They might honestly not have known that much about what a modern day elephant looked like unless they saw them in person (or there were pictures when they reconstructed it). There are some hilariously bad depictions of elephants by european artists who had only heard of them, but never seen them.
I love how the Crystal Palace dinosaurs were originally an exhibit of cutting edge science meant to show what life was like in past, and it is now an exhibit about the progression of science and what our beliefs were in the past.
@@subraxas not really, just scientific knowledge based on a fraction of a fraction of what we know now, which in itself is a fraction of a fraction of a fraction of what was there
it’s nice to know that even though the exact message has changed, it still retains its inherent value as an exhibit that teaches us about humanity’s most recent understanding of these ancient creatures
You are such a great presenter! Dino-gen has easily become one of my favorite channels. There’s a hint of whimsical snark beneath all that knowledge base and that makes the episodes feel personable and well considered in addition to very well organized and interesting. Keep it up!!! You’re amazing!!
Wow, thank you! I really appreciate the kind words and I so glad you enjoy the content 😌 hope it’s stays as one of your favourites for the foreseeable future 🩵
3:15 That _mammoth_ looks less like it has two tusks, but rather a single massive proboscis-like tongue that is rapidly whipping back and forth while frothing at the mouth - which is to say, utterly terrifying.
Your description kind of reminds me of the extra-terrestrial creatures from the fictional alien planet Snaiad, conceived by palaeo-artist Cevdet Mehmet Kösemen.
What I love about science is that it's one of the only professions where you regularly and proudly declare 'so turns out we were wrong'. Everything's always shifting, changing, growing - it's epic.
I'm working on a Victorian Science Fiction project and your 18 minute video has been amazingly helpful. Our point of disagreement centers on the question of what if a Victorian naturalist, geologist, etc. saw an actual dinosaur (2025 versions) would they even know what it was. We have been debating this for months. This would be the late1870's, the era of tail dragging reptiles or worse. (We have looked at the history of Paleoart) If we could make it a bit later that would be better, but we can't. Your video gave all of us a terrific starting point. Awesome approach! I'm asking everyone to watch this video! Cheers!
I love how you talk about the stegosaurus's thagomizers so calmly and present the term without any further explanation. Edit: yes, I know it's an official term now, which is cool, but a lot of places can't help but throw in an aside as to the origin of the word.
@@emmarina3525 Indeed. I expect the vast majority of people who would deliberately click on a video like this are already familiar with the thagomizer and the origin of the term. That being said, I was wondering about the usage of the term in this video. I thought the term "thagomizer" referred to the entire tail assembly, as in 4 spikes and a number of vertebrae, but in this video he seems to use the term referring to the individual spikes themselves.
For the final questions, I think part of the issue is using Years as the unit of measurement, when the unit should be generations. Because in the same time frame of an elephant going from conception to breeding age, a population of rats can cycle through dozens of generations, so natural selection will affect rats faster.
Tbh. We really never know what dinos look like, if were just going to base our finds on fossil evidence and the lack of other remains like smooth muscle, or how much muscle it has. Not to mention some fossils gets destroyed due to enviromental or human impacts making the fossil finds more incomplete.
@@starcetus tbf. Majority of our dino reconstructions seems inaccurate to the actual creature. This is why I say that paleontology is speculative science. Look what happend to saurophaganax or the size estimates of the updated megalodon and dunkleosteus
Fun fact: David Peters believes gnathostomes are actually divided into two unrelated groups, one of which has salmons and a bunch of other fish for some reason, while the other has another load of fishes and tetrapods. He also believes mammals are archosaurs or something along those lines. You can find his goofy phylogenic trees on his Reptile Evolution website Edit: I made a mistake, he thinks salmoniformes are part of another branch which includes most, though not all, modern fish who convergently evolved jaws with his gnathostomata 1 and gnathostomata 2. He unironically believes banded knifefish and a couple other extant fish are gnathastomatans 2 (placoderms) but somehow other teleost fish aren't. He also put a couple others including opahs in gnathostomata 1.
