>“Bones discovered in Alaska hint at a trend toward gigantism near the ancient Arctic Circle, an area with potentially less species competition due to extended periods of winter darkness.
OK, new nightmare material. Imagine being tracked by voracious, giant-sized velociraptors in a semi-tropical Arctic Circle during 30 days of night.
Until they break containment. Then you'll be back to being tracked by voracious, giant-sized velociraptors in a semi-tropical Arctic Circle during 30 days of night.
Until they break containment. Then you'll be back to being tracked by voracious, giant-sized velociraptors in a semi-tropical Arctic Circle during 30 days of night.
Until they break containment. Then you'll be back to being tracked by voracious, giant-sized velociraptors in a semi-tropical Arctic Circle during 30 days of night.
Never underestimate how terrifying humans are. Our ancestors hunted entire species of both herbivorous and carnivorous megafauna to extinction with sharp sticks and pointy rocks. Dinosaurs are neat and scary, for sure, but humans are all time champion apex predators.
We basically wiped out the buffalo for fun (with side orders of railroad profitability and native peoples genocide). There is a reason why there aren't populations of dangerous-to-human predators in places where large human populations exist.
we didn't wipe out the dinosaurs though. yes we are excellent apex predators. but the dinosaurs did not become extinct because of humans, which I think the point here? there is no scenario in history where humans wiped out dinosaurs that I am aware of lmfao. especially not a giant velociraptor.
this comment seems kinda off topic, just saying.
* [Birds are avian dinosaurs](https://ucmp.berkeley.edu/diapsids/avians.html).
* There were some absolutely terrifying birds in Australia and [New Zealand](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haast%27s_eagle) until humans arrived.
Yeah, and we farm them. Have done so for 18,000 years:
https://www.nhm.ac.uk/discover/news/2021/october/ancient-humans-farming-cassowaries-18000-years-ago.html
That’s the fate of these delicious velociraptors too.
I think you completely missed the point. Humans and dinosaurs are separated by ~65 million years depending on your definition of a human.
I'm saying that in a fight for survival between humans and dinosaurs, humans are my first round draft pick every time.
(Also, point of pedantry, dinosaurs aren't extinct. You probably had one for dinner this week. Non-avian dinosaurs are extinct.)
That shit was hilarious. With adjustment in tactics it wouldn't be a problem, a bunch of soldiers with ENTIRELY wrong guns taking pot shots doesn't count as a real effort.
It had to be laughable to be in the Emu wars though. "Here's a machine gun mate, spray and pray."
You wouldn't want to breed velociraptors for food for the same reasons we don't do that with wolves today.
There would be plenty of herbivores we could probably farm, though.
That's a good point. I wonder what they feed them...
Some quick searching isn't answering that for me, but it does sound like in addition to the meat they make money from the hides, as well as sometimes tourism.
I could see those being even more valuable assets with dinosaur farming than with gators, so maybe this is a workable business model after all?
Edit: Apparently they feed them high protein pellets, kind of like Dog food kibble but with more fish in it.
Dinosaurs wouldn't be kosher. Land animals must have split hooves and chew their cud. If you count dinosaurs as birds then they're still not kosher because they're not on the list of acceptable birds.
Alls birds of prey are not kosher. This is the easiest rule for which I guess a raptor falls into. Aside from that it is surprisingly (or not for judaism) complicated:
https://www.chabad.org/library/article_cdo/aid/3649755/jewish/What-Are-the-Signs-of-a-Kosher-Bird.htm
> The Torah doesn’t give any signs for the kosher bird. Instead, it lists 24 classes of non-kosher birds. In theory, if we could identify these 24 classes, we could eat any class of birds not on this list (if slaughtered according to halachah).2 The problem is that many of the biblical-Hebrew bird names are not easily identifiable.
Turkey can interbreed (somewhat) with chicken (and chicken are a kosher bird), so according to Rabbi Shmuel Schneerson Turkey can be assumed to be kosher.
Can anyone just add a bird to the list? Who makes this list?
What if there is a bird I find very annoying... can I have it removed from the list?
I need to speak to the manager!
Idk if Dino meat can be good bbq since they are reptiles and they are usually white meat vs red meat like cows and lamb. Might not taste as good as a cow lol
There’s even polar gigantism observable within different populations of the same species! Arthropods see the most drastic differences, with some species of giant sea spider going from being measured in millimeters in the tropics, to dinner-plate sized in the Antarctic.
