Feathered dinos are cool as shit.
Why is the youtube link from the alt-text dead?
Industrial grade borb
I want to see it all fluffed up for winter.
Holy fluffin chirpball !!
CAN THEY LOAF?
They look way more badass with feathers.
It’s time to grow up and accept the truth
Anyone who complains about this are the same people who whinged about the change of Pluto’s status as a planet.
In that, they are clinging to nostalgia instead of embracing a new, wondrous truth. Feathers and fur on dinosaurs shows an entirely new way of imagining the world before us, just like Pluto’s downgrade was simply because we found potentially thousands of more Pluto’s.
I think a lot of people broadly are insecure about change right now. Stability feels precious, and this nostalgic retreat is being leveraged by anti-science groups.
For real though - people will insist that Pluto is a planet but not even know about Eris.
Ceres is super cool though I will always have a spot for Pluto.
Makemake is rad though, so fast it warped.
Except when you actually read about the change in Pluto’s status and how unscientific it actually is.
Oh? Do explain, and pretend I don’t actually know a lot about planetary science.
Edit: Looked at user history and .ml suffix. I shouldn’t be surprised at this kind of take, nor hold my breath for a smart answer.
It’s because the definition includes things that aren’t really about the object itself and more about where it is. And also how inconsistent it is, as Mercury isn’t in hydrostatic equilibrium and yet is explicitly included as a planet by the IAU. Nevermind the fact that the new definition was speed voted and approved by less than 400 astronomers in a convention where 2500+ people attended, let alone not even being discussed with the larger scientific community.
But hey, if you’d rather dismiss my points because of an url, you do you. Not like this changes our everyday live anyway.
Okay you googled what classifies a planet and saw the line about mercury, I am familiar but not sure how that makes any of this “unscientific.” Mercury mostly fits the criteria, pluto definitely does not.
I’m just confused how anyone has a problem with this, nothing is perfect, nothing has hard boundaries but we have to draw lines somewhere or we have solar system models where when we say “planet” we include 90 other objects that are very far removed from each other, besides being “somewhat roundish.”
I’m perfectly fine with 400 astronomers deciding to draw a line somewhere, they’re ones doing the goddamn work. I’m sure there’s a share of people seeking attention pretending to be outraged, but why give those voices power? If you’re an astronomer doing planetary science, you need to define different kinds of bodies, they’re not doing it to make people comfortable, and it shouldn’t make you uncomfortable, if it does that’s really, really weird. From the outside it screams some kind of issues with authority.
Yes, you are right it changes nothing in how we live, so I’m baffled why there’s always one out a hundred people just angry that people doing science changed something in the way they do work.
The problem is that the current definition makes no sense and is, frankly, bad.
400 people, for a huge scientific community like astronomy, is bad. Heck even if they were literally all the astronomers in the world, the fact that it was proposed and voted on basically the same day should be noteworthy at the very least.
And no one here is angry. I was just pointing out that name calling for no reason doesn’t really add to the discussion, even a low stakes one like this.
he problem is that the current definition makes no sense and is, frankly, bad.
You haven’t said why though, I have received zero good arguments why reclassifying a ball of ice and rock that crosses other planetary orbits harms science, it’s a dumb hill to even point at, much less die on.
Sounds like you’re boring to me, feathered dinos are cool AF
Chonk Chicken
What if the feathers were badass mohawks or liberty spikes you ever think of that
Me neither, before I saw the first feathered life-size replicas in dino parks.
And I have to say, they were somehow way more scary than their naked counterparts in my opinion.
So now I am Team Feather!
Everyone that disagrees should have a little face to face time with an enraged Cassowary and then visualise a Cassowary the size of a large truck.
visualise a Cassowary the size of a large truck.
But velociraptors were actually about the size of medium-large dogs. When Jurrasic Park was making the models, the consultants stated the length from head to tail, and the modellers thought they were referring to height
Utahraptor is the size of the ones in the movie and was discovered the same year the movie came out. I like to think that’s what they are, but Crichton and/or Spielberg just thought “velociraptor” was a cooler name.
The book came out in 1990.
A few years ago I created a small pen & paper roleplaying game for my kids to play as dinosaurs. They very much wanted their dinosaurs to be feathered. The kids are alright.
My daughter’s young T-Rex:
Science made the dinosaurs woke 🤬
Dude, they would have been literally running around naked before.
If anything, they became more conservative. ;-)
Dinos were basically Kevin’s from Up.
Behold, a man
Not me, I am very, VERY happy.
User name checks out
