Dinosaurs are not what they used to be. I’m not talking about birds being dinosaurs and all that, but about those extinct giants of the Mesozoic we all grew up loving. As new studies and discoveries are made, dinosaurs are becoming so much different from the way we always imagined them that, today, many of us have trouble recognizing even our childhood favorites. I give you ten classic dinosaurs that have changed radically due to new paleontological discoveries. And they may still change a lot in the future! Note: each entry has two images – the first is the previous image of the dinosaur, and the second is the new. Dinosaur before and after shots!


Stegosaurus is perhaps the most recognizable of all prehistoric animals; it is nearly impossible to mistake it for another creature. We all knew Stegosaurus as that heavy, small-headed dinosaur with an arched back and a dragging tail, sporting four spikes that pointed upwards. Popular books always brought up the fact that Stegosaurus had a brain the size of a walnut, and that it was probably a very dumb animal that went extinct because it couldn’t compete with the much better armored (and slightly smarter) ankylosaurs.
However, Stegosaurus, like many dinosaurs, has changed a lot since. Fossil footprints and detailed studies of its anatomy have proven that Stegosaurus didn’t drag its tail on the mud, but actually walked erect, like an elephant, with its tail held horizontally, parallel to the ground. Its back wasn’t as arched as they had us believe, and the neck was not carried horizontally as usually depicted, but upright, like a bird’s.
Also, the tail spike cluster (known among paleontologists as the “thagomizer”) didn’t actually point upwards, but sideways. This made the tail a much deadlier and more efficient weapon; to stab an attacking predator, Stegosaurus only had to swing its tail horizontally; punctures matching the Stegosaurus’ tail spikes have been found in the bones of predatory dinosaurs from the same age and place, proving once and for all that Stegosaurus wasn’t any less dangerous than the ankylosaurs that would evolve later.
Oh, and by the way, Stegosaurus’ brain was actually NOT the size of a walnut, but about twice as big. Yes, this may not seem to improve the animal’s situation a lot, but even so, the claims that the brain was too small to coordinate the Stegosaurus’ enormous body, and that the creature needed a second brain (located in the hips) to do so, are now considered to be unfounded.


Diplodocus (and its close relative Apatosaurus, formerly known as Brontosaurus) are among the best known sauropods, or giant long-necked dinosaurs. Or at least, they used to be well known to the public; today, they look very different from the classic “brontosaurs”we knew.
Sauropods were once thought to be huge, clumsy denizens of the swamps, spending most of their time underwater feeding on aquatic plants; their huge weight (up to 50 tons or more) was said to be too much for the creatures to properly move on land.
It was also said that, when attacked, sauropods would hide in the water; their nostrils were located in the top of the skull so they could breathe while submerged and escape the fearsome carnivores of their time (which were thought to be unable to swim).
Today, however, we know that sauropods didn’t live in swamps. Actually, it seems that most species avoided swampy areas, and preferred dry land environments. They had legs shaped like columns, and some of them didn’t have toes at all; their legs looked like stumps or like tree trunks, and were exclusively adapted to support their massive weight (in recent times, sauropods much larger than Diplodocus have been found; they weighed up to 100 tons and could support their weight on land without any problem).
Also, they weren’t limited to feeding on soft aquatic plants, as was believed; we now know that the different species had different niches and diets, with some feeding on low vegetation and others on the fruits, twigs and leaves of tall trees.
And it’s not only behavior; turns out Diplodocus and Apatosaurus looked more like a weird, dragon-like creature than the smooth-skinned giants of Land Before Time or The Flinstones. Their backs were adorned with sharp keratin blades, similar to those of a modern day iguana, and their skin was covered with bumpy scales and knobs. Their tail wasn’t dragged but held horizontally, parallel to the ground, and was not just a lizard-like tail. A recent Diplodocus discovery shows that these dinosaurs didn’t need to hide from predators; they could severely injure them, or even kill them, with the terminal portion of their tail, which could not only be swung like a monstrously fast and powerful whip, but was also equipped with bony spines that supported keratinous blades, so that when the tail hit an enemy, it wouldn’t only break bones, but also slash through flesh.
Sauropods are usually pictured as peaceful grazers (Dr. Grant in Jurassic Park even compares them to “a big cow”), but fossil evidence shows that they were anything but harmless.


Velociraptor was practically unknown to the public before Jurassic Park, and has been causing confusion ever since. When most people thinks of Velociraptor, they remember the large, lizard-like, wickedly smart villains from Spielberg’s blockbuster.
However, those creatures were not based on the real life Velociraptor, but on a larger North American relative called Deinonychus. The real Velociraptor was a small animal, about the size of a large dog. It also had a more slender body and a longer snout than Deinonychus.
