T-rex bros...

>gave him homosexual chicken feathers
>made him fat
>made him purely a coward scavanger
>made him literally gay
>made him lose to SpinoCHADeus
And now he loses to a fricking bear. Why do they try to ruin t-rex so much?

Ape Out Shirt $21.68

Black Rifle Cuck Company, Conservative Humor Shirt $21.68

Ape Out Shirt $21.68

  1. 6 months ago
    Anonymous

    Generally speaking, fur > feathers. The grizzly would win
    But seriously how big would a bear have to be to keep up in the cretaceous? Assuming it bulks and doesn't shrink and become a critter

    • 6 months ago
      Anonymous

      like the size of a elephant, they cannot deal with some of those herbivores back, then they just get bodied by sheer bulk

      • 6 months ago
        Anonymous

        Generally speaking, fur > feathers. The grizzly would win
        But seriously how big would a bear have to be to keep up in the cretaceous? Assuming it bulks and doesn't shrink and become a critter

        hows this

  2. 6 months ago
    Anonymous

    lions can kill elephants.
    Grizzly bears working together might well be able to kill a t-rex

    • 6 months ago
      Anonymous

      >Elephants = sluggish, baggy skin, poor cognitive abilities, being herbivores adds to the beehive mentality
      >T-Rex = surprisingly fast for its size, solid scaly skin, are intelligent apex predators themselves
      Sorry anon, a pack of bears won’t be able to do it.

    • 6 months ago
      Anonymous

      Adult bulls?

      • 6 months ago
        Anonymous

        no, elephants.

  3. 6 months ago
    Anonymous

    they were GAY?

  4. 7 months ago
    Anonymous

    picrel = every dino/"""paleoart""" thread on Wauf since 2018

  5. 7 months ago
    Anonymous

    >But he was slow moving and slow thinking
    How the frick does he know that

    • 7 months ago
      Anonymous

      The same way modern paleontologists state all their "findings" with absolute certainty: it's a meme "science" with near zero rigor and near one hundred percent sensationalism.

      • 7 months ago
        Anonymous

        Post 67 examples

      • 7 months ago
        Anonymous

        all science is required to be written with absolute certainty

        all scientists know it's not certain

        these are the rules

        when you complain about the rules you just show you don't understand science. What are scientists going to do, write "we're just guessing here"? That would never get published even if it's true. And we all know it's true.

        if anyone is a dishonest idiot it's you for thinking science is certain about anything or even should be.

  6. 7 months ago
    Anonymous

    OP has gathered only the most intelligent specimens in this thread, good job. The rex went after other dinos larger and more dangerous than a modern bear, and their hide was probably thicker than fur, so a rex would just chomp down onto the back of the bear and sever it's spine with the foot long teeth larger rexes had.

  7. 7 months ago
    Anonymous

    Reminder that Tyrannosaurus, aswell as Tarbosaurus, Daspletosaurus, Albertosaurus and Gorgosaurus (dinosaurs that are actually closely related to T. rex) have evidence for scales and none for feathers

    • 7 months ago
      Anonymous

      We have evidence from other related fossils they had feathers.

      • 7 months ago
        Anonymous

        Yutyrannus and other proceratosaurids aren't closely related

        • 7 months ago
          Anonymous

          Good thing feathers are basal to all dinosaur groups.

          • 7 months ago
            Anonymous

            And good thing many of them lost them

        • 7 months ago
          Anonymous

          *aren't closely related to T. rex
          I just noticed it sounded like i was saying Yutyrannus isn't related to proceratosaurids when in reality it is one

  8. 7 months ago
    Anonymous
  9. 7 months ago
    Anonymous

    I don't know why they insist on using the word "feather" when it's closer to hair. As mentioned before, the biggest tyrannosaurs won't have too much hair (if any), because they would otherwise overheat

    • 7 months ago
      Anonymous

      Because they simply aren't hair. They may look like hair in their primitive stages but evolutionary speaking they have nothing to do with it

  10. 7 months ago
    Anonymous

    >noooo you can't update the shape of a creature we only have dust of and that lived millions of years ago!!!
    If you guys weren't whinny babies about it and actually honest you'd shill for the old design of picrel, not just for the one you saw as kids

  11. 7 months ago
    Anonymous

    Are you seriously trusting a book published by Disney?

    • 7 months ago
      Anonymous

      >published by Disney
      Yup now it all makes sense. Only a furrgay from Disney could make up some bullshit like this.