If we ever disprove the current model of Quetzalcoatlus (and other pterosaurs that stand Like That on land) I will be so disappointed. I’m so in love with them
I love that you call the spikes in a stegosaurus’ tail as thagomizers. The name comes from a comic “The Far Side”. A caveman is giving a lecture and notes that the spikes are called thagomizers after the late Thag Simmons. 🤣
‘Walking With Dinosaurs’ on VHS! My copy currently occupies a place of honor right above my dinosaur encyclopedias on my bookshelf to this day… even though, yes, it is a bit outdated nowadays.
In the city I live, there is going to be a dinosaur show, and the advertizing poster shows very scaly and shrink-wrapped theropods, probably looking that way for the sake of looking scary. Shrink-wrapping is a topic worth talking about in another vid on inaccuracy. Another one is the depiction of extinct humans, the Neanderthals in particular. In older textbooks, they are often shown in a much less human fashion than they probably actually looked.
I had a small but fairly hefty dinosaur encyclopedia from the 80s that listed Deinocheirus as a potential theropod predator, and I remember the language used about it being quite sensational. Finding humor in the 'mistakes' of scientific advancement includes acknowledging that our own proud contributions may one day be laughed about as well.
@@enderman_666 It's a shame Peters didn't have the balls to make all chordates mollusks instead of putting only the hagfish in it. Clearly the big cephalopod "head" proves they are at least craniates and molusks are therefore paraphyletic. Furthermore, the pulmonate snail lung is obviously homologous with tetrapods, which means they are actually legless amphibians convergent with caecilians, if not caecilians themselves. They lost their skeleton afterwards in a process similar to how other lissamphibians lost parts of their skeletons and then worked up their abs to walk on them. Clearly this is the only logical and factual way to redistribute mollusca to be accurate with the real world hidden by the evil elites
I remember when Deinocheirus simply looked like just a 30 foot Ornithomimus. While the placement of this dinosaur in this group was correct, the appearance was far stranger than we had imagined.
Peters is like that guy in my rock identification FB group who constantly spams pics of literal normal river rocks and chunks of asphalt and claims they are fossils and/or indigenous artifacts. He just sees stuff in those rocks that isn’t there.
18:09 my favourite analogy is language. There is no point where one language transitions into another. There was never a Latin speaking mother who gave birth to a child that only spoke Spanish. It was a slow gradual change over many generations.
We got to write a paper at university about all the mistakes made in reconstructions as part of our Vertebrate Paleontology module, with part written as a 1900s Opinion, and part as a 2000 opinion.
Sometimes I wonder how different the zeitgeist around paleontology would be if it didn't owe its recognition to iguanadon and megalosaurus. Like, "what if it was a mammal from the pleistocone?", "what if it was a _stem_ mammal from the Permian?", "what if it was one of the absolute nightmares of almost any prehistoric ocean?"; those sorts of things.
As a creature concept artist, seeing this hurts me. The main rule for drawing anything "organic" is that there needs to be a bone and muscle structure that makes sense. I can understand the misconceptions for some of the dinosaurs. But some of them are obviously inacurate.
VHS stands for Video Home System. In other contexts, it means Vertebral Heart Size. There's probably a young, aspiring scientist somewhere, who knows that acronym but has never heard of a video tape.
About four months ago, TH-camr/Dinotuber/Paleotuber Mario Lanzas produced an excellent animated short film that features many of the 1800s Dinosaurs and other prehistoric reptiles. Definitely check it out! The exact name of the video is "ANTEDILUVIAN. Animated Short Film".
That question at the end is also something Ive too been pondering. Its just so bizarre to think about. Everything that gradually changes over time has no fixed border on when it changed to another but when you dont put a border, comparing the current one to the first one would look anatomically unidentical.
how and who do comes to the conclusion that "yeah the bones look a bit wonky, so it likely had no mouth and 2 big bone pointing in opposite directions" Elephants still exist! an Boars too... how it go that bad? XD
There will never be a single point at which one species changes into another. We need to think of the term as more of a statistical collection of years, with a long overlap period.
