Naysayers may scoff www.nature.com/news/feathers-w…, but new discoveries in Russia CLEARLY indicate that dino-fuzz extends back to basal Ornithodira. Therefor from now on I will not respect any paleo-artist who does not draw their dinosaurs AT least this fluffy.They may be colored pink or any other girly color, depending on your preferences, I'm not picky.
Kulindadromeus Effect in a nutshell.
Fluffy pink dinos FTW!!!
Fluffy iguanas ,scaly hounds, quadrupedal kangaroos ,bipedal frogs all i welcome them!
I for one welcome our new fluffy stegosaurian overlords.
NOICE. This confirms all my secret suspicions and unspoken yearnings (yes, ALL OF THEM)
I'm willing to go as far as saying that feathers in non-avain dinosaurs exist in every theropod in history, since that's where we get our birds. A feathered ankylosaur is pointless because of its armor, so is a feathered sauropod because even with an avian respiratory system, its size alone can keep its body temperature stabilized.
Idk, I mean, giant ground sloths never had a unidirectional respiratory system. Wouldn't armor be insulation enough?
Because some Ankylosaurus lived in fairly cold climates...
Your right, it's possible suaropods and ankylosaurs were secondarily featherless...aside from their lush eyelashes and fabulous mating plumage, of course!
Where would the girls find this "fabulous mating plumage"?
On the head, in a mane down the spine, a poof on the end of the tail, the more ridiculous the bett--- uh, I mean, imagine the GRANDEUR of an adult male Brachiosaurus, fluffing up his throat-pouch and sweeping the air with his 20 meter peacock tail.
What are these new discoveries in Russia?
Search for Kulindasaurus
These are true "feathered dinnosaurs" after all.
Except for Megalosauroidea.
It makes me feel very hot...
*-* this is simply AWESOME! I love especially the pink fluffy sauropod
That huffpost article is based on the Nature article that started the hooha that inspired me to draw the fluffosaurs in the first place
THEY'RE SO FLUFFY!!
I'm really baffled by that article. It basically says "We've found filaments on all these species and have drawn the conclusion that dinosaurs were ancestrally scaly." That's pretty much the opposite of what the evidence suggests.
I think their contention is that the quills on ornithischians evolved convergently with the dino-fuzz of coelurosaurs. There should be a publication soon that will help clarify the issue.
Any links for the Russian discoveries?
This is inaccurate. Why aren't the stegosaur's plates fluffy?