Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi all,
Vanilla are planning an update to the site on April 24th (next Wednesday). It is a major PHP8 update which is expected to boost performance across the site. The site will be down from 7pm and it is expected to take about an hour to complete. We appreciate your patience during the update.
Thanks all.

Apatosaurus and Diplodocus are no more!!!!!

Comments

  • #2
    Rubecula
    Registered Users Posts: 8,551 ✭✭✭Rubecula


    What a load of poo.

    Why don't they just leave well enough alone?

    Brontosaurus dead and gone to be replaced with Appatosaurus. Now they want to change it again.

    Sod it I am going back to saying Brontosaurus in respect of an ancient (sic) cartoon film.:D

    Well Ok maybe not, but it is stupid. Just leave things Alone you mumpties, if you have to change the name, just add a suffix name to it.


  • #3
    The Gnome
    Registered Users Posts: 1,403 ✭✭✭The Gnome


    ...the "Amphicoelias" study suggests the massive sauropods were "filter feeders" who feasted on vegetation floating atop the lakes and ponds they frequented, based on the lack of chewing teeth in their skulls.

    What the hell? Filter feeders!


  • #4
    Rubecula
    Registered Users Posts: 8,551 ✭✭✭Rubecula


    Yep I thought of big flamingos when I saw that :D

    I wonder if they stood on one leg when they were asleep ROFL


  • #5
    Galvasean
    Registered Users Posts: 30,746 ✭✭✭✭Galvasean


    Rubecula wrote: »
    Well Ok maybe not, but it is stupid. Just leave things Alone you mumpties, if you have to change the name, just add a suffix name to it.

    According to the way animals are named by science Amphicoelias must be the correct genus name as it was the first to be given out. That's the way it works.
    I do like how the latest species name (Amphicoelias brontodiplodocus) honours both Brontosaururus and Diplodocus.

    As for the filter feeding idea, I don't really buy it. It's a known fact that sauropods swallowed stones to aid in mechanical digestion, something they wouldn't need to do if they were only eating soft pond slime.


  • #6
    Galvasean
    Registered Users Posts: 30,746 ✭✭✭✭Galvasean


    It seems there is a lot of contraversy about these findings. In fact the paper in question does not even appear to be peer reviewed!
    http://svpow.wordpress.com/2010/10/07/the-elephant-in-the-living-room-amphicoelias-brontodiplodocus/

    We may get to keep our Diplodocus and Apatosaurus yet!


  • Advertisement
  • #7
    Galvasean
    Registered Users Posts: 30,746 ✭✭✭✭Galvasean


    The full paper (all 60 pages of it) is available to view for free here.
    Bear in mind, more or less everything in it has been discredited at this point.


  • #8
    Alvin T. Grey
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,169 ✭✭✭Alvin T. Grey


    Galvasean wrote: »
    According to the way animals are named by science Amphicoelias must be the correct genus name as it was the first to be given out. That's the way it works.

    But exceptions can me made *cough-T.Rex-cough*;):D


  • #9
    Galvasean
    Registered Users Posts: 30,746 ✭✭✭✭Galvasean


    Nomen protectum FTW.


  • #10
    Adam Khor
    Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 5,279 Mod ✭✭✭✭Adam Khor


    The tail structure and defensive posture parts sound reasonable to me... the filter feeding part, erm, not so much XD

    I think all classic dinos, like Apatosaurus, Brachiosaurus, Triceratops etc should be made nomen protectum already :>


  • #11
    Galvasean
    Registered Users Posts: 30,746 ✭✭✭✭Galvasean


    Adam Khor wrote: »
    I think all classic dinos, like Apatosaurus, Brachiosaurus, Triceratops etc should be made nomen protectum already :>

    Give me back my Brontosaurus :(

    Wow, I just googled 'Baker Brontosaurus', because I was looking for one of maverick palaeontologist Robert T. Bakker's Brontosaurus illustrations... turns out there is a porn star by the name of Baker. Google threw up some interesting results. Remember folks, what has been seen cannot be unseen...


  • Advertisement
  • #12
    Adam Khor
    Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 5,279 Mod ✭✭✭✭Adam Khor


    Galvasean wrote: »
    Give me back my Brontosaurus :(

    Wow, I just googled 'Baker Brontosaurus', because I was looking for one of maverick palaeontologist Robert T. Bakker's Brontosaurus illustrations... turns out there is a porn star by the name of Baker. Google threw up some interesting results. Remember folks, what has been seen cannot be unseen...

    I think I'll pass...

    As for Brontosaurus... well I always knew the beast as Apatosaurus and Brontosaurus as the old name. Guess its different if u grew up knowing it as Brontosaurus, as a lot of people did...


  • #13
    Galvasean
    Registered Users Posts: 30,746 ✭✭✭✭Galvasean


    And still do oddly enough...


  • #14
    Rubecula
    Registered Users Posts: 8,551 ✭✭✭Rubecula


    Can we have a petition for "Bring Back Bronty"?:D

    We could start a pressure group and attack establishments for not using the name Brontosaurus. And then we could have a Brontosaurus Liberation Society, and and... Oh dear I am getting carried away again aren't I?

    Anyway I suppose I am a bit of a dinosaur myself, but I don't want new names to confuse matters. I like the name Brontosaurus and I intend to keep using it for as long as folks understand what I mean.

    Rubecula is a Luddite.


Advertisement