16:40 we cant even agree when a living species is a species bovines, citrus & bears can all interbreed without much problems but are still differnet species
16:07 Early Xiphosurans wouldn't have looked like modern horseshoe crabs. Their abdomens were still segmented. There are also other less primitive members of Xiphosura who had wonky delta wing cephalothorax. All in all, it's a misconception to think Xiphosura hasn't changed in 450 million years
Do species change into another instantly or very quickly? I like the illustration of this process as a color gradient, example: yellow slowly changes into green. In the yellow into green gradient example, at what point is it green in the middle of the transformation? In the species change case, it is like that gradient where you can only have two choices, yellow or green. That's how naming confuses people (I think), you can change the species name into a very limited quantity of choices. Is that helpful or is it harmful in teaching it?
I see the idea of species the same way as fish, there is no such thing, we came up with the idea of fish/species at a time where we didn't know that there is no such thing. We should remember that species was a concept created before we discovered evolution, each species was created by God/gods and there were no relation between them. It's a pre-evolutionary idea that we then have tried to manipulate and fit into a new theory where it doesn't apply. It's very useful as it would be hard to have any sort of discussion about animals or their relations if there were no classification of species, but reality doesn't do labels.
I just wanted to say that, as a fan of "The Far Side," I *still* giggle like a little kid every time someone refers to the business end of a Stegosaurus as the "Thagomizer." :-)
David Peters created more eye rolls than dinosaurs. So, in that sense he earned his place on this list. That said, I am glad to have lived long enough to see t-rex with its lips.
Its truly crazy how long kangaroo dinosaurs persisted in our minds, take the original dinobots from transformers, with grimlock being basicly a robot Version of the kangaroo t rex, and the character was designed in 1983😂
They're cool looking because he hallucinates features so hard that Claude Shannon is rolling in his grave and ChatGPT is gonna give him some kind of award.
Actually hearing someone other than myself verbally refer to the thagomizer on the stegosaurus is wild. Absolutely my favorite part of the stegosaurus!
7:10 I heard they went off a vertebra that was assigned to a pliosaur that would have scaled it up to 26m. But the vertebra wasn’t assigned to liopleurodon and I’m not sure if it’s even assigned to a pliosaur now.
and not good ones either, it's be like 'my aunt's kid's tutor told me about how he once met a guy in spain who said he saw this sort of weird beast in africa once, it's got 4 legs and a long face like a horse, but it's got a tail like a lion and a beard and a horn sticking out its face'
Congrats on getting 105k views. Very impressive. This is a great channel that I routinely turn to for solid info. Love to collaborate on a video sometime. Mike
Some reconstructions have just been hilarious, and you literally had to wonder what they were thinking, as surely even they thought they looked too ridiculous to even be close to possible...
"...although they had a skeleton and knew what modern elephants look like..."
Victorian paleontologist: C U B E
With the way they were painting their livestock I’m almost not surprised! XD
@@Fitzroyfallz I was just gonna say, it would make sense.
*C U B E*
Get CUBED
They might honestly not have known that much about what a modern day elephant looked like unless they saw them in person (or there were pictures when they reconstructed it).
There are some hilariously bad depictions of elephants by european artists who had only heard of them, but never seen them.
david peters might be wrong as all hell, but those critters would look cool in a fantasy world
😀 👍
Sadly why he uses it for scientific utility
actually they are a bit over drawn to beiological but they would indeed make fro some great hellscape or magical realms creatures.
well, technically...
True that would be a cool story
I love how the Crystal Palace dinosaurs were originally an exhibit of cutting edge science meant to show what life was like in past, and it is now an exhibit about the progression of science and what our beliefs were in the past.
'Fantasy' animals, basically.
i have a dino book
and there was that photo of a weird iguanodon
looking like a godzilla or smthn😂
those sculptures reminded me of that
@@subraxas not really, just scientific knowledge based on a fraction of a fraction of what we know now, which in itself is a fraction of a fraction of a fraction of what was there
it’s nice to know that even though the exact message has changed, it still retains its inherent value as an exhibit that teaches us about humanity’s most recent understanding of these ancient creatures
You mean "Crystal Palace Dinsoaurs" ?