But both Deinonychus and Velociraptor have changed a lot since Jurassic Park, due to amazing discoveries of Asian fossils which proved that many small predatory dinosaurs, including Velociraptor, had feathers. Today, almost all paleoartists draw Velociraptor, Deinonychus and many of their relatives covered in feathers, more similar to large chickens than to overgrown lizards.
Although some people cringe at the idea of replacing the classic Jurassic Park raptor with a feathered bird-thing, at least the fossil record confirms that it was a deadly killer; a fossilized Velociraptor was found preserved in the act of stabbing the throat of a Protoceratops with its killing claw, while another specimen was found with Velociraptor bite marks on it, suggesting that these nasty little dinosaurs fought, killed and perhaps ate each other once in a while.


Spinosaurus became famous in 2001, when it was depicted in Jurassic Park III, where it fought and killed a Tyrannosaurus Rex. Many dinosaur fans were outraged at this; most of them accused the filmmakers of exaggerating the Spinosaurus’ size, and even some (the least informed) thought that Spinosaurus had been specifically created for the movie, and that it had never actually existed.
In reality, Spinosaurus has been known since 1912, when a German paleontologist, Ernst Stromer, found its enormous remains in Egypt. Even then, Stromer was convinced that Spinosaurus had been as large, or even larger, than Tyrannosaurus Rex (known since 1905).
Unfortunately, Spinosaurus didn’t become well known then, and during WWII, its fossil remains, which were kept in Munich, were destroyed during an Allied bombing. It seemed as if Spinosaurus had went extinct again.
For years, Spinosaurus was mentioned here and there in popular dinosaur books, often depicted as a short-snouted, short armed sail-backed animal and said to be about 12 meters long. Almost, but not quite as large as a T-Rex.
However, in recent years, and following the release of Jurassic Park III, paleontologists have announced, based on newly found specimens, that indeed, Spinosaurus is the largest carnivorous dinosaur known; it could grow up to 18 meters long (the largest T-Rex are around 13 meters long), and weigh up to 10 tons. It was, easily, the largest predatory land animal of all times, at least that we know of. This means, by the way, that the Spinosaurus in Jurassic Park III was not exaggerated, as fanboys claimed, but actually smaller than its real life counterpart! (Not fully grown?)
Spinosaurus also turned out to look very different from the pictures in the books; it didn’t have a short snout, but long, crocodile-like jaws armed with conical teeth. Also, its arms weren’t short, but rather long and powerful, armed with enormous hooked claws.
Recent analysis of its teeth and skeleton have suggested that Spinosaurus may have been a semi-aquatic animal, spending most of its time either wading or swimming to catch large fish (sharks included), as well as crocodiles and anything else it could capture. Its strong forearms would aid in swimming and the strong claws would hook, kill and help dismembering large prey. One thing, however, remains the same; to date, no one knows for sure what the weird sail on its back was used for.


Psittacosaurus was never an extremely famous dinosaur, but it was one of the classics found in almost all popular books on the subject. It was named for its curved beak which resembled that of modern parrots (Psittacidae), but other than that it was always depicted as a rather plain-looking dinosaur.
It seems, however, that Psittacosaurus was one of the most successful and abundant dinosaurs of its time; hundreds of specimens have been found, and some of them, found recently in China, were so well preserved that they not only included fossilized bones, but also the outline of the body, and even skin impressions from the creatures.
Due to these amazing fossils we know that Psittacosaurus was anything but plain-looking. Its beak may have resembled that of a parrot, but its head was more reminiscent of a warthog, with strange bony protrusions that gave it an intimidating appearance; one species, Psittacosaurus sibiricus, even had horns.
But perhaps the most unusual feature of Psittacosaurus was the long, quill-like filaments on its tail. These may have been some kind of proto-feathers, perhaps brightly colored to attract a mate or intimidate a rival, or perhaps they actually were akin to porcupine quills and were used in self defense. Some paleontologists have even suggested that the quills may have been venomous. Whatever the truth is, it seems obvious that Psittacosaurus was among the most bizarre of all dinosaurs.


Most dinosaur books claimed that Compsognathus was the smallest dinosaur. Invariably described as chicken-sized, Compsognathus was depicted as a small, lizard-like creature with two fingers on each hand. Very similar to the man-eating “compys” of the first Jurassic Park sequel.
Today, due to new discoveries and studies we know that Compsognathus could actually grow larger than a chicken (although not much larger), and that it didn’t have two, but three clawed fingers on each hand.