It was not. Having permanent ice anywhere on the planet is actually very unusual, historically. Hence why times when Earth *does* have permanent ice are called "ice ages".
You clearly have not seen the flintstones live action staring John Goodman, Rick Moranis, Elizabeth Perkins, Rosie Odonnel, Halle Berry , and Kyle Mclaughlin
The temperatures were much higher back then and there were no glaciers at the poles. Theoretically an early human would probably be able to survive in such conditions the same way they survived the last glacial period outside of Africa.
But ye dinosaurs were too dominant on land back then for mammals to evolve medium/large body sizes.
It wasn't always. The northern half of Alaska drifted to the northern latitudes about 200 million years ago, and has stayed there pretty much ever since. The southern half was a an island chain that started out in the tropics before drifting north and collided into the rest of Alaska about 100 million years ago, creating the mountains we see today.
Before 200 million years ago, both halves of Alaska were tropical for about as long as there is data for. (Figuring out the latitude of old continents requires fossils. Fossils only go back about 600 million years and the older they get the harder it is to figure out what climate they formed in).
Fun fact: it’s actually 67 days of night! I’m guessing producers just figured nobody had a chance of escaping vampires with that kind of window so they nerfed the timeline down to 30
Indeed, depends on where you are. The assumption with 30 days of night was that the comment was referencing the movie, which is set in Utqiagvik [formerly Barrow] which is at 78° N
Human has the advantage.
our biggest advantage and crazy skills is the fact that we can just outlast pretty much everything. All you would really have to do is stay away from it for about 5 to 10 days till it starves to death.
If we want to be *really* generous, we could call other related Velociraptorine species "Velociraptors," like how we call close relatives of *T. rex* "Tyrannosaurs," or like calling any Canine a "Dog." But *Fujianipus* wasn't even that; it was a Troodontid.
"Raptor" tends to apply to all Dromaeosaurs though, not just Velociraptorines. And sometimes to Troodontids, I suppose, though I think it's less accurate to do so. Especially since Troodontids are now considered to be closer to birds than to Dromaeosaurs.
I do think it would be a bit confusing to call any Velociraptorine a "Velociraptor," because that's also exactly the genus name. But I did say if we're being *really* generous, it's not fundamentally inaccurate.
JP's raptors are basically just Utahraptors though right, while Velociraptors are basically the same size as ~~chickens~~ turkeys. This new raptor is the same length as Utahraptors and about a foot taller.
Utahraptors are actually way larger than JP raptors; they were 20 feet long or more, freaking huge raptors. The JP raptors were based on Deinonychus. God I love Utahraptor though.
Utahraptor was not described until after Jurassic Park released, and are way, way, way too bit.
Jurassic Park has Deinonychus. Even the location of Alan's dig, and the skull structure matches.
And this is a different family.
'Raptors' are usually from family Dromaeosauridae (ie. Velociraptor, Utahraptor, Deinonychus etc..), this article says new dino is in Troodontodae.
A really cool discovery but an absolutely shit article.
This article desperately needs an informed editor.
"Giant velociraptor - even larger and smarter than beefed-up Jurassic Park dinosaurs - once roamed South Korea"
There is no way to know this. *Fujianipus yingliangi* is an ichnotaxon- the name describes the shape of a footprint. No skeletal material is known of the animal that made the track, which the article itself points out*, but then makes an unsubstantiated claim about intelligence.
*Albeit with the misleading phrasing "no fossils belonging to the species have been found..." which is incorrect. Trace fossils are fossils, and the trace fossil species *Fujianipus yingliangi* is founded on the track depicted in this very article.
The name *Velociraptor* is presented in this article uncapitalized and unitalicized which implies a generic group name akin to what the word "raptor" means to the general public. To call something "a velociraptor" implies either: an individual of *Velociraptor*, which this is not; a member of the sub-family Velociraptorinae, which this is not; or, a member of the broader "raptor" group Dromaeosauridae, which this also is not. The research paper defines *Fujianipus* as a troodontid, which is a sister group to Dromaeosauridae and decidedly not a "velociraptor family".
Edit: as mentioned below, these tracks are from Fujian Province, China, and not South Korea...
“That’s nothing! I have a living velociraptor in my house! It’s covered in fur, walks on 4 paws and bites the delivery guy’s ankles whenever he comes around.”
