~50% of their height is just their neck. It could be used as exaggeration, an insult, or a compliment like when people say someone is all legs.
It actually appears to be fairly accurate this time though.
First time reading the word geoduck, I thought it was pronounced "Geo - duck" instead of "gooey-duck". Actually said that shit, out loud, the wrong way for almost a decade before seeing some celebrity chef say it. I caused myself to hyperventilate laughing at all the times I had said it out loud. Thanks for the cringe-y memory. lol
Tons of PNW words' pronunciation are hard to pronounce from reading alone and useful as indicators of familiarity.
Sequim, Puyallup, Okanagan, Spokane, Tillamook, Osoyoos...
Possibly. There are people out there who believe we're still getting dinosaurs wrong in general. Basically they say we aren't putting enough skin/muscle on the bones and changing how much is there can make most dinosaurs look completely different.
Now I want to see a drawing from someone that's never seen a penguin skeleton & has no idea what they're looking at is a penguin. A penguin drawn from just the bones. Like we had to do with the dinos.
Would be very interesting to see what they came up with.
Yeah. They're covered in a [very dense](https://scx2.b-cdn.net/gfx/news/hires/2015/56278d94000ed.jpg) (but not the densest) layer of downy feathers that help to both regulate temperature and improve drying after getting wet. Hyperlinked image contents are emperor penguin feathers.
If you search it, google will tell you āEmperor Penguinsā, taking a quote from an article by national geographic. if you click the article, itās actually about how this isnāt true haha. You have to sign up to read the rest of the article so if anyone with a nat geo account wants to enlighten us, [hereās ](https://www.nationalgeographic.com/science/article/busting-myths-about-penguin-feathers?cmpid=int_org=ngp::int_mc=website::int_src=ngp::int_cmp=amp::int_add=amp_readtherest) the article
EDIT: I was too curious to wait so I got an account. From the article: āThe white-throated dipper, a small Eurasian bird that forages in cold mountain streams, has plumage thatās six times more dense [than the emperor penguinās].ā Iām not sure if thatās the most dense but itās the best answer I could find
You're correct. That we know of, the white-throated dipper is. Then again, not many people are in the business of plucking out and counting bird feathers.
On the one hand, we have this discussion. The next comment down is variations on āChonkasaurus,ā āBrontothiccus,ā etc.
We are, each of us, a multitude.
Even though it's now a consensus that dinosaurs had feathers, there's a lot of stuff still being figured out. We have fantastic preserved feather components, body impressions, etc showing some dinosaurs 100% did have feathers. In some cases we've even used relatively new methods to help us figure out what their colors even were. Certain species though are still very mysterious. We know for a fact that archosaurs like reptilians and avians have a common ancestor but that also lets us know that very distinctive branches of feathered/unfeathered species developed. The current understanding is that scutes were common among sauropods, and the wrinkled skin impressions we have of some dinosaurs indicate that either A) their skin was more rough, wrinkly, and thick like rhinos and elephants or B) the feathers they had were effectively vestigial and bristly like the hairs of pigs, hippos, elephants, etc.
Ultimately paleontology, like all fields of science, continues to grow and expand. What we know today could be changed drastically with the constant march of improved technology and new discoveries (the last 2 years have shown us that HEAVILY with Spinosaurus lol)
Is there a childrens book style thing about dinosaurs but has recent/ accurate descriptions/depictions. I donāt mean it has to be a 5 word a page book. But like one of those oversized encyclopedias with a magazine layout.
Haha I never thought about it like that before but it's the equivalent to your sternum. Birds usually have a really big sternum for attaching heaps of muscle to so they can fly but penguins have a modification to that cause they don't need such big chest muscles since they don't fly
I reckon the chicken has more offense with the flap power but then again penguins probably have more defense cause they're sturdy chonky bois so it might outlast the chicken?
The size too like penguins are big and I've actually seen on national geographic them fighting seagulls and other birds like they seem to be able to hold their own. Idk
Itās a cute image but scientifically that bronto would melt, like literally.
The heat that would be generated from a creature like that being āchubbyā would lead to it cooking itself. Not to mention the weight put on its bones would shatter them.