I feel like this David Peters guy just wants to see how far he can get with inaccuracies
He's just an edgelord. He wants to provoke but gets butthurt if anyone acutally feels provoked.
How far? On national television.... and beyond! 😀 😛
He’s just an idiot who thinks he’s being cool and different, when in reality he’s just a contrarian
You are such a great presenter! Dino-gen has easily become one of my favorite channels. There’s a hint of whimsical snark beneath all that knowledge base and that makes the episodes feel personable and well considered in addition to very well organized and interesting. Keep it up!!! You’re amazing!!
Wow, thank you! I really appreciate the kind words and I so glad you enjoy the content 😌 hope it’s stays as one of your favourites for the foreseeable future 🩵
♥
3:15 That _mammoth_ looks less like it has two tusks, but rather a single massive proboscis-like tongue that is rapidly whipping back and forth while frothing at the mouth - which is to say, utterly terrifying.
imagine if it was real
Your description kind of reminds me of the extra-terrestrial creatures from the fictional alien planet Snaiad, conceived by palaeo-artist Cevdet Mehmet Kösemen.
@@Noonee27I have never seen C.M. Köseman's actual name before lol.
What I love about science is that it's one of the only professions where you regularly and proudly declare 'so turns out we were wrong'.
Everything's always shifting, changing, growing - it's epic.
3:20 Oh, so that's where the idea for the Mamoswine pokemon came from...
i love mamoswine
@@Noonee27 So when will you two get married? :D :P
POV: It's 2015 and you are watching TREY the Explainer
I was beginning to wonder if others noticed too.
...i just watched Treys video again, and, omg, it's extremely similar, isn't it? 😳
That was my first Trey video, actually!
nu uh! it's all lies! Trey only started making videos a couple months ago! i'm not that old! boohoo 😭
It's been a decade? Well, damn. Also, yes.
I'm working on a Victorian Science Fiction project and your 18 minute video has been amazingly helpful. Our point of disagreement centers on the question of what if a Victorian naturalist, geologist, etc. saw an actual dinosaur (2025 versions) would they even know what it was. We have been debating this for months. This would be the late1870's, the era of tail dragging reptiles or worse. (We have looked at the history of Paleoart) If we could make it a bit later that would be better, but we can't. Your video gave all of us a terrific starting point. Awesome approach! I'm asking everyone to watch this video! Cheers!
👍 💛
I love how you talk about the stegosaurus's thagomizers so calmly and present the term without any further explanation.
Edit: yes, I know it's an official term now, which is cool, but a lot of places can't help but throw in an aside as to the origin of the word.
It's the formal scientific term now
None needed. It has been adopted officially by the scientific community. Sorry if you missed the Far Side fad.
"We're all nerds here, gentlemen. I trust you understand what a thagomizer is very well"
@@emmarina3525 Indeed. I expect the vast majority of people who would deliberately click on a video like this are already familiar with the thagomizer and the origin of the term.
That being said, I was wondering about the usage of the term in this video. I thought the term "thagomizer" referred to the entire tail assembly, as in 4 spikes and a number of vertebrae, but in this video he seems to use the term referring to the individual spikes themselves.
They also thought the back scales of the stegosaurs acted as flying sails
For the final questions, I think part of the issue is using Years as the unit of measurement, when the unit should be generations. Because in the same time frame of an elephant going from conception to breeding age, a population of rats can cycle through dozens of generations, so natural selection will affect rats faster.
Why don't the rats simply use their superior numbers to overwhelm the elephants?