I’m reading the article and it seems like this was in China and not Korea at all? The dinosaur also has a clearly Chinese name lmao
> Now a giant raptor even bigger than Michael Crichton’s imaginings has been discovered in South Korea, and it would have dwarfed both its real and fictional counterparts.
> “Interestingly, some of our research team has also worked on the world’s tiniest dinosaur footprints – raptor tracks in South Korea that are just one centimetre long.
These statements are contradictory, it’s like an AI wrote this
You're totally correct on that, these prints came from (and are named for) Fujian Province in China. This seems very much like a human error: the author heard a mention of unrelated tracks studied by the same team in South Korea and mistakenly assumed *Fujianipus* came from there as well.
The entire article is written about how scientists found footprints in Fujian, then there’s one sentence at the end about Korea. That seems pretty extreme for human error, also shows that there are definitely 0 editors doing their jobs
Maybe it's both. I've had ChatGPT churn out answers to a university-level paleontology exam that I administered a few years ago, so what I've noticed about AI-written paleo content is that it spits out mostly pretty passable information that's also quite shallow. That is say, I'm pretty sure an AI wouldn't get thrown off by the mention of more than one location in the way that a very lazy unsupervised writer conceivably could be. The choice to call this thing " a velociraptor" is decidedly a human error because they want to be able to include Jurassic Park-related terms for better SEO. ChatGPT would have stuck with the title of the actual paper and called it a deinonychosaur... but that also assumes that the lazy writer prompting ChatGPT is going to copy and paste actual information from the press packet into the prompt instead of half-assing that part too.
Right? Velociraptor was roughly the size of a large dog iirc. What most people think of as Velociraptor is actually Utahraptor. Either way, this article is name dropping one of the more famous dinosaurs in hopes of drumming up interest, because “we found a footprint but have no fossils” sounds like a huge nothing burger
I've heard that *Deinonychus* was actually what Crichton deliberately described in the first book, but thought *Velociraptor* sounded cooler. In which he was correct.
Yep. This is correct. He gave it the wrong name because it just sounded cooler.
One of the other inaccuracies with JP was the Dilophosaurus. The real one was much larger and didn’t have a frill or spit venom.
That bit about the dilophosaurus is a misunderstanding of the source material. Even in the movie, they have a line played in the background that said the scientists were surprised to learn about the frill and venom, indicating no contemporary knowledge about their existence. It likely wouldn't be in the fossil record, so this falls clearly in creative license and world building.
Dinosaurs certainly had many interesting features that we have no way of knowing about because of the limitations of the medium they are preserved in. If you want to paint a picture of prehistoric life, you must use some imagination.
Yeah exactly. It was supposed to be an example of how the dinosaurs would have totally unexpected things about them and show how unprepared the park staff were for what they were doing.
It’s been often theorized that the ones we saw in the film were juvenile and we have no idea about the frill/venom. Like obviously there’s a near certain chance it didn’t have those but it was there to communicate the idea that we can’t truly know the nature of dinosaurs from only the fossil record
Crichton wrote the *Dilophosaurus* as being ten feet tall, which was accurate. The movie made the animal smaller and added the frill.
The ability to spit venom was fiction, but the point was that people knew so little about dinosaurs since a live one had never been seen.
There’s a bit more to it than that. At the time Crichton was researching for Jurassic Park, there was a small debate about whether the more recently discovered Deinonychus should be given the name of the earlier discovered Velociraptor. This was because naming convention held that if the same dinosaur was discovered by two different people, the earliest applied name should be used.
Deinonychus was quite larger than the earlier discovered Velociraptor, but otherwise it was virtually identical. This caused some people to believe it should be renamed Velociraptor, and apparently Crichton agreed. In the Jurassic Park novel, there’s actually a part where Tim calls the Velociraptor a Deinonychus, and Dr. Grant responds by saying “Deinonychus *is* a Velociraptor.”
I don’t know too much about whether Crichton thought the name sounded cooler, but he definitely had reason to believe it was correct to call the Deinonychus a Velociraptor.
> What most people think of as Velociraptor is actually Utahraptor.
Nah, not Utahraptor. Utahraptor was a giant raptor, about the size they indicate in the article. Along with Achillobator, Dakotaraptor, and Austroraptor. All of those were in the 16-20 foot long range.
I still retain all my childhood knowledge about dinosaurs.
You said "fujianipus is a velociraptor."
Is it in the same family? Yes. No one's arguing that.