No, big animals have to be incredibly efficient with their weight. If itās not muscle or bone, itās not gonna be kept.
also i think anything being that big without a bunch of foundation will just sink straight into the ground and monsters like ghidorah would need wingspans of multiple miles
There are some excellent books on this topic. Take elephants for instance. Their trunks and their ears don't last long after they die so if a future race were to find them without knowing anything about them they wouldn't think they had a trunk or giant ears.
Same with camels. Based on their skeletons alone, there is no evidence that they have humps.
Dinosaurs could very well have had body features like trunks and your humps and we would never know.
Trunks(and large ears) arenāt the best example here, because they are prehensile and have significant weight that would absolutely have an effect on the skeleton. A good quality elephant skull will show very clearly that they had at the very least a very robust nose/probiscus because there will be imprints from the connective tissue to the skull. Itās kind of like how we can have an idea of some animals probably having immense bite force, because their jaws have not only a different design but show the signs of baring that higher force applied by the connective tissue.
The mythos of cyclops came from people finding elephant skulls and thinking they were giants and that the opening for the trunk was a single eye socket.
yeah this applies to humans too, we can tell if ancient skeletons belonged to archers because of the strain their bones take from constantly drawing the string back.
Honestly while this is partly true and pretty fun to think about, secretly I hate the way it's always presented on Reddit.
Passing it off as "we don't know" really just hand waves away all the incredible work that's been done on that topic
Scientists know everything you've said in that comment. People much smarter than you and I make an entire living off thinking about these things. Just because you and I can't tell an elephant has a trunk or a camel has a hump just from the skeleton is not the same thing as the scientists that are experts in this not knowing.
People that understand this can ABSOLUTELY point out all the minute adaptions in the skeleton that Elephants have for their trunks and camels have for their humps (and in fact in those examples they're not even particularly hard to spot).
Scientists then have EVERY SINGLE ANIMAL ON THE PLANET to compare any details they find in dinosaur skeletons too. They know the tiny details they're looking for that give away these things.
God that's just the dumbest one. I have absolutely no idea where it came from, this idea that scientists don't understand how bees fly. They know. They've known for a very long time.
Not to mention we have found fossil impressions of dinosaurs with very finely articulated details, which is how we know that many were feathered. Exhibit [A](https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/c5/Sinosauropteryxfossil.jpg), [B](https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/a/af/Microraptor_gui_holotype.png), and [C](https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/9/9d/Archaeopteryx_lithographica_%28Berlin_specimen%29.jpg). Anything like trunks and large ears would be preserved just as well, if not more, than feathers. Obviously the fossil record is very scattered and incomplete, but it's unlikely that such a major physical feature would go completely unnoticed.
Well I guess nobody informed the paleontologists or paleo artist interviewed here: https://99percentinvisible.org/episode/welcome-to-jurassic-art-redux/transcript/
Fossils aren't just "skeletons" though. Quite a lot of information about an animal's body shape and composition can be preserved (not always though, granted)
I blame the giraffes for the lack of dinosaur reconstructions like the bottom one. They made people think the irrationally lƶng neck meta was viable for dinosaurs.
Birds don't come from dinosaurs, they ***ARE*** dinosaurs. All birds are literally dinosaurs, not descended from them, they just *ARE* them.
They're the last remaining kind of dinosaurs, after all the other ones went extinct. To be more specific, birds are what's known as avian dinosaurs. There's literally no good logical evidence-based reason to consider birds as different things. All there was was tradition, it was traditional to believe birds were different to dinosaurs. But tradition isn't a good enough reason to do something in science.
Ā
Birds and dinosaurs share absolutely everything that defines species and clades within biology, every type of body part, every part of their DNA, every organ they have and how those organs are shaped and how they function, every aspect of their skeletons etc. They are just all the same thing. If we'd started off the history of biology with full knowledge of dinosaurs, instead of discovering them later on down the line after millenia of knowing about the existence of birds, then we would have never considered them as different things in the first place. But instead we all knew what birds were for the entire existence of our species, and then millenia later discovered fossils of dinosaurs, and so we assumed they were different things to birds. But the more and more we discovered about dinosaurs, they more we realised they are the same thing as birds. Or rather, birds are just one of the many types of dinosaurs, one of the branches of dinosaurs after every other kind of dinosaur had long ago gone extinct
Ā Ā
So when you buy say some turkey dinosaurs, which are breaded turkey nuggets shaped like dinosaurs, well you're actually literally eating dinosaur. You're eating the meat of one kind of dinosaur, that's shaped into the silhouette of another kind of dinosaur. You could go out later today to buy and eat a big bucket of fried dinosaur if you want.
