Why do so many large prehistoric animals end up being downsized?

Why do so many large prehistoric animals end up being downsized?

  1. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Paleontologists are retards who can't measure things correctly.

  2. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    I kinda wish dinosaurs actually had headache-inducing strobe coloration and made loud, nausea-inducing sounds just so that they triggered every autist away and ruined any enjoyment of the field they had forever.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous
    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      This and all the males wore t-shirts that had "bimbo slut" written on them in glitter

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      We should grind all those bones into chinese potency powder and then just pretend they never existed and autists just dreamt it all up.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        Nah, chinks realized they'd make way more money using magic marker to draw on "feather" streaks.

  3. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Smells like deranged chud in here

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      wash your cunt, dirty bitch

  4. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    fossil whales are the only thing that seem to be immune to it

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      Which whales are you referring to?

  5. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Cuz half the time these creatures end up being known from a single vertebra or something. So they infer the size based off it and everyone always takes high-end estimates and runs with it cuz it's epic.

  6. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    These new estimates are getting out of hand

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      The sauropods are re-evolving. Nature is healing!

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      Took me a while to figure out what I was looking at.

  7. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    >Cope
    Seems like he predicted the future.

  8. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    why do you know absolutely nothing about dinosaurs aside from their shallow exterior appearance?

    are you a child?

  9. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    A better question is why do so many paleo"artists" insist on making dinosaurs as ugly and deformed as possible?

  10. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Less food due to environment condition/competition. Smaller ones survive. Tale as old as time

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      I was referring to size estimates inferred from fossils. A lot these change dramatically.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        Ah. I think that’s partially a result of early fossil study being the domain of amateurs and people whose job was to drum up publicity, along with autists looking for just bigger and bigger animals even if they don’t exist.

        Partially also result of improved technique though that should necessarily cause bias in one direction… unless that’s the interesting direction, as per my first point.

        Large dinosaurs have large remains, which get preserved fully far less.

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          >Large dinosaurs have large remains, which get preserved fully far less.
          lol

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            It’s true. You get one bone from a giant dinosaur go figure what the damn thing looked like.

            • 1 month ago
              Anonymous

              does it make you comfortable to think that?

              like you got things pretty well figured out?

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                ?

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                I'm asking if that makes you feel safe and secure?

                thinking that larger animals are less likely to be completely fossilized, or that scientists usually only get one bone to go by, or that they can't tell from one bone what an animal looked like?

                do you feel good thinking these things? Do they make you happy?

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                Why would I feel any of those things? I’m not getting what you want from me

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                >The tortoise lays on its back, its belly baking in the hot sun, beating its legs trying to turn itself over, but it can't. Not without your help. But you're not helping.

                nothing you believe is true, so I'm curious if it makes you feel good to believe it.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                Why are you shitting up the thread? Just say you disagree and move on. Nobody cares about the rando anon #62662525262 on Wauf that rejects the entirety of settled science

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                Why are you shitting up the thread? Just say you disagree and move on. Nobody cares about the rando anon #62662525262 on Wauf that rejects the entirety of settled science

                [...]
                [...]
                [...]
                Are you a woman?
                You talk like one. That passive-agressive pseudo-sassy and full of smugness. Can't be direct and talk like a man

                I don't mind trolling, I do mind the poor level of discussion going on here.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            does it make you comfortable to think that?

            like you got things pretty well figured out?

            I'm asking if that makes you feel safe and secure?

            thinking that larger animals are less likely to be completely fossilized, or that scientists usually only get one bone to go by, or that they can't tell from one bone what an animal looked like?

            do you feel good thinking these things? Do they make you happy?

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

            >The tortoise lays on its back, its belly baking in the hot sun, beating its legs trying to turn itself over, but it can't. Not without your help. But you're not helping.

            nothing you believe is true, so I'm curious if it makes you feel good to believe it.

            Are you a woman?
            You talk like one. That passive-agressive pseudo-sassy and full of smugness. Can't be direct and talk like a man

            • 1 month ago
              Anonymous

              I'm trying to figure out if you guys are bots or just really dumb.
              I'm not trying to argue facts with you. That's stupid.

