Support NeoGAF

[TimeEffect]

#TeamFeathers

What is more badass than a vicious raptor, that is also magnificently covered in beautiful feathers? That's both tough and graceful. The total package.

 

[Charles Foster Kane]

Suck it, feather haters. We all know that THIS is what you want to be false.

All is right in the world.

lol

 

[Charles Foster Kane]

And this:

Might LOOK like it should be this:

But is actually:

It's quite possible we are WAY off the mark in our recreations of dinos. There's only so much that bones can tell us.

Whoa, that's nuts!

 

[Supermanisdead]

This is just cishet white male patriarchy at work

 

[Toxi]

No one outside of super speculative artists thought they were all feathered. This is nothing new.

Yep. This is hilariously presented.

 

[Soulscribe]

I had no idea that there was a possibility that dinosaurs were feathered.

Feathered T-Rex is blowing my mind rn

 

[balladofwindfishes]

Well its not like there are dinosaurs running around today that we could use genetics and rational deduction on to extrapolate the probably appearances of extinct dinosaurs from... oh wait.

Yea, for the dinosaurs that eventually led to birds, the way they're drawn is pretty close to how a bird looks without feathers, or like baby birds with their primitive feathers. The only missing elements would be if they had large fleshy crests or something, but we'd not really easily be able to find that out.

There's a turkey's head. Pretty close to most interpretations of raptors.

 

[Toa TAK]

I had no idea that there was a possibility that dinosaurs were feathered.

Feathered T-Rex is blowing my mind rn

Might've been a pack hunter, too.

 

[Anton Sugar]

Whoa, that's nuts!

Right? I want to see a chunky T-Rex now.

 

[Snaku]

I had no idea that there was a possibility that dinosaurs were feathered.

Feathered T-Rex is blowing my mind rn

I can't wait for the CollectA feathered Rex to be released in a few months.

 

[BokehKing]

Just googled feather t-rex and I'm now highly disturbed

 

[Toxi]

I had no idea that there was a possibility that dinosaurs were feathered.

Feathered T-Rex is blowing my mind rn

Not just a possibility; we have fossils with feather impressions. Lots of them.

Theropod dinosaurs were the ancestors of birds, or rather, birds are dinosaurs.

Might've been a pack hunter, too.

Would be interesting if true, but predators attacking in a group isn't always pack behavior.

 

[Anoregon]

Just googled feather t-rex and I'm now highly disturbed

Yo that dude looks like a boss!

 

[Anton Sugar]

Just googled feather t-rex and I'm now highly disturbed

See, I think that looks AWESOME. Looks like a lion!

 

[Extra Sauce]

Interesting timing. Was the study financed by Comcast?

 

[SigmasonicX]

To add on another mind-blowing thing for people here, a case made that many distinct dinosaurs are actually the same species at different stages of growth. Note that not everyone agrees with Jack Horner on this.

 

[Lorcain]

Not just a possibility; we have fossils with feather impressions. Lots of them.

Theropod dinosaurs were the ancestors of birds, or rather, birds are dinosaurs.

I tell my kids we have a dinosaur feeder on our back porch. They're like, it's just a bird feeder. Exactly. We have a bat house too, but the colorful flying dinosaurs won't let them roost.

 

[Joni]

Not just a possibility; we have fossils with feather impressions. Lots of them.

But not for the T-Rex itself.

 

[Jawmuncher]

See, I think that looks AWESOME. Looks like a lion!

Going Super Saiyan.

 

[Toxi]

But not for the T-Rex itself.

Sure, but it most likely had feathers because we've found another large tyrannosaur with feathers.

 

[Kyleripman]

PS

I actually really like this.

 

[Cow Mengde]

To add on another mind-blowing thing for people here, a case made that many distinct dinosaurs are actually the same species at different stages of growth. Note that not everyone agrees with Jack Horner on this.

This issue will be discussed in a documentary airing on Nat Geo a few days later.

http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?p=166481591&highlight=#post166481591

 

[Ryaaan14]

So only the best ones had feathers.

Great.

 

[Gr1mLock]

I do not condone this featherlust but I must say some of those illustrations are great.

