago
                Anonymous

                no, the evidence points for theropods being warm blooded and for dinos being ancestrally warm blooded

              • 4 months ago
                Anonymous

                All dinosaurs actually were likely mesotherms. There have been about 3 or 4 papers trying to assess the homeothermy of dinosaurs and they have conflicting results, but they're all hovering around dinosaurs being mesotherms. Even the suspected feathered ones and possibly even early birds. Sauropods and Hadrosaurs grew quickly. Theropods were some of the slowest growing dinosaurs. Check the chart. These are the growth curves for Tyrannosaurids. By contrast elephants are half-grown by age 10. Probably the best argument against dinosaurs being warm-blooded is that not a damn one of them survived the Cretaceous extinction, but animals that could survive cold or live in marginal tropical habitats DID. Size isn't even an argument because there were tons of small dinosaurs near the end of the Mesozoic. The mainstream even claims a lot of them were digging, which they probably weren't.

                Does someone hear a yipping chihuahua?

              • 4 months ago
                Anonymous

                "We observe no correlation between atmospheric oxygen concentrations11 and metabolic rates. Inferred ancestral states reveal that the metabolic rates consistent with endothermy evolved independently in mammals and plesiosaurs, and are ancestral to ornithodirans, with increasing rates along the avian lineage. High metabolic rates were acquired in pterosaurs, ornithischians, sauropods and theropods well before the advent of energetically costly adaptations, such as flight in birds."

                "Giant sauropods and theropods were not gigantothermic9,10, but true endotherms. Endothermy in many Late Cretaceous taxa, in addition to crown mammals and birds, suggests that attributes other than metabolism determined their fate during the terminal Cretaceous mass extinction."

                https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-022-04770-6

              • 4 months ago
                Anonymous

                >ancestral to ornithodirans
                First of all, ornithodiran is not a thing. Pterosaurs aren't archosaurs.

                >"Giant sauropods and theropods were not gigantothermic9,10, but true endotherms.
                Like I said, conflicting results.

                >suggests that attributes other than metabolism determined their fate during the terminal Cretaceous mass extinction.
                NOPE. Size was the causal factor once the food chain collapsed, but again, not all dinosarus were large. There is no good reason why dinosaurs were "just as good as birds pretty much" but the birds leaved and the dinosaurs ate dirt. And the overwhelming evidence was that cold - LONG cold was the thing that fricked up most species.

              • 4 months ago
                Anonymous

                *birds lived

              • 3 months ago
                Anonymous

                >Pterosaurs aren't archosaurs.

              • 3 months ago
                Anonymous

                I too have visited wikipedo.

              • 3 months ago
                Anonymous

                https://bioone.org/journals/bulletin-of-the-american-museum-of-natural-history/volume-2011/issue-352/352.1/The-Early-Evolution-of-Archosaurs--Relationships-and-the-Origin/10.1206/352.1.full

              • 3 months ago
                Anonymous

                Honey, I know what the mainstream has to say on the topic more than you do. I promise. The mainstream is wrong. They can't even examine early Pterosauromorph fossils correctly.

                https://archived.moe/an/thread/4697431/#q4700408

              • 3 months ago
                Anonymous

                You legitimately might just be schizophrenic and mentally moronic, lmao. How the frick does your post disprove pterosaurs being archosaurs when the linage is universally agreed to have emerged during the early triassic. Even the fricking points you post there literally put the Scleromochlus at MOST a relative of Archosauria.

                I genuinely thought you might be a troll but at this point, not even god is worth saving you.

              • 3 months ago
                Anonymous

                >Proving yourself wrong
                Darling... Respect yourself.

              • 3 months ago
                Anonymous

                >ornithodiran is not a thing.
                it is the official clade of pterosaurs + dinosaurs

                >Pterosaurs aren't archosaurs.
                they have all the diagnostic traits of archosaurs

                >Like I said, conflicting results
                all studies that take molecular date in account point for endothermic methabolism

                >Size was the causal factor once the food chain collapsed, but again, not all dinosarus were large
                don't explain why many other small animal, including entire mammal and bird lineages also went extinct

                >There is no good reason why dinosaurs were "just as good as birds pretty much" but the birds leaved and the dinosaurs ate dirt.
                do you know that almost all bird lineages went extinct along the other dinos, right ?

                >And the overwhelming evidence was that cold
                that don't add anything to your argument

              • 3 months ago
                Anonymous

                Hai David Peters-kun <3

              • 3 months ago
                Anonymous

                At least you know more than most in these threads. Peters thinks Pterosaurs are literally lizards, I don't. Though honestly it's not a totally ill-founded suggestion. Lizards have been around almost as long as reptiles and they've turned into all sorts of wild shit.

              • 4 months ago
                Anonymous

                But that's a man?

              • 4 months ago
                Anonymous

                The chameleon in the image you posted earlier isn't an erect archosaur either, yet you're using it as an example to support your claim.