  12. 7 months ago
    Anonymous

    NuDinos look very surrealist and alien in comparison to the giant lizard ones. I think they’re better monsters.

    • 7 months ago
      Anonymous

      An imporntant factor people forget is that even with feathers most Dinosaurs wouldn’t even have ones like bird feathers because those types evolved for aviation first, then readapted into the later bird species for other means. The larger, feathered dinos like T-Rex could have a more streamlined and scaly looking feather texture similar to a penguin or cormorant.

      • 7 months ago
        Anonymous

        T-Rex wouldn't even have feathers, there's skin impressions of it and it was scaly. Combine that with the facts of thermal gigantism and the place and time it lived it would have died of overheating if it was feathered

        • 7 months ago
          Anonymous

          [...]
          [...]
          I think it's most probable that the majority of dinosaurs did have feathers, but they weren't necessarily the kind we associate with birds - probably more similar to downy feathers than flight ones. But dinosaurs wouldn't have had to have them all over their bodies.
          It's entirely possible that T. Rex had no feathers on most of its body, but had some in a few places (maybe a crest for mating displays or something).

          I really don’t care what the evidence ends up saying when it’s all said and done, all I know is your legit moronic if you actually think the science says Dinosaurs actually looked like pic related.

          • 7 months ago
            Anonymous

            That's not what science says though, moron. Having feathers doesn't mean it was toucan sam with teeth. I swear to god /misc/tards are only capable of thinking in hyperbole.

            • 7 months ago
              Anonymous

              >twisting my comment to get the same side of the argument out
              Keep staying classy Wauf

              • 7 months ago
                Anonymous

                thanks for playing, moron.

    • 7 months ago
      Anonymous

      An imporntant factor people forget is that even with feathers most Dinosaurs wouldn’t even have ones like bird feathers because those types evolved for aviation first, then readapted into the later bird species for other means. The larger, feathered dinos like T-Rex could have a more streamlined and scaly looking feather texture similar to a penguin or cormorant.

      T-Rex wouldn't even have feathers, there's skin impressions of it and it was scaly. Combine that with the facts of thermal gigantism and the place and time it lived it would have died of overheating if it was feathered

      I think it's most probable that the majority of dinosaurs did have feathers, but they weren't necessarily the kind we associate with birds - probably more similar to downy feathers than flight ones. But dinosaurs wouldn't have had to have them all over their bodies.
      It's entirely possible that T. Rex had no feathers on most of its body, but had some in a few places (maybe a crest for mating displays or something).

      • 7 months ago
        Anonymous

        >majority
        No, the vast majority of dinosaurs, both in speculation and literal skin examples, were featherless. Almost no herbivores had feathers and most carnivores aside from a few families had no feathers, either. Nothing before the Middle Jurassic likely had feathers, either.

        • 7 months ago
          Anonymous

          Almost all large dinosaurs lacked feathers, but small ones of most branches had them. They're basal to archosauria, but several groups lost them when they went through phases where they grew larger (whether they shrunk again afterwards or not) or a handful of other scenarios. Marginocephalia only retained quills ancestrally for example, and they were lost in almost every group. Thyreophora developed them into hard scutes similar to how crocodilians did very early on, even when small. Theropods had several smaller species lose them due to presumably their environment - but some kept them even when growing larger. Some tyrannosaurids had feathers, but notably the largest and most popular basically all lost them way before they grew to such large sizes.

    • 6 months ago
      Anonymous

      definitely better than naked chicken model

      • 6 months ago
        Anonymous

        >Left side = the Western depiction of dinosaurs as food or scaly lizards.
        >Right side = the Chinese depiction of dinosaurs as trans icons.
        No wonder I irk every time I see male birds having flashy troon feathers, they traded masculine crocodile features for "powered flight".
        It's fricking sad to see any species naturally selected like this.

        • 6 months ago
          Anonymous

          i think burger identity politics rotted your brain, go outside anon

          • 6 months ago
            Anonymous

            >Go outside
            >Sees pic-related
            I'm sorry, the outside world is broken now. Both human civilization and nature.

            It's not worth it.

            In hyperreality, I still live in the Chad Mesozoic Era.

            • 6 months ago
              Anonymous

              Should have ended at
              >sees pic-related
              No need for all that wordvomit.

  13. 7 months ago
    Anonymous

    The people that take this thread seriously would unironically believe that a cat could actually murder a full grown man in a fight to the death.