I’m surprised Spinosaurus didn’t pop up on this list 😂
People actually have to decide what spinosaurus looks like before we can laugh at all the wrong versions
@@starcetusexactly
@@starcetusi swear, we could get a reconstruction saying it FLYS and I wouldn't discount it immediately
Tbh. We really never know what dinos look like, if were just going to base our finds on fossil evidence and the lack of other remains like smooth muscle, or how much muscle it has. Not to mention some fossils gets destroyed due to enviromental or human impacts making the fossil finds more incomplete.
@@starcetus tbf. Majority of our dino reconstructions seems inaccurate to the actual creature. This is why I say that paleontology is speculative science. Look what happend to saurophaganax or the size estimates of the updated megalodon and dunkleosteus
Fun fact: David Peters believes gnathostomes are actually divided into two unrelated groups, one of which has salmons and a bunch of other fish for some reason, while the other has another load of fishes and tetrapods. He also believes mammals are archosaurs or something along those lines.
You can find his goofy phylogenic trees on his Reptile Evolution website
Edit: I made a mistake, he thinks salmoniformes are part of another branch which includes most, though not all, modern fish who convergently evolved jaws with his gnathostomata 1 and gnathostomata 2. He unironically believes banded knifefish and a couple other extant fish are gnathastomatans 2 (placoderms) but somehow other teleost fish aren't. He also put a couple others including opahs in gnathostomata 1.
What a guy!
My new hero!
:D
what an incredibly weird person.
Or just don’t because he’s a load of BS.
Do the work.Then get back to us. Don't be an onlooker, a spectator, an umpire. a whiner. Be a player. Be a scientist. Test. Find out for yourself.
@@DAVIDPETERS12C not that you'd know anything about being a scientist
A moment of silence for the late Thag Simmons 😔
Finally, a video that isn't full of AI garbage. You've earned my sub.
If we ever disprove the current model of Quetzalcoatlus (and other pterosaurs that stand Like That on land) I will be so disappointed. I’m so in love with them
I kinda hate them because they're Very Scary, but love them at the same time. The azhdarchids are fascinating, wondrous nightmare fuel
And it will change years to come
I love that you call the spikes in a stegosaurus’ tail as thagomizers. The name comes from a comic “The Far Side”. A caveman is giving a lecture and notes that the spikes are called thagomizers after the late Thag Simmons. 🤣
It's not just him; that's widely accepted as the official name. Because that was the first time someone gave them a name
‘Walking With Dinosaurs’ on VHS! My copy currently occupies a place of honor right above my dinosaur encyclopedias on my bookshelf to this day… even though, yes, it is a bit outdated nowadays.
i loved that series so much.
He mentioned liopleurodon from WWD but not Megarachne from WWM. smh
@@seanmarshall8713 Mega-Karen? :)
7:14 Dr. David Martill confirmed this as being the case when he was interviewed by Ben G. Thomas
David Peters' creations look like spore creations i made when i was little.
In the city I live, there is going to be a dinosaur show, and the advertizing poster shows very scaly and shrink-wrapped theropods, probably looking that way for the sake of looking scary.
Shrink-wrapping is a topic worth talking about in another vid on inaccuracy.
Another one is the depiction of extinct humans, the Neanderthals in particular. In older textbooks, they are often shown in a much less human fashion than they probably actually looked.
😞
tfw you've got severe scoliosis and some sapiens digs you up thousands of years later & figures you all looked that way
I also remember seeing online the “pre-flood man” that looked more like a fish than anything
I had a small but fairly hefty dinosaur encyclopedia from the 80s that listed Deinocheirus as a potential theropod predator, and I remember the language used about it being quite sensational.
Finding humor in the 'mistakes' of scientific advancement includes acknowledging that our own proud contributions may one day be laughed about as well.
You know it's gonna be a good time when you feature David Peters pterosaurs on the thumbnail
UPDATE: The thumbnail has changed
how do you do my fellow archosauromorph
@enderman_666
Lmaooo
@@enderman_666 It's a shame Peters didn't have the balls to make all chordates mollusks instead of putting only the hagfish in it. Clearly the big cephalopod "head" proves they are at least craniates and molusks are therefore paraphyletic. Furthermore, the pulmonate snail lung is obviously homologous with tetrapods, which means they are actually legless amphibians convergent with caecilians, if not caecilians themselves. They lost their skeleton afterwards in a process similar to how other lissamphibians lost parts of their skeletons and then worked up their abs to walk on them.