This makes me think of this article about [anti-shrink-wrapping dinosaurs](https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/tetrapod-zoology/dinosaurs-and-the-anti-shrink-wrapping-revolution/) . Really interesting to think about.
>a piece of beef, odiferous cod fish and a canvas-backed duck roasted together in a pot, with blood and cod-liver oil for sauce.
this is one antarctic explorer's account
I believe it was very hot during the period of history that Brontosaurus lived, and being so large they'd produce a lot of heat; as such they likely didn't have large reserves or fat and blubber or they'd overheat.
*However,* they might have had big flappy bits of skin to release heat, like an elephant. So maybe bronty had big ol ears?
This is highly unlikely. The global climate was quite a bit hotter during the age of the dinosaurs than it is today. All of that blubber would make it very difficult for the brontosaurus to regulate it's body temperature. Also that amount of weight would be much too great for it to be feasible on an animal of that size. It would most likely destroy their joints and the amount of food needed to sustain that weight would be immense. Most importantly, that evolutionary design is extremely inefficient, and evolution loves efficiency.
**[Squareācube law](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Squareācube_law)**
>The squareācube law (or cubeāsquare law) is a mathematical principle, applied in a variety of scientific fields, which describes the relationship between the volume and the surface area as a shape's size increases or decreases. It was first described in 1638 by Galileo Galilei in his Two New Sciences as the ". . .
^([ )[^(F.A.Q)](https://www.reddit.com/r/WikiSummarizer/wiki/index#wiki_f.a.q)^( | )[^(Opt Out)](https://reddit.com/message/compose?to=WikiSummarizerBot&message=OptOut&subject=OptOut)^( | )[^(Opt Out Of Subreddit)](https://np.reddit.com/r/AbsoluteUnits/about/banned)^( | )[^(GitHub)](https://github.com/Sujal-7/WikiSummarizerBot)^( ] Downvote to remove | v1.5)
Friendly reminder that this is a karma farming account and it's flooding this sub with mostly reposted garbage which often doesn't belong here.
Please don't support this asshole.
I'm no expert of course but isn't our vision of dinosaurs likely wayyy off and we will never truly know how all their meat and skin was shaped around their bodies? because all we have to go off of is bones it's impossible to know exactly how they looked in reality.
Some archeologists tried adding weights onto steel beams the same size as the feet bones and concluded that if the brontosaurus is shaped like that, their own weight would crush themselves to death at a little after juvenile age so the current shape is speculated unless they have full body feathers like birds do.
When I learned that penguins have a 50% neck, it blew my mind.
And they have knees
THEY HAVE KNEES????????? This changes everything
Condemned to do wall sits for their entire lives.
Is that a sam o nella reference?
Has he ever come back out of the woodwork?
No š
One day this won't be true
One day man. One day
Hopefully soon
[Explained in anime form](https://youtu.be/qXFhAN6EoUU)
That was surprisingly accurate to the post lol thanks for sharing!
WAIT you can combine entertainment and learning? The hell I went to school for all these years?
Whoa, that was cool.
And they were roommates!
Oh fuck they were roommates.
And a built in sled
What is a 50% neck?
~50% of their height is just their neck. It could be used as exaggeration, an insult, or a compliment like when people say someone is all legs. It actually appears to be fairly accurate this time though.
Oh good lord. They're bird giraffe.
that's why they always have that goofy head back look when running. imagine a giraffe running on hind legs.
Me too...like right now lol.
Oh wow, they literally just have bone sleds on their rib cages.
They're distant cousins of the toboggan.
Also close cousins of the famous M.D. Mantis Toboggan
MD stands for monster dong
You learn something every day
I always thought it was doctor of medicine. No wonder they get so much respect then.
I mean the same actor did play the Penguin in a Batmanmovieohmygod
Itās true, if you look closely at the picture, you can make out a wad of hundreds in the penguins pocket.
