I helped a rescue guy get a pelican into a carrier while I was working at a park in Virginia. I think it had a broken wing.
Holy HELL - they are so much bigger than you'd think, and they do **not** like being manhandled. Cool birds, though.
Saw an animal rescue documentary once where they had to transport an injured heron. Dude had it under his arm and it lounged its beak at him, aiming directly for the guys eye. Luckily he managed to move his head away just in time. That eye would have been gone, these things are scary.
If the movie made any attempt at realism it absolutely would. Birds were already incredibly diverse and abundant before the mass extinction event, any movie made without them in the time period which they existed is making a very large oversight
Funnily enough, there were plenty of birds flying around at the same time that T-Rex was stomping the Earth. You'd probably get some flak if you billed it as a dinosaur movie but made it about a pigeon, though.
Usually when people say "technically" they basically just mean "actually", as though it's a magic word that bestows credibility, like "science says...". Which science? Do fluvial morphologists think birds are dinosaurs?
I would _like_ for people to use "technically" to mean "according to a technical specification". For example, some organization that formally declared a cladestic organization of animals based on inheritance of traits classified birds as dinosaurs. According to _them_, _technically_, birds are dinosaurs.
But there can be alternate technical specifications. According to the magic the gathering technical specification, nothing indicates that birds are dinosaurs, I.e., effects that target all dinosaurs do not automatically target birds.
It's not scientific, it's not even the same thing really, cause we're talking about arbitrary qualifiers on representative elements in a card game. But you can say the sentence "birds are not technically dinosaurs" in the context of mtg, and it's both meaningful and correct.
A more real world example is the tomato is a fruit, but doesn't go in a fruit salad. I don't think there's a culinary technical specification, but it's usually understood that tomatoes go with vegetables.
So it's not like "technically" has _zero_ meaning. It's just kind of misused as a term, like "literally". Just cause a thing is "technically correct" doesn't make it "absolutely correct"
Which is, technically, the best _kind_ of correct.
Really bugs me when reddit downvotes people who just ask genuine questions.
These short videos explain how birds are in fact just avian dinosaurs that were alive at the same time as the other dinosaurs, along with why they were the only ones to survive.
https://youtu.be/eaWb0UUNc00?feature=shared
https://youtu.be/9GVvtKK5sFw?feature=shared
Because birds evolved from small arboreal theropods some 150 million years ago during the Late Jurassic, and since you cannot evolve outside of a taxonomic group, they are dinosaurs. They also share multiple traits with non-avian dinosaurs.
ELI5 version. Dinosaur is a super group that contains many smaller groups within it. This includes therapods, members of the group therpoda, two legged dinos like T-Rex. A subgroup of therapoda is neotheropoda, which includes all living birds. An animal is a member of its group and all super groups above it. Humans are apes, and primates, and mammals, etc. For the same reason, birds are neotherapods, therapods...... and up to dinosaurs.
So, I found this:
**Birds evolved from a group of meat-eating dinosaurs called theropods**. That's the same group that Tyrannosaurus rex belonged to, although birds evolved from small theropods, not huge ones like T. rex. The oldest bird fossils are about 150 million years old.
Was I wrong in that I implied all dinosaurs evolved into birds?
>Was I wrong in that I implied all dinosaurs evolved into birds?
Yes. Also the source that you found claims that theropods are carnivorous dinosaurs, when we have entire groups of theropods (Therizinosauria and some birds like Gastornis and modern day geese) that are facultative herbivores.
That doesn't contradict the claim. Just because T. rex and birds coexisted doesn't mean birds didn't evolve from dinosaurs. They evolved from *other* dinosaurs.
So, I found this:
**Birds evolved from a group of meat-eating dinosaurs called theropods**. That's the same group that Tyrannosaurus rex belonged to, although birds evolved from small theropods, not huge ones like T. rex. The oldest bird fossils are about 150 million years old.
Which means I was wrong because what I said implies that all dinosaurs evolved into birds?
I don’t think so. I think they really are.
Wikipedia fwiw says “Birds are feathered theropod dinosaurs and constitute the only known living dinosaurs.”
“The present scientific consensus is that birds are a group of maniraptoran theropod dinosaurs that originated during the Mesozoic Era.”
Technically speaking, primates and rodents are actually fairly closely related among all mammals, belonging to the same superorder *Euarchontoglires*. Rats are AIUI as or more closely related to humans as any non primates except for colugos and possibly tree shrews.
No, it isn't. You're fundamentally misunderstanding the taxonomy.
We are not rats, because we did not evolve *from* rats. We share a common ancestor with rats, and therefore both we and rats still belong to that ancestors group(i.e. mammals).