Clearly this is the only logical and factual way to redistribute mollusca to be accurate with the real world hidden by the evil elites
The best part is when Peters comes to videos such as this one to defend his claims
Some kinda tusky boi is the in the thumbnail now
I remember when Deinocheirus simply looked like just a 30 foot Ornithomimus. While the placement of this dinosaur in this group was correct, the appearance was far stranger than we had imagined.
0:44 Reconstruction was so bad that they badly reconstructed even the words
5:00 Derpasaurus is my new favorite dinosaur.
I had a really difficult day today, but seeing this video turned it around. What a wonderful and well-researched gem. Thank you!
Thank you, I’m so glad I could brighten someone’s day a little 😊 hope everything is ok 🩵
Peters is like that guy in my rock identification FB group who constantly spams pics of literal normal river rocks and chunks of asphalt and claims they are fossils and/or indigenous artifacts. He just sees stuff in those rocks that isn’t there.
Or pics of leftover bones from KFC chickens. :D
3:19 Suddenly the Pokémon Mamoswine makes so much more sense. XD
18:09 my favourite analogy is language. There is no point where one language transitions into another. There was never a Latin speaking mother who gave birth to a child that only spoke Spanish. It was a slow gradual change over many generations.
5:33 it's the magical liopleurodon, Charlie!
Rar Rar Rar Rar
It has told us the way
We got to write a paper at university about all the mistakes made in reconstructions as part of our Vertebrate Paleontology module, with part written as a 1900s Opinion, and part as a 2000 opinion.
What a coincidence! We actually did an almost identical sounding paper for our vertebrate palaeontology module too!
Walking with dinosaurs is one of my favorite dinosaur documentaries!!!
Meanwhile the new Talking with dinosaurs: 💀
@@petersmythe6462 "Talking"? :D
I saw the Magdeburg unicorn in person, it was the most amazing experience
I loved walking with dinosaurs, best birthday gift I ever got
Sometimes I wonder how different the zeitgeist around paleontology would be if it didn't owe its recognition to iguanadon and megalosaurus. Like, "what if it was a mammal from the pleistocone?", "what if it was a _stem_ mammal from the Permian?", "what if it was one of the absolute nightmares of almost any prehistoric ocean?"; those sorts of things.
I saw this video and was like: He's going to mention David Peters, right? And I was so right
Lol! Yep!
Walking with Dinosaurs was awesome, accuracy be damned
Someone tell David Peters to create a fantasy world. He fits perfectly for the genre
Right? As ridiculously inaccurate as they are his creatures are incredibly cool from an artistic perspective
As a creature concept artist, seeing this hurts me. The main rule for drawing anything "organic" is that there needs to be a bone and muscle structure that makes sense. I can understand the misconceptions for some of the dinosaurs. But some of them are obviously inacurate.
I cannot believe he had to explain what a VHS is
And what is it?
VHS? Vehicular Homicide.... Supreme?
VHS stands for Video Home System.
In other contexts, it means Vertebral Heart Size. There's probably a young, aspiring scientist somewhere, who knows that acronym but has never heard of a video tape.
0:44 I clicked the video for inaccuracy in reconstructions. Found spelling error as well.
"Dinsoaurs"? 🙂
@subraxas A bit disappointing from a Paleontologist. "Kangeroo" too.
Still a great, and interesting, video though.
@themotorider1 paleontologist not a spellomizer lmao
@@themotorider1 Doesn't matter at the end of the day. Moreover, nobody's infallible.
Total Peters W
Imagine social media being around at the time of the beginnings of paleontology.
That would have both dramatic and hilarious.
Outdated reconstructions and pictures have always fascinated me and been a niche I really enjoy, thank you for this, and great work!
2:09 As someone who isn't working at the same job as Ross from FRIENDS, I have NO idea, which are supposed to be correct and which are not.
