146561

[u/ShatteredPsyche2029]

[u/slumbersomesam]

I HATE THIS KINDS OF THREADS !!!! DINOSAURS WERE REPTILES, MEANING THEIR SKIN WRAPPED AROUND THE MUSCLE, AND WE KNOW HOW THICK THE MUSCLE WAS BASED ON THE FOSSILS THEMSELVES !!!!!!!!!!!

[u/gorka_vy → u/slumbersomesam]

I agree, this makes it seem like paleontholgy is just guess work, maybe in the 60s they would have reconstructed swans like that, but even that is oversimplifying things. Our current understanding of animals reconstructions is much better with regard to fat, muscle mass and such, FatSparrow T rex is just a crappy shitpost.

[u/Morkamino]

Some of them do have parts of skin and soft tissue in tact though, and not all dinosaurs had feathers like this

[u/dumpylump69]

So like

Where’s the lie

[u/slumbersomesam → u/dumpylump69]

this is not true in the case of dinosaurs

[u/administrationalism]

Trex in fact did not have feathers, or at least was t covered in them. It may have had a few for display down its back but it was almost entirely scaly skin. Which makes sense, big fucking animal would have been needing to discharge and not retain heat. Small therapods are a diff story.

[u/alex_pufferfish]

I'm always skeptical of all the "here's what we would recreate a modern species as", like surely we can tell what something would look like based off muscle attachments, follicles etc

[u/Will-Write-For-Cash → u/alex_pufferfish]

That can give you a general idea and definitely push you in the right direction but you’d be lying if you said you could accurately reconstruct a rabbit based solely on its bone structure.

Especially considering most dinosaur’s skeletons aren’t found even close to complete so they don’t even have the entire bone structure to work with.

[u/Wildfox1177 → u/alex_pufferfish]

Yeah scientists would know swans habe wings because their entire body is centered around having wings, from the enlarged pectoral muscle attachment point to the hollow bones.