              • 4 months ago
                Anonymous

                Yeah, if you really wanna compare dinosaurs to modern reptiles, and crocs have to be excluded because of reasons, then a 70kg terrestrial komodo dragon is a far better fit than a 700g arboreal chameleon.

              • 4 months ago
                Anonymous

                No, but all reptiles DO support my claim. Any "chub" you see on a reptile is going to be muscle, not fat.

                https://i.imgur.com/6CbkJiq.jpg

                Yeah, if you really wanna compare dinosaurs to modern reptiles, and crocs have to be excluded because of reasons, then a 70kg terrestrial komodo dragon is a far better fit than a 700g arboreal chameleon.

                Again, this is a sprawling animal and it has limbs that indicate this. Salamanders and lizards also have limbs that look like this because they have a similar gait. This is how an actual erect archosaur's locomotive limbs look. Notice a difference? Now birds have a slightly different femer to tibia ratio and orientation and that affects the calf mass a bit, so ostriches for example have enormous calves which dinosaurs wouldn't. But what you WON'T see is crocodile like limbs on a ratite. Why? Because they don't sprawl like lizards.

              • 4 months ago
                Anonymous

                >this is a sprawling animal and it has limbs that indicate this.
                If sprawling is an issue, then why did you include a chameleon in your picture? You know that they are sprawlers too, right?

              • 4 months ago
                Anonymous

                You just go ahead and keep bouncing between cherry picked arguments and think you're right. Dinosaurs will never be fat, sweaty.

                https://i.imgur.com/4XqqJLD.jpg

                That's because Engh is a contrarian and only cares about his personal cuture "war" with imaginary rightoid boogiemen. Picrel is made by someone who, understanding that while birds are technically Therapods, understands that the VAST majority of extinct Therapods were wildly different and most likely didn't resemble them much outside of minor postural similary.

                Fred's good, but those hands are wrong. Dinosaurs had more backwards facing palms than that. Carpenter was wrong.

              • 4 months ago
                Anonymous

                >but those hands are wrong.
                they aren't, all that we know about their arms anatomy point to that being their rest position

              • 4 months ago
                Anonymous

                They are. Theropods don't have palms that face inward. That was based on Carpenter's incorrect reconstruction of Allosaurus arms. He wrongly assumed the bones must have just been attached to each other as if they were lain flat on a table. But we know from crocodilians that that isn't how their bones were attached at all. We also have tracks from from other dinosaurs like Hadrosaurs that have the same diagonal, but mostly forward facing hand position. See pic for how crocodilian hand bones are ACTUALLY connected in the living animal.

              • 4 months ago
                Anonymous

                This is what the bones look like when you lay them out though. You would never know they were oriented as they are in the living animal if you just laid the bones out on a table.

                ALL information we have on the position of dinosaur front limbs points to theropods having hands mostly oriented forward, with a slight diagonal orientation from ~10-45° variation from forward:

                Arguments FOR theropod hands being oriented correctly:
                - Non saurischians like Ceratopsids & Hadrosaurs also have this mostly forward but slightly diagonal hand position
                - Trackway from what is likely Acrocanthosaurus (already posted) show that they would have raked in a nearly "bunny hands" position (heaven forfend!)
                - Crocodilians have this hand position now - combined with Ornithischian evidence, this argues strongly for a basal trait.
                - You LITERALLY have to break the wrists of theropods like Dromaeosaurs to force them into "bird natural" hand positions.

                Arguments AGAINST theropod hands being oriented correctly and making them palm inward, or god forbid upside down:
                - Chickens.

              • 4 months ago
                Anonymous

                Weren't Acrocanthosaurus arms more flexible than other theropod dinosaurs? Like I remember this being something that was prominent feature along their high spines.

              • 4 months ago
                Anonymous

                Yes, they were
                https://zslpublications.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1017/S0952836905006989

              • 4 months ago
                Anonymous

                I promise you they weren't.

              • 4 months ago
                Anonymous

                >Comparing quadrupedal animals to bipedal ones

              • 4 months ago
                Anonymous

                >comparing related animals with similar traits
                Yes, that's what we like to call "taxonomy".

              • 4 months ago
                Anonymous

                And decide to ignore the Birds, literally theropod dinosaurs dinosaurs, in favor of distantly related clade that is crocodilia and dinosaurs who filled an entirely different niche.Just to give you a perspective on how utterly moronic your taxonomic comparisons are, comparing crocodile morphology to dinosaur ones is the same as comparing placental mammal morphology with monotremes.

                Why don't you get yourself into a discussion with a fricking paleontologist? Why come here to argue with us? You ain't convincing anyone shit with your pathetic and sub-Black person tier arguments on the most pity topic on the planet earth.
                I know why, because you don't have the fricking balls to argue with someone who knows what they're talking about you twat.