 

[SiegfriedFM]

It's funny how T-Rex has this massive preconception of being the biggest, baddest, meanest thing around. How much of this is because it was identified as an "American" dinosaur? It kind of fits into the 1900's nationalist thing when the idea of dinosaurs took hold in popular science. And then there was the suggestion that it was a carrion eater which mostly used its size to look scary, and there there's pretty good evidence that it pranced around in a feather boa. It's kind of hilarious, actually.

 

[Cow Mengde]

For the record, even though I support feathers on T.rex, that doesn't mean I think it looks like this.

I think its feathering is much more conservative mainly for maintaining body temperature.

 

[Version 3.0]

As for the "cat head is just a skull", there are plenty of dino recreations (particularly larger theropods) that look like the skin is just a miniscule layer over the bone.

Which is what modern reptiles look like, which was my point. It wasn't until after the whole cold-blooded / warm-blooded debate back in the 70's/80's that it was generally accepted that dinosaurs were not only not reptiles, but not very similar to reptiles, either. And then paleontologists and paleo-artists started to question again what these animals looked like alive. But by that time, we already had these world-famous images of how dinosaurs looked, and now science has to contend with that as well as just trying to figure out the truth.

Anyway, these silly images of hippos and turkeys are only pointing out that someone else is wrong. That's easy to do after the same community that described the animals in the first place has also done all the work to show its own errors, and correct them as best possible.

And even though paleo art is running with up-to-date theories, there's no guarantee that they're very close to correct, either. Doesn't mean we should mock them in 20 years. They're working with the information they have, and that is built on 100+ years of other people's work. They're "standing on the shoulders of giants" just as much as people working in other fields.

Well its not like there are dinosaurs running around today that we could use genetics and rational deduction on to extrapolate the probable appearances of extinct dinosaurs from... oh wait.

Once it was realized how closely related birds and dinosaurs were, that process started. It's not the scientific community's fault that the world at large won't let go of outdated imagery. Look at all the anti-feather bitching in every dinosaur thread. How much of that do you suppose is coming from paleontologists? None - they're busy looking at rocks, and doing a pretty damn good job of getting information out of them, if you ask me.

 

[Anton Sugar]

It's funny how T-Rex has this massive preconception of being the biggest, baddest, meanest thing around. How much of this is because it was identified as an "American" dinosaur? It kind of fits into the 1900's nationalist thing when the idea of dinosaurs took hold in popular science. And then there was the suggestion that it was a carrion eater which mostly used its size to look scary, and there there's pretty good evidence that it pranced around in a feather boa. It's kind of hilarious, actually.

lol

 

[billy beane]

I don't care how t-rexs look this is how I'm going to imagine them from now on.

 

[SchrodingerC]

Goddamnit scientists, either clone the dinosaurs or create time travel so we can end this feather debate once and for all.

 

[Toa TAK]

Once it was realized how closely related birds and dinosaurs were, that process started. It's not the scientific community's fault that the world at large won't let go of outdated imagery. Look at all the anti-feather bitching in every dinosaur thread. How much of that do you suppose is coming from paleontologists? None - they're busy looking at rocks, and doing a pretty damn good job of getting information out of them, if you ask me.

It definitely feels like most people are interested in the idea of dinosaurs, then what these animals actually were in reality.

 

[Toxi]

It's funny how T-Rex has this massive preconception of being the biggest, baddest, meanest thing around. How much of this is because it was identified as an "American" dinosaur? It kind of fits into the 1900's nationalist thing when the idea of dinosaurs took hold in popular science.

A few reasons.

• At the time it was discovered, T. rex was the biggest, baddest predatory dinosaur known. Everything larger or the same size was discovered later.
• Much more is known about T. rex than most other predatory dinosaurs its size thanks to tons of well-preserved specimens.
• It was the go-to "evil" dinosaur for the last century. Old habits die hard.
• As you mentioned, it's a North American dinosaur discovered in the US. MURICA
• It looks really cool. Like, just look at T. rex and tell me it doesn't look cool. You can't.

And then there was the suggestion that it was a carrion eater which mostly used its size to look scary, and there there's pretty good evidence that it pranced around in a feather boa. It's kind of hilarious, actually.