  14. 7 months ago
    Anonymous

    Evolution is just a theory.

  15. 7 months ago
    Anonymous
    • 7 months ago
      Anonymous

      your reddit gold, sir

      • 7 months ago
        Anonymous

        >your reddit gold, sir

      • 7 months ago
        Anonymous
      • 7 months ago
        Anonymous

        "Fools Gold"

    • 7 months ago
      Anonymous

      https://i.imgur.com/eR0IZxM.png

      your reddit gold, sir

      someone posted the Reddit thread of this image last time and the comments are good for a kek, so many pissed off sois

      • 7 months ago
        Anonymous

        reddit is so goddamn cringe

      • 7 months ago
        Ss

        not even good for an almost-laugh nose-exhale. highly predictable, surface level barely humor

        • 7 months ago
          Anonymous

          The fact that redditors find those tepid HFY-tier reductionisms clever is exactly why it's funny tbqh

      • 7 months ago
        Sage

        Nah, they're right for once, you're unironically a bunch of contrarian imbeciles purely concerned with looking cool/funny/edgy/different.

    • 7 months ago
      Anonymous

      >science says T-Rex looks stupid now which means the mass killing animal can’t be taken seriously by the humans that would absolutely get horrifically slaughtered by it regardless of what the damn thing actually looks like
      Holy shit dilate harder you actual homosexual.

      • 6 months ago
        Anonymous

        You first.

      • 6 months ago
        Anonymous

        T. rex was a reptile, not a mammal

    • 7 months ago
      Anonymous

      >NOOOOO MY HECKIN DINOS :~~* THEY AREN'T COOL LIKE IN MY BOOMER BOOKS AND JURASSIC PARK ANYMORE :'''~~*~~* MUH CHILDHOOD :~~*

      • 7 months ago
        Anonymous

        your sóy vanilla latte sir (from organic fair trade coffee beans)

        • 7 months ago
          Anonymous

          >S-S-S-SOI!!!! Y-YOU'RE SOI!!! NOW CHANGE MY DINOS BACK RIGHT NOW YOU MEANIE!!!

          • 7 months ago
            Anonymous

            go back to r*ddit already

            • 7 months ago
              Sage

              you first 😉

  16. 7 months ago
    Anonymous

    Remember a decade ago when we used to mock sjws for their irrational outrage over absolutely inconsequential shit? Now the right-wing thinks dinosaurs are a homosexual plot to feminize boyhood interests.

    • 7 months ago
      Anonymous

      Normal ass people don’t fricking care. Some of the dumbest looking animals on the planet like bears and hippos kill more people than sharks and crocs do.

  17. 7 months ago
    Anonymous

    >now he loses to a bear
    that image is clearly from the 50s or something. see no feathers so it's an outdated reconstruction.
    why are you trying to present this like it's a new thing?
    answer: because you're an emotional homosexual who thinks the mean palaeontologists are out to get your childhood toy monster

    • 7 months ago
      Anonymous

      Exactly! Get with the times chud, its 2023. Dinosaurs are trans and feathered now!

      • 7 months ago
        Anonymous

        This, but unironically.
        Reddit Leftist israeli-Controlled Cat Website, so sorry anon....

        • 7 months ago
          Anonymous

          Least deranged newbie post

          • 7 months ago
            Anonymous

            most original """""oldgay""""" response

    • 7 months ago
      Anonymous

      Doesn’t matter whether it looks like a giant chicken or not because we know that the animal is the equivalent to a giant pitbull with a bite force 10x stronger than a hippopotamus. It would tear a grizzly in half like a moronic child with a teddy bear.

      • 7 months ago
        Anonymous

        what matters is that the images is not the current thinking nor is a new thing. so it's got nothing to do with the trend you're talking about

        • 7 months ago
          Anonymous

          Shouldn’t even matter what it looks like here anyways cause it’s not even the right fricking size. Most Normies don’t care what T-Rex currently looks like. All they know is a bad ass giant lizard with tiny arms that could easily frick up a bear with ease. As for the mythological fantasy aspect, the mammals like Bears and Gorillas would actually get more fricked up by T-Rex if they were bigger. That pic and shit like King Kong were made by a bunch of furrgays that seeth at the sight of giant kino reptiles actually existing. Thank god for Primal showing us the reality of how mammals would be getting cucked by these mofos.