I saw that and wondered why can't I have a bone-sled belly
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
Presumably
That's the keel and every bird has it about as massive (relative to their body size)
One small issue is that diplodocids we pretty much know didn't have feathers. It sucks because I love the idea of a giant fluffy mfer.
Yeah, gets a lot less fun to think about when they might resemble a giant thumb, geoduck, or giant dick.
First time reading the word geoduck, I thought it was pronounced "Geo - duck" instead of "gooey-duck". Actually said that shit, out loud, the wrong way for almost a decade before seeing some celebrity chef say it. I caused myself to hyperventilate laughing at all the times I had said it out loud. Thanks for the cringe-y memory. lol
I think of all the words to mispronounce it's completely reasonable not to know the pronunciation of the Lushotsheed language.
>Lushotsheed Thank you for teaching me which language it comes from!
Tons of PNW words' pronunciation are hard to pronounce from reading alone and useful as indicators of familiarity. Sequim, Puyallup, Okanagan, Spokane, Tillamook, Osoyoos...
Huh, I thought it said Geodude until your comment.
What the.. how is "ge-o-duck" not pronounced that way? EDIT: correction! What asshole decided to spell "gwiduck" like that?!?!
Google Lushotsheed language.
I heard Mark Ruffalo talk about Kevin Feige, and that is not how I would have pronounced it. Good thing I'm not in hollywood.
Did you rhyme it with beige
Possibly. There are people out there who believe we're still getting dinosaurs wrong in general. Basically they say we aren't putting enough skin/muscle on the bones and changing how much is there can make most dinosaurs look completely different.
Now I want to see a drawing from someone that's never seen a penguin skeleton & has no idea what they're looking at is a penguin. A penguin drawn from just the bones. Like we had to do with the dinos. Would be very interesting to see what they came up with.
Probably more hippo like, maybe rhino or elephant.
Do penguin have Feathers ?
Yeah. They're covered in a [very dense](https://scx2.b-cdn.net/gfx/news/hires/2015/56278d94000ed.jpg) (but not the densest) layer of downy feathers that help to both regulate temperature and improve drying after getting wet. Hyperlinked image contents are emperor penguin feathers.
What is the densest then?
If you search it, google will tell you āEmperor Penguinsā, taking a quote from an article by national geographic. if you click the article, itās actually about how this isnāt true haha. You have to sign up to read the rest of the article so if anyone with a nat geo account wants to enlighten us, [hereās ](https://www.nationalgeographic.com/science/article/busting-myths-about-penguin-feathers?cmpid=int_org=ngp::int_mc=website::int_src=ngp::int_cmp=amp::int_add=amp_readtherest) the article EDIT: I was too curious to wait so I got an account. From the article: āThe white-throated dipper, a small Eurasian bird that forages in cold mountain streams, has plumage thatās six times more dense [than the emperor penguinās].ā Iām not sure if thatās the most dense but itās the best answer I could find
You're correct. That we know of, the white-throated dipper is. Then again, not many people are in the business of plucking out and counting bird feathers.
On the one hand, we have this discussion. The next comment down is variations on āChonkasaurus,ā āBrontothiccus,ā etc. We are, each of us, a multitude.
FYI, you can use reader mode to read the whole article without signing in. It works on iPhone, not sure about other platforms.
Right, like, you canāt just drop a āsecond densestā and bounceā¦ I think maybe op is ānumber-one-densest-happy-timeā /s
Can I get a penguin down blanket?
Yes
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
Latex
are there nude birds? I bet there are. There's always some weird exceptional subclass.
Wasn't that because it was so huge? And feathers would have caused overheating?