              • 4 months ago
                Anonymous

                Birds are the result pf an extreme bottleneck and have selected for insane ammounts of encephalization compared to non-avian dinosaurs. Most large dinosaurian terrestrial predators had a brain the size of a peanut

                They were large dumb lizards that spend much time and energy investing in becoming larger and processing more food+reproducing like rabbits than they did in any K selective strategy simply because they dont have the size-body limitation of viviparous animals regarding reproduction

              • 4 months ago
                Anonymous

                But sar nooo mesoterm sauropserinos were basically primates and canids saaar

              • 4 months ago
                Anonymous

                Can you name what the main difference in the hand is between a theropod and a bird? I'll tell you: birds don't fricking have hands. This is like claiming Artiodactyls have flippers because whales do and they're MUCH more closely related than ANY theropod is to ANY living bird. You just like being wrong.

              • 4 months ago
                Anonymous

                Btw, someone can't even read an abstract:

                >Pronation and supination are precluded by immobility of the radius relative to the ulna. Motion also seems to be restricted at the wrist. The palm faces medially, and digital movement is subtransverse.

              • 4 months ago
                Anonymous

                This, of course, is also due to the erroneous assumption that the phalanges are in the same plane as the radius and ulna, which trackways and crocodilians prove is false. That's not how the tendons and ligaments are connected. The plane of the hand and the plane of the radius and ulna are nearly perpendicular, not parallel.

              • 4 months ago
                Anonymous

                Btw this is the other image of crocodilian hand bones lain out on a table. TOTALLY different from how they look in the living animal.

                Weren't Acrocanthosaurus arms more flexible than other theropod dinosaurs? Like I remember this being something that was prominent feature along their high spines.

                Oh boy here comes the cope. I don't see any reason to believe that other than mainstream paleogays got proven wrong again.

              • 4 months ago
                Anonymous

                I literally just asked a question, what the frick is there to cope?

              • 4 months ago
                Anonymous

                Dude, you are dealing with an obsessed schizo who is mad that dinosaurs apparently looked different from ones shown in his favorite childhood movie.

              • 4 months ago
                Anonymous

                Don't play innocent trying to defend the mainstream with bullshit ad hoc theorizing.

              • 4 months ago
                Anonymous

                Explain how the arms are wrong. "They JUST ARE, OKAY???" doesn't count.

              • 4 months ago
                Anonymous

                Done. In detail.

              • 4 months ago
                Anonymous

                >I don't have an answer
                Thank you for your concession 🙂

          • 4 months ago
            Anonymous

            Even smaller ones are extremely fleshy.

        • 4 months ago
          Anonymous

          >few if any dinosaurs expressed pack hunting behaviors
          why tho? it makes perfect sense
          by the jurassic most dinosaurs would have developed pack hunting due to how dangerous and massive their preys would have evolved. you can't tell me with a straight face that a lone allosaurus would have killed a stegosaurus, even ambushes are a big risk considering the thagomizer. let alone a goddamn diplo.
          surely there have been ambush hunters, probably most raptors were, but later theropods like tyrannosaurids would surely have the brain capacity to form bonds and hunt in coordinated groups

          or as always it's ~~*paleontologists*~~ making shit up to get funding and some pages in popsci tabloids

          • 4 months ago
            Anonymous

            Because we don't see it in crocodiles, lizards, or the vast majority of birds.
            Pack hunting is extremely rare outside of mammals.
            Even crows, that are very smart and do flock together in social communities, do most of their food attainment on their own and only rarely do anything that could be called 'pack hunting'.

            Opportunistic gatherings like you see from crocodiles, vultures, monitor lizards, definitely happened.
            But there isn't any evidence we can point to among extant archosaurs or their relatives that would tell us dinosaurs pack hunted. It is not a common behavior that we see in living relatives.

            • 4 months ago
              Anonymous

              you forgot that dinosaurs aren't crocs and lizards? they'd never behave the same at all
              and birds usually don't prey on megafauna, which are the main drive for organized hunting, so they didn't need to develop that behavior.
              most theropods (at least in the cretaceous) should have had a bird-level intelligence too, meaning that definitely they were over the frolicking of reptiles and could have social behavious. pack hunting to bring down the occasional big-ass/heavily defended prey doesn't seem too far fetched

              • 4 months ago
                Anonymous

                We gotta use what we have for comparisons.
                Dinosaurs are somewhere between Archosaurs and Avians.
                Archosaurs and Squamates almost never pack hunt. Avians only very rarely display cooperative hunting strategies.

                Nowhere in there, does it seem that there is room for dinosaurs to have evolved the ability to cooperate and pack hunt in a structured manner, and then failed to pass that on to Avian descendants.
                Unless you think it only evolved in extinct families and never appeared in the lines that evolved into Avians.

                There is potential for modern Avians to pack hunt, eagles could very well go after full grown deer or even moose if they swarmed and worked together. But they never do/will unless it is an opportunistic mobbing of a dead/dying animal.
                Crows could hunt raccoons or opossums and other larger mammals in groups, but they never do/will unless it is an opportunistic mobbing of a dead/dying animal.
                Just because A.) There are carnivorous/omnivorous predators in an environment, and B.) There are larger potential prey animals in the same environment, does not mean that those predators will cooperatively hunt those prey.