          • 7 months ago
            Anonymous

            Fang got buttfricked by the giant gorilla tho

            • 7 months ago
              Anonymous

              The Niggorilla rigged the match by drinking the magic demon semen that shouldn’t have even been in my paleo kino. Cope harder butt munky.

            • 7 months ago
              Anonymous

              >Monkey had to drink the writer’s magic syrup in order to take on a midget T-Rex
              That shit was stupid and you fricking know it, as with all the other magic nonsense they put in that show.

  18. 7 months ago
    Anonymous
    • 7 months ago
      Anonymous

      kek
      you made this?

      • 7 months ago
        Anonymous

        I made it

    • 7 months ago
      Anonymous

      Amazing, anon. If you have any sort of art page I'd love to see more.

    • 7 months ago
      Anonymous

      nice

    • 7 months ago
      Anonymous

      >manlet think Smash Bros style physics equates to real life.
      That game really gave you sexless midgets a huge confidence boost didn’t it?

    • 7 months ago
      Anonymous

      We're not worthy

  19. 7 months ago
    Anonymous

    Liberal homosexuals will never take away the based dinosaurs of my youth

  20. 7 months ago
    Anonymous

    moronic. You know what else is bulky and slow moving? Hippos. Now tell me with a straight face a grizzly would beat a hippo, much less a hippo the size of a bus

    • 7 months ago
      Anonymous

      hippo top speed: 19 mph. the fastest olympic athlete on the planet maxes at 8 mph.

      • 7 months ago
        Anonymous

        >Usain Bolt's top speed during his world record run was 27.33 miles per hour (mph) , which he reached around the 60-80m mark. This is equivalent to: 44.72 km/h.

      • 7 months ago
        Anonymous

        T-Rex top speed: 15-20 mph

      • 7 months ago
        Anonymous

        >the fastest olympic athlete on the planet maxes at 8 mph.
        bro 8mph is literally the average walking speed of an adult human.

  21. 7 months ago
    Anonymous

    >now
    This is clearly from decades ago when people still thought dinosaurs were moronic, slow, cold-blooded lizards.
    Anyway, imagine being over the age of 12 and still getting upset about dinosaurs not being the same as they were in your shitty picture book from 1985. Pathetic.

    • 7 months ago
      Anonymous

      You know there is no scientific evidence from outside china that supports the feathered dino theory, plus the art of feather dinos used in scientific journals is literally drawn by a furry artist named Emily Willoughby? This is not a conspiracy theory, its an open collaboration between furry freaks and chinese investors.

      • 7 months ago
        Anonymous

        >NO YOU DON'T UNDERSTAND, FEATHERED DINOSAURS ARE A CHINESE PLOT
        The only thing more pathetic than getting upset about autism lizards is ascribing advances in science to some kind of chink/furgay conspiracy simply because you don't like change (due to your autism).

        • 7 months ago
          Anonymous

          look it up.

          • 7 months ago
            Anonymous

            homosexual, the first fossil of a feathered dinosaur ever discovered (Archaeopteryx) was found in fricking Germany. Paleontologists suspected dinosaurs may have had feathers since the 1800s.

            • 7 months ago
              Anonymous

              Yeah, and all of the feathered dinosaurs found in China in the 00's were revealed to be hoaxes, with pic related being the big one, and then starting in the 2010's western scientists weren't allowed to analyze the fossils and now we just take their word for it.
              https://www.theguardian.com/theguardian/2000/feb/07/features11.g22
              Funny how everything aligns with a proven hoax. Imagine if the Piltdown Man was corroborated with "later evidence".

              • 7 months ago
                Anonymous

                that's just some shady Chinese curiosity dealer. not a legit paleontologist. obviously more fossils than this have been found and actually verified.

          • 7 months ago
            Anonymous

            nah

          • 6 months ago
            Anonymous
            • 6 months ago
              Anonymous
        • 7 months ago
          Anonymous

          >muh china
          Fricking moron.

          I wasn't too sure at first but these responses convinced me that he's probably right.

      • 7 months ago
        Anonymous

        >muh china
        Fricking moron.

      • 7 months ago
        Anonymous

        Death to America.

      • 7 months ago
        Anonymous

        You sound like Chris Chan complaining about how they changed Sonic's arms blue, but with Dinoautism instead

      • 7 months ago
        Anonymous

        What about the fossils with feathers?