Lol!
0:23 I hate how I immediately thought of that reconstruction of a Woolly Rhino
You have the walking with dinosaurs voice :D
I have honestly never received a higher compliment, please tell the BBC so I can narrate the sequel! 😂
Ngl, I think it would be wickedly cool to see a "retro dinosaur documentary" with the old school dinosaur designs
About four months ago, TH-camr/Dinotuber/Paleotuber Mario Lanzas produced an excellent animated short film that features many of the 1800s Dinosaurs and other prehistoric reptiles.
Definitely check it out! The exact name of the video is "ANTEDILUVIAN. Animated Short Film".
TH-camr Mario Lanzas recently made a short animated film like this. It's superb!!!
Whoever interpreted that woolly mammoth should have been arrested.
That question at the end is also something Ive too been pondering.
Its just so bizarre to think about. Everything that gradually changes over time has no fixed border on when it changed to another but when you dont put a border, comparing the current one to the first one would look anatomically unidentical.
how and who do comes to the conclusion that "yeah the bones look a bit wonky, so it likely had no mouth and 2 big bone pointing in opposite directions" Elephants still exist! an Boars too... how it go that bad? XD
>5:30
I personally blame the unicorns that I still pronounce liopleurodon wrong.
There will never be a single point at which one species changes into another. We need to think of the term as more of a statistical collection of years, with a long overlap period.
16:40 we cant even agree when a living species is a species
bovines, citrus & bears can all interbreed without much problems but are still differnet species
Lemon milk from a cow-bear sounds exotic.
@@ScionStorm1 never tasted?😂
lemons aren't even a species,
@@comradewindowsill4253 exactly, they are hybrids of """species""""
Ahhhhhh the casual use of "thagomizer" makes me so very happy. 😁
"You might even remember having it on VHS."
Don't do this to me - I remember watching the original first broadcast on BBC as a child...
I remember seeing the impressive Deinocyrus arms in paleontology books as a kid, and imagining what terrifying creature could have possessed them.
Wow completely unrelated but that green wall behind you is such a nice shade of green.... 😅💚 I love it
16:07 Early Xiphosurans wouldn't have looked like modern horseshoe crabs. Their abdomens were still segmented.
There are also other less primitive members of Xiphosura who had wonky delta wing cephalothorax.
All in all, it's a misconception to think Xiphosura hasn't changed in 450 million years
Do species change into another instantly or very quickly? I like the illustration of this process as a color gradient, example: yellow slowly changes into green. In the yellow into green gradient example, at what point is it green in the middle of the transformation?
In the species change case, it is like that gradient where you can only have two choices, yellow or green. That's how naming confuses people (I think), you can change the species name into a very limited quantity of choices.
Is that helpful or is it harmful in teaching it?
My only problem with that analogy is that I didn’t think of it! That is an excellent way of putting it 😃
I see the idea of species the same way as fish, there is no such thing, we came up with the idea of fish/species at a time where we didn't know that there is no such thing. We should remember that species was a concept created before we discovered evolution, each species was created by God/gods and there were no relation between them. It's a pre-evolutionary idea that we then have tried to manipulate and fit into a new theory where it doesn't apply. It's very useful as it would be hard to have any sort of discussion about animals or their relations if there were no classification of species, but reality doesn't do labels.
Do read up on Linnaeus.
I just wanted to say that, as a fan of "The Far Side," I *still* giggle like a little kid every time someone refers to the business end of a Stegosaurus as the "Thagomizer." :-)
I like the one that's 50000 feet long and had headlights on it
Your channel is really good. Please never stop making videos.
♥
Never stop never stopping! :D
I'd love to see more of these. It's Wonderful to see how far we've come in our knowledge and understanding.
Agreed!
David Peters created more eye rolls than dinosaurs. So, in that sense he earned his place on this list. That said, I am glad to have lived long enough to see t-rex with its lips.
Love that the old versions of Steph look kind of like Godzilla.