Perhaps the most surprising find is that some Compsognathus relatives were feathered, too. In China, the exceptionally well preserved remains of Sinosauropteryx, a Compsognathus-like animal, were found, proving that the creature had a coat of fur-like proto-feathers covering almost its entire body.
As amazing as it may seem, Sinosauropteryx has also become the first dinosaur of which the original coloration is known. Thanks to the study of microscopic pigment structures in the Sinosauropteryx’s feathers, we know the creature had a reddish-orange color, with orange and white stripes on its long tail, making it look very similar to a modern day coatimundi.
There was some debate for a while on whether Compsognathus also had feathers or not, since another close relative, Juravenator, had been found with skin impressions that showed scales, not feathers. However, a recent study found a fur-like covering on Juravenator too, which means that, indeed, Compsognathus is likely to have been feathered as well.


Often called “the first bird”, Archaeopteryx is one of those creatures you could find in any book on dinosaurs or evolution. Often considered to be a sort of “missing link” between reptiles and birds, Archaeopteryx has been used as a mascot by both scientists trying to prove evolution, and creationists trying to disprove it (by claiming that Archaeopteryx is simply a bird).
However, the fossil evidence shows that both scientists and creationists were wrong. As more and more feathered dinosaurs are found in China, some of them even more similar to birds than Archaeopteryx, it becomes obvious that this creature was not the missing link, and was not a bird either, but one hundred per cent dinosaur. Its anatomy, actually, is very similar to that of the early raptor dinosaurs, the same lineage that would eventually lead to Deinonychus and Velociraptor. It even has the same retractable, sickle-shaped claw on each foot!
It now seems likely that raptor dinosaurs were actually the flightless descendants of feathered, flying dinosaurs like Archaeopteryx.
There’s also evidence suggesting that Archaeopteryx could grow to larger sizes than usually claimed, and that it had feathers not only on its forelimbs, but also on its hind limbs (a feature seen too in many of the raptor-like dinosaurs found in China).


The most classic of all duck-billed dinosaurs, Parasaurolophus was once believed to have been a semi-aquatic creature. Its flat, duck-like bill, and what seemed to be webbing between its toes and fingers led many paleontologists to believe that it fed on soft aquatic vegetation and it ran to water when attacked by its enemies.
Even the long, tube-like crest on its head was thought to be a snorkel, or perhaps an oxygen reservoir. However, later studies proved all of this wrong.
There was no opening on the end of the Parasaurolophus’ crest; it was useless as a snorkel. And although there were air passages on the inside of the crest, these were strangely shaped, and not really ideal for storing air.
Also, the webbing between the fingers and toes turned out to be fleshy pads that kept the digits together. The fingers and toes were equipped with hooves, which proved that Parasaurolophus and other duck-billed dinosaurs were adapted to walking on dry ground, not swimming.
If attacked by a predator, they were able to run bipedally, and if cornered they could smack their attacker with their heavy tail. There was no need to run to the water. So, what was the Parasaurolophus’ crest for? The answer was more amazing than any of the previous theories; turns out, Parasaurolophus used the crest to produce and amplify its calls; by regulating the air that went through the air passages on the inside of the crest, the creature could modulate its vocalizations, and probably had an extensive “vocal range”, just like some birds today.
By using computer models, paleontologists were even able to reproduce the sounds Parasaurolophus probably made over 70 million years ago. To listen to those sounds, go here (but be aware that the picture shows an outdated depiction of Parasaurolophus, now known to have had an arched back and a tail that was held parallel to the ground).


We reach now the most famous of all dinosaurs, the mighty Tyrannosaurus rex. Up to 13 meters long and weighing up to 7 tons, this bone-crushing predator has a long story of inaccurate depictions. Shown in old movies and book illustrations as a lizard-like monster with a square, plain-looking skull, a long tail being dragged on the ground and a tripod-like stance, T-Rex would later be found to be much more imposing.
In real life, Tyrannosaurus walked in an horizontal stance, with the tail held above the ground. Although this means it was actually shorter than the classic, tripod-Rex version, it also means that it was a much more agile animal, able to run at high speed and quickly capture prey with its massive jaws.
Its head was not square, and it was not as lizard-like as old movies had made us believe. It actually had a unique shape, different to any other dinosaur, with a narrow snout, eyes that looked forwards (giving it highly accurate depth perception), and a series of knobs over the snout which were probably covered on keratin when the animal was alive. This all gave T-Rex a much more frightening appearance than the giant lizards in say, King Kong.