              Why are you shitting up the thread? Just say you disagree and move on. Nobody cares about the rando anon #62662525262 on Wauf that rejects the entirety of settled science

              >rejects the entirety of settled science
              Like the fact that larger dinosaurs are much more likely to be preserved, and much more completely than smaller ones?
              or the fact that a single bone diagnostic to genus or family is easily enough to tell what an animal looked like?
              or the fact that we have more complete sauropod skeletons than virtually any other group of dinosaurs?

              these are facts. It's odd for anyone to not know them, let alone deny them. Or claim that they're the opposite of "settled science."

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                >Like the fact that larger dinosaurs are much more likely to be preserved, and much more completely than smaller ones?
                Not him, but really? I didn't know that.

            • 1 month ago
              Anonymous

              It's probably paleoperiod. She always enters every thread with the most insane chip on her shoulder and shits the entire thread up.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                >shits the entire thread up.
                yes, your threads full of lies and fiction are so good. Keep up the great work!

                you know how you hate it when someone says something stupid and wrong like
                >dinosaurs got big because more oxygen in the atmosphere

                that's how I feel about almost everything you post. Stupid and wrong. What do you get out of being stupid and wrong all day every day?

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                Not my thread.

                >you know how you hate it when someone says something stupid and wrong like
                >dinosaurs got big because more oxygen in the atmosphere
                >that's how I feel about almost everything you post.

                The key difference between us is that you never present any arguments. Just name calling, cancel culture bullshit "SILENCE HIM!!!", spamming threads trying to derail them, etc. I not only present my arguments, I back them up with papers, charts, images and weblinks.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                >The key difference between us is that you never present any arguments.
                your failure to understand arguments is not my failure to provide them.

                I would love it if you understood what I say, as any intelligent child could. But sadly you're retarded. Like talking to a brick wall.

                >I back them up with papers, charts, images and weblinks.
                none of which you understand. It would be funny if you didn't do it constantly for years straight.
                as it is, it's just sad.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                See? You spent your entire pointless post just calling names. Adding nothing whatsoever to the board. You're like an addict. Literally, and I can not stress this enough, TAKE YOUR FUCKING MEDS.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                >You spent your entire pointless post just calling names.
                You are stupid and annoying.

                I want you to know that every time you come here until you eventually go away. Go be stupid and annoying somewhere else. You are not wanted here.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                Name calling doesn't affect me. You're wasting your breath. If you'd like to present an actual fucking argument, you could actually add something to these discussions other than college lib culture bullshit.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                >Name calling doesn't affect me
                neither does facts or reason

                you're a turd. Impervious to everything but a shower.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            Ah. I think that’s partially a result of early fossil study being the domain of amateurs and people whose job was to drum up publicity, along with autists looking for just bigger and bigger animals even if they don’t exist.

            Partially also result of improved technique though that should necessarily cause bias in one direction… unless that’s the interesting direction, as per my first point.

            Large dinosaurs have large remains, which get preserved fully far less.

            >YOU'RE HUGE
            >THAT MEANS YOU HAVE HUGE GUTS

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            Why has this post garnered so much hatred? Why would a big bone preserve less well than a small bone?

            • 1 month ago
              Anonymous

              big bones demonstrably outnumber small ones in the fossil record by thousands to one.

              the post got a lot of attention because the dinofans here are a batch of idiots.

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          Cuz half the time these creatures end up being known from a single vertebra or something. So they infer the size based off it and everyone always takes high-end estimates and runs with it cuz it's epic.

          Correct

          >Large dinosaurs have large remains, which get preserved fully far less.
          lol

          Retard that doesn’t know the history of paleontology and the development of vertebrae analysis, but still has to shit up the post

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            >vertebrae analysis
            do tell

            • 1 month ago
              Anonymous

              Eg pic related

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                what's that got to do with "vertebrae"?

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        well A. fragillimus was because we originally thought it was a diplodocid, so it was given diplodocid proportions resulting in the gigantic size. Then we realised it was a rebbachisaurid

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      Dumbass

Your email address will not be published.