              • 4 months ago
                Anonymous

                >Dinosaurs are somewhere between Archosaurs and Avians.
                avians are archosaurs

                >Archosaurs and Squamates almost never pack hunt.
                same as mammals, only between 20% and 5% of predators exhibit pack hunting
                also Harris's hawk and butcherbird are two bird that practice pack hunting

                >and then failed to pass that on to Avian descendants.
                birds are just one dinosaur lineage, just because a trait evolve in one lineage don't mean it will evolve in another that occupies a completely different niche

                >Unless you think it only evolved in extinct families and never appeared in the lines that evolved into Avians.
                maybe because modern birds don't occupy niches where pack hunt is a viable strategy, just like most mammals

                >There is potential for modern Avians to pack hunt
                and yet no need or pressure for such behavior to evolve, there's no pressure to eagles to go after deer or for crows to go after raccoons
                Different from dinos that we know went after bigger prey animals and likely needed to cooperate with each other to bring them down

              • 4 months ago
                Anonymous

                >avians are archosaurs
                We're all fish.
                There is a 'break' between crocodiles and birds enough to call them something separate.

                5-20% of mammalian predators engaging in cooperative hunting is far more significant than literally two bird species that are notable specifically because they might be the only ones to express complex pack hunting behavior.
                We can tell that cooperative hunting is something fairly endemic to the mammalian family.

                But for Avians, it does not appear to be an ancestral trait, same goes for Crocodilians.
                A trait evolving in at most a handful of highly derived descendants does not lend much weight to the idea of it being ancestral to the family.

                Birds could occupy those niches, but don't.
                There is nothing stopping eagles or corvids from engaging in pack hunting behavior. They're smart enough to do it, and they already engage in hunting behavior. And even can have complex social networks.
                They just don't. Because it is a behavior pattern that isn't endemic to birds.

                We don't know that for example, Allosaurs regularly hunted healthy adult Sauropods.
                We have reasonable evidence to suppose they hunted the far smaller Stegosaurus. But just because they existed in the same environment doesn't mean that they were antagonistic.
                As far as I'm aware we don't have many, if any, examples of adult sauropods that have healed injuries caused by Allosaurus or any other North American carnosaurs.

              • 4 months ago
                Anonymous

                >There is a 'break' between crocodiles and birds enough to call them something separate.
                that's no how it's works, it's like claiming humans aren't mammals

                >5-20% of mammalian predators engaging in cooperative hunting
                no, it's 5-20% of all known predators, not just mammals

                >We can tell that cooperative hunting is something fairly endemic to the mammalian family.
                mammals aren't a family and cooperative hunting isn't something endemic to them

                >But for Avians, it does not appear to be an ancestral trait, same goes for Crocodilians.
                doesn't matter

                >not lend much weight to the idea of it being ancestral to the family.
                no one claims that it's ancestral to dinosauria you idiot, but that proves that it is a thing that can evolve independently in dinosaur clades

                >Birds could occupy those niches
                no, they couldn't

                >but don't
                for the same reason bat's don't occupy many diurnal areal niches, because they are already occupied by more specialized animals

                >There is nothing stopping eagles or corvids from engaging in pack hunting behavior.
                there's no pressure or intensive to drive them to that strategy

                >Because it is a behavior pattern that isn't endemic to birds.
                it isn't "endemic" to mammals either
                and they don't because theirs no advantage to it giving the niche they occupy

                >But just because they existed in the same environment doesn't mean that they were antagonistic
                we have fossils with signs of predation

                >examples of adult sauropods
                why are you fixating on sauropods ?

              • 3 months ago
                Anonymous

                >But for Felids, it does not appear to be an ancestral trait, same goes for Cetaceans.
                A trait evolving in at most a handful of highly derived descendants does not lend much weight to the idea of it being ancestral to the family.

                >Cats could occupy those niches, but don't.
                There is nothing stopping Tigers or Cheetas from engaging in pack hunting behavior. They're smart enough to do it, and they already engage in hunting behavior. And even can have complex social networks.
                They just don't. Because it is a behavior pattern that isn't endemic to cats.

                this is how moronic you sound
                i'm going to ignore all your bullshit from now on

              • 3 months ago
                Anonymous

                listen man, truth to be told it's all speculation, we can hardly if at all grasp social behaviour from fossils of any kind, but that's also the point. not to sound like a moronic paleoartist tho
                you say that we have to use birds and reptiles as comparison, but they cover extremely different niches from dinosaur. they were megafauna, the niche that is now occupied by MAMMALS. and to add to this they covered that role for almost DOUBLE the time that mammals did. with such a large timeframe, and consequentially a massive amount of environement and evolutionary diversity, there's no reason not to think that dinosaur did evolve pack hunting behaviour, even if just in some groups, for certain environements/prey, for a certan time.
                cmparing birds/crocs to dinosaurs is like comparing humans to cows, and arguably there are more similiarities between the latter

              • 3 months ago
                Anonymous

                Humans and cows have many shared behavioral characteristics.
                Social structures with defined leadership. Some degree of empathy for the treatment of others. Caring for the young. Communal defense.
                We can make assumptions to mammals at large about a predisposition towards communal living and potentially cooperative feeding strategies in predatory species.
                Looking at wolves, primates, dolphins, etc., we can say that cooperative hunting is widely dispersed throughout mammals without relying on any one singular example. Outside of predators, we see that structured communal living is endemic to mammals.