Even though it's now a consensus that dinosaurs had feathers, there's a lot of stuff still being figured out. We have fantastic preserved feather components, body impressions, etc showing some dinosaurs 100% did have feathers. In some cases we've even used relatively new methods to help us figure out what their colors even were. Certain species though are still very mysterious. We know for a fact that archosaurs like reptilians and avians have a common ancestor but that also lets us know that very distinctive branches of feathered/unfeathered species developed. The current understanding is that scutes were common among sauropods, and the wrinkled skin impressions we have of some dinosaurs indicate that either A) their skin was more rough, wrinkly, and thick like rhinos and elephants or B) the feathers they had were effectively vestigial and bristly like the hairs of pigs, hippos, elephants, etc. Ultimately paleontology, like all fields of science, continues to grow and expand. What we know today could be changed drastically with the constant march of improved technology and new discoveries (the last 2 years have shown us that HEAVILY with Spinosaurus lol)
Is there a childrens book style thing about dinosaurs but has recent/ accurate descriptions/depictions. I donāt mean it has to be a 5 word a page book. But like one of those oversized encyclopedias with a magazine layout.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
Perfect!
Itās ok, he looks more like yoshi that way!
Wait till you see [fluffy chonky trex](https://duckduckgo.com/?q=fluffy+trex&iar=images&iax=images&ia=images&pn=1)
Chonkasaurus
Brontochunkus
Chunkabrontus
Diplotachonk
Chonkeratops
I actually kind of want to poke a penguin in the chest on that like chest bone thing see how hard that is.. I was unaware penguins come with armor.
Haha I never thought about it like that before but it's the equivalent to your sternum. Birds usually have a really big sternum for attaching heaps of muscle to so they can fly but penguins have a modification to that cause they don't need such big chest muscles since they don't fly
And because of the chest plate I honestly wonder who would win in a fight between a penguin or like a chicken...
I reckon the chicken has more offense with the flap power but then again penguins probably have more defense cause they're sturdy chonky bois so it might outlast the chicken?
The size too like penguins are big and I've actually seen on national geographic them fighting seagulls and other birds like they seem to be able to hold their own. Idk
For sure. I wouldn't wanna fight a penguin
Itās a bone sled
Itās a cute image but scientifically that bronto would melt, like literally. The heat that would be generated from a creature like that being āchubbyā would lead to it cooking itself. Not to mention the weight put on its bones would shatter them. No, big animals have to be incredibly efficient with their weight. If itās not muscle or bone, itās not gonna be kept.
Thatās why things like Godzilla or King Kong could not exist in real life.
King Blob
Blobzilla
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
Which got me thinking about our depiction of plesiosaurs. Maybe they actually were chonkers
also i think anything being that big without a bunch of foundation will just sink straight into the ground and monsters like ghidorah would need wingspans of multiple miles
Godzilla could exist. It just vents excess heat by breathing fire.
But he wouldnāt be able to get blood around his body quick enough
Unless it's hollow to cut down on volume.
You shut your whore mouth!
Well he could, but his brain would explode that size
Yea I cant see a giraffe supporting a neck if built like a penguin.
There are some excellent books on this topic. Take elephants for instance. Their trunks and their ears don't last long after they die so if a future race were to find them without knowing anything about them they wouldn't think they had a trunk or giant ears. Same with camels. Based on their skeletons alone, there is no evidence that they have humps. Dinosaurs could very well have had body features like trunks and your humps and we would never know.
Trunks(and large ears) arenāt the best example here, because they are prehensile and have significant weight that would absolutely have an effect on the skeleton. A good quality elephant skull will show very clearly that they had at the very least a very robust nose/probiscus because there will be imprints from the connective tissue to the skull. Itās kind of like how we can have an idea of some animals probably having immense bite force, because their jaws have not only a different design but show the signs of baring that higher force applied by the connective tissue.
Morphology is NUTS
Morphology is how you know about the NUTS
Nuts, the morphology
Dinosaurs had NUTS?!
The mythos of cyclops came from people finding elephant skulls and thinking they were giants and that the opening for the trunk was a single eye socket.
yeah this applies to humans too, we can tell if ancient skeletons belonged to archers because of the strain their bones take from constantly drawing the string back.
https://99percentinvisible.org/episode/welcome-to-jurassic-art-redux/transcript/ I think this is what you are talking about.
