• Welcome to ZD Forums! You must create an account and log in to see and participate in the Shoutbox chat on this main index page.

What can you talk about for hours?

ExLight

why
Forum Volunteer
about how nagito komaeda did nothing wrong and about how every liquid can be classified as soup

fr tho with strangers I can just keep going about some series I enjoy like pokémon, yugioh, and danganronpa or anything I’ve played or watched really

with online friends uh idk kinda same but also whatever is the hot topic atm, sometimes the ball just gets going and everyone ends up chatting for hours about the most random things
with irl friends it’s usually nostalgia talk, our current lives, whatever we like that brought us together, etc

and with people I really really really care it’s just about anything, it can be about themselves or something they like and I’ll just gladly ask and listen for it and I just like seeing them chatting about something that matters to them so that works out

.
 
Last edited:

Vanessa28

Angel of Darkness
Staff member
ZD Legend
Administrator
Joined
Jan 31, 2010
Location
Yahtzee, Supernatural
Gender
Angel of Darkness
True crime.

Besides the usual hobbies, one of my favorite pastimes is reading about unsolved cases. My mom and I like to watch the ID channel quite a bit, but she doesn't like to watch episodes of anything if the case is unsolved. So when one starts and it's ambiguous to whether it's solved or not she'll ask me if it is and I can usually tell her if it isn't.

There have been a couple of times where I've just walked in the room or we just turned it onto a show and within seconds I've told her what case it is that they're talking about just based off of one or two key words.

It's really satisfying to read up on an unsolved case and then later hear that it's been solved. Which thankfully seems to be happening a lot lately with genetic genealogy becoming more popular.
I used to watch crime night on Discovery every week! There are really some weirdos out there for sure! Some stories are so fascinating. The smallest detail can lead to a killer. Especially when a very gruesome crime has been committed and the case is going cold and then years later they solve it. The story about John List and how that artist was able to make a buste resembling almost every detail of how List would look at that time was one of the most fascinating ones I've ever seen.

Other things I can talk about forever is zelda, music, NHL Hockey and of course the power of mother nature
 

Rubik

King of Lorule Lounge
Joined
Jan 19, 2018
Location
California
Gender
Horsehead
Board games.

I have spent many consecutive hours talking about board games with my friends instead of actually playing them.
 

TheGreatCthulhu

Composer of the Night.
Joined
Jan 22, 2016
Location
United States of America
Gender
Very much a dude.
Anything on matters of science, but my particular area is in dinosaurs, specifically.

I do have countless numbers of awesome dinosaur facts, if you ask.

I actually am a biology major with an emphasis in natural history, so I am on my way of being a paleontologist.

The other thing I can talk about for hours is guitars, guitar gear, musical equipment, music theory, playing music, and such. I've been a guitar player for pretty much my whole life, and I'm not going to be stopping anytime soon.

I do like whisk(e)y too, but that's more of a "I like this," kind of thing than it is a true passion. I can tell you all the varieties of whisk(e)y, the different kinds of scotch, what bourbon is, Irish whisk(e)y and so forth.

I just like the drink.

And of course, video games, anime, and such.
 

~Kilza~

The Resting Sun
Joined
Sep 9, 2019
The first thing that comes to mind is hockey, easily. It's something I'm very well-versed about and could easily just talk about for as long as I wanted to. Aside from that, video games would be another thing I could talk on and on about, and I think just life in general, like philosophies and how we view the world and what we want from the future and all that. It's always interesting to hear about those things from different perspectives.
 
Joined
Jul 1, 2018
Location
Canada
Anything on matters of science, but my particular area is in dinosaurs, specifically.

I do have countless numbers of awesome dinosaur facts, if you ask.

I actually am a biology major with an emphasis in natural history, so I am on my way of being a paleontologist.

The other thing I can talk about for hours is guitars, guitar gear, musical equipment, music theory, playing music, and such. I've been a guitar player for pretty much my whole life, and I'm not going to be stopping anytime soon.