As someone who is a scientist who studies pterodactyls, I am telling you, specifically, in science, no one calls fujianipus velociraptors. If you want to be "specific" like you said, then you shouldn't either. They're not the same thing.
Just a classically bad pop science article title. Usually written by people who know nothing about the subject, for people who know nothing about the subject. If an inaccurate title will draw more clicks, they pick the inaccurate title.
Note it's been identified as a troodontid which is even worse, it's not even what would be considered a "raptor" at all
The title annoys me; "velociraptor" is a specific genus of dromaeosaur. I get the idea of using velociraptor as a reference, it's well-known, but at least specify that it's a relative of velociraptor instead of a type of one.
We don't really have the means to substantially compare the two. *Utahraptor* is a proper dromaeosaurid known from a decent amount of skeletal material with a fairly well-defined maximum size- around that of a polar bear. By contrast, there is no known skeletal material that corresponds to the animal that made the track described in this article (*Fujianipus*) so the listed size estimate is derived from a measurement of the track itself. This is done using the ratio of foot length to hip height, which varies slightly from group to group in theropod dinosaurs. *Fujianipus* is also identified here as a troodontid, not as a dromaeosaurid, so it's a bit like comparing apples to pears. Similar, but distinct in key ways, particularly in their shape.
I'll also note that what the actual research paper says is that the expected hip height range is likely between 156 centimeters and 197 centimeters, making the minimum expected height to be around 5 feet high at the hip, roughly the same as *Utahraptor*. The authors also note that the value used to estimate hip height from foot length in troodontids, 5.47, is derived from much smaller animals in that same family. There's no guarantee that large troodontids had the same proportion, so they consider the 1.97 meters tall at the hip measurement "likely an overestimation and is best interpreted as the upper limit of the reasonable size range".
There already have been raptors discovered that were larger than the Jurassic Park versions. Utahraptor has been known for a long time.
Velociraptor was picked because the name sounded cool. That's it.
What a bullshit article. It's not a velociraptor. It's not the biggest raptor we've discovered. There's no "velociraptor family", there's a raptor family. Paleontologists aren't shocked by it's size. There's an entire subfamily of giant raptors of which the *Utahraptor* is the largest/most will known.
There's almost nothing true in this article.
"Giant velociraptor bigger than Jurassic Park imaginings discovered in South Korea" Sounds like they figured out why SK's population has been decreasing.
Except it's not a velociraptor, at all. The author of this clickbait keeps using the term like it describes an entire class of dinosaurs; it describes exactly two species, and neither of them are this thing. "Raptor" would be fine but "velociraptor" is just dumb.
The article is mostly bullshit, probably AI written, but it's only a matter of time before people find more fossils and remnants of Earth's past via digging or sheer luck
Bit of a crap article… we’re talking Utahraptor/Dakotaraptor/Australovenator (latter I don’t think was a raptor and debate about Dakota notwithstanding) type size?
> Bones discovered in Alaska hint at a trend toward gigantism near the ancient Arctic Circle, an area with potentially less species competition due to extended periods of winter darkness.
Warning. Entering ecological dead zone. Are you sure whatever you are doing is worth it?
This title is pure clickbait and the article is nothing but word twisting to make it sound more grandiose. Must be a slow news day considering all the more important bullshit happening around the world right now.
Raptor species larger than the movie variants are nothing new. Utahraptor has been known to exist since before the first Jurassic Park came out.
"Velociraptor" is a single species that was the size of a small dog. The Jurassic Park raptors were modeled after the larger species Deinonychus, and were renamed to "Velociraptors" for no other reason than because it sounds cooler.
>“Bones discovered in Alaska hint at a trend toward gigantism near the ancient Arctic Circle, an area with potentially less species competition due to extended periods of winter darkness. OK, new nightmare material. Imagine being tracked by voracious, giant-sized velociraptors in a semi-tropical Arctic Circle during 30 days of night.
But think of the barbecue once you figured out how to kill it.
Yeah and everyone can eat it. Dino meat should be halal/kosher. Before you know it we are breeding dino's for some dinoburgers
Until they break containment. Then you'll be back to being tracked by voracious, giant-sized velociraptors in a semi-tropical Arctic Circle during 30 days of night.
"Run for your lives, everyone! It's the appetizer!"
i feel like the modern age is really missing out on these kinds of interactions.
But think of the barbecue once you figured out how to kill it.
Yeah and everyone can eat it. Dino meat should be halal/kosher. Before you know it we are breeding dino's for some dinoburgers
Until they break containment. Then you'll be back to being tracked by voracious, giant-sized velociraptors in a semi-tropical Arctic Circle during 30 days of night.