Speaking of which, although King Kong and many other movies depicted T-Rex with three fingered hands, in real life T-Rex had only two fingers, with meathook-like claws. Although people often wonder why T-Rex’s arms were so small and weak, they were actually quite robust and had very strong muscles; it is believed that T-Rex could lift over 100 kgs—although they were obviously not used for lifting stuff, and were probably used to hold onto prey while delivering a fatal bite to the neck or spine.
Once again, new discoveries from China have confirmed that the earliest T-Rex relatives had feathers. Some paleontologists believe that this meant T-Rex would have feathers, too, at least during a part of its life. Although actual evidence of feathers on T-Rex has yet to be found, it is possible that very young Tyrannosaurus had a downy coat, and that as they grew larger, they lost them, partially or completely, since very large animals don’t need insulation as much as small ones.
Finally, there have also been changes regarding T-Rex’s suggested longevity. There was a time when large dinosaurs were thought to be long-lived animals, just like many reptiles today. However, studies on the growth-ring on their bones (yes, just like in trees) proved that T-Rex reached sexual maturity, and its adult size, at age 16-18. It would then stop growing, unlike modern reptiles which grow throughout their life, and could live up to 30 years, very short lived for such a large animal.
Which shouldn’t be surprising if we consider that there is plenty of fossil evidence suggesting that T-Rexes killed and ate each other, at least once in a while.


And finally we get to number one, Triceratops, the T-Rex’s stereotypical arch-nemesis, and one of the largest members of the Ceratopsidae, or horned dinosaur family. Just like Stegosaurus, Triceratops is hard to mistake for any other animal. It has become fixed in our mind as this giant rhinoceros-like, parrot-beaked three horned reptile, with skin like an elephant or a rhino and sprawled forelegs.
We are also pretty sure that Triceratops was a plant-eater.
Being one of the most abundant and successful dinosaurs of its time, however, it was only a matter of time before new Triceratops material revealed its incredible secrets. Turns out, Triceratops was bigger than we thought, and it didn’t have skin like an elephant or a rhino. Instead, it had a series of alligator-like, flat scales, called scutes, on its belly, and the rest of its body was covered in large scales and knobs. Its back and tail also had a series of weird, fist-sized bumps, each one holding a nipple-like structure which has yet to be explained by scientists.
These structures may very well be anchoring points for porcupine-like quills, like those found on Triceratops’ older cousin, Psittacosaurus. Or perhaps, some scientists suggest, they were poison glands, oozing toxins to protect the Triceratops’ hindquarters from T-Rex attacks. It may also have been both, or none- we still have no way to know for certain.
That’s not all. Triceratops’ forelegs were not sprawled; a study of its limbs proved that it actually walked erect, like an elephant, and used only the three inner toes of its forelegs to hold weight, while the other two toes were vestigial and didn’t touch the ground. This also suggests Triceratops was much faster and more agile than usually thought.
And finally, the weirdest part. After examining the beak and jaws, paleontologists reached the conclusion that Triceratops may have been partially carnivorous, probably scavenging after T-Rex, or even scaring smaller predators away from their kills. Its strong jaws were able to crush bone and flesh as easily as they could grind plant material. The result would be an incredibly bizarre-looking, intimidating beast that behaved more like a giant wild boar or an entelodont (a carnivorous pig-like creature) than the placid vegetarian of classic imagery. We simply will never look at Triceratops the same way now.


Quetzalcoatlus is a pterodactyloid pterosaur; that means it is related to dinosaurs, but is not a dinosaur itself, hence its place as a mere bonus. This is one of the most incredible prehistoric animals; when its bones were found in Big Bend, Texas, in 1971, it was obvious to paleontologists that they had found the largest flying creature known to science. At first, they estimated a wingspan of 12, 15 or even 21 meters! That is, the size of a small plane.
It was later found, however, that the proportions of Quetzalcoatlus were different from other pterosaurs (like the better known Pteranodon), and therefore the size estimate was reduced to 10-11 meters. Today, Quetzalcoatlus is no longer considered as the largest flying creature, for a larger relative from Romania, Hatzegopteryx, seems to have been slightly bigger.
However, the big change regarding Quetzalcoatlus wasn’t its size, but its body shape. Formerly depicted as a scaled-up, crestless version of Pteranodon, Quetzalcoatlus is now known to have been a very different animal. It had a huge head up to three meters long, a very long, stiff neck, and a diminutive body, as well as very long limbs and relatively short wings.
It now seems that Quetzalcoatlus didn’t soar like a vulture looking for dinosaur carcasses to feed on, as was once believed, but rather stalked on the ground like a stork, or a ground hornbill, using its huge beak to capture any animal that crossed its path. Based on the size of Quetzalcoatlus’ jaws and neck, it is possible that, were they alive today, they would be able to swallow a man whole without difficulty.
