Land Before Time Motivational Posters

[Noname]

Oh well. I have all 13 on DVD. That explains a lot. I never bothered to get the TV episodes, though. I would never have gotten 13 if I knew it was so BAD. I might make a poster on that subject. Yeah.

[Noname]

Here's a new one.

[Noname]

Here's one that speaks about the nature of inaccurately portrayed creatures.



This one was just plain funny.

[Pangaea]

Here's one that speaks about the nature of inaccurately portrayed creatures.

Actually, it may not be as inaccurate as you might think. Some birds like ostriches and ground hornbills have eyelashes, and many at least two other dinosaurs in Triceratops's order (Tianyulong and Psittacosaurus) had hair-or-bristle like structures on their bodies. So while a little far-fetched, it's not impossible that some dinosaurs could have developed eyelashes. I even know of one wildlife artist, Peter Schouten, who illustrated dinosaurs with eyelashes for a book called Feathered Dinosaurs. (Granted, he didn't research all of his subjects perfectly, and some of them have inaccuracies, but I figure it must say something for a natural history artist of his caliber to illustrate dinosaurs with eyelashes.)

[Noname]

I'm no expert, but I doubt that any sort of feathers or hair would have developed on the Triceratops. A raptor maybe, at least the feathers. Now the public has to remove the ideas of what it thought raptors looked like for all these years.   :blink: Doesn't that article state that all feathered dinosaurs so far are Theropods?

[Pangaea]

All feathered dinosaurs known so far are theropods, but not all dinosaurs with hair-or-bristle-like integumentary structures. The dinosaur discussed in the article, Tianyulong, has hollow, rigid filaments on its neck, back, and tail (it apparently possessed a coat of shorter bristles all over its body as well). This is significant because it belongs to a very "primitive" (I dislike using the word because it implies an evolutionary hierarchy) group of ornithischian dinosaurs, the heterodontosaurs. If its filaments are the product of the ornithischians common ancestry with the saurischians (the group that contains theropods), then this could mean that all ornithischians had the genetic potential for fuzziness. If it evolved its bristles independently of the theropods, then evidently it isn't too difficult for such structures to develop, and they could have appeared in other ornithischians in the same way. Furthermore, evidence for such integument is present in Triceratops's own group, the Ceratopsia. One of the most...ahem...primitive ceratopsians, Psittacosaurus, had a line of quill-like structures along the top of its tail, similar to the filaments on Tianyulong. And (I completely forgot to mention this in my last post ) Triceratops itself has apparently been found to have bristle-like structures on its skin. I am unaware of the precise nature of these, and know that there are skin impressions from Triceratops that show that it had scales as well; I am also, admittedly, doubtful that real Triceratops would have had Tria-style eyelashes, but the concept is not completely  impossible.

[Noname]

It would be more like "eye-bristles" rather than eyelashes.  

And in any case, it is not proven. I'm noticing a lot of "ifs" in that.

Except for the scales. I don't find that at all hard to believe.

[Pangaea]

^ Of course it's not proven (assuming you're talking about the eyelashes thing. The fact that some ornithischians were bristly is no less certain than Triceratops's scales). I'm just saying that a Triceratops with eyelashes can't be completely written off as a scientific impossibility.

Scientific hypotheses are full of “ifs”. What can I say? *shrugs*

By the way, while most of these motivational posters aren't my cup of tea, I thought the "all you can eat bacon" one was pretty funny.

[Noname]

That's fine. And frankly, I'm less concerned with the "cup of tea" of any one person as I am with making jokes I find amusing. No offense.

[Pangaea]

^ None taken. -_- Just figured that as long as I was picking on you about something you said in this thread, I'd leave some feedback. (I'm just habitually blunt with such things.)

[Noname]

I'm sure I could say a LOT of blunt things, such as why one is so meticulous about scientific detail on a site devoted to cartoon dinosaurs.   You know, you missed on VERY big scientific inaccuracy present in ALL the Land Before Time films. Want to guess what it is?  

(And yes, I'll be back on topic soon)

[metadude1234]

I'm sure I could say a LOT of blunt things, such as why one is so meticulous about scientific detail on a site devoted to cartoon dinosaurs.   You know, you missed on VERY big scientific inaccuracy present in ALL the Land Before Time films. Want to guess what it is?  

(And yes, I'll be back on topic soon)

different species of dinosaur childeren playing together?

[Noname]

No, even larger. And no, its not that many of those creatures lived millions of years apart from each other either.  

[Serris]

Dinosaurs speaking English!

[Noname]

Got it! Everyone knows that Dinosaurs speak Spanish!  

Seriously, that's it. Dinosaurs couldn't speak.

[Noname]

Here's a new one.

[Pangaea]

^ This is another one I find pretty funny.

[Noname]

Glad to hear it, Pangaea.  

[Noname]

Here we have one that could be interpreted many ways.

[Noname]

Here's one that's long overdue.