                When we look at communal avians, we see a predisposition towards non-cooperative feeding strategies.
                Flocking is a means of self-defense, more eyes looking for more predators/danger. But it does not turn into pack hunting.
                Some have actual structures, others create associations of convenience. It is clear that avians have a totally different concept of socialization compared to mammals.

                https://i.imgur.com/GuWSBTE.gif

                >But for Felids, it does not appear to be an ancestral trait, same goes for Cetaceans.
                A trait evolving in at most a handful of highly derived descendants does not lend much weight to the idea of it being ancestral to the family.

                >Cats could occupy those niches, but don't.
                There is nothing stopping Tigers or Cheetas from engaging in pack hunting behavior. They're smart enough to do it, and they already engage in hunting behavior. And even can have complex social networks.
                They just don't. Because it is a behavior pattern that isn't endemic to cats.

                this is how moronic you sound
                i'm going to ignore all your bullshit from now on

                Felids appear to have largely lost those traits over time.
                Lions appear to have redeveloped their cooperative hunting uniquely within the family.
                Looking at a phylogeny table, it is clear that the feline ancestor was not a cooperative hunter.
                So if we're considering ancient cats like Smilodon or the American Lion, it is unlikely that they engaged in cooperative hunting strategies.

                But by looking at mammals as a whole, we can say that it is likely there are latent genetics for cooperative hunting in all felines.
                Because its wide prevalence tells us it has to be reasonably ancestral to the entire group.

                With Avians, it would have to be that basically all the dinosaurs that did evolve instincts to hunt cooperatively, were all outside of their ancestry. Because it is not a trait that appears repeatedly throughout the family but only in a few exceptional cases.

              • 3 months ago
                Anonymous

                >behavior=genetics
                you are genetically predisposed to be a moron i estimate
                also behavior is the easiest thing to "ingrain" in a species genetic
                why? because it ISN'T fricking genetics, it's memetics. which work about the same, but aren't tied to the laws of biology

              • 3 months ago
                Anonymous

                T. rex weren't teaching their offspring.
                Dinosaurs largely lacked a cerebral cortex from what we see in brain case scans. Only some derived coelurosaurs potentially had them. And otherwise their palliums were proportionately smaller than modern birds. So even if you point to structural differences making the need for a cerebral cortex to be lesser, they will still not be on the level of modern avians.
                They were driven by instinctual and genetically ingrained behaviors. Just like sea turtles landing on beaches to lay eggs. They're not taught to do that, it is pure instinct.

                They very likely weren't learners like crows are.
                In terms of brain development, outside of exceptions like Troodontids (and even that is potentially questionable), they had brains similar to, or less advanced, than modern crocodilians in structure.

              • 3 months ago
                Anonymous

                T. rex weren't teaching their offspring.
                Dinosaurs largely lacked a cerebral cortex from what we see in brain case scans. Only some derived coelurosaurs potentially had them. And otherwise their palliums were proportionately smaller than modern birds. So even if you point to structural differences making the need for a cerebral cortex to be lesser, they will still not be on the level of modern avians.
                They were driven by instinctual and genetically ingrained behaviors. Just like sea turtles landing on beaches to lay eggs. They're not taught to do that, it is pure instinct.

                They very likely weren't learners like crows are.
                In terms of brain development, outside of exceptions like Troodontids (and even that is potentially questionable), they had brains similar to, or less advanced, than modern crocodilians in structure.

                >https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/cne.25453
                Theropod dinosaurs had primate-like numbers of telencephalic neurons
                >https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/cne.25458
                Could theropod dinosaurs have evolved to a human level of intelligence?
                >https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/cne.25471
                How smart dinosaurs?
                >https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/cne.25472
                Could a theropod like T. rex have had human-like numbers of neurons?

                This is basically the state of the art on Theropod intelligence discussion.

              • 3 months ago
                Anonymous

                Missed this one
                >https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2024.01.10.575006v2.full.pdf
                How smart was T. rex? Testing claims of exceptional cognition in dinosaurs and the application of neuron count estimates in palaeontological research
                Probably some others, too.
                It is a live research field.

              • 3 months ago
                Anonymous

                >there's no reason not to think that dinosaur did evolve pack hunting behaviour
                There is actually pack hunting behavior even in todays large reptiles which is shown within varanids and crocdiles. But they're less "pack hunt" and more so "mob", there isn't any strategy in mobbing aside from the eldest and biggest individual going for the first bite. Afterwards it is fair game and even cannibalism is on the table.
                Dinosaurs best modern day analogues are the monitor lizards as they are the most active of the cold blooded lizards and the largest lizards come from this said order.