Tyrannosaurus was probably a "carrion eater" in the same way lions today are carrion eaters; it scavenged when the opportunity presented itself, and hunted otherwise. The only tetrapod obligate scavengers are the different kinds of vultures, and those have the advantage of being able to fly great distances without much effort. An animal as large as Tyrannosaurus would have also had a lot more trouble feeding itself just scavenging.

You also run into the problem of "Which animal is Tyrannosaurus stealing kills from?" There aren't any other large predators known from the Hell Creek Formation. I can't imagine Tyrannosaurus would be able to survive just scavenging the kills of tiny Troodontids or Dromaeosaurs.

 

[MisterGrey3000]

Ok...as it was stated earlier in the thread...
Paleontologist and anybody else who actually cares about dinosaurs don't believe that every single major group within dinosauria sported feathers; it's honestly unreasonable to think so considering how many large mammals are completely hairless or sport incredibly fine coats of fur.
However, very recent discoveries of little ornithopods (like the Jurassic's Kulindadromeus) with full fluffy coats of feathers have brought fourth the idea that feathers are probably a basal trait that might have been much more widespread throughout the three major groups than we once thought.

 

[OmegaX]

PS

I think I hate you.

Spoiler

I don't hate feathered dinosaurs but T-Rex shouldn't be a giant chicken

 

[FunkyDealer]

Feathers is love.

 

[MisterGrey3000]

Applying this to a human skelleton would actually create a somewhat accurate human being, don't you think? I mean, Anthropology and all that.

Maybe that's part of the problem? It more or less makes sense for humans, but not for animals.

Not really.
A lot of what makes humans look human is the copious amounts of fat, fur (fine or thick), muscle, cartilage, and skin we've got on our bodies; I mean, living breathing human apes don't look like shrink-wrapped museum skeletons.
Just think about the fact that our skull doesn't even represent that we've got relatively large protruding noses in comparison to many other primates and even our cousins (chimps, gorillas, etc.). Or the fact that our large round ears aren't represented either.
Shrink-wrapping a human skeleton (with the mindset of something that isn't a synapsid or maybe not even a vertebrate) would probably look just as unnatural and off the mark as it does with those other examples.

 

[jett]

That's all John Conway, an artist who tries to reimagine how dinosaurs looked and behaved. Those pics are from his book, All Yesterdays:



This guy did some of the illustrations, too, and has a cool tumblr:





Here's Conway's take on the domesticated cat, as incorrectly interpreted by future scientists:

That is really great.

 

[Shaanyboi]

Gonna post what I posted on another forum about this

-The authors do not contest the presence of feathers in Theropoda (JP terms: t-rex/raptors/gallimimus/etc)
-The authors contest the presence of true feathers or protofeathers in Ornithischia (stegosaur/ankylosaur/iguanodon/'ceratops) but do not contest that Orniths have developed other filamentous structures (as in Psittacosaurus or Tianyulong, ceratopsians for which we have skin impressions demonstrating these structures) - they're just saying these structures did not turn into the feathers of modern day birds
-They used pterosaurs as an outgroup. Pterosaurs aren't particularly scaly, and their own filamentous structures (pycnofiber hairs) probably developed independently of dinosaur feathering or other integumentary structures, as in the reason they developed those structures might have been completely different (related to their surface area issues and of course flight!)
-The paper mainly wanted to push forward the revolutionary idea that the ancestral dinosaur species were scaly, not feathered or featuring other special integument accessories
-Sedimentology has a strong effect on what is preserved, and many integument specimens cannot even be found (many complete fossils, as in just the BONES, cannot be found). This paper is a caution against overinterpretation (ex. when psittacosaurus was found, some people started going "well maybe they are all fuzzy")
-If you are curious about the sauropod group: there are some preserved embryos of one species with scaly skin
-This write-up of the paper assumes a LOT more than what the paper actually says, even from the first sentence.

Here's a listserv conversation about this work (pre-publication so not all data available) from way back in December 2013: http://dml.cmnh.org/2013Dec/msg00187.html

Here is the present conversation about the finished paper (but it doesn't say much yet): http://dml.cmnh.org/2015Jun/msg00015.html

PS

that picture makes me very happy

 

[Zetta]

PS

Holy hell the T-Rex ;ppls a lot like the Fat Chocobo from FFXIV. Now the T-Rex is adorable and nothing more, I mean just look at this.