      • 7 months ago
        Anonymous

        have you heard of archeopteryx? found in the chinese province of GERMANY

      • 6 months ago
        Anonymous

        >You know there is no scientific evidence from outside china that supports the feathered dino theory
        Feathered dinosaurs were first proposed during the time of Charles Darwin, IIRC Huxley was proponent of the theory. The first feathered dinosaur discovered was found in germany, actual dinosaur feathers have been found in Myanmar.

        • 6 months ago
          Anonymous

          He's also ignoring the fact that birds have several hundred diagnostic traits of dinosaurs in the skeleton alone, proving that feathers must have evolved in dinosaurs.

          but ignoring stuff is what ignorant people do.

          • 6 months ago
            Anonymous

            >but ignoring stuff is what ignorant people do.
            Because blissful ignorance is better than emotional suffering as a result of life experience, as in "knowledge".

            • 6 months ago
              Anonymous

              >tfw no t-rex maid
              I'm upset now

  22. 7 months ago
    Anonymous

    ?si=dtJ2DMc0WXX09ziK

    • 6 months ago
      Anonymous

      >gay couple acts creepy around children and have to be chased off by their parents
      What did they mean by this?

  23. 7 months ago
    Anonymous

    How big were bears in dinosaur times though? If I recall correctly most animals were fricking huge and dangerous back then, even sloths were as big as trees

    • 7 months ago
      Anonymous

      homie that was like 1-2 million years ago. Not fricking dinosaur times.

      • 7 months ago
        Anonymous

        Ok but how big were the bears that actually were around in the dinosaur age then?

        • 7 months ago
          Anonymous

          Mammals didn't exist back then. Proto-mammals which were still somewhat related to dinosaurs were tiny

          • 7 months ago
            Anonymous

            Even proto-bears?

          • 7 months ago
            Anonymous

            Explain this then:

            https://i.imgur.com/11VDDzZ.jpg

            the short-faced bear. 12 foot tall standing up. the largest known ancient bear.

            i can see him taking on a dino. and he probably did. any stegosaurus walking by got fricked in the ass.

            • 7 months ago
              Anonymous

              Dispute what your coloring book level of knowledge suggests, stegosaurus didn't exist anywhere near the time that trex did. The point is moot

        • 7 months ago
          Anonymous

          Bears didn’t exist 65 million years ago. There were early mammals but the biggest in record was about the size of a beaver.

          • 7 months ago
            Anonymous

            It could still frick up your ankles though

        • 6 months ago
          Anonymous

          >Ok but how big were the bears that actually were around in the dinosaur age then?
          Anon, I'm moronic and even I feel embarrassed for you.

      • 7 months ago
        Anonymous

        That sounds about right for dinosaur times. Bears were bigger because the air was heavier or something back then

        • 7 months ago
          Anonymous

          Oxygen is the word you're looking for

    • 7 months ago
      Anonymous

      Would be so based if megafauna just reappeared from holes in the ground and started destroying civilization

      • 7 months ago
        Anonymous

        they specifically jobbed to humans, and the survivors in Africa aren't exactly doing hot.

      • 7 months ago
        Anonymous

        That's what the Godzilla and the other big ones are about

      • 7 months ago
        Anonymous

        Apache Helicopter

    • 7 months ago
      Anonymous

      Dinosaur times? Bro, bears weren't a thing until millions of years after the dinos were wiped out. So they say. Our ancestors couldn't have even begun to progress unless the hoards of terrible lizards were dead.

      Goddamn, evolution is based. Praise SOL

    • 7 months ago
      Anonymous

      >dinosaur times

      This is the guy who has giant meltdowns when he sees feathered dinosaurs in media.

      • 7 months ago
        Anonymous

        I don't get what your point is even supposed to be

        • 7 months ago
          Anonymous

          "Dinosaur times" is the kind of language a child -or a manchild with low-functioning autism - uses. No adult who knows anything about paleontology uses that term. If you don't even know the term "Mesozoic" you shouldn't be allowed to talk about dinosaurs.

          • 7 months ago
            Anonymous

            What does it matter, do you also insist that people refer to dogs as "Canis lupus familiaris", redditor?

            • 7 months ago
              Anonymous

              I insist that they refer to dogs as dogs. If someone uses juvenile terms like "pupper" or "doggo" (the equivalent to "dinosaur times") I would also call them moronic.

              • 7 months ago
                Anonymous

                Why is that juvenile? Its the times when dinosaurs were around, just like people refer to the times when romans were around as "roman times". You are just being pretentious and whiny.

