this post was submitted on 10 Nov 2023
662 points (97.0% liked)

Science Memes

16103 readers
2624 users here now

Welcome to c/science_memes @ Mander.xyz!

A place for majestic STEMLORD peacocking, as well as memes about the realities of working in a lab.



Rules

  1. Don't throw mud. Behave like an intellectual and remember the human.
  2. Keep it rooted (on topic).
  3. No spam.
  4. Infographics welcome, get schooled.

This is a science community. We use the Dawkins definition of meme.



Research Committee

Other Mander Communities

Science and Research

Biology and Life Sciences

Physical Sciences

Humanities and Social Sciences

Practical and Applied Sciences

Memes

Miscellaneous

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] stebo02@sopuli.xyz 64 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (6 children)

Actually this is how we've been reconstructing dinosaurs. They're probably all very wrong.

[–] Malgas@beehaw.org 43 points 2 years ago (2 children)
[–] makuus@pawb.social 14 points 2 years ago

I want to believe…

[–] MonkderZweite@feddit.ch 4 points 2 years ago

Then you have physcs and how much weight the bones can lift before breaking.

[–] fossilesque@mander.xyz 37 points 2 years ago (1 children)
[–] jomoo99@lemmy.world 17 points 2 years ago

We need to bring back the chonkosaurs

[–] protist@mander.xyz 22 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (2 children)

T. rex

T. rex may have had lips, for example

[–] dingleberry@discuss.tchncs.de 24 points 2 years ago

Luscious kissable lips?

[–] Smokeydope@lemmy.world 14 points 2 years ago (2 children)

I dont care how scientifically accurate Dino's with bird feathers are, they will never be as cool as the Jurassic park dino of my childhood

[–] HiddenLayer5@lemmy.ml 15 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (5 children)

IIRC the current theory is that many (likely most) had feathers but few of the large ones had actual wings beyond just a row of longer feathers on the forearms. The bodily structures that allow flight are absent on the vast majority of dinosaurs so it's thought they mostly used their arm feathers as rudders for better control when running (which the ostrich and other large flightless birds still use). However, it is thought that some smaller species likely did have wings which they used to glide much like a flying squirrel. Eventually they evolved larger chest muscles and a keel for attaching said large muscles, and at that point you could reasonably just call them birds, which are to this day a subset of dinosaurs.

load more comments (5 replies)
[–] Salvo@aussie.zone 8 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Spoken like someone who thinks Pluto should still be considered a Planet.

But you are right, Jurassic Park would be a completely different movie if Genaro was eaten my something that looked like an oversized quail.

[–] name_NULL111653@pawb.social 9 points 2 years ago

Pluto will forever be a planet in our hearts...

[–] usualsuspect191@lemmy.ca 3 points 2 years ago (1 children)
[–] Salvo@aussie.zone 1 points 2 years ago

Just purchased. Now it will languish in my iBooks library with other illustrated books until some time in the distant future…

[–] MonkderZweite@feddit.ch 2 points 2 years ago

It's a while ago. Now they're probably pretty accurate.

[–] baseless_discourse@mander.xyz 64 points 2 years ago (2 children)

I remember someone mentioned online that the reconstruction of animals are more complicated than just tracing the bone line.

I am very interested if some experts are willing to tell us more.

[–] agent_flounder@lemmy.world 53 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (3 children)

Since none chimed in (in the past 6 minutes) , I, an idiot, will share what I think I know. When reconstructing the faces of people from a skull, either with clay or software, they model the various tissues--muscles, fat, skin, etc according to models based on samples. How they would do this for a creature that isn't very like any current living creature I don't know. It is probably educated guesswork?

I just read an article on this process for a neanderthal and in that particular instance they used data from humans since I guess it was close enough.

But, for example (referencing a recent meme) how do they know spinosaur had a sail and not a hump back and neck muscles like a buffalo?? Seriously though I'm sure they can tell which bones have attachment points, how much force they can withstand, etc.

[–] snooggums@kbin.social 39 points 2 years ago

Over the last few decades there have been massive improvements on telling which bones have attachment points for muscles and hints at how strong the muscles are likely to be, but it takes a long time to replace all of the existing artwork with newer and more accurate artwork.

Even with improvements to the muscle structure, any part of the body that has fatty buildup like breasts would be missed without soft tissues being preserved. I am fairly certain that a hippos nose and lip area wouldn't have enough detail to reconstruct accurately. Heck, tyrannosaurs most likely had lips to cover their teeth, but that is based on other animals with similar teeth all having lips to protect the teeth from dryness and rot that doesn't apply to crocodiles who live in a very wet environment.

[–] Hillock@kbin.social 13 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 children)

As another idiot, there is a difference between tusks and teeth. They are different, tusks don't contain enamel for example and I think aliens could also determine this difference. It's rare for teeth to stick out like in the reconstruction.

They would also be able to determine that hippos can open their mouth extremely wide. Making it more likely for the long "fangs" to be at least partially covered and not exposed like the tusks of elephants.

[–] lugal@sopuli.xyz 14 points 2 years ago

Often, dinosaurs are depicted with mouths showing their tooth. This is debated and more and more scientists think they had closed mouths, like most animals today.