Also unusual is the fact that Quetzalcoatlus and its closest relatives were quite agile on the ground; while most pterosaurs were rather clumsy and slow on the ground, Quetzalcoatlus seems adapted to walk, and even to run very efficiently; it would keep its wings folded while doing so and probably take off only if approached by a carnivorous dinosaur. Although, considering that an adult Quetzalcoatlus standing on all fours was as tall as a Tyrannosaurus Rex, it is possible that they were left alone by most predators.




















Great list …!!!
Dinosaurs are cool with me : )
Agreed
Cool list again tyb , i always loved dinosaurs as a child . I like the new look dinosaurs actually they look more exotic and poisonous .
Cool list again tyb , i always loved dinosaurs as a child . I like the new look dinosaurs actually they look more exotic and poisonous . Glad we actually got a list today , didn’t know if the earthquake would effect anything .
The one in NZ?
The earthquake wasn’t near me but we are all incredibly worried about friends and family. A number of listversers from Christchurch have told me they are ok but a pall has fallen across our country. 65 confirmed deceased with the toll expected to increase dramatically. Please pray for those who are alive now but won’t be rescued in time. It must be horrifying for them.
i feel bad now a list isnt really all that important considering . Saw the picks , it’s impossible for me to imagine destruction on that huge scale. I hope everyone is rescued on time .
This is the best list I’ve seen on this site. Fun and educational. Thank you TyB for the great information and for bringing back the kid in me.
Do a little digging; follow a few links! There are plenty more like this here if you’re interested. TyB’s one of the site’s best.
I’m not typically a fan of his prehistoric lists, but this one was very interesting.
Fascinating!
This list should be “Top 10 dinosaurs that look so much cooler than we thought.” Great list, per usual, TyB. The size of these animals always amazes me.
“…they would be able to swallow a man whole without difficulty.” – that’s absolutely terrifying/amazing.
That quote you said scared me too!
As a christain, I believe humans and dinosaurs existed at the same time…. Very glad i wasn’t alive with all those dinosaurs swallowing my friends whole! That’s enough to give you the shivers!
Love the list.
Sadly, some of these made the dinos seem less cool.
Apart from T-Rex and Spino which are so awesome!
Good List TyB.
By the way, just heard that there was a 6.5 Richter Scale earthquake in and around Christchurch, New Zealand. Saw some demolished structures on the news. Hope everyone is alright, Jamie.
great job as usual, tyler………this is one of the most in depth and succinct write-ups you’ve given us yet.
it makes me wonder one thing from your statement in the intro:
@TyB: I give you ten classic dinosaurs that have changed radically due to new paleontological discoveries. And they may still change a lot in the future!
from what you know on this subject, which is more than 99% of the people reading this, probably:
–which entries do you believe might change a lot in the future?
–which entries may change more drastically due to a wider array of unknown and/or inferred information?
–which are the most likely to remain as presented here, due to an exhaustion of potential paleontological markers?
just wondering what you thought — i knew about the archaeopteryx (although this artistic rendition looks kind of like a roadrunner), as well as quetzalcoatlus, diplodocous, and steg…….but i didn’t know the old information and the new information varied so greatly on most of the others.
thanks again…..nice job.
Hey, glad you like the list
About your questions…
–which entries do you believe might change a lot in the future? Well, possibly those of which only fragmentary remains are known, in this case Quetzalcoatlus and Spinosaurus. Any new discovery on these two guys could change the current picture radically. On the other hand, we have so much material (and so well preserved) from say, Psittacosaurus, that surprising secrets are likely to be revealed sas the specimens are studied, possibly changing everything once more.
–which entries may change more drastically due to a wider array of unknown and/or inferred information? Spinosaurus and Quetzalcoatlus, no contest. Many paleontologists dream of finding aditional remains from these two guys.
–which are the most likely to remain as presented here, due to an exhaustion of potential paleontological markers?
We have complete skeletons from most of the other dinosaurs presented here (recently, a group of amazingly well preserved Diplodocus was found; they are almost complete, and represent different growth stages). Velociraptor, Archaeopteryx, Compsognathus and T-Rex are also known from very complete specimens, yet they all have secrets to reveal. For example, it was only recently that Archaeopteryx was found to have feathered hind limbs. Same goes for the Velociraptor having feathers.
In reality, all of the entries may very well change radically in the near future.
No Titanosaurs!?