              • 3 months ago
                Anonymous

                >Wow these animals that have gathered because they're being fed by moonfaced brown thirdies so ~~*western*~~ boomers can film the gore sure does prove that komodo dragons are pack hunters!
                homosexual. Every time I see one of these images I want to bomb the entire nation of Indonesia.

              • 3 months ago
                Anonymous

                Do you have a clue what mobbing is?
                I even made the point in the fricking previous post that mobbing isn't exactly pack hunting, its just the gathering of multiple same species carnivores and eating away at the prey without conflict with each other.
                And because you hate komodo dragons so much, here's a nile crocodiles doing the same in the wild.

                ?t=131

              • 3 months ago
                Anonymous

                I read your comment sort of. And I agree with you. I'm just sick of seeing these stupid "canned gore" shots set up by thirdie peasants and everyone on Wauf jacking off to them.

              • 3 months ago
                Anonymous

                >And because you hate komodo dragons so much, here's a nile crocodiles doing the same in the wild.

                ?t=131
                Are you jerking off right now? How small's your dick?

                Lol. Worst part is that they seem to break the legs of the goats a lot of the time so they can’t run. The Dutch should have kept dicking them down.

                Of course they do. Makes the gore better for germanic tourists. The literal rot of the world.

              • 3 months ago
                Anonymous

                What the frick are you even on about? Is there any other schizo who gets off watching animals getting butchered? I literally just linked the behavior of animals congregating and feeding together which is called a mob.
                https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crocodile#Social_behaviour_and_vocalization
                https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Komodo_dragon#Behaviour_and_ecology

              • 3 months ago
                Anonymous

                The entire reason these images and videos exist is because there's an entire industry devoted to it. Please stop pretending that nobody is engaging in this sick fricking animal abuse.

              • 3 months ago
                Anonymous

                I choose to remain ignorant.

              • 3 months ago
                Anonymous

                Lol. Worst part is that they seem to break the legs of the goats a lot of the time so they can’t run. The Dutch should have kept dicking them down.

              • 3 months ago
                Anonymous

                This is completely incorrect. The layperson has absolutely no clue the fricking mountain of information we have on dinosaurs. When it comes to some animals like the Hell Creek fauna, about the only things we DON'T know are what color they were and how Triceratops reproduced. We know tons about their behavior too. We know that all Hadrosaurs were highly social communal nesters. We know that Centrosaurs were herding also (but have no nests), but we also know that Chasmosaurs were likely solitary for most of their lineage. We know T. rex hunted even the very largest of prey because we have healed rex bites on Torosauriform frills. The amount we know about dinosaurs would absolutely boggle the mind of the average peasant. The problem is it's in fashion to play dumb and make shit up now to make money and a name for yourself. And everyone in STEM is doing this shit.

      • 4 months ago
        Anonymous

        80% of Birds are dumb af tho and they're the smartest clade

    • 4 months ago
      Anonymous

      >mammals are the best, says mammal

      • 4 months ago
        Anonymous

        well, when a non-mammal invents their own internet, they can say whatever they want on it, until then, mammals rule this planet

    • 4 months ago
      Anonymous

      >um I had to evolve more because my evolutions suck wiener and are for homosexuals without scales so I win
      lmao mammalcuck... really?

    • 4 months ago
      Anonymous

      https://i.imgur.com/v3GeKc7.jpg

      Time is a flat circle. We're back to "dinosaur dumb, mammal smart" levels of reasoning again.

      My thought exactly.

      >Um actually reptiles died out because they were dumb

      Those who fail to learn from history are doomed to repeat it. And modern NPCs can't learn period.

      • 4 months ago
        Anonymous

        I don't even want to get into the feather debate. It is just so tiring hearing something that was mocked my entire life be brought up as some new salient point.
        >Oh, did you know reptiles are cold blooded? Mammals must have had a huge advantage over them!
        Interesting. Please explain the synapsids getting fricked by reptiles again, then.
        >BUT A NEW STUDY
        I am tired of this world, its people, and the petty noises they make.

        • 4 months ago
          Anonymous

          The good paleontologists never bought into any of this horseshit.

        • 4 months ago
          Anonymous

          Synapsids weren't fully endothermic.

      • 4 months ago
        Anonymous

        https://i.imgur.com/9Aa5QMN.jpg

        I don't even want to get into the feather debate. It is just so tiring hearing something that was mocked my entire life be brought up as some new salient point.
        >Oh, did you know reptiles are cold blooded? Mammals must have had a huge advantage over them!
        Interesting. Please explain the synapsids getting fricked by reptiles again, then.
        >BUT A NEW STUDY
        I am tired of this world, its people, and the petty noises they make.

        The good paleontologists never bought into any of this horseshit.

        So we agree the feather stuff is bullshit

        • 4 months ago
          Anonymous

          Yes, but you'll get called paleoschizo for saying so and I personally just want to keep this about "reptiles are inferior to mammals" bullshit.