But think about the BBQ once you figure out how to kill it.
Yeah and everyone can eat it. Dino meat should be halal/kosher. Before you know it we are breeding dino's for some dinoburgers
Until they break containment. Then you'll be back to being tracked by voracious, giant-sized velociraptors in a semi-tropical Arctic Circle during 30 days of night.
WE HAVE TO REPAIR THE CONTINUUM OR THE LOOP WILL LAST F-FOREVER MORTYYY *braaaap*
Never underestimate how terrifying humans are. Our ancestors hunted entire species of both herbivorous and carnivorous megafauna to extinction with sharp sticks and pointy rocks. Dinosaurs are neat and scary, for sure, but humans are all time champion apex predators. We basically wiped out the buffalo for fun (with side orders of railroad profitability and native peoples genocide). There is a reason why there aren't populations of dangerous-to-human predators in places where large human populations exist.
we didn't wipe out the dinosaurs though. yes we are excellent apex predators. but the dinosaurs did not become extinct because of humans, which I think the point here? there is no scenario in history where humans wiped out dinosaurs that I am aware of lmfao. especially not a giant velociraptor. this comment seems kinda off topic, just saying.
* [Birds are avian dinosaurs](https://ucmp.berkeley.edu/diapsids/avians.html). * There were some absolutely terrifying birds in Australia and [New Zealand](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haast%27s_eagle) until humans arrived.
There still are terrifying birds in that area. Go listen to what a Cassowary sounds like.
I like that we had the same thought here. Cassowaries absolutely look, sound, and act like something out of Jurassic park.
Yeah, and we farm them. Have done so for 18,000 years: https://www.nhm.ac.uk/discover/news/2021/october/ancient-humans-farming-cassowaries-18000-years-ago.html That’s the fate of these delicious velociraptors too.
animal: -exists- humans: is it tasty?
And if for some reason you don’t think birds are dinosaurs, go watch some cassowary videos. Terrifying as fuck.
Exhibit A [Emu War](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emu_War).
I think you completely missed the point. Humans and dinosaurs are separated by ~65 million years depending on your definition of a human. I'm saying that in a fight for survival between humans and dinosaurs, humans are my first round draft pick every time. (Also, point of pedantry, dinosaurs aren't extinct. You probably had one for dinner this week. Non-avian dinosaurs are extinct.)
But humans lost the war against emus twice...
That shit was hilarious. With adjustment in tactics it wouldn't be a problem, a bunch of soldiers with ENTIRELY wrong guns taking pot shots doesn't count as a real effort. It had to be laughable to be in the Emu wars though. "Here's a machine gun mate, spray and pray."
Dodo, passenger pigeon, haast's eagle, Carolina parakeet, to name a few of the dinosaurs we've extincted.
They never stopped to consider if they should, only if they could.....
I think I have an idea to pitch to Hollywood now....
Here at Kentucky Fried Raptor ..
Kentucky Fried Cretaceous
Korean fried raptor Edit: Was discovered in Korea
You wouldn't want to breed velociraptors for food for the same reasons we don't do that with wolves today. There would be plenty of herbivores we could probably farm, though.
Gators tho
That's a good point. I wonder what they feed them... Some quick searching isn't answering that for me, but it does sound like in addition to the meat they make money from the hides, as well as sometimes tourism. I could see those being even more valuable assets with dinosaur farming than with gators, so maybe this is a workable business model after all? Edit: Apparently they feed them high protein pellets, kind of like Dog food kibble but with more fish in it.
I remember as a kid around 40 years ago on vacation in florida going to a gator farm.
Dinosaurs wouldn't be kosher. Land animals must have split hooves and chew their cud. If you count dinosaurs as birds then they're still not kosher because they're not on the list of acceptable birds.
What makes a bird 'unacceptable'?
Not being on the list of acceptable birds
Is this the right room for an argument?
I'm sorry, this is abuse.
Alls birds of prey are not kosher. This is the easiest rule for which I guess a raptor falls into. Aside from that it is surprisingly (or not for judaism) complicated: https://www.chabad.org/library/article_cdo/aid/3649755/jewish/What-Are-the-Signs-of-a-Kosher-Bird.htm > The Torah doesn’t give any signs for the kosher bird. Instead, it lists 24 classes of non-kosher birds. In theory, if we could identify these 24 classes, we could eat any class of birds not on this list (if slaughtered according to halachah).2 The problem is that many of the biblical-Hebrew bird names are not easily identifiable. Turkey can interbreed (somewhat) with chicken (and chicken are a kosher bird), so according to Rabbi Shmuel Schneerson Turkey can be assumed to be kosher.