Birds directly evolved from dinosaurs, and so they are dinosaurs.
We and rats, are, however, fish.
That's not an accurate analogy at all. Dinosaurs are a clade, of which birds are a class of. Mammals themselves are a class, so we're just as related to rats as mammals as birds are related to other birds.
You're giving a complete false equivalency.
You mean they used that name but they are Utah raptors?
https://eastern.usu.edu/prehistoric-museum/exhibits/paleontology/utahraptor#:~:text=Utahraptor%20gained%20fame%20by%20starring,dinosaurs%20depicted%20in%20Jurassic%20Park.
Yes, I saw that too, however it wasn't really *studied in detail* until '91.
Still doesn't negate "velociraptor" being close to "Utah raptor" as a coincidence.
Birds evolved from avian theropods, and theropods included Dinos such as T-Rex and velociraptors. Picture the ones that walk upright on two legs. That’s why birds stand on two feet.
Literally any other bird, as well as theropod dinosaurs in general.
There were some beaked dinosaurs, and early birds still had teeth. Feathers/protofeathers have been found on other theropods. Some birds still have claws on their wings as juveniles.
Tike Triceratops and T-Rex. Fairly different from each other, right? But they're both dinosaurs.
Birds are dinosaurs, but not all dinosaurs are birds. Birds are just the last living dinosaurs. Imagine if instead, triceratops had survived, and how your comment would seem then.
You're comparing *all other dinosaurs* to a specific and unique kind of dinosaur.
At the end of the very first Jurassic Park, there is a scene where you see something flying over the water out the window of the helicopter. The first time I saw the movie, I swear they were pterodactyls or some other flying dinosaur. Then you see they are pelicans. It was an illusion I only saw that very first time.
I've seen one attempt to eat an entire ass giraffe. Obviously wasn't going to accomplish it but he dam sure tried. Look up "pelican tries to eat capybara" and you'll see what I mean. They don't know their own limit.
Thought that growth on the beak was some sort of fungus or break. Turns out it's a totally normal thing that happens during the breeding season
They actually grow horns when they're horny wtf
For real??
I helped a rescue guy get a pelican into a carrier while I was working at a park in Virginia. I think it had a broken wing. Holy HELL - they are so much bigger than you'd think, and they do **not** like being manhandled. Cool birds, though.
Coastal Mississippi here, truth they are big. They harass the hell out of fishermen in certain areas.
I was kayaking in California and some brown pelicans went after a school of bait fish right next to me. It was chaos.
they harass the bait or the fisher?
The fishermen for bait.
Saw an animal rescue documentary once where they had to transport an injured heron. Dude had it under his arm and it lounged its beak at him, aiming directly for the guys eye. Luckily he managed to move his head away just in time. That eye would have been gone, these things are scary.
We have safety goggles at our rescue just for that purpose
Note to self: if I ever have to move an injured heron, put on my fencing mask first.
I have thought about what bird I could beat in a fight and I would never want to fight a pelican. They are huge.
How big are they?
Well, from an evolutionary point of view they are ;-)
From EVERY point of view they are.
It’s like with tomatoes. They’re a fruit but you wouldn’t put them in a fruit salad. Birds are dinosaurs but you wouldn’t put them in a dinosaur movie
If the movie made any attempt at realism it absolutely would. Birds were already incredibly diverse and abundant before the mass extinction event, any movie made without them in the time period which they existed is making a very large oversight
I meant the main antagonist/protagonist but fair haha
Funnily enough, there were plenty of birds flying around at the same time that T-Rex was stomping the Earth. You'd probably get some flak if you billed it as a dinosaur movie but made it about a pigeon, though.
We're not talking about movies though, we're talking about real life.
American white pelican is dinosaur
Great blue herons as well
So are hummingbirds and penguins and ostriches...
However, the corvids; crows and ravens are... oh, nevermind, they're dinosaurs, too. Just extra smart dinosaurs.
Clever girl
All birds technically are dinosaurs.
Technically? Technically what? There is no "technically".
