Why has there been no good dinosaur documentaries/movies released in the past 15 years?
Furthermore why is the production quality always so low? Every dino doc since BBC's Walking with Dinosaurs looks like a SyFy original movie.
You'd think the effects would improve over the years, but no it seems like the '90s/early 2000s was the peak of dinomatography.
Compare this scene from Walking with Dinosaurs…
…to the same scene copied a few years later for Giants of Patagonia.
Is there any good dino docs that don't have shit production quality?
Why doesn't anyone talk about this movie?
becuz it waz shid
...
Reminder that feathercucks will hang on the day of the rope.
this
fucking kill yourself faggot
jurassic park are not supposed to be accurate so it gets a pass
But why not? Anyway, the question is, why do they keep portaying dinos as reptilid things, when we now know they were much more bird-like?
I want there to be dinosaurs depicted with feathers but the dinos in JP are genetically enchanced themepark monsters not dinos
...
even morso a reason JP should go to feathers is they need to bring the horror back and feathered dinosaurs in the raptor family were actually terrifying imagine tens of this little fucks chasing you if not the big ones
>>>/blacked/
kys
...
kys
People are plebs who don't appreciate true kino
False. The feather shit is speculation. A retarded one at that.
Source? Other than the Archaeopteryx there is none as far as i know.
Feathershit is reddit-tear nonsense on the level of flat-Earthers.
I wouldn't expect a nigger to appreciate true kino
Why do they keep saying that dinos went extinct 65.5 million years ago when we know for a fact that some of those same dinos have existed less than ten thousand years ago?
1. Jurassic Park was such a huge financial and critical success that any other dinosaur film would inevitably get compared to it and called a rip off no matter how different they made. JP's massive success basically killed dinosaurs in films for at least 15 years, so no big budget studio is going to make a dinosaur focused film
2. Most people think feathers on dinosaurs look stupid, even though its scientifically accurate.
WHERE THE HELL IS DINO TIME
I heard that originally it was supposed to be a silent movie where the dinosaurs don't talk and be in the vein of the dinosaur short in Fantasia.
Why even live?
Anyone else wanted this badass dino devil to win?
Kek
lol. If they ask me if dinos had feathers I'll just say they didn't even though I think they did.
You will never catch me, fag.
"When Dinosaurs Roamed America" was a national geographic series released shortly after Walking With Dinosaurs. The other walking with Series are pretty good, especially cavemen. Everything since then has been child-oriented garbage
Liopleurodon wasnt that big. They were using bitemarks on skeletons and attributing them to liopleurodon. And bitemarks grow with skeletons
Not on adults.
And if the attack was successful, not on juveniles either. It's unlikely an attack which goes down to the bone, even if the predator is somehow injured or doesn't kill the prey right away, would end up with the prey surviving.
Sure thing eternal vilo. kys
Actually there are plenty of examples of bite scars on bone which display healing and fusing of the bones. So they must have survived at least a few months.
A bigger issue is them seeing two marks on the same incomplete skeleton and assuming that they correspond to the same wound or that the animal was rigid straight when bitten.
If you want evidence for the size of an animal find skeletal remains and a another complete specimen so that a scalar estimate of the maximum size can be determined from the fragments you have.
sauce: I'm a biostratigrapher and petroleum geologist
more like
You need to back that shit with more sources.
Dinos aren't as popular as they were back in the 90s. The Jurassic Park hype long since died out.
There is one stereotype about carnosaurs in chidrens dinosaur movies I would like to discuss. The carnosaurs are portrayed as mindless monsters while the herbivores are smart and dindu nuffin wrong. In reality carnosaurs were intelligent and smarter than the herbivores due to eating meat. Why is it they portray carnosaurs like this while in other media predatory mammals like wolves and lions are portrayed as intellignet?
The carnosaur is dominant, agressive and individualist. Can't be like that goy, you should relate with the passive and peaceful herd.
...
REPORTED NAZI
This. I showed this picture to my parents awhile back and they laughed out loud.
feathercucks would ruin it
Are you trying to say that the fuzzy fruit loop T. rex doesn't fill you with awe and terror?
Feathers are kino
Feathercucks are the nu-star wars fans of the scientific community.
no mention of Carnosaur! Are you guys for real?
also Carnosaur 3 was pure realistic Kino.
earlier tryannosaurs [sic] had feathers''', the study’s conclusions would mean that tyrannosaurs evolved a feathery coat, only to eventually lose it. The study’s authors believe that the T. rex’s size can help explain the evolutionary shift, Bittel reports.
It makes sense that the largest species of the genius would not have plumage to help insulate. But this still suggests most smaller Tyrannosaurs would have had them. T. Rex is just one species.
this.
I'm sure there would be many variations across continents, climates, and age as well. Baby rex with downy feathers is plausible. Pigeon rex not so much.