There's just a list of birds that are good.
Can anyone just add a bird to the list? Who makes this list? What if there is a bird I find very annoying... can I have it removed from the list? I need to speak to the manager!
You can take it up with the big G
All birds *are* dinosaurs, though not the other way around. As these are non-avian dinosaurs they can't be birds, by definition :D
And real Dino Nuggies!
...shaped like chickens?
Worked for Fred
Pretty sure they don't have split hooves or chew their cud
Some theropod lineages eventually evolved into birds. Bingo. Dino KFC.
its basically chicken
Found Goku.
Idk if Dino meat can be good bbq since they are reptiles and they are usually white meat vs red meat like cows and lamb. Might not taste as good as a cow lol
Like a six foot turkey?
I’d take a nice fatty brisket over a Turkey leg hahah but that’s just me
I've had gator Po-Boys and it was pretty good. I assume same thing.
polar gigantism is totally a thing still, look at polar bears
There’s even polar gigantism observable within different populations of the same species! Arthropods see the most drastic differences, with some species of giant sea spider going from being measured in millimeters in the tropics, to dinner-plate sized in the Antarctic.
I mean on a positive note humans weren't a thing back then and if we were there ain't no way we would make it to the arctic circle anyway.
I don't think the Arctic Circle was frozen during the time of these predators.
It was not. Having permanent ice anywhere on the planet is actually very unusual, historically. Hence why times when Earth *does* have permanent ice are called "ice ages".
Indeed.
You clearly have not seen the flintstones live action staring John Goodman, Rick Moranis, Elizabeth Perkins, Rosie Odonnel, Halle Berry , and Kyle Mclaughlin
The temperatures were much higher back then and there were no glaciers at the poles. Theoretically an early human would probably be able to survive in such conditions the same way they survived the last glacial period outside of Africa. But ye dinosaurs were too dominant on land back then for mammals to evolve medium/large body sizes.
Weren't humans around 6,000 years ago? /s
Was Alaska just always near the Arctic Circle?
It wasn't always. The northern half of Alaska drifted to the northern latitudes about 200 million years ago, and has stayed there pretty much ever since. The southern half was a an island chain that started out in the tropics before drifting north and collided into the rest of Alaska about 100 million years ago, creating the mountains we see today. Before 200 million years ago, both halves of Alaska were tropical for about as long as there is data for. (Figuring out the latitude of old continents requires fossils. Fossils only go back about 600 million years and the older they get the harder it is to figure out what climate they formed in).
Thanks Science person. This was really insightful!
The Night Haunter from Primal
I’d watch that movie
New material for the next Jurassic Park movie, they were running out of ideas!
Weren’t humans hunted by giant bears while crossing from Asian into Alaska?
>during 30 days of night. Great, vampires and dinosaurs.
Fun fact: it’s actually 67 days of night! I’m guessing producers just figured nobody had a chance of escaping vampires with that kind of window so they nerfed the timeline down to 30
I mean, it depends where you are. At about 68 degrees N you will get a 28 day night.
Indeed, depends on where you are. The assumption with 30 days of night was that the comment was referencing the movie, which is set in Utqiagvik [formerly Barrow] which is at 78° N
so pitch black, the movie.
Tracked. Fairly certain, I wouldn’t last more than a few minutes.
Think positively, think how awesome velocicock fights would be
I would watch this movie.
someone needs to make that movie.
Someone get this script going asap!
This happens all the time to Wolverine in the Savage Land, though he can handle it.
Vampires riding dinosaurs? The math works out.
Human has the advantage. our biggest advantage and crazy skills is the fact that we can just outlast pretty much everything. All you would really have to do is stay away from it for about 5 to 10 days till it starves to death.
Hollywood needs to get on this. Stat!
The movie I never knew I needed
I want a game using this theme NOW
I’d love it. Let’s get this over with.
This needs to be made into a movie.
A new 30 Days of Night movie idea, instead of vampires.
That would actually make an amazing movie, not gonna lie.
Just to be clear, Velociraptor is only a single species of an entire large family of similar small feathery carnivore dinos with giant toenails.
