HOME | DD
DerpyDuckArt — New Tyrannosaurus Rex Model
#dinosaur #modeling #trex #paleoart
Published: 2018-08-15 18:33:42 +0000 UTC; Views: 6502; Favourites: 164; Downloads: 0
Redirect to original
Description
made a new rex because my old one is pretty inaccurateRelated content
Comments: 50
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
I love it, now this is how Tyrannosaurus lips should be done
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
Amazing!! This is absolutely breath-taking! I'm really impressed by how the neck and legs look. But I have to ask, why are there no tarsal scutes? I know that there are some on the toes, but they seem a bit wrong. Maybe that's just me, but overall, this is spectacular.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Thanks! Where else would they be? I only included them on the toes and bottom parts of the legs, I thought that would be enough.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Having taken a closer look, I can now see the ones on the sole of the feet. But I kinda meant something like this.
encrypted-tbn1.gstatic.com/ima…
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Ah. I was basing mine more on emu feet i.pinimg.com/originals/55/a4/a…
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
woah, I had no idea emu tarsal scutes were like that.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
Thanks! What inaccurate bits? I'd like to know so I can improve
👍: 0 ⏩: 6
Don't worry, usually if Guchiha criticizes your reconstruction, that means it's accurate.
👍: 1 ⏩: 0
i thinks its better to block tho
since he basically spam every T.rex art about the lips,etc. you can ask several paleoartists or any artist who just drawn T.rex at least with a hint of feathers. they at least met him at some point. if you want to be direct and want me to link one of the many victims even recent, i can do it in notes to prevent unnecessary conflict.
besides aint a stalker. talk to the man himself to know more.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Please let's not accuse anyone of being a troll or stalker. I won't block anyone, but I am a little suspicious of , simply because of what I've heard from other people, as well as he responds to criticism. seems more trustworthy. However I will not block anyone unless I get bothered on multiple occasions. I will block if he continues to respond to criticism with "he is nothing but a troll and a stalker", rather than be civilized and justify his claims. Although I disagree with some of what he says, at least provides evidence for his claims.
👍: 0 ⏩: 2
ok then
yeah lets not start a flame war
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
You're free to do whatever you want bro.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
You might what to block he is nothing but a troll and a stalker.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
Actually, it's completely fine. JPGuchiha is an awesomebro who makes up shit to appear like he knows everything and tries to justify his views of a completely scaly and lipless tyrannosaurus cuz that's what he prefers. Ya know, typical awesomebro.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
No worries, it's fine.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
You're welcome.
The scales on the face should be larger, the tiny hair-like feathers is wrong, and the lips shouldn't be there at all.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
You should block he's an awesomebro.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
Okay, where the hell did you get 27,4% from? Last time I checked, it was 13,6664269616108Youpulledthisnumberoutofyourfuckingarse789101112% at the highest
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Bell et al 2017 rsbl.royalsocietypublishing.or…
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
👍: 0 ⏩: 2
I did read the paper on the scales, it is convincing. The wide distribution of scales and the environment t rex lived in makes a fully scaly t rex likely. I did consider making it scaly in my model, but filaments can coexist with scales, filaments being in between the scales. So, I added sparse filaments mostly to add some detail to it, and it's technically not entirely innacurate. As for the lips, I considered a lipless rex, but after doing some more research, I've come to the conclusion that the t. rex likely had lips, and would not bite its lips if it had them. I don't want to go into detail why, and continue with the conversation myself, because I know it'll end badly. But, I appreciate the input and I will still consider different views.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
My mistake, 97.4% chance of being completely scaly
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Nope
Before you bother even continuing, I consider Bell to be rather biased and untrustworthy on the subject as far as researchers go, but when you go so far as to suggest that he did something as ridiculously unscientific as make up ridiculously exact percentages, I must beg you to reconsider your stance on talking about him. This is a palaeontological paper, not some SciFi Gag manga. No palaeontologist worth his salt would act this unscientifically, and if you keep on slandering poor Bell like this just to make your point seem more credible, I will keep calling you out on it.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Did you read the paper? Because it is on one of the diagrams.
I also would like to say that all scientists are the same way. Bias about certain aspects. So please tell me, any peer reviewed papers suggesting he is wrong? Because his paper was viewed by more than one person, and he wasnt the only one doing the research. I also would like to ask why you have a grudge on every scientist. And sense we are getting to know our opinions, I personally think you are being a little bias as well. Of course I could be wrong, that's just me 🤷♂️
So, if you really want to continue this (which Im assuming you don't), give me an up to date peer reviewed paper and then we can talk.
👍: 0 ⏩: 2
You should just block Kyle AKA Because he's an awesomebro.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
I wouldn’t say awesomebro because those people are the kind that like dinosaurs because they look cool and are scary. They don’t care if let’s say Velociraptor had feathers because it doesn’t look ‘cool.’ Although a feather nazi wouldn’t fit either. These two people are pretty much here to be, well here! To enjoy the art that others have made, because... why not???