I do like whisk(e)y too, but that's more of a "I like this," kind of thing than it is a true passion. I can tell you all the varieties of whisk(e)y, the different kinds of scotch, what bourbon is, Irish whisk(e)y and so forth.

I just like the drink.

And of course, video games, anime, and such.

Wouldn't that be paleontology, specifically? The study of ancient animals?

Oh lol, you just mentioned you're a biology major with an emphasis in natural history.

What inspired you to become interested in paleontology? Was it Jurassic Park? I remember watching it for the first time as a kid and thinking how cool it'd be to study dinosaurs. Unfortunately, I ended up becoming a Writing major instead.
 

TheGreatCthulhu

Composer of the Night.
Joined
Jan 22, 2016
Location
United States of America
Gender
Very much a dude.
Wouldn't that be paleontology, specifically? The study of ancient animals?

Oh lol, you just mentioned you're a biology major with an emphasis in natural history.

What inspired you to become interested in paleontology? Was it Jurassic Park? I remember watching it for the first time as a kid and thinking how cool it'd be to study dinosaurs. Unfortunately, I ended up becoming a Writing major instead.
I've always liked dinosaurs ever since I was a kid. I only vaguely remember watching Jurassic Park once when I was a kid.

As a preteen, I watched it again along with the Lost World, and I liked it.

But the actual real animals, well, at least their bones, petrified and preserved in rock (impressions, skin, and integument in some rare cases) was something so cool to me.
 

Bowsette Plus-Ultra

wah
ZD Legend
Joined
Mar 23, 2013
Location
Iowa
Gender
Lizard
Star Trek.

With the right conversation partner willing to put up with long tangents, gushing, and rants, I can talk about Star Trek well into the twilight hours. Unfortunately, that talk has mostly become about post-JJ Abrams Star Trek these days, and talks tend to be long tirades about how folks like Alex Kurtsman and JJ Abrams just don't get Star Trek, and how their continued spearheading of the franchise makes it worse and worse.
 
Joined
Jul 1, 2018
Location
Canada
I've always liked dinosaurs ever since I was a kid. I only vaguely remember watching Jurassic Park once when I was a kid.

As a preteen, I watched it again along with the Lost World, and I liked it.

But the actual real animals, well, at least their bones, petrified and preserved in rock (impressions, skin, and integument in some rare cases) was something so cool to me.

That's neat. How would you rate Jurassic Park in terms of accuracy? I have read and heard that dinosaurs were not in actuality scaly-looking lizards, but were closer in relation to our modern-day birds. I also saw a video, I believe it was last year, which talked about how the T-Rex would have sounded very, very different. It would have made more of a low guttural throat sound as it approached prey as opposed to the iconic loud roar seen in Jurassic Park. If I can find the video, I'll link it to you. It's very interesting.
 

TheGreatCthulhu

Composer of the Night.
Joined
Jan 22, 2016
Location
United States of America
Gender
Very much a dude.
That's neat. How would you rate Jurassic Park in terms of accuracy? I have read and heard that dinosaurs were not in actuality scaly-looking lizards, but were closer in relation to our modern-day birds. I also saw a video, I believe it was last year, which talked about how the T-Rex would have sounded very, very different. It would have made more of a low guttural throat sound as it approached prey as opposed to the iconic loud roar seen in Jurassic Park. If I can find the video, I'll link it to you. It's very interesting.

In terms of the general things the movie franchise gets wrong.

All of the theropods have their palms pronated down, but no theropod could biomechanically hold such a position without breaking or hyper extending their wrists. They should be holding their hands with the palms facing each other.

In terms of sound, probably didn't sound anything like in the movies. Roaring is definitely out, as most tyrannosauroids didn't have the right kind of larynx to make that roaring sound. Think more sub-low rumbles, grunts, hisses, or booms. Plus, most tyrannosauroids were active predators, so roaring before you catch your prey is a bad move, lol.

