Maybe? I'm not sure what sources to check to verify this.
Edited by harryhenry
Out of curosity, what is the source that Basilosaurus lived in shallow waters only (I've seen it too on the "WWD remakes" discussions at Deviant Art)? Could it be a confusion with the idea that Basilosaurus lived in shallow seas (i.e. Tethys and the Southern US)? A shallow sea is still dam deep compared to a mangrove.
Hide / Show Replies
According to Wikipedia, mammal paleontologist Philip Gingerich has suggested that its method of swimming (as evidenced by its anatomy) is suggestive of a surface dweller.
ETA: Here’s the source
.
Thanks. The fact that it could not deep dive but Dorudon could, could have made an interesting plot point.
Oddball Nerd
- Arthropods DO have brains, DO use them and CAN think, contrary to what the show explicitly stated.
Cut this out because it's not an example. It's just a pissed-off rant (note the capitalization of the verbs), and while I haven't seen the series in a while, I don't think they explicitly said it. At worst, it was probably Executive Meddling to make the story more interesting to the average viewer.
Also there seems to be some abuse for Artistic License – Paleontology and Rule of Cool, but it's a little unclear.
Edited by MagnusForce "Detecting trace amounts of mental activity. Possibly a dead weasel or a cartoon viewer"
Mweheheh
Was Iberomesornis recognized as an enantiornithine by 1999? I remember an (Iberomesornis(Enantiornis, Passer)) topology being kicked around back in the day.
Peace is the only battle worth waging. Hide / Show Replies
You're right; I don't think Iberomesornis was considered an enantiornithine until 2000.
Deviant Art Raptormaniacs blog
The lineage that gave rise to mammals split to the one that gave rise to reptiles and birds before those invented the reptilian scales. The show represents perhaps the first time that Dimetrodon and its herbivorous "twin" Edaphosaurus have skins similar that of modern hairless mammals, instead of the classic scaly one. However, some think now that they would have the skin texture of a salamander, and the belly of a fish.
Out of curiosity, who are these "some" and what is their evidence?
Taken out of the WWD section:
- Placerias and the cynodont aren't reptiles in modern phylogenetic sense, but instead mammal ancestors.
Not Science Marches On, because it was known at the time the series was made. Chalk it up to simplifications of the narrative or even Artistic License – Paleontology.
- Liopleurodon was only about 6-10 meters (19-33 feet) in length, rather than the 25 meter (82 foot) long juggernaut in the series (to be fair, they said it was a huge specimen, but still, they probably couldn't grow that big even then).
This size was never proposed by experts. It was made up by the series and handwaved as the animal being an unusually old specimen (presuming that Liopleurodon kept growing for life, like crocodiles). Rule of Cool at its finest.
- The Late Triassic of North America was the exact opposite to what the program showed; the real deal was covered in floodplains and tropical forests, not searing desert and dry, dusty wastes.
It was lush and flooded at the end of the episode, when the wet season arrived. Was this dry/wet circle of seasons not actually the case, but believed in academic circles in 1999? If not, it's not Science Marches On.
Edited by 80.26.120.40
Wasn't Portugal connected to North America at the time of the Lourinha Formation?
Hide / Show Replies