        • 4 months ago
          Anonymous

          There is indisputable fossil evidence that some late dinosaurs had feathers and some basal ones may have evolved all the way to fuzz in lieu of scales (if crocs are genetically similar, that is literally a single gene being switched to produce elongated floppy scales).

          • 4 months ago
            Anonymous

            >some late dinosaurs had feathers
            This is disputed by facts known for 150 years.
            First of all, feathers were advanced enough by the JURASSIC to provide the ability of at least limited flight. Pic fricking related. There was ZERO EVIDENCE of any feathers in the fossil record until miraculously China revealed the Archeoraptor in 1999, which was revealed to be a PROVEN HOAX, but later that PROVEN HOAX was brushed under the rug as more and more fossils with feathers came out of China and the Chinese government not so subtly told the scientific community that if they were looked at too closely then China would lock them out of their fossil beds. So that was that. A new myth was born, that - much like intelligent design or gradualism of old - either dinosaurs who had no feathers in earlier ages magically gained them by the Cretaceous, OR ALTERNATIVELY most if not all dinosaurs had feathers based on when those feathers must have evolved (i.e. extremely early, Triassic).

            The fossil evidence is not only disputable based on the proven hoax, but disputable on all other elements as well. You cannot pick and choose which dinosaurs "had feathers all along" just based on how you think they ought to have looked in the Cretaceous.

          • 4 months ago
            Anonymous

            no, feathers and scales are derived from the same structure, anything that has scales has the ability to have feathers, it just needs another thing, i cant remember what, to turn them into down, which is far cry from flight feathers

            • 4 months ago
              Anonymous

              So where are the feathered lizards and crocodiles? Why can crocodile scales NOT be turned into feathers, even though bird feet scales can be?

              • 4 months ago
                Anonymous

                >So where are the feathered lizards and crocodiles? Why can crocodile scales NOT be turned into feathers,
                because they dont have the thing that turns scales into feather, can you read, moron.

          • 4 months ago
            Anonymous

            >some basal ones may have evolved all the way to fuzz
            Nope. There is precisely ZERO evidence for this and LOTS of evidence that contradicts it. This is one of those things modern paleogays just literally made up and have been trying for the past 20 or so years to "prove" is real, despite constantly coming up empty handed.

        • 4 months ago
          Anonymous

          There are only TWO species of feathered dinosaur ever found outside of china and mongolia: Ornithomimus (and some of these fossils look sus also) and Archaeopteryx, which has fully formed asymmetrical flight feathers, despite being the earliest known feathered dinosaur. That's literally it. Everything else is chinks or inference and a giant game of pretend. Some dinosaurs that were inferred to have feathers like T. rex or Concavenator have been PROVEN to have scales instead. And Concavenator even had supposed "quill knobs".

          • 4 months ago
            Anonymous

            https://i.imgur.com/5YM7072.jpg

            >some late dinosaurs had feathers
            This is disputed by facts known for 150 years.
            First of all, feathers were advanced enough by the JURASSIC to provide the ability of at least limited flight. Pic fricking related. There was ZERO EVIDENCE of any feathers in the fossil record until miraculously China revealed the Archeoraptor in 1999, which was revealed to be a PROVEN HOAX, but later that PROVEN HOAX was brushed under the rug as more and more fossils with feathers came out of China and the Chinese government not so subtly told the scientific community that if they were looked at too closely then China would lock them out of their fossil beds. So that was that. A new myth was born, that - much like intelligent design or gradualism of old - either dinosaurs who had no feathers in earlier ages magically gained them by the Cretaceous, OR ALTERNATIVELY most if not all dinosaurs had feathers based on when those feathers must have evolved (i.e. extremely early, Triassic).

            The fossil evidence is not only disputable based on the proven hoax, but disputable on all other elements as well. You cannot pick and choose which dinosaurs "had feathers all along" just based on how you think they ought to have looked in the Cretaceous.

            I'd like to know, if chinks were making "feathers on dinosaurs" up, why? What's their endgame?

            • 4 months ago
              Anonymous

              To demoralize the American public.

            • 4 months ago
              Anonymous

              TO MAKE FRICKING MONEY, moron. This has been explained to you 500 million times. These fossils are dug up by peasant farmers. A doctored fossil will fetch about 1,000 times more money than a real one.

              • 4 months ago
                Anonymous

                So, why make feathered fake dinosaurs then instead of faking scaly ones or producing a whole bunch of Piltdown men?

              • 4 months ago
                Anonymous

                Why do you come on the internet and pretend to be more moronic than you are? Because of western contrarians realizing that tabloid shit sells their papers more than honest science. Hence the replication crisis. This has also been told to you many times.