Its truly crazy how long kangaroo dinosaurs persisted in our minds, take the original dinobots from transformers, with grimlock being basicly a robot Version of the kangaroo t rex, and the character was designed in 1983😂
Dino Riders, a toyline, comics and cartoon from Tyco, launched in 1989 and their bipedal dinosaurs unfortunately still walked semi-upright. :(
I love the idea that someone can think an elephants tusks would go opposite ways while actual elephants exist
In a hundred years from now they'll be making fun of how we think extinct creatures looked
David Peters reconstructions are really cool looking despite how inaccurate they are.
They look like they could be some kind of fantasy animal, they also look like weird animals that could be out of avatar the last airbender lol
They're cool looking because he hallucinates features so hard that Claude Shannon is rolling in his grave and ChatGPT is gonna give him some kind of award.
@@petersmythe6462 true
Huh?!! 0_0
I mean, modern paleontologist does the same
Well, nice try with the Volkswagen bus aka wolly mammoth 😂
These creatures would look cool as a stand-alone beast in a fantasy world.
Aye!
Actually hearing someone other than myself verbally refer to the thagomizer on the stegosaurus is wild. Absolutely my favorite part of the stegosaurus!
7:10 I heard they went off a vertebra that was assigned to a pliosaur that would have scaled it up to 26m. But the vertebra wasn’t assigned to liopleurodon and I’m not sure if it’s even assigned to a pliosaur now.
Great video, I enjoyed it!
Thank you!
Why did everyone always go for 'turtle like' when they didn't know lmao
13:11 He almost said Budgie Fugglers! ALMOST
The history of paleontology is something I find even more interesting than paleontology.
🙂
What day do we go to bed young and wake up old?
It was last Tuesday or the one before, or maybe it was next Tuesday...? It definitely happens on a Tuesday, though
the day you wake up with a sore back
When I was a kid in the 80's a museum in Western Australia had a T-Rex skeleton standing up with it's tail running along the ground like Godzilla.
We all know Stegosaurus was included in this just so you could say "thagomizer" casually in a video. And I am all for it
3:40 he is perfect and he is mine now and I will accept no slander
thagomizer - Gary Larson left his Far Side legacy there :)
Interesting. Got worried that, in my very limited knowledge, even the Stegosaurus i remembered was wrongly depicted.
Subbed.
I love that mammoth and his tiny chipmunk ears. Also, disappointed you didn't mention the flying Stegosaurus.
I love some of the old drawings of rhino's and lions .They just got to go on descriptions of the species
and not good ones either, it's be like 'my aunt's kid's tutor told me about how he once met a guy in spain who said he saw this sort of weird beast in africa once, it's got 4 legs and a long face like a horse, but it's got a tail like a lion and a beard and a horn sticking out its face'
10:36 ngl, this actually looks way more unrealistic and made up than most of the outdated ones presented in this video 😄
Excellent recap! The only other things I can think of is bad reconstructions in palaeomedia.
Also today’s viewer question is excellent.
Congrats on getting 105k views. Very impressive. This is a great channel that I routinely turn to for solid info. Love to collaborate on a video sometime. Mike
Funny how much changes from when you’re a child to a full grown adult.
Also…
“It’s a Liopleurodon Charlie!”
Some reconstructions have just been hilarious, and you literally had to wonder what they were thinking, as surely even they thought they looked too ridiculous to even be close to possible...
1:41 3:39 4:55 5:10 8:18 8:33 12:07 12:20
The Thagomizer was of course named after the late Thago stevens...
"Possum Pterodactyl isn't real, it can't hurt you."
Possum Pterodactyl: 12:18
It is honestly my favorite "creature" as it cracks me up for some reason
possodactyl?
I adore bad paleoart. Looking at the timeline of our understanding of fossils is as fascinating as looking at the fossils themselves.
This is some of favorite stuff, the awkward teenage years of science, where they were so close to being right but were not quite there yet.
Thoroughly enjoyed this video, thank you! 🦖
Really nice vid man good job I love paleontology ^^