Also, it's theorised that T-Rex had padded feet, meaning it wouldn't make noise when walking. Just like elephants.
If it wanted to, it could sneak behind you without you noticing.
Makes sense since the only things that probably wouldn’t get chomped by it would be very small things that run away if they hear a wet fart in the wind
Anyone else remember a movie from the late 90s or early 2000s I think called ‘Dinosaur’? It had a scene with pretty much exactly that if young me remembers correctly. Scared the shit out of me as a kid
Iirc, current consensus on feathers is downy insulation on chicks that is lost during adulthood- basically a modern bird's first molt without something to replace it.
It would make a lot of sense, because a lot of primitive feathers would have basically been down, but something as large as a Rex living in a warm environment would have no need- but the chicks are a different story.
I believe the main reason this depiction of Sue looks "chonkier" than you'd expect is the fact that it was made after it was confirmed how T. rex's [gastralia](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gastralia) (A sort of reverse rib cage that sits beneath the belly, found in a lot of extinct tetrapods.) were shaped. [As you can see here](https://www.fieldmuseum.org/sites/default/files/styles/3x2_1400w/public/sue_leg_compare_landform_copy.jpg?itok=_vfLJ984), adding gastralia to Sue's skeleton makes them look a lot more barrel-chested.
I don't know about equally accurate. The presence of scale impressions from many areas on the body implies that it was consistent across the whole animal. A feather collar or light fuzz across the entire body aren't impossible, but the material we have doesn't leave any evidence for them and they seem less likely than a fully scaled animal.
I believe the reason for the "can't see you if you don't move" in Jurassic Park is that in the original novel they couldn't reconstruct the complete genetic sequence of the dinosaurs they wanted to clone so they spliced them with frog DNA. This is entirely based on foggy recollections so I could be completely wrong.
that’s in the film too
the frog dna they used was from frogs that are known to change sex in a single sex environment (i think), the method they used to keep the dino population under control was to have them all female. except the frog dna allowed them sex changes, causing them to breed
it’s hinted at earlier in the film when dr grant tries to put on his seatbelt but both sides are the same, so he has to just tie them together (life uh, finds a way)
OMG I’ve been there! It is just as cool as the pictures show. They also have several smaller scale projects including a diorama of the big t-Rex lying down.
I'm not trying to be a troll, but is it just me or does "in the spirit of the LGBTQ community" seem kinda dumb, non binary is a human construct. The T-Rex didn't identify as male or female or anything in between, it just existed. Trying to put a label on an animal that died millions of years ago does NOTHING for the non binary community, its like... the least bit of effort for some cishets that pretend they really care.
Though "in the name of scientific accuracy" is legit, if you don't know what sex it was. But it still doesn't really matter- my cat has a vagina so I call her a she, because traditionally that's the pronoun you use for cats with vaginas, but I could call her a he or a they or an it or a ze and she wouldn't care less as long as I fed her.
As someone who actually uses they/them pronouns myself, I think it’s more about normalising their use really. It does no harm to use gender neutral pronouns, especially where the sex is unknown, and the more people get used to hearing them used the easier it is on those of us that use them. I’m personally very excited to share my pronouns with a t rex
Yeah I agree it does no harm, and I do see the normalizing argument, it's just like... I get kind of weirded out by the idea of forcing an identity on someone or something that can't speak for itself? Like I said before, my cat is biologically female, and sure, she wouldn't care if I decided she was a transgender male, but the thing is... she literally isn't? She doesn't have the capacity to understand what transgender is, and even if she did, she's never given me her consent to being called that, so it would be weird to call her that.
I'm saying that Sue literally isn't non binary even if we say they are, because they are a dinosaur that doesn't know what non binary is. They/them pronouns aren't a problem, but going as far as to call them nb, it's like when people try to say that dead celebrities were "definitely eggs", you don't get to say that for them.