👍: 0 ⏩: 2
Kingrexy is the real awesomebro here. Just look at his shit artwork, if you can even call it that. He doesn't care for he viewers.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
Guchiha is an awesomebro. That's literally the only reason why he's on a crusade against feathered or lipped trex. His intentions are based on preference, not scientific value.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
Oh.
This kinda shit is exactly why I don't take Bell seriously smh, but I guess I was wrong about pulling the numbers out of your ass... You pulled them out of someone else's ._.
I found the diagram quite easily. It was part of the introductions and Bell never mentions where the hell he got those specific percentages (or for that matter, any other percentages) from, so I guess unless you can find me a place where he convincingly justifies it retroactively, I'll just write the whole paper off as using flawed methods.
Bell also seems to share your erroneous notion that "scales and filaments" cannot coexist on an animal, and suggests that the loss of feathers observed in Tyrannosaurids happened due to body size early on, which is weird since basal Tyrannosaurids tend to be close in size to the feathered Yutyrannus (with the similarly sized Sinotyrannus not even getting a mention, but that's more a nitpick, considering the fragmentary nature of the holotype). Furthermore, the paper also presumes that integument is identical across related animals and suggests that Bell et al upscaled imprints found on Albertosaurus and Gorgosaurus to fit Tyrannosaurus/Tarbosaurus and then presumed the result to be present within the entirety of Tyrannosauridae, ignoring the fact that upscaling doesn't work that way.
Furthermore, Bell et al makes a few minor... Oddities.
-Bell at al states Dinosaurian scales to be reptilian in nature, however, dinosaurian scales are rather distinct from those of most reptiles, excluding certain Archosaurs of course.
-Bell et al states that Yutyrannus lived in a cold environment. The climate of Yixian was actually closer to temperate and quite similar to Hell Creek. While he does not use the climate fallacy as an argument and in fact later on criticizes it, this is nonetheless rather misleading.
-Bell et al seems to just assume the placement of multiple of the skin samples based upon guesswork.
-Bell et al seems to forget that Aves is within Coelurosauria and to have failed to notice rather obvious naked/scaly patches within some feathered specimen (the Sinosauropteryx holotype being among the most prominent).
-Bell et al compares a reduction of filament with a proposed complete loss of filament, which is rather obviously risky.
-Bell et al later suggests the more reasonable approach of feather loss due to body volume, correctly noting that this loss would have occurred in animals smaller than Yutyrannus. This is also consistent with other Dinosaurs who seem to have lost their feathers. Other hypothesis discussed are the possibility of feathers being reduced because of activity or climate, both of which are dismissed.
Now, where is the problem here, you might ask? Well, Bell et al announced that they would discuss four hypotheses. They merely got up to three. I mean, granted, everyone can make this mistake. "Three" and "Four" are only thirteen letters total apart on the keyboard after all.
-Bell. et. al. cites. Mother. Fucking. Feduccia. I originally wanted to have some big final statement, but I think I´ll just leave it at that.
I won't deny that a personal bias wouldn't be impossible, but I am merely a layman interpreting a paper, not a scientist tasked to write them (or, well, in this case at least). As I pointed out below, I am not a fan of redundancy.
I don't have a grudge against every scientist. It just happens that you seem to have only latched onto the... How do I put it nicely... Less professional(?) ones. That being said, however, I must point out that I take even the (peer-reviewed!) papers from scientists I trust with a grain of salt. After all, if I wanted to blindly follow everything a person of authority says, I'd get into religion and not science (I am sorry if I just made a passerby theologist cry).
Linking random peer-reviewed papers in an attempt to shut my opponent down isn't really my style, and I personally (as pointed out above) don't believe that peer review actually makes that much of a difference. Now, I would love to give you a peer-reviewed paper to show why I distrust Bell et al (2017). However, only one such paper exists. You linked it further up, and I am not a fan of redundancy.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Kindly asking, where in the paper is this all located? I'm saying this because I'm very confused and never read Bell et. al after the abstract....
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Ugh, I wrote this a good while ago. You can probably find it if you search line by line, I guess.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Your T.rex is. about as accurate as it can get with current available material.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Instead of talking to me, why don't you go back to insulting religious people or those who don't choose their face as an avatar? You seem to have a passion for hatred and anger.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
"Instead of talking to me, why don't you go back to insulting religious people or those who don't choose their face as an avatar?"
How are you not that? Are you man enough to state your name and are you an anti-theist atheist?
"You seem to have a passion for hatred and anger." No. I have a passion for truth and logic. I just bring a humor into it. Because this is not some Harvard debate team.
You what me to keep things boring and ONLY focus on ideas?
👍: 0 ⏩: 2
I've asked you multiple times to stop spamming my comments, without providing evidence for your claims about T. rex. And if you DO go around insulting people for their religion, I'd rather not be associated with sensitive arguments like religion. To me it seems you do not wish for a peaceful, scientific, logical conversation. If I see any more disrespectful comments I will block you
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
No. You being dishonest and condescending to others makes you weak.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
You have no respect for people. If you did you would talk to them honestly. You're just an awesomebro like Kingrexy.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Dear JPGuchiha,
kindly piss off
Sincerely, the DA paleo community.
👍: 0 ⏩: 2
| Next =>