In terms of integument, Jurassic Park isn't actually too bad for T. rex, specifically. Most large tyrannosaurids like T. rex, Tarbosaurus, Gorgosaurus, Daspletosaurus, Lythronax, and Albertosaurus we have skin impressions for, and they show scaly skin.

main-qimg-bbf560b3c1333e449b482723517bf768


There was a paper by Bell et al. discussing why this could be the case, as with tyrannosauroid evolution, whether talking the more derived tyrannosaurids, or the more basal proceratosaurids show an overall increase in mass, length, and power. Considering the environments of the large tyrannosaurids, and their overall larger size, they hypothesize that maybe having down like feathers was selected against by their environment.

The above chart is a recording of fossil skin impression findings that was peer-reviewed by tyrannosauroid experts, and summarizes the paper I mentioned quite succinctly.

Of course, the largest proceratosaurid is Yutyrannus hauli, and it's covered in filamentous feathers some 20 cm long from head to toe. But, while both Yutyrannus hauli and Tyrannosaurus rex are of the same kin, so to speak, they're actually not as close as say T. rex and Tarbosaurus.

For the raptors, or dromaeosaurids for the name of the whole group, Jurassic Park is showing its age.

Dromaeosaurids are maniraptorans, and the definition of a maniraptoran is having long hands with three fingers, and a semi-lunate, or half moon shaped bone in the wrist, which is the bone that allows birds (another type of maniraptoran) to fold their wings against their bodies.

On top of this, all fossil specimens of different kinds of maniraptorans all show quite derived feather covering, with the most derived feathers appearing in the deinonychosaurians (maniraptorans with a hyper-extended second toe claw), and the avialans, with avialans being the group that contains the ancestors of birds, and all birds.

For example, here's a fossil of Microraptor, a small crow sized version of Velociraptor:

Microraptor - Wikipedia


The arrows are pointing to the feather impressions. Near the end of the tail, we have a fan of feathers, on the legs we actually have wings, funnily enough, on the arms we have wings, and on the body and head, we have feathers too.

For Velociraptor, specifically, we have quill knobs on its ulna that's almost identical to the quill knobs in modern birds:

Velociraptor Had Feathers | AMNH


The arrows are showing where those quill knobs are, showing where the feathers were anchored.

In terms for all deinonychosaurians, including dromaeosaurids, the morphology we should expect to see is illuminated by this fossil of Anchiornis, a small troodontid.

Anchiornis - Wikipedia


Basically, we should expect to see feathers completely covering the head, around the eyes, but on the end of the snout, we should see reticulate scales, the arms should have quite derived pennaceous feathers, the legs and body should at least be contour feathers, the feet should be kinda like an eagle's foot, where you have scales that are basically feathers that turned into scales again, and on the tail, you should have a tail fan or frond, basically pennaceous feathers covering the tail too, or at least, on the end of the tail.

For larger dromaeosaurids, we actually have the same quill knob evidence on Dakotaraptor, a large horse sized dromaeosaurid contemporaneous with Tyrannosaurus rex:

Reconstructed Dakotaraptor wing and plumage, with avian and theropod... |  Download Scientific Diagram


In terms of what the hyper-extended second toe claw is for, as that is, after all, what they're famous for, there was a study done by Fowler et al. discussing the purpose of it.

He noticed that the first digit, which is basically a dew claw, was roughly opposed to the rest of the digits, and since the second toe claw isn't really like a scythe blade, it doesn't have a cutting edge, but it's very pointy, and their biomechanics are roughly analogous to a bird of prey like a hawk or an eagle, in that they have enormous grip strength in their feet, he deduced that they might have ambushed the prey, pinned it down with their body weight while they dug their claws in to pin the prey down as they tore it apart alive.


The above paper is free and open sourced, by the way.

In terms of speed, that's always a bit tricky for animals that's been dead for at least 65 million years. For large tyrannosaurids, namely T. rex, estimates are around 15-25 mph, give or take, and for dromaeosaurids, around 25-35 mph, give or take.