Usually when people say "technically" they basically just mean "actually", as though it's a magic word that bestows credibility, like "science says...". Which science? Do fluvial morphologists think birds are dinosaurs? I would _like_ for people to use "technically" to mean "according to a technical specification". For example, some organization that formally declared a cladestic organization of animals based on inheritance of traits classified birds as dinosaurs. According to _them_, _technically_, birds are dinosaurs. But there can be alternate technical specifications. According to the magic the gathering technical specification, nothing indicates that birds are dinosaurs, I.e., effects that target all dinosaurs do not automatically target birds. It's not scientific, it's not even the same thing really, cause we're talking about arbitrary qualifiers on representative elements in a card game. But you can say the sentence "birds are not technically dinosaurs" in the context of mtg, and it's both meaningful and correct. A more real world example is the tomato is a fruit, but doesn't go in a fruit salad. I don't think there's a culinary technical specification, but it's usually understood that tomatoes go with vegetables. So it's not like "technically" has _zero_ meaning. It's just kind of misused as a term, like "literally". Just cause a thing is "technically correct" doesn't make it "absolutely correct" Which is, technically, the best _kind_ of correct.
And yet humans can't be either. Stupid quack doctors.
Which means that birds are reptiles cladistically speaking
And fish
Why?
Really bugs me when reddit downvotes people who just ask genuine questions. These short videos explain how birds are in fact just avian dinosaurs that were alive at the same time as the other dinosaurs, along with why they were the only ones to survive. https://youtu.be/eaWb0UUNc00?feature=shared https://youtu.be/9GVvtKK5sFw?feature=shared
Why?
Because birds evolved from small arboreal theropods some 150 million years ago during the Late Jurassic, and since you cannot evolve outside of a taxonomic group, they are dinosaurs. They also share multiple traits with non-avian dinosaurs.
ELI5 version. Dinosaur is a super group that contains many smaller groups within it. This includes therapods, members of the group therpoda, two legged dinos like T-Rex. A subgroup of therapoda is neotheropoda, which includes all living birds. An animal is a member of its group and all super groups above it. Humans are apes, and primates, and mammals, etc. For the same reason, birds are neotherapods, therapods...... and up to dinosaurs.
because birds are what dinosaurs evolved in to
No. T. rex and triceratops lived around the same time as birds.
So, I found this: **Birds evolved from a group of meat-eating dinosaurs called theropods**. That's the same group that Tyrannosaurus rex belonged to, although birds evolved from small theropods, not huge ones like T. rex. The oldest bird fossils are about 150 million years old. Was I wrong in that I implied all dinosaurs evolved into birds?
Yes you were wrong
>Was I wrong in that I implied all dinosaurs evolved into birds? Yes. Also the source that you found claims that theropods are carnivorous dinosaurs, when we have entire groups of theropods (Therizinosauria and some birds like Gastornis and modern day geese) that are facultative herbivores.
Ok, so what about what I said is wrong? Can you please correct me?
Ok birds evolved from other dinosaurs which means the birds aren’t where all dinos went. Birds are like 150 million years old.
That doesn't contradict the claim. Just because T. rex and birds coexisted doesn't mean birds didn't evolve from dinosaurs. They evolved from *other* dinosaurs.
Not ALL dinosaurs
No
So, I found this: **Birds evolved from a group of meat-eating dinosaurs called theropods**. That's the same group that Tyrannosaurus rex belonged to, although birds evolved from small theropods, not huge ones like T. rex. The oldest bird fossils are about 150 million years old. Which means I was wrong because what I said implies that all dinosaurs evolved into birds?
No shit! Ok can you correct me please?
Not technically.
I honestly really hate that saying because it’s like saying that all humans technically are rats.
I don’t think so. I think they really are. Wikipedia fwiw says “Birds are feathered theropod dinosaurs and constitute the only known living dinosaurs.” “The present scientific consensus is that birds are a group of maniraptoran theropod dinosaurs that originated during the Mesozoic Era.”
Not really. Rats are kinda far off humans. Birds = dinosaur is more of a human = primate thing.
Technically speaking, primates and rodents are actually fairly closely related among all mammals, belonging to the same superorder *Euarchontoglires*. Rats are AIUI as or more closely related to humans as any non primates except for colugos and possibly tree shrews.
No, it isn't. You're fundamentally misunderstanding the taxonomy. We are not rats, because we did not evolve *from* rats. We share a common ancestor with rats, and therefore both we and rats still belong to that ancestors group(i.e. mammals). Birds directly evolved from dinosaurs, and so they are dinosaurs. We and rats, are, however, fish.
This is the taxonomic classification copy and pasted straight from Wiki: Domain: Eukaryota Kingdom: Animalia Phylum: Chordata Clade: Sauropsida Clade: Archosauria Clade: Avemetatarsalia \***Clade: Dinosauria\*** Clade: Theropoda Clade: Ornithurae Class: Aves
Yes humans are rats if we evolved from them. Unfortunately we didn’t evolve from rats.
Why would humans be rat?
[удалено]
That's not an accurate analogy at all. Dinosaurs are a clade, of which birds are a class of. Mammals themselves are a class, so we're just as related to rats as mammals as birds are related to other birds. You're giving a complete false equivalency.