How I love to know how the Spinosaurus use those limbs! Do they walk on all fours or those hands/claws are just for fishing? How about heat regulation for the sail since the Spinosaurus is usually submerged in water? Problem is for such a large animal, internal temperature should not be a problem and there’s the Cretaceous weather. I’m no pterosaur fan but anything about the extremely large Quetzalcoatlus is more than welcome. I’ve been always fascinated on how such a large flapping kite can exist!
Next time please post a list about some very strange dinosaurs like Agustinia, Spinophosaurus, Dichraeosaurus, Polacanthus, Achrocanthosaurus, Pentaceratops, Cryolophosaurus, Euhelopus, Mamenchisaurus and Brachytrachelopan. There’s more that I can name like those herbivorous theropods but I need to shut up or this reply will never end.
Fun list! Here’s a little factoid. Most people know that humans did not coexist with dinosaurs, but what most people don’t know, but all dinosaur artists should know, is that grass had not evolved and did not exist during the time of the dinosaurs either. That’s just one more reason why the stegosaurus ‘before’ image (or any image depicting dinosaurs with grass) is incorrect.
it seems like they didn’t have the motor skills to handle bongs or rolling papers anyway.
so yes, when you see a picture of a dinosaur and grass in the same frame, start screaming “photoshop!”
What we need are genuine photographs…
thats why they usually smoke hash so they dont have to maul for seeds and sticks .
Actually, grass did exist in the Cretaceous (seems that it appeared at this time). It has also been found preserved in dinosaur dung which means at least some of them were already adapted to feed on grass.
It seems, though, that grass during the Cretaceous was found mostly near rivers and lakes, so huge grasslands seem unlikely.
so my suspicion that some of them are stonersaurus who smoke themselves into extinction might be proven after all….
Was it Nigersaurus that fed on them with that kind of mouth? But that was like 100 million years ago so I am not sure.
Fantastic list!!
Highly interesting and informative list. TyB is the man!
So this means that all the beautiful illustrations in the Dinotopia books are inacurate. Sadness. I loved those books as a kid. The first was the best, of course.
Excellent list though. I thoroughly enjoyed it. TyB never fails to be great.
The new T-rex pic is still a little outdated but cool list non the less.
The thing I love most about dinosaurs is the room for speculation and imagination.
Oh yeah and Tyrannosaurus Rex would have crushed Spinosaurus. I don’t care what happened in that movie.
*loud choral singing* Amen Brother! Preach it! Let me hear that sweet sweet gospel! T-Rex is the bomb!
Superb list.
lol just imagine nb 9 in real life
Now this is interesting.
Fantastic list!. I had thought I knew quite a bit about how we now think dinosaurs looked. But this list has taught me quite a bit. Loved every word of it, thank you TyB.
Wonderful list, as usual, TyB. I was expecting Triceratops to be #1, but for a totaly different reason. Was thinking there would be some mention of the whole Triceratops= Torosaurus thing.
http://www.physorg.com/news198306111.html http://news.discovery.com/dinosaurs/triceratops-a…
Didn´t mention it because there seems to be quite a lot of evidence against that theory. Personally, I think Torosaurus and Triceratops are two different genera (the fact that there are Triceratops specimens much larger than any Torosaurus seems to support this).
I also knew triceratops would be no. 1, but not because any of the mentioned reasons. You see, recent studies have shown triceratops didn’t even have three horns! So actually, no such animal ever even existed.
Didn´t have three horns? Do you have any references?
ahh to think of my misspent youth, reading about all those creatures with fascination and now to have it all turn out to be…something else entirely. well, still an edifying read. i wonder what other things in store that will turn out to be wrong.
Haha, right. I’m going to tell my kids not to get too involved in anything since it will just be disproven a few years down the road. Save them the pain.
i suggest that you don’t do that. let them get disillusioned on their own in their adult life. heh. it’s hard enough to get kids to learn anything these days, as you can see by the illustrious examples of teen’s grammar and spelling.
(who am i to comment on others’ spelling, when my use of capital letters is deplorable. forgive me listversers, i am so used to the faithful minions of spellcheck to do that for me)
But ever since slavery was abolished, the minions have been hard to come by…
Great fun, this list. Dinosaurs are cool!
Jurassic Park – it could happen…
What anonymous kitteh said
torosaurus/triceratops/toroceratops is one of the biggest debates on paleontology in recent times
Most importantly dinosaurs had guns:youtube.com/watch?v=dWl-Kryr0dk
Great list. Love Dinosaurs!
There was a comedy programme on the BBC a few years ago, called-”T-Rex-The Full Story,” showing his history ever since it was first discovered. And it showed the way he`d been shown from the very beginning to the way he is today. With feathers. And at the end of the show, he was so outraged, that he looked so retarded, he pulled them out! Best programme about T-Rex I`ve seen! T-Rex is still my favourite Dinosaur.
