If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(IT World)   Paleontologists are ticked off that dinosaurs in upcoming Jurassic Park 4 won't have feathers   (itworld.com) divider line 29
    More: Asinine, Jurassic Park 4, paleontology, dinosaurs, Jurassic Park, Hollywood, velociraptor, University of Southampton, New Scientist  
•       •       •

2958 clicks; posted to Geek » on 08 Apr 2013 at 6:40 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



Voting Results (Smartest)
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


Archived thread
2013-04-08 11:57:42 PM
3 votes:
Yeah, raptors with feathers would actually be fairly awesome in a big budget film...

www.dinosaur-world.com
www.ucmp.berkeley.edu
blogs.smithsonianmag.com
images.nationalgeographic.com
blogs.nature.com
www.nhm.ac.uk
images.nationalgeographic.com
fascinatingly.com
www.abc.net.au
2013-04-08 06:48:35 PM
3 votes:
They have a problem with the lack of feathers, and not the fact that they are making Jurassic Park 4?

Talk about screwed up priorities.
2013-04-08 06:43:13 PM
3 votes:
They wrote in a plot device to explain why they could take creative license with the dinosaur designs. They spliced frog DNA with the dino DNA so they're not going to be exactly like the dinos from 30 million years ago. And since they already established raptors as not having feathers, it would be internally inconsistent to suddenly give them feathers in the sequel.

You paleo-nerds had hundreds of years to let everyone know that some dinos had feathers. It's too late to whine about the depictions of them now.
2013-04-08 11:42:02 PM
2 votes:
1.bp.blogspot.com

T-Rex with the teeny arms makes a bit more sense like this...
2013-04-08 10:53:51 PM
2 votes:

nocturnal001: Raptors with feathers might be scary, but a Trex would look simply retarded.

As a kid I was a dino fanatic, but as I got older and started keeping reptiles as pets the whole thing was confusing regarding body temperature. Dinos wouldn't be cold blooded and be that large, but being warm blooded without fur/feathers would be a huge waste of energy.


Yeah, whales and elephants have a hell of a time being large, warm-blooded and virtually hairless.
2013-04-08 10:47:19 PM
2 votes:

Dinobot: Next thing you know, they'll complain about the stars were not accurate in the sky during night scenes in the Titanic.

Oh wait...


The cool thing is, Cameron went back and put the correct stars in for the re-release.  What's the excuse for JP4?
2013-04-08 07:30:30 PM
2 votes:

scottydoesntknow: [www.walkingwithdinosaurs.com image 800x400]


Nah, the truth is way more interesting.

imgs.xkcd.com
2013-04-08 07:28:38 PM
2 votes:

scottydoesntknow: [www.walkingwithdinosaurs.com image 800x400]


imgs.xkcd.com

/oblig
//hot like feathery death machines
2013-04-08 07:16:10 PM
2 votes:

scottydoesntknow: [www.walkingwithdinosaurs.com image 800x400]

popcultureasylum.com

And he slashes at you with this. A six inch blade hidden behind his ear.
2013-04-08 07:06:27 PM
2 votes:
Getting the feathers right would make the raptors even more sinister, and the boffins would be tickled pink.
2013-04-09 07:49:42 AM
1 votes:
I don't care whether they are feathered or not.  Just clone them already so we can hunt them.
2013-04-09 01:24:12 AM
1 votes:

ReapTheChaos: Who cares, it's entertainment. Now they'll know how I feel whenever I watch a movie with the U.S. Air Force in it. Just sit there shaking your head thinking; Nope that's wrong. Sorry, it doesn't work that way. Bullshiat, that could never happen.


I watched Red Dawn with a bunch of military guys and they all started laughing when they showed the Nork paratroopers.
2013-04-09 01:16:04 AM
1 votes:

Albinoman: Also, T-rex, allosaurus, etc. are more like giant crocodiles, not running around on land. Powerful tale, legs built for launching, eyes and nostrils at the top of their head. If you look at a T-rex foot, they look like the swimming foot of a crocodile with long, relatively slender bones. Not the small, rounder bones used to support large amounts of weight. Their little "arms" would seem useless, but are perfect when youre belly down scooting along the bottom of a lake or river.


imgs.xkcd.com
2013-04-09 01:00:03 AM
1 votes:

Albinoman: Also, T-rex, allosaurus, etc. are more like giant crocodiles, not running around on land. Powerful tale, legs built for launching, eyes and nostrils at the top of their head. If you look at a T-rex foot, they look like the swimming foot of a crocodile with long, relatively slender bones. Not the small, rounder bones used to support large amounts of weight. Their little "arms" would seem useless, but are perfect when youre belly down scooting along the bottom of a lake or river.


Wut?
2013-04-09 12:19:51 AM
1 votes:
It's sort of fun that folks like to hold onto the idea that dinosaurs were somehow plodding and unsophisticated critters. When they had 135 million years to branch out from their earliest forms. Mammals, sort of had to wait to really branch out into roles, until after the dinosaurs had passed on. In fairness, you can say that mammals have been more successful--in that they have been on the Earth in some form or another, for about 225 million years--but then again, there is also the argument that dinosaurs continued on until today, as warm blooded birds. Yes, they don't exactly rule the world in the same fashion in being in every damn niche, but that continuity does mean that they are damn successful critters, and if you accept the birds ARE dinosaur descendants, then that sort of pushes mammals success into perspective.