T. rex seems more adapted to long-distance running though, due to the lovely named arctometatarsus, which is referring to a pinched middle metatarsal in the foot that acts a shock absorber.

Trex,skeleton,bones,foot,ungal - free image from needpix.com


If you look at the middle metatarsal of this T. rex foot, it's squished between the other two metatarsals, which serves to make the structure of the foot more solid, allowing the animal to regain lost energy on the next step. It's basically a natural shock absorber.

On top of that, most tyrannosaurs have a large caudofemoralis longus muscle, which is a muscle that runs from the back of the femur to the middle of the tail. This is the main locomotor muscle in theropods, roughly homologous to our gluteus maximus muscle.

The Tail of Tyrannosaurus: Reassessing the Size and Locomotive Importance  of the M. caudofemoralis in Non‐Avian Theropods - Persons - 2011 - The  Anatomical Record - Wiley Online Library


On top of that, most tyrannosaurs, T. rex included, have really long legs. To be a strong runner in the dinosaur sense, you need nice long legs to increase the length of your stride, and powerful muscles. T. rex has both of these in spades.

For dromaeosaurids, evidence points to the fact they're more ambush predators, considering fossil trackways showed that they held their second toe claw off the ground, meaning they walked on the outer two toes, and they lack the foot structure like T. rex has.

But, if Utahraptor is anything to go by, they all have relatively robust foot structure in terms of grip, meaning that they likely ambushed the prey, pinned it down, dug the claws in and ripped the prey apart.

As far as T. rex destroying a Jeep, that actually has semblance in reality. T. rex is actually famous for having the strongest bite of any terrestrial animal, somewhere between 20,000-35,000 Newtons of force.

Which makes sense, since you find T. rex teeth that are either buried in bone, or leave a tooth impression in some of the strongest bones of strong dinosaurs like Triceratops pelvises, and apparently, according to a specimen of T. rex, could bite a T. rex tail clean off.

There was a famous study that said that T. rex's bite was so powerful that it could pulverize bone. Not just crack it, pulverize it.

For raptors, their primary weapon was their limbs, so they didn't have as strong a bite as you would think. They mainly used their mouths for eating.

Anyhow, what I think should be improved is for Jurassic Park to make their T. rex more robust, as it looks rather.... gracile compared to T. rex.

Think more like this:

Tyrannosaurus | Saurian Wikia | Fandom


In terms of the dromaeosaurids, they should be covered head to tail in feathers and should be trying to pin prey down with their feet and rip them apart alive.

So dromaeosaurids should look and act like this:

Mark Witton on Twitter: Random Tuesday afternoon Velociraptor vs.  Protoceratops #paleoart, just for fun.…


There's more, but if I start discussing what's wrong with the other dinosaurs, namely Spinosaurus, this would turn out to be unnecessarily long, lol.

:)

Let me say this, the dinosaurs in the films don't look like dinosaurs, and Jurassic Park already has an explanation that they're genetic constructs, not true dinosaurs.

Which, fine.

Accuracy though, the first movie's around a 6/10. The T. rex is almost there, just not robust or muscular enough, and looks more like a Tarbosaurus to me.

For the dromaeosaurids, that's why it's a 6/10, lol. They should be feathered.
 
Last edited:
Joined
Jul 1, 2018
Location
Canada
In terms of the general things the movie franchise gets wrong.

All of the theropods have their palms pronated down, but no theropod could biomechanically hold such a position without breaking or hyper extending their wrists. They should be holding their hands with the palms facing each other.

In terms of sound, probably didn't sound anything like in the movies. Roaring is definitely out, as most tyrannosauroids didn't have the right kind of larynx to make that roaring sound. Think more sub-low rumbles, grunts, hisses, or booms. Plus, most tyrannosauroids were active predators, so roaring before you catch your prey is a bad move, lol.