              • 3 months ago
                Anonymous

                >they could multiply their profits if they could doctor them to make them look like they had feathers
                okay but why? i feel like there's a missing bit of exposition here

              • 3 months ago
                Anonymous

                ~~*westerners*~~

              • 3 months ago
                Anonymous

                meds

            • 4 months ago
              Anonymous

              straight white males: YEAH THUNDER LIZARDS
              >umm, akshually, dinosaurs were covered in feathers and engaged in constant homosexual anal sex, which proliferated turbo-aids and was the real reason for the mass extinction

            • 3 months ago
              Anonymous

              Just google it, the first thing that comes up is creationist bs, if it had feathers that's a nod to evolution and they don't want that

            • 3 months ago
              Anonymous

              Easy, Chinese want glory and to prove they are better scientists than the US. This requires new discoveries, even when made up.
              Chinese fossils were frequently derided as hoaxes throughout the 2000's, these hoaxes were never disproven, the accusations just mysteriously stopped in the 2010's. No conspiracy here, of course, just coincidence.

              • 3 months ago
                Anonymous

                It's not even that impressive. It's just money.

            • 3 months ago
              Anonymous

              israeli subversion of the Aryan spirit

      • 4 months ago
        Anonymous

        That image frickin kills me. We're back to middle ages bullshit. Remarkable how that happens.

        • 4 months ago
          Anonymous

          It really isn't. This shit has been predicted for years. It's why Mike Judge made the movie Idiocracy. Only NPCs tried to pretend this wasn't happening. Now everyone's whining about a "competency crisis". Gee, I wonder how the frick that happened?

    • 4 months ago
      Anonymous

      No shit.
      Reptiles are largely locked to niches where mammals don't compete with them directly.
      Like shallow water ambush hunters. A niche that would be challenging for more energetic and higher metabolic rate mammals to beat out reptiles in.
      But most other ones, yeah. Endothermy is really good.

    • 4 months ago
      Anonymous

      Birds are reptiles thoughbeit

      • 4 months ago
        Anonymous

        birds are as much reptiles as human are an ungulates, actually, im pretty sure all mammals are more related to each other than a bird is related to a lizard

        • 4 months ago
          Anonymous

          no moron Bird are as much reptiles as humans are mammals
          you just don't know how phylogeny works

          • 4 months ago
            Anonymous

            That's not how that works. I can understand why you don't get it since you're a cladist moron. You see, when a group of organisms differentiates enough from its ancestors, we group them in a separate category. That's how we keep things neat and tidy. You can do that AND have a larger group that includes both. Like saying "Vertebrate" for all animals descended from bony fish. You don't have to call everything a fish. Birds are archosaurs which is fine because archosaur is a broad group. They are NOT dinosaurs because dinosaurs have specific characteristics that birds lack such as cold blood (yes, dinosaurs were cold-blooded, mesothermic at best, yes even the feathered ones).

            • 4 months ago
              Anonymous

              >when a group of organisms differentiates enough from its ancestors, we group them in a separate category.
              not, that is not how it works moron
              organisms ate classify accourding with their ancestry and they don't change category just because they become divergent
              Birds are dinosaurs

              >That's how we keep things neat and tidy.
              no, that how you keep thing disjointed and messy

              >You don't have to call everything a fish
              fish is not a scientific classification

              >They are NOT dinosaurs because dinosaurs have specific characteristics that birds lack
              no, birds have all the diagnostic traits of dinosaurs

              >yes, dinosaurs were cold-blooded, mesothermic at best, yes even the feathered ones).
              not according with most data and research into the topic

              • 4 months ago
                Anonymous

                >not, that is not how it works moron
                Yes it is, moron. You just don't know this because you're twelve and all you've ever known is wikipedo tier woke classification via cladism.

    • 4 months ago
      Anonymous

      mammalian hands wrote this article

      • 4 months ago
        Anonymous

        Crocodiles having any kind of cerebral cortex makes them the smartest living reptile.
        Overall reptiles mostly just suck. They've stuck around because having a glacial metabolism means they don't have to be competitive with mammals to eke out a living.

    • 4 months ago
      Anonymous

      > A new study suggests

  25. 4 months ago
    Anonymous

    Yeah? If he's so perfect... explain this.

    • 4 months ago
      Anonymous

      What would happen if she stopped?

      • 4 months ago
        Anonymous

        he would get sad

      • 4 months ago
        Anonymous

        It would be extremely painful

        • 4 months ago
          Anonymous

          for you

    • 4 months ago
      Anonymous

      Ok but what the hell is she doing to it
      Do they really need a deep scrubbing on their backs

      • 4 months ago
        Anonymous

        >need
        Stop using this word

        • 4 months ago
          Anonymous

          Ok but why

      • 4 months ago
        Anonymous

        they like it
        helps prevent pests/parasites
        keeps them looking cleaner for guests
        helps keep them from getting issues based on the smaller scale enclosures that don't totally mimic their natural environment

    • 4 months ago
      Anonymous

      I wish b***hes would scrub my back.

    • 4 months ago
      Anonymous

      >how does it make you feel, therapsid boy?

    • 4 months ago
      Anonymous

      Must feel heavenly for something that can't reach it's back to scratch it

    • 3 months ago
      Anonymous

      Everyone has a weakness for blondes

  26. 4 months ago
    Anonymous

    Brutal mogging

  27. 4 months ago
    Anonymous

    >*valleys*

    • 4 months ago
      Anonymous

      The duality of Archosauria

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *