| Author |
|
Tim Cousar
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 12 May 2006
Location: United States
Posts: 1665
|
| Posted: 30 April 2013 at 6:59pm | IP Logged | 1
|
|
|
A zookeeper in Memphis was killed by a giraffe several years ago.
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
Terry Thielen
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 30 May 2012
Location: United States
Posts: 480
|
| Posted: 30 April 2013 at 7:04pm | IP Logged | 2
|
|
|
sadly, most books were telling those outdated ideas on into the 80s. Long after the "Dinosaur Renaissance" of the 70s. It took a long time for a lot of these ideas to bubble to the surface and it's still a struggle today just to get people to accept feathers (JP4 news comes to mind...) among other ideas."Brontosaurus" was not the proper name for that sauropod, but I'd argue that they probably should have left it that way simply because Brontosaurus had become such a part of public consciousness. I've even heard Paleontologist Robert Bakker suggest the same. A new book called My Beloved Brontosaurus: On the Road With Old Bones, New Science, and Our Favorite Dinosaurs, by Brian Switek, touches upon the figurative "second extinction" of the titular dino. It sounds like a very interesting read. |
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
Carmen Bernardo
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 08 August 2006
Location: United States
Posts: 3666
|
| Posted: 01 May 2013 at 4:29am | IP Logged | 3
|
|
|
I recall the actual name for the Brontosaur being Apatosaurus. I guess the popular name was adopted because of people who wanted to get the idea of how big the animal was (imagine a 70-foot long giant goose browsing along the trees like they were grazing on grass).
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
Terry Thielen
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 30 May 2012
Location: United States
Posts: 480
|
| Posted: 01 May 2013 at 4:45am | IP Logged | 4
|
|
|
Othniel Charles Marsh came up with both names for what he thought were two different dinosaurs (he was looking at very partial skeletons). Years later, Elmer Riggs of the Field Museum in Chicago, was studying Marsh's discoveries when he noticed that the two dinosaurs were actually the same. Apatosaurus was the name that was published first, so it takes precedence. Sadly, by this time the public had already latched onto Brontosaurus and have not really let go (for 100 years now!).
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
John Byrne
Grumpy Old Guy
Joined: 11 May 2005
Posts: 133279
|
| Posted: 01 May 2013 at 4:53am | IP Logged | 5
|
|
|
Othniel Charles Marsh came up with both names for what he thought were two different dinosaurs (he was looking at very partial skeletons). Years later, Elmer Riggs of the Field Museum in Chicago, was studying Marsh's discoveries when he noticed that the two dinosaurs were actually the same. Apatosaurus was the name that was published first, so it takes precedence. Sadly, by this time the public had already latched onto Brontosaurus and have not really let go (for 100 years now!). •• Not sure why that's "sad"? People just happen to LIKE the name "Brontosaurus". The dinosaur bone I own happens to be from this creature, and when people ask what it belongs to I say "Apatosaurus, tho I still insist on saying 'Brontosaurus'!" This is one instance where the popular name should have won over the scientific tradition.
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
Terry Thielen
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 30 May 2012
Location: United States
Posts: 480
|
| Posted: 01 May 2013 at 4:58am | IP Logged | 6
|
|
|
"This is one instance where the popular name should have won over the scientific tradition." I agree. I said so a couple posts ago. Many people agree. It's sad that after 100 years it's a battle to call it by it's proper name. |
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
Rick Shepherd
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 25 June 2012
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 1095
|
| Posted: 01 May 2013 at 5:03am | IP Logged | 7
|
|
|
I don't see why someone couldn't have repurposed the name for some newly-discovered Apatosaur. Boom - in one fell swoop, decades-old dinosaur books with 'Brontosaurus' are accurate again!
(Just ignore the T-Rex dragging it's tail along the floor - and without any down-like feather coverage...)
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
Terry Thielen
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 30 May 2012
Location: United States
Posts: 480
|
| Posted: 01 May 2013 at 5:05am | IP Logged | 8
|
|
|
the group as a whole are now called "Brontosaurids"
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
Carmen Bernardo
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 08 August 2006
Location: United States
Posts: 3666
|
| Posted: 01 May 2013 at 2:28pm | IP Logged | 9
|
|
|
There was a sort of resonance to the name "Brontosaurus" that made sense. After all, these were among the largest land animals that ever existed, far bigger than any elephant. How they did it will probably always remain a mystery of science. On the subject of presumably "gentle" animals like giraffes turning out to be quite aggressive and dangerous to man, and noting the territorial aggressiveness of Canada geese during their nesting and brooding seasons, I could imagine that the Apatosaurs might've been similarly dangerous in their own way. They were basically giant geese, if you use the relationship between dinosaurs and modern birds. I can imagine one of those things knocking predators away from their young with a crack of that long whip-like tail. Barney Rubble would probably find himself clubbed to death by a big bronto's head if he tried robbing its nest.
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
Richard Fisher
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 17 April 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 1229
|
| Posted: 02 May 2013 at 10:41am | IP Logged | 10
|
|
|
yeah, the poor Brontosaurus name got plutoed.
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
John Byrne
Grumpy Old Guy
Joined: 11 May 2005
Posts: 133279
|
| Posted: 02 May 2013 at 12:05pm | IP Logged | 11
|
|
|
On the subject of presumably "gentle" animals like giraffes turning out to be quite aggressive and dangerous to man, and noting the territorial aggressiveness of Canada geese during their nesting and brooding seasons, I could imagine that the Apatosaurs might've been similarly dangerous in their own way. They were basically giant geese, if you use the relationship between dinosaurs and modern birds.•• The Apatosaur and it's kind were not in the dinosaur families that led to birds.
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
Carmen Bernardo
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 08 August 2006
Location: United States
Posts: 3666
|
| Posted: 02 May 2013 at 2:32pm | IP Logged | 12
|
|
|
Correct. That would be the theropods, which included smaller species like Compsognathus (the chicken-sized dinosaur) as well as the familiar Veloceraptors and Tyrannosaurs. I recall that Archaeopterix (from the Jurassic period that also saw our Apatosaurs) looked more a dinosaur than a bird, so it could well have been that "missing link" paleontologists often spoke of when seeking the descendant of apes from which we humans rose.
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
Topic Closed)