The more we learn about sharks, the more we realize that they have sophisticated senses, their chemistry is uniquely suited for their roles, and likewise, crocodilians have a rep for being "primitive" yet oddly enough, they are suited for their roles, and haven't changed much outwardly, because there was little reason to--not when they have adapted to those roles so well, even WITH the die offs that killed so many species. Multiple times. Their senses are tuned to their roles in manners we are just now beginning to really understand, and the more we study these "simple" critters, the more we realize just how sophisticated these critters are.
2013-04-09 12:04:11 AM
1 votes:

hubiestubert: [1.bp.blogspot.com image 850x381]

T-Rex with the teeny arms makes a bit more sense like this...


Nah; While it's tiny cousin Dilong had a coat of filamentous feathers (like Motley Raptor above), there is evidence of mosaic scales on T-Rex samples found.

Chances are either they were born with feathers but shed them as they grew (insulation value diminished with size) or they had areas of their bodies that were featherless.
2013-04-08 11:46:57 PM
1 votes:
I think they could make some really cool looking dinosaurs with sleek feathers. Also have to add to everyone else's Velociraptor beef: Their claws are for latching on to prey and/or puncturing organs.
2013-04-08 11:11:38 PM
1 votes:

Mugato: They wrote in a plot device to explain why they could take creative license with the dinosaur designs. They spliced frog DNA with the dino DNA so they're not going to be exactly like the dinos from 30 million years ago. And since they already established raptors as not having feathers, it would be internally inconsistent to suddenly give them feathers in the sequel.

You paleo-nerds had hundreds of years to let everyone know that some dinos had feathers. It's too late to whine about the depictions of them now.


look, the frog DNA was also what allowed them to gender-morph and start breeding.  You know what the solution to that problem is, my friend?  Bird DNA.  Feathers and all.
2013-04-08 09:03:37 PM
1 votes:

CygnusDarius: Erix: LordJiro: JP would totally be paleontologically accurate if the dinosaurs had feathers! Never mind the acid-spitting dilophosaurs and the Deinonychus-sized velociraptors.

And the Deinonychus-sized Dilophosaurs..

And Dogson.
[images.wikia.com image 500x271]


Nobody cares about Dodgson.
2013-04-08 08:48:18 PM
1 votes:

Erix: LordJiro: JP would totally be paleontologically accurate if the dinosaurs had feathers! Never mind the acid-spitting dilophosaurs and the Deinonychus-sized velociraptors.

And the Deinonychus-sized Dilophosaurs..


And Dogson.
images.wikia.com
2013-04-08 08:42:36 PM
1 votes:

LordJiro: JP would totally be paleontologically accurate if the dinosaurs had feathers! Never mind the acid-spitting dilophosaurs and the Deinonychus-sized velociraptors.


And the Deinonychus-sized Dilophosaurs..
2013-04-08 08:41:20 PM
1 votes:
JP would totally be paleontologically accurate if the dinosaurs had feathers! Never mind the acid-spitting dilophosaurs and the Deinonychus-sized velociraptors.
2013-04-08 08:19:28 PM
1 votes:

Eternal Virgin: I actually want feathered dinosaurs, just to see how they can make them look scary.


If all mammals except for bats went extinct, some far-future paleontologists would be trying to convince its fellows that yes, those ancient grizzly bears and tigers would have been terrifying even though they were covered with fuzzy fur, just like harmless little bats.
2013-04-08 07:40:10 PM
1 votes:
I actually want feathered dinosaurs, just to see how they can make them look scary.
2013-04-08 07:36:49 PM
1 votes:

Mugato: They wrote in a plot device to explain why they could take creative license with the dinosaur designs. They spliced frog DNA with the dino DNA so they're not going to be exactly like the dinos from 30 million years ago. And since they already established raptors as not having feathers, it would be internally inconsistent to suddenly give them feathers in the sequel.

You paleo-nerds had hundreds of years to let everyone know that some dinos had feathers. It's too late to whine about the depictions of them now.


5/10

2013-04-08 07:27:39 PM
1 votes:

scottydoesntknow: Spartapuss: scottydoesntknow: [www.walkingwithdinosaurs.com image 800x400]
[popcultureasylum.com image 400x267]

And he slashes at you with this. A six inch blade hidden behind his ear.

Jesus, it's like Motley Crue gangbanged a raptor.


Jurassic Park, directed by Tim Burton and/or Terry Gilliam.
2013-04-08 06:55:02 PM
1 votes:

fuhfuhfuh: They have a problem with the lack of feathers, and not the fact that they are making Jurassic Park 4?

Talk about screwed up priorities.


JP 3D, a 20 year old movie is making a decent amount of money in theaters right now. If I was a studio suit, I'd be shiatcanned if I didn't greenlight a JP4.
2013-04-08 06:52:17 PM
1 votes:
But as New Scientist explains:

Since the early 1990s, when the first Jurassic Park came out, evidence has mounted that many of its lizard-skinned stars in fact wore feathery bling. The turkey-sized Velociraptor and at least some of the gigantic tyrannosaurs had feathers. A few dinosaurs even had iridescent ones, perhaps for display.

Bling? WTF New Scientist?
2013-04-08 06:51:09 PM
1 votes:

Mugato: 30 million years ago.


~240-65 millions years ago?

/They clearly had feathers but it's canon gee-darnit. No point to change it now.
 
Displayed 29 of 29 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report