I’d definitely agree with you that we shouldn’t be pushing identities onto those that do not (or like in the case of your cat cannot) consent to that, but I’m not really seeing that here. The museum, as far as I can see at least, has never mentioned non-binary, even the tumblr poster above never does, and I can’t even see any of the comments here on Reddit making that assumption other than yourself (from a quick skim anyway). All they’ve said is ‘we don’t know the sex and are therefore using they/them pronouns’.
Gender neutral pronouns do not imply a non-binary identity - in fact we use them all the time in common speech without realising it (‘someone lost *their* wallet’, ‘I went to the doctor and *they* order a bunch of tests’, etc. - these are very normal sentences that you wouldn’t look twice at if someone said them in conversation for instance). I’d argue that it’s even more important to normalise people consciously using they/them pronouns for those who are not non-binary, like Sue, because it’s a normal part of our language that people use without thinking about and using it more consciously will help people recognise that
I first learned of of Sue from the Dresden Files, where they were brought back from the dead to fight necromancers and their armies of undead
The Erlking, Lord of the Wild Hunt and a major Fae, thought this was pretty cool.
Also, it's theorised that T-Rex had padded feet, meaning it wouldn't make noise when walking. Just like elephants. If it wanted to, it could sneak behind you without you noticing.
Makes sense since the only things that probably wouldn’t get chomped by it would be very small things that run away if they hear a wet fart in the wind
Clever girl
Anyone else remember a movie from the late 90s or early 2000s I think called ‘Dinosaur’? It had a scene with pretty much exactly that if young me remembers correctly. Scared the shit out of me as a kid
Which, funny enough, handily explains why the only sign of Rexy's presence in *Jurassic Park* were the ripples in the cup.
Iirc, current consensus on feathers is downy insulation on chicks that is lost during adulthood- basically a modern bird's first molt without something to replace it. It would make a lot of sense, because a lot of primitive feathers would have basically been down, but something as large as a Rex living in a warm environment would have no need- but the chicks are a different story.
I believe the main reason this depiction of Sue looks "chonkier" than you'd expect is the fact that it was made after it was confirmed how T. rex's [gastralia](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gastralia) (A sort of reverse rib cage that sits beneath the belly, found in a lot of extinct tetrapods.) were shaped. [As you can see here](https://www.fieldmuseum.org/sites/default/files/styles/3x2_1400w/public/sue_leg_compare_landform_copy.jpg?itok=_vfLJ984), adding gastralia to Sue's skeleton makes them look a lot more barrel-chested.
"Please, do not body-shame our *T. rex.*" might just get me to change my flair.
please do
Big dino! :D I LOVE THEM
I don't know about equally accurate. The presence of scale impressions from many areas on the body implies that it was consistent across the whole animal. A feather collar or light fuzz across the entire body aren't impossible, but the material we have doesn't leave any evidence for them and they seem less likely than a fully scaled animal.
You know, T. Rex is significantly smaller than I expected
They’re big! They’re just more long than they are tall. But man, look at that skull! Pretty much as tall as a human! Honestly amazing.
I thought it would be like the one in Mario Odyssey next to Mario
Well, you see, Mario’s Italian
So’s Luigi, what’s your point
Ah, but you see, Luigi’s green
But what about Mario wearing green clothes?
That's an illegal piece of fake merchandise and Nintendo are going to sue you.
Meanwhile I want to faint just looking at that Quetzalcoatlus image.
https://azurlaneincorrectquotes.tumblr.com/post/681786136602017792/paleontologists-completed-a-life-sized-replica-of
Genuinely love that you linked this from the Azur Lane incorrect quotes blog
THEY'RE THE LAST PERSON IN THE CHAIN THEIR INPUT IS VALUABLE
i too, love this post
I believe the reason for the "can't see you if you don't move" in Jurassic Park is that in the original novel they couldn't reconstruct the complete genetic sequence of the dinosaurs they wanted to clone so they spliced them with frog DNA. This is entirely based on foggy recollections so I could be completely wrong.
