HOME | DD
Boverisuchus β Dinos had feathers.
Published: 2010-10-15 11:09:51 +0000 UTC; Views: 9873; Favourites: 225; Downloads: 19
Redirect to original
Description
I get really sick of stupid people whining about how "feathers make dinosaurs look gay/retarded", or creationists denying they had them. I dont freaking care if it makes them look scarier.GUESS WHAT BITCHES?
DINOSAURS HAD FEATHERS!
So tough titties, that's what they looked like.
Related content
Comments: 334
π: 0 β©: 0
We really need to see the more currently accurate image of how dinosaurs looked in cinemas. It's not really a place where people go to generally for facts, but continuing to use the old Jurassic Park looks based on outdated scientific models will just continue to confuse and mislead the public.
π: 0 β©: 1
I agree totally. But Jurassic World may be the wrong format to bring this in, we need a new series of blockbuster films or at least one new film that does justice to scary feathered dinosaurs. I had an idea a while ago that you could have a Yutyrannus-type dinosaur menacing a bunch of hikers that take refuge in a cabin in the Yukon, etc.
π: 0 β©: 0
π: 0 β©: 2
Dinos are birds nevertheless, love it! Been in love with them since a kid and birds. Makes sense
π: 0 β©: 0
Where, where was I insinuating that ALL dinosaurs had feathers? I wasn't.
π: 0 β©: 1
π: 0 β©: 0
Gonna be honest, I think at least a lot of them did.Β
But to be fair, there's still a lot about them we don't know - how do we know they actually roared, for instance? For all we know, they could've spoke fluent German.
π: 1 β©: 1
Judging from how alligators and birds make noises, they probably didn't roar at all.
π: 1 β©: 1
Not all only derived coelurosaurs had them
π: 0 β©: 1
How do you define feathers? Broad definition = Pterosaurs and all Dinosaurs had them, narrow definition = not even Sinosauropteryx has them.
π: 0 β©: 1
The ones observed in coelurosaurs. Also saying all dinosaurs had them is way too far
π: 0 β©: 1
What do you call the "feathers" that we see in other dinosaurs like Kulindadromeus or Psittacosaurus or Tianyulong? Or the fuzz of pterosaurs? All of these greatly resemble the most primitive kinds of feathers or what those are hypothesized to look like. Also, why does it matter what we call a feather in this case, small ornithischian were fuzzy, pterosaurs were fuzzy, and so were coelurosaurs, just because we call something a "feather" does not devalue it's importance.
Why are we making this distinction even? For the sake of accuracy/semantics? Or because we don't want dinosaurs other than Coelurosaurs to have them?
I was not saying that all dinosaurs have them, I was saying that the broad definition would mean that the common ancestor of pterosaurs and dinosaurs had them, and that all dinosaurs could have them, but many would have evolved to lose them at a larger size? Also, Sauropods, Tyrannosaurs, Hadrosaurs and Ankylosaurs all existed at the poles at various times as different species (and it was cold for part of the year), what if these kinds DID have feathers but the southern kinds did not? Does this ruin your idea of these animals?
I am really getting an anti-feather-pundit vibe from you. I would like you to explain why you care so much about my statements on the definition of feathers in dinosaurs etc.
π: 0 β©: 0
They still do.Β It's for this reason that I nicknamed the cardinal that lives in the tree right off my parents' balcony "Cardinalsaurus."
π: 0 β©: 0
except that these "fanboys" are very uncommonΒ and there isn't many.
π: 0 β©: 0
Anyone who things that dinosaurs aren't scary anymore since they have feathers clearly has never seen a cassowary, or goose.
π: 1 β©: 1
They Β found a dinosaur tail covered in feathers Β in amber last year but people still deny that some of them Β had feathers because " They aren't as badass as the evil lizards in Jurassic Park. " despite Β that birds as a species are really cool; Even when I was little I had to argue with people that a lot of dinosaurs are the ancestors of birds.Β
π: 0 β©: 0
I wonder if there are feathered reconstructions of an Anklyosaurus, an Alamosaurus, or even a Saurolophus.