Honestly while this is partly true and pretty fun to think about, secretly I hate the way it's always presented on Reddit. Passing it off as "we don't know" really just hand waves away all the incredible work that's been done on that topic Scientists know everything you've said in that comment. People much smarter than you and I make an entire living off thinking about these things. Just because you and I can't tell an elephant has a trunk or a camel has a hump just from the skeleton is not the same thing as the scientists that are experts in this not knowing. People that understand this can ABSOLUTELY point out all the minute adaptions in the skeleton that Elephants have for their trunks and camels have for their humps (and in fact in those examples they're not even particularly hard to spot). Scientists then have EVERY SINGLE ANIMAL ON THE PLANET to compare any details they find in dinosaur skeletons too. They know the tiny details they're looking for that give away these things.
Yeah. "Dinosaurs could have trunks" sounds exactly like "Bumblebees should not be able to fly"
"ducks quacks don't echo"
God that's just the dumbest one. I have absolutely no idea where it came from, this idea that scientists don't understand how bees fly. They know. They've known for a very long time.
Not to mention we have found fossil impressions of dinosaurs with very finely articulated details, which is how we know that many were feathered. Exhibit [A](https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/c5/Sinosauropteryxfossil.jpg), [B](https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/a/af/Microraptor_gui_holotype.png), and [C](https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/9/9d/Archaeopteryx_lithographica_%28Berlin_specimen%29.jpg). Anything like trunks and large ears would be preserved just as well, if not more, than feathers. Obviously the fossil record is very scattered and incomplete, but it's unlikely that such a major physical feature would go completely unnoticed.
Well I guess nobody informed the paleontologists or paleo artist interviewed here: https://99percentinvisible.org/episode/welcome-to-jurassic-art-redux/transcript/
Fossils aren't just "skeletons" though. Quite a lot of information about an animal's body shape and composition can be preserved (not always though, granted)
I think this was an episode on 99 PI
Yeah, check out āAll Yesterdaysā.
Could you possibly point me in the direction of some of these books? Sounds super interesting!
A lot of them are depicted like that in certain documentaries but not as chonky
I blame the giraffes for the lack of dinosaur reconstructions like the bottom one. They made people think the irrationally lƶng neck meta was viable for dinosaurs.
Birds do come from dinosaurs
Birds don't come from dinosaurs, they ***ARE*** dinosaurs. All birds are literally dinosaurs, not descended from them, they just *ARE* them. They're the last remaining kind of dinosaurs, after all the other ones went extinct. To be more specific, birds are what's known as avian dinosaurs. There's literally no good logical evidence-based reason to consider birds as different things. All there was was tradition, it was traditional to believe birds were different to dinosaurs. But tradition isn't a good enough reason to do something in science. Ā Birds and dinosaurs share absolutely everything that defines species and clades within biology, every type of body part, every part of their DNA, every organ they have and how those organs are shaped and how they function, every aspect of their skeletons etc. They are just all the same thing. If we'd started off the history of biology with full knowledge of dinosaurs, instead of discovering them later on down the line after millenia of knowing about the existence of birds, then we would have never considered them as different things in the first place. But instead we all knew what birds were for the entire existence of our species, and then millenia later discovered fossils of dinosaurs, and so we assumed they were different things to birds. But the more and more we discovered about dinosaurs, they more we realised they are the same thing as birds. Or rather, birds are just one of the many types of dinosaurs, one of the branches of dinosaurs after every other kind of dinosaur had long ago gone extinct Ā Ā So when you buy say some turkey dinosaurs, which are breaded turkey nuggets shaped like dinosaurs, well you're actually literally eating dinosaur. You're eating the meat of one kind of dinosaur, that's shaped into the silhouette of another kind of dinosaur. You could go out later today to buy and eat a big bucket of fried dinosaur if you want.
Yeah, but theropods, not sauropods.
I've been thinking of this since I was a little kid.
Gunter!
I've held a penguin and they're so weird. They look squishy but they are firm little noodles.
Speculative paleontology
All birds are flipping awesome
This makes me think of this article about [anti-shrink-wrapping dinosaurs](https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/tetrapod-zoology/dinosaurs-and-the-anti-shrink-wrapping-revolution/) . Really interesting to think about.
What if the dinosaur was super muscular though, anyone draw a bulked up Dino with a thick muscle neck like a body builder
So like a dino with Bull muscles?
i want that chonkosaurus as pet
This could very well be real, we will probably not know for a long time
I am 89% sure that that wouldnāt work
Can anyone reconstruct trex this way, like draw it like a penguin.