A perfect list as always, TyB! I found myself hanging on every word written. I love dinosaurs, but would hope that stuff like Jurassic Park NEVER happens. We’ve got other ways of wiping ourselves out without adding the element of becoming food.
Awesome list!
or we could got the Flintstones route of brontosaurus steaks and ribs . .
Which would be ok…but I’m thinking more along the lines of US becoming a T-bone for a T-Rex.
I’d be up for an island of farmable dinosaurs. Just put my English teacher over there too.
My Local park in Crystal Palace has load of dinosaur statues put there by the Victorians. They have all been proven to be anatomically incorrect by todays standards and they have little plaques showing the differences. It’s really interesting.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crystal_Palace_Dinosaurs
Fantastic list!! Best in a while.
Great list. Is there any way to know the colour of the skin or is that just a guess?
I would assume that there’s no real way to know, because skin decomposes and fossils don’t tell us everything. I would imagine that scientists and artists make educated guesses based on other things they assume such as where the dinosaur in question lives, what it would eat, if it would have some sort of mating ritual, etc. This would influence things like camouflag, bright colors for attracting a mate, or maybe even a color based on what it eats (like the flamingo). That’s what I would imagine they do. Maybe not. I don’t feel like actually researching it. Instead I’m gonna go make cinnamon rolls.
Wow. Camoflag… Sounds like a symbol of the south…
*camouflage.
hmmm.. I don’t like cinnamon.
It is not possible, to date, to know the color of a dinosaur’s skin. However, it is possible to guess the color of dinosaur feathers because microscopic pigment structures are preserved in fossilized feathers; by examining these structures and comparing them to those of modern day birds, we can have an idea of what was the color of the dinosaur’s feathercoat.
I should probably mention that the colors of three different feathered dinosaur species (including a giant penguin) have been revealed already, with many more to be announced eventually.
The color of scaly dinosaurs, however, remains a complete mystery.
Great list again from you TyB – this always brings me back to our game reserves here in S.A. as Ive commented on your lists before I spend a lot of time their as I enjoy the wild life
I do not know how much media coverage you guys get about the rhino slaughtering here, its horrific – the demand in Asia is tops for rhino horn.
Our newspapers show close up photos of these rhino suffering from automatic gun fire and their horn sawn off.
And this is on big scale at the moment – this makes me so mad and at the same time so helpless.
Thanks again pal nice list.
I enjoy how much effort you put into your lists. Not only do you create some of the most well researched lists here, but you involve yourself in the comments section and answer questions. I really appreciate that.
Thanks, I appreciate your kind words :>
wow this list was really interesting!
)
Thanks Jamie
Absolutely fascinating! Love it.
Makes no sense how they can guess all this from bones. Ridiculous.
That’s just what I don’t get… How does anybody know the colours when all they have is bones?!?! Someone needs to tell me!!
Only the colors of some feathered dinosaurs are known, because fossilized feathers preserve microscopic pigment structures; pigments are what give color to feathers. Each kind of pigment has a different microscopic structure, so by studying them and comparing them to the pigments in modern day bird feathers, they can guess the color of a dinosaur’s feathers.
The colors of scaly dinosaurs, on the other hand, are impossible to know for certain, at least up to this moment.
Read every word! Thanks TyB.
So that means the Power Rangers dinozords were innacurate? NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!
*GASP* My world has fallen to pieces. I lurved those things as a kid.
The parasaurolophus call sounds like a trombone XD
Cool list.
In your Archaeopteryx entry you have “Archaeopteryx has been used as a mascot by both scientists trying to prove evolution, and creationists trying to disprove it (by claiming that Archaeopteryx is simply a bird).” There are plenty of scientist who believe in creation so it should be “… both scientists trying to prove evolution and those scientists trying to disprove it…”
Random trivia: The word Thagomizer was originally coined by one Gary Larson, in a Farside comic.
Poor Thag…
http://www.bigtimeattic.com/blog/uploaded_images/…
Gary Larson is awesome.
All birds are 100% dinosaurs too, because they evolved from them. Growing out of one’s lineage is not possible. (Not critizising the Archaeopteryx part, just wanted to make that clear.
Anyway, fun article. I love dinosaurs, but my passion goes more for pterosaurs. Sad that they’re so underappreciated
Correct, I should have said a hundred per cent non-avian dinosaur, even though some believe raptors (dromaeosaurs) should be considered as birds too.
I know the Spinosaurus was bigger and badder than T-Rex, but T-Rex was my hero growing up. (I was a strange little girl, I know.) In my dreams, ol’ Rexy grows to enormous sizes and rips Spinosaurus to bits. Which, if you ask me, is how it should be. Forever and ever. (goes merrily through dream world)
I’ve fallen in love with you!
