6 ms·
Small horned dinosaur from China, a Triceratops relative, walked on two feet
- labster 7y agoI'm glad with articles like this and others recently[1], academia is finally taking the possibility of lizardmen seriously. [1]: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19707426 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19707426
- i_feel_great 7y agoAnd one day, we may encounter them as dramatized in Star Trek https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Distant_Origin https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Distant_Origin
- SantalBlush 7y agoLooks bizarre at first, but then you start to see the similarities to a bird.
- ahje 7y agoYeah, add feathers and it'll almost look like a chicken. The question is if that's just the illustrator's bias, or if they actually did look like that.
- singularity2001 7y agoMany dinosaurs had feathers, can it be ruled out for this critter?
- senectus1 7y agoAm I reading too much into the picture? the thing has a "Red" head... just a coincidental color or yet another bit of Chinese propaganda?
- nkozyra 7y agoYou are reading too much into the picture.
- senectus1 7y agook fair enough.
- dang 7y agoPlease keep nationalistic flamebait off this site. It leads to nationalistic flamewars, which we've had enough of here. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
- ohso 7y agoThat is extremely cool and they look extremely grumpy from that photo.
- phil248 7y agoKids these days get to grow up with much cooler dinosaurs. They've found like eight sauropods larger than the brontosaurus since I was a kid in the 90's. And now brontosaurus isn't even a species, they changed it to a genus!
- apatosaurus 7y agoNo, brontosaurus turned out to be an incorrectly assembled/restored partial skeleton with incorrect skulls substituted when unavailable, including bones from two different animals (apatosaurus and diplodocus or brachiosaurus), to depict a single animal. This naming fiasco happened starting around 1969 and validity opinions became widely held toward the end of the 1980's. That's why Jurassic Park went with brachiosaurus as the lead sauropod. Brontosaurus, for a period of time, was viewed as incorrect and the product of archeological errors. Since then, naming conventions have re-adopted brontosaurus as a subtype of apatosaurus to alleviate some of the confusion as to whether brontosaurus is a valid dinosaur name. As of 2015, opinions have solidified with deeper context and better data. It's sort of like the rebellion against whether Pluto is the ninth planet or not. So many people just like the name, brontosaurus, that there's been a consensus to squeeze it back into a usable, valid place that doesn't leave the world confused and dismayed.
- fhars 7y agoBrontosaurus has always either been a genus or a younger sysnonym. The most prominent species of that genus has always been Brontosaurus excelsus, apart from the few years up to 2014, when it was Apatosaurus excelsus,
- jaclaz 7y agoJFYI ;-): https://tinyapps.org/blog/200702250700_why_in_my_day.html https://tinyapps.org/blog/200702250700_why_in_my_day.html
- hunglee2 7y agoFor anyone interested in anatomically accurate depictions of dinosaurs, head over to Dr Mark Witton's blog. He is a palaeontological researcher AND paleoartist. https://markwitton-com.blogspot.com/ https://markwitton-com.blogspot.com/