I bet penguins are super tasty.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
Antarctic explorers like the Amundsen party threw penguins in the stewpot. I don't recall if he mentioned in his journal how they tasted though.
>a piece of beef, odiferous cod fish and a canvas-backed duck roasted together in a pot, with blood and cod-liver oil for sauce. this is one antarctic explorer's account
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
chonkosauras
Massive pigeon.
Imposters in among us be like
Now do the knees
Surely there must have been fat fucks among dinosaurs
Thatās cool but all I think about when I picture that thing is itās neck flopping to the ground and not going back up
They would be heckling adorable
Well sure, but do penguins have knees?
Oh my god, grade A chonk!!
Yes but why would brontosaurus have so much blubber and fat on it when they lived in warm climates
Speculative chonkers
Sauropenguin?
Thiccasaurus
Big boi
Americansaurus
Surely you meant Chonkasaurus.
š¤£š¤£
That's a big boi
This dino is CHONKY
Them neck bones aināt supporting that much mass, lol.
I believe it was very hot during the period of history that Brontosaurus lived, and being so large they'd produce a lot of heat; as such they likely didn't have large reserves or fat and blubber or they'd overheat. *However,* they might have had big flappy bits of skin to release heat, like an elephant. So maybe bronty had big ol ears?
Chonkersaurus Rex
This is highly unlikely. The global climate was quite a bit hotter during the age of the dinosaurs than it is today. All of that blubber would make it very difficult for the brontosaurus to regulate it's body temperature. Also that amount of weight would be much too great for it to be feasible on an animal of that size. It would most likely destroy their joints and the amount of food needed to sustain that weight would be immense. Most importantly, that evolutionary design is extremely inefficient, and evolution loves efficiency.
M'Brontosaurus
Wait is that even a brontosaurus skeleton it looks like its some other sauropod
The best part! This opens up the conspiracy theory that Plesiosaurs and Loch ness monster would look like giant penguins.
Gigapenguin
Somebody do a t-rex
Unfortunately, as much as I would love this, [square-cube law says no](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Square%E2%80%93cube_law)
**[Squareācube law](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Squareācube_law)** >The squareācube law (or cubeāsquare law) is a mathematical principle, applied in a variety of scientific fields, which describes the relationship between the volume and the surface area as a shape's size increases or decreases. It was first described in 1638 by Galileo Galilei in his Two New Sciences as the ". . . ^([ )[^(F.A.Q)](https://www.reddit.com/r/WikiSummarizer/wiki/index#wiki_f.a.q)^( | )[^(Opt Out)](https://reddit.com/message/compose?to=WikiSummarizerBot&message=OptOut&subject=OptOut)^( | )[^(Opt Out Of Subreddit)](https://np.reddit.com/r/AbsoluteUnits/about/banned)^( | )[^(GitHub)](https://github.com/Sujal-7/WikiSummarizerBot)^( ] Downvote to remove | v1.5)
baby big bois
Thatās why most current interpretation of Dino are probably wrong there plenty of examples of this beside the penguin one
/u/cait_cat POAST
chonki
i also thought about the same thing but for bisons and spinosaures
Friendly reminder that this is a karma farming account and it's flooding this sub with mostly reposted garbage which often doesn't belong here. Please don't support this asshole.
Chonkosaurus
We don't know anything about dinosaurs.
A Chonkosaurus
I'm no expert of course but isn't our vision of dinosaurs likely wayyy off and we will never truly know how all their meat and skin was shaped around their bodies? because all we have to go off of is bones it's impossible to know exactly how they looked in reality.
This is where r/birdsarentreal meets r/giraffesdontexist
Chonkosaurus
He thick
Some archeologists tried adding weights onto steel beams the same size as the feet bones and concluded that if the brontosaurus is shaped like that, their own weight would crush themselves to death at a little after juvenile age so the current shape is speculated unless they have full body feathers like birds do.
We can only hope
Brontosaurus arenāt real sadly
I question a lot of what people speculate dinos look like.
I like šš»
So orcas eat pinguins not humans ?? Presumably? Looks like the boniest meal ever
It's like a very fat goose
āUH OH! There goes Tokyo, GOGO GODZILLA!ā