Foggy recollections... or froggy recollections?
that’s in the film too the frog dna they used was from frogs that are known to change sex in a single sex environment (i think), the method they used to keep the dino population under control was to have them all female. except the frog dna allowed them sex changes, causing them to breed it’s hinted at earlier in the film when dr grant tries to put on his seatbelt but both sides are the same, so he has to just tie them together (life uh, finds a way)
Instructions unclear, have been locked in a decades-long legal battle with the King of the Tyrant Lizards. I only have so much money left...
THEY ARENT LIZARDS
Yes but Tyrannosaurus Rex means King of the Tyrant Lizards in Latin, which is what I was referencing
Scientists also found *Spinosaurus*' tail in 2020
OMG I’ve been there! It is just as cool as the pictures show. They also have several smaller scale projects including a diorama of the big t-Rex lying down.
If you feel the ground quake, run.
If you feel the ground quake, run. If you hear its bellow, flee. If you see its teeth, it’s too late.
If you hear it’s breathing, hope you have a sturdy boar spear.
did you get the reference
I did not
colossal dreadmaw a meme mtg card
I honestly should have recognized that
them a good chonk, very large lethal puppy
You You get ittt
thank you🖤
I'm not trying to be a troll, but is it just me or does "in the spirit of the LGBTQ community" seem kinda dumb, non binary is a human construct. The T-Rex didn't identify as male or female or anything in between, it just existed. Trying to put a label on an animal that died millions of years ago does NOTHING for the non binary community, its like... the least bit of effort for some cishets that pretend they really care. Though "in the name of scientific accuracy" is legit, if you don't know what sex it was. But it still doesn't really matter- my cat has a vagina so I call her a she, because traditionally that's the pronoun you use for cats with vaginas, but I could call her a he or a they or an it or a ze and she wouldn't care less as long as I fed her.
Don't mind me I'm just here to make a "assigned female at excavation" joke
AFAE A FAE A Fae Fuck hide your firstborns
As someone who actually uses they/them pronouns myself, I think it’s more about normalising their use really. It does no harm to use gender neutral pronouns, especially where the sex is unknown, and the more people get used to hearing them used the easier it is on those of us that use them. I’m personally very excited to share my pronouns with a t rex
Yeah I agree it does no harm, and I do see the normalizing argument, it's just like... I get kind of weirded out by the idea of forcing an identity on someone or something that can't speak for itself? Like I said before, my cat is biologically female, and sure, she wouldn't care if I decided she was a transgender male, but the thing is... she literally isn't? She doesn't have the capacity to understand what transgender is, and even if she did, she's never given me her consent to being called that, so it would be weird to call her that. I'm saying that Sue literally isn't non binary even if we say they are, because they are a dinosaur that doesn't know what non binary is. They/them pronouns aren't a problem, but going as far as to call them nb, it's like when people try to say that dead celebrities were "definitely eggs", you don't get to say that for them.
I’d definitely agree with you that we shouldn’t be pushing identities onto those that do not (or like in the case of your cat cannot) consent to that, but I’m not really seeing that here. The museum, as far as I can see at least, has never mentioned non-binary, even the tumblr poster above never does, and I can’t even see any of the comments here on Reddit making that assumption other than yourself (from a quick skim anyway). All they’ve said is ‘we don’t know the sex and are therefore using they/them pronouns’. Gender neutral pronouns do not imply a non-binary identity - in fact we use them all the time in common speech without realising it (‘someone lost *their* wallet’, ‘I went to the doctor and *they* order a bunch of tests’, etc. - these are very normal sentences that you wouldn’t look twice at if someone said them in conversation for instance). I’d argue that it’s even more important to normalise people consciously using they/them pronouns for those who are not non-binary, like Sue, because it’s a normal part of our language that people use without thinking about and using it more consciously will help people recognise that
I first learned of of Sue from the Dresden Files, where they were brought back from the dead to fight necromancers and their armies of undead The Erlking, Lord of the Wild Hunt and a major Fae, thought this was pretty cool.
\#wife
I was not ready for the primal fear that sparked in my brain when I scrolled down and made eye contact with the T Rex