Official Q&A thread of DPG's Paleontology Center

The longer middle toe might have been made by the animal stepping and sliding forward slightly in mud. But other than the possibility of it being a theropod, it could also be from a prosauropod. Some of their tracks look similar to later carnivores.

I’m willing to bet it was from a Theropod, though. It’s bird-like enough to make me feel it’s a safe guess.

2 Likes

…And then I tilted it slightly diagonal and it started to look like a hadrosaur or iguanodontid track. If the first/second digits weren’t cut away like that, I could tell you for sure. LOL I really want to say Theropod at this point, though, based on the heel and general shape, even though the digits are deformed.

1 Like

Good to see you back @Dalek62771. I had wondered where you had gotten to. :slight_smile:

1 Like

I was just going to suggest eoraptor or coelophysis, but I think those are american

The track was found in Tampa, Florida. So it’s from the US.

I didn’t go far, Colin. Just had to get on with adulting.

1 Like

For those of you who missed it on Halloween, here’s a link to the first part of my special reveal of the top 13 scariest (or strange) dinos ever:

And here is the link to part 2:

1 Like

I’ve seen them but thanks again for the links

Also, what is the scolosaurus

Scolosaurus was an early ankylosaur. Some scientists think that it was either an offshoot of the nodosaur group of early ankylosaurs or something in between an ankylosaur and a nodosaur. stegos, nodos and Ankys are all in the thyreophoran group.

scolosaurus-size

1 Like

Not to change the theme of the thread but just in case you’re stressed or salty; enjoy

I found this

1 Like

I think Bajadasaurus looks more awesome with that punk hairstyle.:rofl:

@Ned can you tell your designers to add this new dino in game?
It’s closely relative to Amargasaurus, so they can share the same basic 3D model.

5 Likes

Oh wow! A new Dicraeosaurid! Good one, Tarbo!

1 Like

It looks like amargasaurus, but the “spikes?” on the neck are inverted

Edit: I think that’s what you meant to say, oops

Probably a common, we have 3 rares and 2 epics, we need another common tank

Reading back this comment, I’ve noticed something: when you said all pterosaurs seem to represent females EXCEPT tupandactylus, I thought you forgot another pterosaur: Tapejara

I think it’s funny that tupandactylus looks a lot like the tapejara in walking with dinosaurs, to be honest…

I don’t see that much similarity (probably only the crest)

I just saw this

1 Like

It’s neat, but the story of Leonardo has been around for a while. And yes - it’s cool to think about scientists getting fragments of DNA from the mummy - but reason tends to win out over daydreaming. I’m saying that because there’s two good reasons: First, any DNA fragments recovered would more than likely be unusable after being fossilized for 65 million years or more, and Second, there are five films that show exactly why cloning any extinct animal is a very bad idea.

It works in the realm of sci-fi, but not in the realm of actual science. (A lot of articles like this tend to focus more on the sensational aspect of the discovery than they should, blowing it way out of proportion, making the gullible public believe that it’s possible to clone dinosaurs. Tabloid newspapers online and their irl doppelgangers don’t normally bother with fact-checking anything they publish.)

When anything fossilizes, the bones and soft tissues decay and are replaced by minerals - sort of like pouring plaster into a mold. The same would go for any traces of DNA left behind - at the end of the day, it’s all a chunk of rock.)

Not too likely that they could clone another Leonardo, but it’s entirely possible that they found fragments of fossilized and unusable DNA.

For a good example, look at it like this - say you’ve just found some frozen steak that’s been lost in the hinterlands of your freezer for a year or two. It’s a brick. An ice-encrusted, freezer-burned brick. Now no one in their right mind would eat anything that old, but say you’re just so hungry that you decide to cook it in a way that will somehow reconstitute the steak’s now non-existent flavor and molecular integrity. Yum, right?

Wrong.

The reason it won’t turn out the way you think it will is because being in the deep recesses of
your freezer for that long has caused structural and molecular damage from freezing and thawing out after such a long time. It hasn’t been in “cryostasis”. It’s already breaking down. This is because decay and cellular breakdown are not halted completely by freezing, they’re just slowed down to a nearly imperceptible crawl.

You’re basically trying to bring the meat back to a somewhat edible state, but the damage has already been done, and you can’t reverse it. The same holds true of fossilized DNA fragments.
It’s an imprint. A ghost. Nothing more.

You can’t reverse fossilization, especially something that’s 77 million years old. That thing is made of rock now. Nothing truly organic could survive for that length of time.

3 Likes