In terms of integument, Jurassic Park isn't actually too bad for T. rex, specifically. Most large tyrannosaurids like T. rex, Tarbosaurus, Gorgosaurus, Daspletosaurus, Lythronax, and Albertosaurus we have skin impressions for, and they show scaly skin.

main-qimg-bbf560b3c1333e449b482723517bf768


There was a paper by Bell et al. discussing why this could be the case, as with tyrannosauroid evolution, whether talking the more derived tyrannosaurids, or the more basal proceratosaurids show an overall increase in mass, length, and power. Considering the environments of the large tyrannosaurids, and their overall larger size, they hypothesize that maybe having down like feathers was selected against by their environment.

The above chart is a recording of fossil skin impression findings that was peer-reviewed by tyrannosauroid experts, and summarizes the paper I mentioned quite succinctly.

Of course, the largest proceratosaurid is Yutyrannus hauli, and it's covered in filamentous feathers some 20 cm long from head to toe. But, while both Yutyrannus hauli and Tyrannosaurus rex are of the same kin, so to speak, they're actually not as close as say T. rex and Tarbosaurus.

For the raptors, or dromaeosaurids for the name of the whole group, Jurassic Park is showing its age.

Dromaeosaurids are maniraptorans, and the definition of a maniraptoran is having long hands with three fingers, and a semi-lunate, or half moon shaped bone in the wrist, which is the bone that allows birds (another type of maniraptoran) to fold their wings against their bodies.

On top of this, all fossil specimens of different kinds of maniraptorans all show quite derived feather covering, with the most derived feathers appearing in the deinonychosaurians (maniraptorans with a hyper-extended second toe claw), and the avialans, with avialans being the group that contains the ancestors of birds, and all birds.

For example, here's a fossil of Microraptor, a small crow sized version of Velociraptor:

Microraptor - Wikipedia


The arrows are pointing to the feather impressions. Near the end of the tail, we have a fan of feathers, on the legs we actually have wings, funnily enough, on the arms we have wings, and on the body and head, we have feathers too.

For Velociraptor, specifically, we have quill knobs on its ulna that's almost identical to the quill knobs in modern birds:

Velociraptor Had Feathers | AMNH


The arrows are showing where those quill knobs are, showing where the feathers were anchored.

In terms for all deinonychosaurians, including dromaeosaurids, the morphology we should expect to see is illuminated by this fossil of Anchiornis, a small troodontid.

Anchiornis - Wikipedia


Basically, we should expect to see feathers completely covering the head, around the eyes, but on the end of the snout, we should see reticulate scales, the arms should have quite derived pennaceous feathers, the legs and body should at least be contour feathers, the feet should be kinda like an eagle's foot, where you have scales that are basically feathers that turned into scales again, and on the tail, you should have a tail fan or frond, basically pennaceous feathers covering the tail too, or at least, on the end of the tail.

For larger dromaeosaurids, we actually have the same quill knob evidence on Dakotaraptor, a large horse sized dromaeosaurid contemporaneous with Tyrannosaurus rex:

Reconstructed Dakotaraptor wing and plumage, with avian and theropod... |  Download Scientific Diagram


In terms of what the hyper-extended second toe claw is for, as that is, after all, what they're famous for, there was a study done by Fowler et al. discussing the purpose of it.

He noticed that the first digit, which is basically a dew claw, was roughly opposed to the rest of the digits, and since the second toe claw isn't really like a scythe blade, it doesn't have a cutting edge, but it's very pointy, and their biomechanics are roughly analogous to a bird of prey like a hawk or an eagle, in that they have enormous grip strength in their feet, he deduced that they might have ambushed the prey, pinned it down with their body weight while they dug their claws in to pin the prey down as they tore it apart alive.


The above paper is free and open sourced, by the way.

In terms of speed, that's always a bit tricky for animals that's been dead for at least 65 million years. For large tyrannosaurids, namely T. rex, estimates are around 15-25 mph, give or take, and for dromaeosaurids, around 25-35 mph, give or take.