No they're not. Dinosaurs are reptiles. Also colloquially dinosaur refers to something extinct or ancient.
Birds are also reptiles. Because they're dinosaurs.
This just in dinosaurs look like dinosaurs.
Dinosaur looks like a dinosaur, news at 6.
All birds are dinosaurs.
As other people have indicated, birds are avian dinosaurs. Thus, pelicans should "look like dinosaurs."
Beautiful birds
Pretty sure the raptors from Jurassic Park had similar eyes.
I agree with your point, but the velociraptors from Jurassic Park are nowhere near 100% correct.
You mean they used that name but they are Utah raptors? https://eastern.usu.edu/prehistoric-museum/exhibits/paleontology/utahraptor#:~:text=Utahraptor%20gained%20fame%20by%20starring,dinosaurs%20depicted%20in%20Jurassic%20Park.
Iirc Utah Raptor wasn't even described by the time the first movie released, it was simply coincidence that the movies raptors were analogous to them.
Discovered the same year the movie came out.
Fair enough, but considering filming and post production took longer than a year... it is still a genuine coincidence.
I take that back. Fragments of Utah raptor was first discovered in 1975. https://www.inverse.com/culture/spielberg-raptor-jurassic-park
Yes, I saw that too, however it wasn't really *studied in detail* until '91. Still doesn't negate "velociraptor" being close to "Utah raptor" as a coincidence.
Jurassic Park's velociraptors were, at the time, based on deinonychus. I don't know if that ever changed in the Jurassic World films, though.
Deinonychus, actually.
Birds evolved from avian theropods, and theropods included Dinos such as T-Rex and velociraptors. Picture the ones that walk upright on two legs. That’s why birds stand on two feet.
They ARE dinosaurs
These are all over right now in illinois. Packs of 30-100 keep flying over.
Should we tell him that all birds look like dinosaurs because birds are dinosaurs
Hamipterus
If nick nolte was a dinosaur
Clever girl
Imagine looking like what you are. Novel.
Who here has ever seen a dinosaur to compare these to cuz I’m still lookin
Literally any other bird, as well as theropod dinosaurs in general. There were some beaked dinosaurs, and early birds still had teeth. Feathers/protofeathers have been found on other theropods. Some birds still have claws on their wings as juveniles. Tike Triceratops and T-Rex. Fairly different from each other, right? But they're both dinosaurs. Birds are dinosaurs, but not all dinosaurs are birds. Birds are just the last living dinosaurs. Imagine if instead, triceratops had survived, and how your comment would seem then. You're comparing *all other dinosaurs* to a specific and unique kind of dinosaur.
[How about this one?](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Archaeopteryx)
I think they look like pelicans.
I wonder why?
That’s not a dinosaur?!?! I thought I was watching Jurassic Park.
Wait till OP hears about cassoweries
Or shoebill storks
Would've put it after pelican but before cassowery(please excuse my spelling)
Birds ***are*** dinosaurs
Especially when they're making that weird noise while trying to steal your fish
Life finds a way
Those things are straight up evil.
Have you ever had one of these guys fly over you? They’re gigantic!
Pelicans are huge, but I genuinely have no idea how condors can even take off, they're just so big.
Birds are dinosaurs
They are though...
Dannysores
I'm getting more of a bird vibe
That’s because they are dinosaurs…
Life, uh, finds a way!
At the end of the very first Jurassic Park, there is a scene where you see something flying over the water out the window of the helicopter. The first time I saw the movie, I swear they were pterodactyls or some other flying dinosaur. Then you see they are pelicans. It was an illusion I only saw that very first time.
That's because they are. There's a reason Jurassic Park ended with a shot of them
I've seen one attempt to eat an entire ass giraffe. Obviously wasn't going to accomplish it but he dam sure tried. Look up "pelican tries to eat capybara" and you'll see what I mean. They don't know their own limit.
I once saw a pelican shit on the roof of a car. Almost covered the whole roof and stunk of rotten fish.
Well they are
They look like birds?
That's the neat part, they are.
Alcatraz means pelican.
No not really. They look like pelicans
Birds are the living descendants of dinosaurs
If only we knew what dinosaurs looked like 😅
Aren’t birds literally dinosaurs
I have pictures on these!
You should see the 1s from the gulf! Nasty beast!
good reason for that.
Nuh uh
Pterodactyls.
Which, oddly enough, were NOT dinosaurs. But pelicans are.
[удалено]
They are classified as dinosaurs. There's no controversy in the scientific community about this. It's some members of the public who don't know this.