Wolf89 Posted June 18, 2018 Share Posted June 18, 2018 http://westerndigs.org/t-rex-didnt-have-feathers-new-study-of-fossil-skin-finds/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Amateur Paleontologist Posted June 18, 2018 Share Posted June 18, 2018 That theory is somewhat debated.. There are some who argue that large theropods could have had both feathered and non-feathered areas on their body. Opalised fossils are the best: a wonderful mix between paleontology and mineralogy! Q. Where do dinosaurs study? A. At Khaan Academy!... My ResearchGate profile Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Troodon Posted June 18, 2018 Share Posted June 18, 2018 A discussion we had on this subject. Feathered Tyrannosaurids are out, question is to the degree of fuzz they had. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Amateur Paleontologist Posted June 18, 2018 Share Posted June 18, 2018 @Troodon So it was basically part-fuzz and part-scales, right? Opalised fossils are the best: a wonderful mix between paleontology and mineralogy! Q. Where do dinosaurs study? A. At Khaan Academy!... My ResearchGate profile Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Troodon Posted June 18, 2018 Share Posted June 18, 2018 8 minutes ago, The Amateur Paleontologist said: @Troodon So it was basically part-fuzz and part-scales, right? Yes that's where current research is point us Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Miocene_Mason Posted June 18, 2018 Share Posted June 18, 2018 1 hour ago, Troodon said: question is to the degree of fuzz they had. One has to wonder why. Camouflage? Sexual selection? Vestigial? “...whilst this planet has gone cycling on according to the fixed law of gravity, from so simple a beginning endless forms most beautiful and most wonderful have been and are being evolved.” ~ Charles Darwin Happy hunting, Mason Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Amateur Paleontologist Posted June 18, 2018 Share Posted June 18, 2018 3 minutes ago, WhodamanHD said: One has to wonder why. Camouflage? Sexual selection? Vestigial? Maybe a mix of all three, somehow? Opalised fossils are the best: a wonderful mix between paleontology and mineralogy! Q. Where do dinosaurs study? A. At Khaan Academy!... My ResearchGate profile Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Troodon Posted June 18, 2018 Share Posted June 18, 2018 46 minutes ago, WhodamanHD said: One has to wonder why. Camouflage? Sexual selection? Vestigial? 42 minutes ago, The Amateur Paleontologist said: Maybe a mix of all three, somehow? Good question and yes possibly all three who knows Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Auspex Posted June 18, 2018 Share Posted June 18, 2018 Unfortunately, "feather" is far too specific a word to use when discussing dinosaurian dermal integuments. There is no functional reason for an earth-bound creature to incur the metabolic cost of growing (and maintaining) vaned feathers (of the sort that the word brings to mind). Keratinous dermal integuments of both fibrous and of downy nature would be the most I would expect to find, as they could conceivably serve a survival or reproductive purpose, and would thus have had evolutionary pressure shaping their development. "There has been an alarming increase in the number of things I know nothing about." - Ashleigh Ellwood Brilliant “Try to learn something about everything and everything about something.” - Thomas Henry Huxley >Paleontology is an evolving science. >May your wonders never cease! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wolf89 Posted June 18, 2018 Author Share Posted June 18, 2018 28 minutes ago, Auspex said: Unfortunately, "feather" is far too specific a word to use when discussing dinosaurian dermal integuments. There is no functional reason for an earth-bound creature to incur the metabolic cost of growing (and maintaining) vaned feathers (of the sort that the word brings to mind). Keratinous dermal integuments of both fibrous and of downy nature would be the most I would expect to find, as they could conceivably serve a survival or reproductive purpose, and would thus have had evolutionary pressure shaping their development. Though it makes sense, why would flightless birds like ostriches, kiwis, chickens, penguins cassowaries and emus grow them? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Auspex Posted June 18, 2018 Share Posted June 18, 2018 1 hour ago, Wolf52893 said: Though it makes sense, why would flightless birds like ostriches, kiwis, chickens, penguins cassowaries and emus grow them? They don't. Their 'feathers' they have are not vaned, but are structured in ways that are beneficial to their habitat and lifestyle. This is a good proof to my point, as they are descended from flighted birds, and adapted the structures that had no use into something that did. "There has been an alarming increase in the number of things I know nothing about." - Ashleigh Ellwood Brilliant “Try to learn something about everything and everything about something.” - Thomas Henry Huxley >Paleontology is an evolving science. >May your wonders never cease! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.