T. rex seems more adapted to long-distance running though, due to the lovely named arctometatarsus, which is referring to a pinched middle metatarsal in the foot that acts a shock absorber.

Trex,skeleton,bones,foot,ungal - free image from needpix.com


If you look at the middle metatarsal of this T. rex foot, it's squished between the other two metatarsals, which serves to make the structure of the foot more solid, allowing the animal to regain lost energy on the next step. It's basically a natural shock absorber.

On top of that, most tyrannosaurs have a large caudofemoralis longus muscle, which is a muscle that runs from the back of the femur to the middle of the tail. This is the main locomotor muscle in theropods, roughly homologous to our gluteus maximus muscle.

The Tail of Tyrannosaurus: Reassessing the Size and Locomotive Importance  of the M. caudofemoralis in Non‐Avian Theropods - Persons - 2011 - The  Anatomical Record - Wiley Online Library


On top of that, most tyrannosaurs, T. rex included, have really long legs. To be a strong runner in the dinosaur sense, you need nice long legs to increase the length of your stride, and powerful muscles. T. rex has both of these in spades.

For dromaeosaurids, evidence points to the fact they're more ambush predators, considering fossil trackways showed that they held their second toe claw off the ground, meaning they walked on the outer two toes, and they lack the foot structure like T. rex has.

But, if Utahraptor is anything to go by, they all have relatively robust foot structure in terms of grip, meaning that they likely ambushed the prey, pinned it down, dug the claws in and ripped the prey apart.

As far as T. rex destroying a Jeep, that actually has semblance in reality. T. rex is actually famous for having the strongest bite of any terrestrial animal, somewhere between 20,000-35,000 Newtons of force.

Which makes sense, since you find T. rex teeth that are either buried in bone, or leave a tooth impression in some of the strongest bones of strong dinosaurs like Triceratops pelvises, and apparently, according to a specimen of T. rex, could bite a T. rex tail clean off.

There was a famous study that said that T. rex's bite was so powerful that it could pulverize bone. Not just crack it, pulverize it.

For raptors, their primary weapon was their limbs, so they didn't have as strong a bite as you would think. They mainly used their mouths for eating.

Anyhow, what I think should be improved is for Jurassic Park to make their T. rex more robust, as it looks rather.... gracile compared to T. rex.

Think more like this:

Tyrannosaurus | Saurian Wikia | Fandom


In terms of the dromaeosaurids, they should be covered head to tail in feathers and should be trying to pin prey down with their feet and rip them apart alive.

So dromaeosaurids should look and act like this:

Mark Witton on Twitter: Random Tuesday afternoon Velociraptor vs.  Protoceratops #paleoart, just for fun.…


There's more, but if I start discussing what's wrong with the other dinosaurs, namely Spinosaurus, this would turn out to be unnecessarily long, lol.

:)

Let me say this, the dinosaurs in the films don't look like dinosaurs, and Jurassic Park already has an explanation that they're genetic constructs, not true dinosaurs.

Which, fine.

Accuracy though, the first movie's around a 6/10. The T. rex is almost there, just not robust or muscular enough, and looks more like a Tarbosaurus to me.

For the dromaeosaurids, that's why it's a 6/10, lol. They should be feathered.

This was an informative read and has given me much to ponder and ruminate over.

I gather that not all dinosaurs were feathered then, only some. I have often seen the classic T. Rex depicted with feathers and resembling more of a giant chicken. However, your discussion and analysis here show that not to be the case despite what some experts in the field might say about it.

I wish I could respond in kind but I have next to no knowledge on paleontology and much of what I know comes from Jurassic Park LOL. So, not quite on your level, I'm afraid.

However, I think it's amazing that we're still deriving and learning so much from animals that have been extinct for millions of years. It shows that the more we learn, the less we seem to know.

I'm curious now to hear your thoughts on other ancient animals such as Megalodon which came much later and whether you think the theory of its existence has any credit or not. I think it's all bogus, by the way.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top Bottom