              • 7 months ago
                Anonymous

                Because it's what a literal child would say when talking about dinosaurs.
                A literal child would also get upset that the modern depiction of dinosaurs no longer matches their depiction in his favorite movies/shows/books/drawings. A functioning adult would not.

              • 7 months ago
                Anonymous

                Why do you support the feminization of dinosaurs?

              • 7 months ago
                Anonymous

                who says feathers are feminine?
                also I don't "support" anything other than the truth. if we found undeniable proof that dinos were literally gay homosexuals I'd have to accept that. because facts don't care about your feelinga

              • 7 months ago
                Anonymous

                Feathers aren't "feminine" you terminally online /misc/cel moron.
                I don't deny science just because it upsets me and my autistic obsession with dinosaurs.

              • 7 months ago
                Anonymous

                Are you seriously trying to pretend that a dinosaur covered in fluffy colorful feathers is not more feminine than a featherless reptile?

              • 7 months ago
                Anonymous

                It's fricking nature, anon. It's only "feminine" if you choose to view it that way. It's an adaptation for survival, nothing more, nothing less.
                Is a vulture feminine? Is an eagle? Is a hawk?

                So why would they survive while way stronger animals died out?

                Because smaller animals need less food to survive. After something like a massive asteroid impact, food is going to be scarce for a while.
                I imagine other mammalian adaptations such as live birth and milk probably played a role, too.

              • 7 months ago
                Anonymous

                >Is a vulture feminine? Is an eagle? Is a hawk?
                They're all more feminine than a crocodile

              • 7 months ago
                Anonymous

                Only if you see everything through a lens of "masculine" and "feminine" like some kind of moron compensating for his small dick.
                Fricking feminine ass Romans and their feminine fricking eagle, amirite? They should have used a crocodile, that would have been so much cooler and more manly. Fricking gays.

              • 7 months ago
                Anonymous

                Why are you even here? is reddit down or something?

              • 7 months ago
                Anonymous

                >if you aren't a braindead boomer /misc/tard who throws fits about fricking dinosaurs you belong on reddit
                have a nice day election tourist.

              • 7 months ago
                Anonymous

                I really hope we do one day bring back dinosaurs just so to see them rip apart homosexuals like you. Nothing can be a more shameful death than getting mauled by a giant duck.

              • 7 months ago
                Anonymous

                IF homosexual cultures like the Romans were compensating for their dick size, they were most definetly compensating for the fact that they were fricking little boys 247.

              • 7 months ago
                Anonymous

                >the peak of Western civilization was so gay
                Insightful input, Rabbi.

              • 7 months ago
                Anonymous

                >Rome, the peak of Western Civilization
                Ok moron.

              • 7 months ago
                Anonymous

                >Dinosaurs roamed the earth many millions of years ago
                >Pic-related discovered how to sharpen sticks
                >The horny bipedal primates found the large reptiles to look tasty and their feminine-looking feathers were appealing for tool-making
                >Ate all the non-avian dinosaurs into extinction
                >Only the masculine reptiles (including the avian dinosaurs which were too small, agile and cuckold to be caught) remained alive to the present day
                >The bipedal primates of the modern day are still wondering what actually went wrong

              • 6 months ago
                Anonymous

                she sharpens my stick.

              • 7 months ago
                Anonymous

                >colorful feathers
                Almost always a male trait when only one sex has them.

              • 7 months ago
                Anonymous

                >The most powerful and dominant group of killers the planet has ever conjured before mankind were actually all a bunch of savage flamboyant wieners with teeth.
                Not the kind of win you feather gays think it is. No matter how the science try to spin it, you can’t stop dinosaurs from looking based.

              • 7 months ago
                Anonymous

                I love how this is basically the "b-b-but they don't look COOL with feathers" argument a child would use but with the word cool swapped for based.

              • 7 months ago
                Anonymous

                Where the frick did you get the feather = feminine association. What the frick are you talking about? I hear feathered serpent and think of Quetzalcoatl

              • 6 months ago
                Anonymous

                >Feathers on dinosaurs is a Chinese conspiracy to feminize them just to piss off Anon.
                Based Chinese.

      • 7 months ago
        Anonymous

        But bears didn't have feathers?