Other than that, the proposition of fat is very hard to reconstruct. Reconstructing a hippo you would have other mammals in mind and reconstructing dinosaurs, scientists take reptiles but they could as well take birds so this is a big question.

For context: I'm an idiot too

[–] msage@programming.dev 1 points 2 years ago

I'll be honest, I double-checked your username to make sure I'm not going to read about Undertaker at the end

[–] blackbrook@mander.xyz 17 points 2 years ago

They can get some idea from the bones of muscle attachment points and how strong of a muscle would have been attached.

[–] FuglyDuck@lemmy.world 34 points 2 years ago (3 children)

They might look cute and cuddly, but hippos are freaking mean. And they hold grudges longer than a snubbed karen-in-law

[–] kamenlady@lemmy.world 7 points 2 years ago (2 children)

They are also faster than they look.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] MonkderZweite@feddit.ch 1 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Aren't they the most deadly wild animal? (because people think they are like cattle and get too close)

[–] FuglyDuck@lemmy.world 3 points 2 years ago

I’m not sure most deadly animal is right, but they’re definitely top five. Mothers also supper protective of children and males are hyper territorial.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] RIP_Cheems@lemmy.world 25 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (2 children)

Did you know the bite force of a hippo is 1820 psi? For comparison, the bite force of a lion is 650 psi, which could easily crush your rib cage as it can only withstand 630 pounds of force.

[–] LemmysMum@lemmy.world 14 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Imagine a hydrolic press pushing a coke can through your leg.

[–] BassaForte@lemmy.world 21 points 2 years ago (1 children)
[–] remotedev@lemmy.ca 2 points 2 years ago

It's fine I'll have water

[–] ALostInquirer@lemm.ee 4 points 2 years ago (2 children)

[...] which could easily crush your rib cage as it can only withstand 630 pounds of force.

...How is this known? Also is that calculated with the skin/muscle/connective tissue buffer in mind? If so, that honestly raises even more questions...

[–] RIP_Cheems@lemmy.world 14 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (2 children)

There is a method of execution known as pressing, which was the crushing of someone under immense weight. One famous example occurred during the Salem witch trials where a man, not a woman, got so sick of salems bullshit that he refused to talk when questioned and so the town tried to get a confession out of him by stacking rocks on top of him, with the only response being "more weight". He eventually died from the crushing pressure of the rocks. Another famouse example involves an elephant crushing a person, though it was common to crush the limbs then the head.

[–] ALostInquirer@lemm.ee 2 points 2 years ago

Thanks! I was aware of that execution method, but I've never read of a precise amount of weight employed in the process.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] MonkderZweite@feddit.ch 2 points 2 years ago

How is this known?

Scale in mouth, bite?

[–] moistclump@lemmy.world 24 points 2 years ago (2 children)

I dunno, I think aliens would be smarter than that and we’re projecting our history of being overly simplistic on our dino reconstruction. Why put it on the aliens? It’s already an us issue.

[–] angrystego@lemmy.world 17 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Because the post is not about aliens. It's about people. Aliens serve here to help you see the problem from the outside, to not use what you know about the animal. It's supposed to show you the reflection of our way of thinking about fossils.

[–] Draconic_NEO@mander.xyz 2 points 2 years ago (1 children)

How can anyone say that an Alien archeologist would make the same minimalist assumptions that humans have made as opposed to making their own assumptions about the muscle and cartilage structures based on the creatures they're familiar with or current creatures alive on earth at the time.

[–] angrystego@lemmy.world 3 points 2 years ago

Don't fixate on the alien part. That part is not supposed to be realistic, because it doesn't really represent aliens - it represents us people.

It's the same kind of alien trope used in Star Trek to represent different aspects of humans. It's not what aliens would probably really be like (trully alien).

It's a tool for illustrating human behaviour and it works decently well.

[–] UraniumBlazer@lemm.ee 5 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Uh oh... Looks like SOME alien got offended...

[–] moistclump@lemmy.world 4 points 2 years ago

I am and I am!

[–] sj_zero@lotide.fbxl.net 22 points 2 years ago

Honestly, knowing what I know about the last slide, it might as well be the middle slide.

[–] Grownbravy@hexbear.net 13 points 2 years ago (1 children)

How it looks: This creature would use it’s oversized teeth to impale it’s prey and it’s massive muscles gives it a crushing bite.

The truth: I eata da plant

[–] Collatz_problem@hexbear.net 22 points 2 years ago (1 children)

The truth: I eata da plant and also indiscriminately murder everyone who comes too close.

[–] lol3droflxp@kbin.social 7 points 2 years ago (1 children)

And then eat the meat sometimes

[–] SubArcticTundra@lemmy.ml 5 points 2 years ago (1 children)

They only eat meat that's already been killed – the perfect flexitarians

[–] sukhmel@programming.dev 4 points 2 years ago

But since they indiscriminately kill whatever is close enough, they may supply themselves with said "meat that's already been killed"

[–] Etterra@lemmy.world 1 points 2 years ago

Oh hey, it's Tusky Tooth, the cryptid mascot of the Alabama turn named after him.

load more comments
view more: next ›