Well that’s kind of awesome! I gained an admirer simply because I love T-Rex.
It is commonly believed that the spinosaurus’ sail on it’s back was yous to swim and it is also believed that spinosaurus didn’t prey on large animals, mostly just bigger fish. As far as T-Rex VS Spinosaurus, there shouldn’t be an argument as all Rex would have to do is bite the sail or knock the spinosaurus over. The sail on the spinosaurus would be attached to the actual spine and severing or breaking it would result in instant paralysis if not death.
Wrong, nobody thinks the sail is used to swim; it is made out of rigid spines and wouldn`t serve any obvious function while swimming; Spinosaurus probably swam using its four legs, and possibly, to some extent, its tail. The sail is more likely to have been some kind of exhibition, perhaps to make the animal appear bigger and scarier.
It may also have been used to attract a mate. Some have suggested that it could store fat like a camel during drought, but this is unlikely for two reasons; one, that Spinosaurus lived in swampy, coastal environments where there was water all year round, and two, because animals with large tails like lizards and crocodiles store fat in their tails, and evolving a complex structure like a sail or hump would not be necessary.
Nobody knows for certain, but the sail seems useless for swimming.
Ok, it’s sail could make it more dynamic under water but let’s just say that your right.
Even so my argument stands that T-Rex is far the superior and studies show that spinosaurus teeth were hollow (that of fish eating carnivore) and had WAY less biting power than T-Rex. T-Rex would kill spinosaurus with ease. And I disagree that spinosaurus claws were for fight. I believe they were for holding prey as it ate.
Also, I justread some more that the spine was actually probably used for cooling the temperature of the spinosaurus. So my bad about the swimming misconception.
or it could be that the spine are actually mohawk hairstyles, i suggest those scientists start searching for traces of hairspray, lots and lots of hairspray.
Remember the earth is only about 6000 years old.
You are an IDIOT.
I’m right there with you. And you are so not an idiot. But… to each their own. Some folks just don’t know how to be polite.
and flat, right?
LOL – what a maroon
Amazing list!!!
If T-Rex and Spinosaurus had met, the Spinosaurus would have been OWNED. T-Rex has the most powerful bite in HISTORY. It teeth were designed for slashing through flesh and breaking bones. when it attacked something it bit chunks out of it. All it`d have to do, is bite it on the neck and it`d die. Easy as that. It`s not called Tyrant-Lizard King for nothing!
Ahhh, I feel I’ve learned (or updated) something today. Consider it a job done. Thanks for the list.
Wow, the triceratop a carnivore?
Ahh… this brings me back to grade 5 science projects =D
The funny thing about this is, one guess is as good as the next.
That’s what cracks me up about things like this. You can’t blame science
for trying,but the new looks are as irrelevant as the old ones.
one guess is as good as the next.
They aren’t just simple “guesses”.
the new looks are as irrelevant as the old ones
No they aren’t. The new looks are based on the most current information available. The old looks have been reasonably proven to be inaccurate, based on studies of newly available evidence. The new looks could be later proven to be incorrect as well, on the basis of newly yet-to-be discovered evidence, but until then, they are relevant today.
Just so I got this straight about T-Rex.
He still has the big head, little arms thingy going, right?
Correct.
Love the website, and this post was as enjoyable as the best you have. Having a small son with a love for dinosaurs has revived my awareness of dinosaurs to a level I haven’t experienced since I was his age. I enjoy the recent discoveries demonstrating the close link between dinosaurs and birds. A book I’ved enjoyed recently that emphasizes this is by Steve Brusatte, and is illustrated with computer graphics of terrific quality. The illustrations accompanying #7, 4, and 2 of this entry reminded me of this.
New evidence establishes that the stegosaurus’ brain wasn’t the size of a walnut. Rather, it was twice the size of a walnut. This means that a stegosaurus would’ve been fully qualified to be John McCain’s 2008 vice presidential running mate.
you have offended walnuts and tina fey.
again a TyB list… n i love this list…….
Superb list. very hlepful
Wow, an informative and interesting share.
Vanimator
http://www.vanimator.com
you destroyed my childhood memories……
Very most excellent list TyB. Meat eating Triceratops is news to me – I’d assume that they weren’t ruminants then? Save them a whole lot of time just hanging around chewing their cud. I always assumed they were.
Those big bird things? No way nature could make something that awkward looking; I do believe that there’s going to be some changes with that one. Scientists haven’t got it quite right yet.
Beautiful list, well done. Well researched and well written.