 

[ibyea]

Didn't they know this already? Feathered dinosaurs seemed mainly like a therapod dinosaur thing.

Edit: Looks like I missed this additional info:

Gonna post what I posted on another forum about this

-The authors do not contest the presence of feathers in Theropoda (JP terms: t-rex/raptors/gallimimus/etc)
-The authors contest the presence of true feathers or protofeathers in Ornithischia (stegosaur/ankylosaur/iguanodon/'ceratops) but do not contest that Orniths have developed other filamentous structures (as in Psittacosaurus or Tianyulong, ceratopsians for which we have skin impressions demonstrating these structures) - they're just saying these structures did not turn into the feathers of modern day birds
-They used pterosaurs as an outgroup. Pterosaurs aren't particularly scaly, and their own filamentous structures (pycnofiber hairs) probably developed independently of dinosaur feathering or other integumentary structures, as in the reason they developed those structures might have been completely different (related to their surface area issues and of course flight!)
-The paper mainly wanted to push forward the revolutionary idea that the ancestral dinosaur species were scaly, not feathered or featuring other special integument accessories
-Sedimentology has a strong effect on what is preserved, and many integument specimens cannot even be found (many complete fossils, as in just the BONES, cannot be found). This paper is a caution against overinterpretation (ex. when psittacosaurus was found, some people started going "well maybe they are all fuzzy")
-If you are curious about the sauropod group: there are some preserved embryos of one species with scaly skin
-This write-up of the paper assumes a LOT more than what the paper actually says, even from the first sentence.

Here's a listserv conversation about this work (pre-publication so not all data available) from way back in December 2013: http://dml.cmnh.org/2013Dec/msg00187.html

Here is the present conversation about the finished paper (but it doesn't say much yet): http://dml.cmnh.org/2015Jun/msg00015.html

PS

That picture is hilarious.

 

[Ecotic]

I'd love it if dinosaurs looked totally off from anything we could have expected.

 

[kswiston]

I don't think there was ever much evidence for extending feathers to all dinos. Several groups of Theropods conclusively had them (including the lines leading to Tyrannosaurs and all of the Raptors).

Velociraptor has feather barbs on its ulna (same as birds do) so there's no taking that one back to the land of scales.

 

[Anton Sugar]

Dino-GAF, assemble!

(it's Cow's dino OT)

 

[Timedog]

Wow, science flip-flops again. Can't trust a scientist, they be making stuff up, and getting me pissed

 

[Gambit 1138]

This makes the Jurassic Park series's work a lot easier. They can easily explain away why the carnivores don't have feathers (which they heavily allude to in Jurassic World) and the rest of the animals are consistent with scientific research anyway. See everything works out in the end.

 

[StayDead]

Yea, for the dinosaurs that eventually led to birds, the way they're drawn is pretty close to how a bird looks without feathers, or like baby birds with their primitive feathers. The only missing elements would be if they had large fleshy crests or something, but we'd not really easily be able to find that out.

There's a turkey's head. Pretty close to most interpretations of raptors.

I always knew those damn Turkeys were up to something. Raptors are said to be known for their smarts. It's only a matter of time before the turkeys rebel. There's even one in my garden right now and for some reason it's staring at me... *looks to the side*

 

[David Incorporated Esq.]

I think its feathering is much more conservative mainly for maintaining body temperature.

This. The idea of a heavily feathered T-Rex is pretty ridiculous because they were massive animals, and massive animals need all the help they can get shedding heat.

 

[Gambit 1138]

Just googled feather t-rex and I'm now highly disturbed

that doesn't look very scary! more like a 6 foot turkey!

 

[maniac-kun]

To add on another mind-blowing thing for people here, a case made that many distinct dinosaurs are actually the same species at different stages of growth. Note that not everyone agrees with Jack Horner on this.

What the f. O_O

 

[Chuckie]

This looks awesome!

This looks like a retarded gorilla though.

But this one is of course the best!