π: 0 β©: 1
I have one in a size chart, (a fluffy ankylosaur and sauropod) but it wasn't meant seriously
π: 0 β©: 0
Theropods were chickens, and they need get over it. If they want featherless dinos, they still have Sauropods.
Also, I was an HUGE Dino fan back when I was a kid, I was buying every Dinosaur toys I could find "but mostly Theropods", and I would fangirl HARD everytime I found a feathered Dino toy, which was even more unlikely than today.
π: 0 β©: 1
Glad you do !
π: 0 β©: 1
There is still a possibility sauropods must have had some too, maybe in the form of whiskers, much like that of a whale.
π: 0 β©: 1
Yeah, but not like COVERED of feathers like a burd.
I don't think people would complain about a few barely visible whiskers.
π: 0 β©: 1
I think whiskers would make them more interesting actually.
π: 0 β©: 1
Same, but you know Dinosaur fantards : they hate everything that doesn't look like a Jurassic Park Dino.
I even saw a guy hating the real Spinosaurus because he really was a fisher, and was saying "I want the old Spino back !"... Ugh.
π: 0 β©: 1
And you got the people who still stick to the quad spino, even though it was proven to be a mistake. And when they do draw the quad spino, the hands are pronated like thisΒ [link]
π: 0 β©: 1
Really ? The quad Spino was proven wrong ? Good to know, I'll come back at drawing the Spino on two legs.
Good for me, because last time I drew the Spino on all four, it looked super awkward. -----> orig12.deviantart.net/5008/f/2β¦
π: 0 β©: 0
I constantly find myself in debates with friends and colleagues about this issue. They always throw this at me "well it isn't possible to know what dinosaurs really look like they're just bones!" And I have to keep pointing out the existence of skin and feather impressions. After that, they just keep coming back to "Jurassic park, Jurassic Park, JURASSIC PARK!" Cause who could argue with the extremely up-to-date Jurassic Park? (made in 1993 by the way)
As a Jurassic Park fan, I am disappointed in them.
π: 0 β©: 0
.................people throw a fit over this? Seriously? Considering NOW I can imagine the T-rex as this gorgeous creature with lots of colors?Β
π: 0 β©: 1
Some people want dinosaurs to look and act bad-ass all the time, so they think feathered predatory dinosaurs look un-cool and wussy. These people probably don't fully understand that all dinosaurs are/were animals, and they didn't spend 100% of their time chasing things and roaring loudly. Animals sleep, poop, get sick etc, lots of things that are not bad-ass. People think lions are bad-ass, but male lions have very brief orgasms, people think gorillas are bad-ass, but the males actually have embarrassingly tiny penises (I'm not joking). Animals are animals, no animal is a perfectly designed movie monster.
π: 1 β©: 0
I'm probably only person here who don't support feathered dinosaurs.
π: 0 β©: 2
Why not? The new discoveries prove they had feathers and filaments.
π: 0 β©: 1
I know but I still prefer featherless dinos.
π: 0 β©: 1
That's okay, you can like what you like, I just have a problem with spreading around inaccuracy. That's all.
π: 0 β©: 0
Do you want an award or something?
π: 0 β©: 1
Well tough nuts, you're not getting one.
π: 0 β©: 1
I totally agree with this! I made a small rant about it with this picture. XDΒ
denece-the-sylcoe.deviantart.cβ¦
I think dinosaurs with feathers look even cooler and more beautiful. People really need to get over it. Dinosaurs are not solely movie monsters deigned to inspire terror, they were REAL animals and ACTUALLY existed and science doesn't give a damn about you "childhood". That's how science works, it changes as new evident is brought to light.Β
π: 0 β©: 1
Totally true.
π: 0 β©: 0
A lot of depictions of feathered dinosaurs look like they have MOHAWKS. Punk rocker Velociraptors, HELL YEAH!
π: 0 β©: 0
I think feathered dinosaurs sometimes look 'scarier' than those without them x3 i have nothing wrong with people drawing them or portraying them in moves with or without feathers.
π: 0 β©: 1
| Next =>