    • 7 months ago
      Anonymous

      I don't think bears were around but I remember the old science museum in SF before they tore it down to build an aids memorial with a lawn on the roof had a room with lots of models of giant insects which scared the shit out of 6 year old me

    • 7 months ago
      Anonymous

      the short-faced bear. 12 foot tall standing up. the largest known ancient bear.

      i can see him taking on a dino. and he probably did. any stegosaurus walking by got fricked in the ass.

      • 7 months ago
        Anonymous

        Jesus I knew American education was bad but really?

        • 7 months ago
          Anonymous

          God is real

      • 7 months ago
        Anonymous

        That was in the ice age. Mammals got no bigger than cats while Dinosaurs were still around.

        • 7 months ago
          Anonymous

          So why would they survive while way stronger animals died out?

          • 7 months ago
            Anonymous

            do they really not teach you this at school? the lack of food killed of the big ones.

            • 7 months ago
              Anonymous

              Why would there be a lack of food though? you just told me that the smaller animals survived, so why didn't the big ones eat them?

              • 7 months ago
                Anonymous

                Something the size of a T. Rex is not going to be able to subsist in the long term off of tiny little animals. There's a reason why big predators generally eat big prey. They need a lot of food, and every hunt expends energy. I'd wager a T. Rex or other large predatory dinosaur would expend more energy trying to catch small surviving mammals than they would gain from eating one. All of the larger herbivores would be the first ones to starve, because the impact would have not only directly resulted in vast swathes of their food sources burning to the ground, the impact winter afterwards would kill most of the large plants the large herbivores subsisted off of.
                Small animals can also hide in places the larger ones can't reach. Some could burrow, and some could likely climb trees. And there's also the fact that, at least soon after the impact, these animals wouldn't exactly be thriving. They'd be surviving, and doing better than most others, but they probably wouldn't be common enough to keep the big predators alive.

          • 7 months ago
            Anonymous

            The same way their synapsid ancestors survived the Permian extinction.

          • 7 months ago
            Anonymous

            All mammals on Earth evolved from tiny nocturnal creatures, they were nocturnal because they wouldn't last 5 minutes in the daylight. When the dinosaurs ceased they crawled out of their wholes and grew huge in the sun.

        • 7 months ago
          Anonymous

          There were lineages of mammals as large as 30 lbs in the Cretaceous. And it’s always possible some will be discovered that were larger

      • 7 months ago
        Anonymous

        Why was everything so big back then?

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

        Love the bear's face.

        • 7 months ago
          Anonymous

          >Why was everything so big back then?
          Higher oxygen levels.

          • 7 months ago
            Anonymous

            Why do higher oxygen levels make everything bigger?

            • 7 months ago
              Anonymous

              Because it was easier for them to breathe so they could provide oxygen to their large bodies, and more plants existed to feed the upper levels of the food chain. When oxygen and food become more scarce, being a large animal with a lot of blood that needs to eat a large number of calories every day becomes a liability.

        • 7 months ago
          Anonymous

          >Why was everything so big back then?
          Because we fricking killed them all.
          The human migration on different continents is universally met with decrease in megafauna like elephants and other large herbivores.
          Palaeoloxodon was the biggest land mammal to ever exist and it was wiped at the same time humans started to migrate to eurasian continents. Australia was riddled with megafauna like land crocs, giant komodo dragons, giant wombats, etc. and they all went extinct when aboriginals entered the Australian continent.

          Also this is false statement as we as of current times, have the largest animal to have ever lived, The Blue Whale.

          • 7 months ago
            Anonymous

            Only continent where megafauna wasn't completely culled from us happening was where the homosexual genus originated, big ol' africa and we're now culling the megafauna there for coq powder, tinky metals and edible oil

    • 7 months ago
      Anonymous

      In dinosaur times the bear’s ancestor was like a tree shrew thing

    • 7 months ago
      Anonymous

      >How big were bears in dinosaur times though?
      kek are you like the zoomers who have their minds blown by the fact that the Egyptian pyramids were built thousands of years before Cleopatra was born?

    • 7 months ago
      Anonymous

      You fricking moron

    • 7 months ago
      Anonymous

      >most animals were fricking huge
      bigger animals' bones tend to get fossilized more easily
      "most" animals were probably average sized by today's standards

    • 6 months ago
      Anonymous

      Triassic- mid sized
      Jurassic - a cat
      Cretaceous -barely a blimp

    • 6 months ago
      Anonymous

      Hmm... 4.5 meters tall on the hind legs... 3 tonnes

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