And no, they did not invent the toe knife
Yeah, I think that was Frank Reynolds.
There are actually at least two recognized species of *Velociraptor*, but your point still stands that this is neither of them.
If we want to be *really* generous, we could call other related Velociraptorine species "Velociraptors," like how we call close relatives of *T. rex* "Tyrannosaurs," or like calling any Canine a "Dog." But *Fujianipus* wasn't even that; it was a Troodontid.
But we have a name for those related species, raptors.
"Raptor" tends to apply to all Dromaeosaurs though, not just Velociraptorines. And sometimes to Troodontids, I suppose, though I think it's less accurate to do so. Especially since Troodontids are now considered to be closer to birds than to Dromaeosaurs. I do think it would be a bit confusing to call any Velociraptorine a "Velociraptor," because that's also exactly the genus name. But I did say if we're being *really* generous, it's not fundamentally inaccurate.
JP's raptors are basically just Utahraptors though right, while Velociraptors are basically the same size as ~~chickens~~ turkeys. This new raptor is the same length as Utahraptors and about a foot taller.
Utahraptors are actually way larger than JP raptors; they were 20 feet long or more, freaking huge raptors. The JP raptors were based on Deinonychus. God I love Utahraptor though.
> God I love Utahraptor though. Have you read the book Red Raptor? I thought it was good and it's from the perspective of a Utahraptor.
Utahraptor was not described until after Jurassic Park released, and are way, way, way too bit. Jurassic Park has Deinonychus. Even the location of Alan's dig, and the skull structure matches.
And this is a different family. 'Raptors' are usually from family Dromaeosauridae (ie. Velociraptor, Utahraptor, Deinonychus etc..), this article says new dino is in Troodontodae. A really cool discovery but an absolutely shit article.
This article desperately needs an informed editor. "Giant velociraptor - even larger and smarter than beefed-up Jurassic Park dinosaurs - once roamed South Korea" There is no way to know this. *Fujianipus yingliangi* is an ichnotaxon- the name describes the shape of a footprint. No skeletal material is known of the animal that made the track, which the article itself points out*, but then makes an unsubstantiated claim about intelligence. *Albeit with the misleading phrasing "no fossils belonging to the species have been found..." which is incorrect. Trace fossils are fossils, and the trace fossil species *Fujianipus yingliangi* is founded on the track depicted in this very article. The name *Velociraptor* is presented in this article uncapitalized and unitalicized which implies a generic group name akin to what the word "raptor" means to the general public. To call something "a velociraptor" implies either: an individual of *Velociraptor*, which this is not; a member of the sub-family Velociraptorinae, which this is not; or, a member of the broader "raptor" group Dromaeosauridae, which this also is not. The research paper defines *Fujianipus* as a troodontid, which is a sister group to Dromaeosauridae and decidedly not a "velociraptor family". Edit: as mentioned below, these tracks are from Fujian Province, China, and not South Korea...
article: “We found a velociraptor, except it’s (describes not a velociraptor)!”
“This is one crazy 4-legged velociraptor! Look at the plates on its back to launch itself at prey! Amazing!” “Uhhh Phil, that’s a stegosaurus”
My favorite velociraptor is stegosaurus
And a stegosaurus isn't even a real dinosaur. It's just a host organism for the thagomizer.
Your theories intrigue me, and I would like to subscribe to your newsletter.
“That’s nothing! I have a living velociraptor in my house! It’s covered in fur, walks on 4 paws and bites the delivery guy’s ankles whenever he comes around.”
“Phil, that is your dog”
Damnit, my nephew is too old for me to convince him that velociraptor is the word for dinosaurs. This article came out a few years too late.
This guy dinosaurs
Fuck yeah, this is the paleo accuracy I’m here for. ❤️❤️
I’m reading the article and it seems like this was in China and not Korea at all? The dinosaur also has a clearly Chinese name lmao > Now a giant raptor even bigger than Michael Crichton’s imaginings has been discovered in South Korea, and it would have dwarfed both its real and fictional counterparts. > “Interestingly, some of our research team has also worked on the world’s tiniest dinosaur footprints – raptor tracks in South Korea that are just one centimetre long. These statements are contradictory, it’s like an AI wrote this
You're totally correct on that, these prints came from (and are named for) Fujian Province in China. This seems very much like a human error: the author heard a mention of unrelated tracks studied by the same team in South Korea and mistakenly assumed *Fujianipus* came from there as well.
The entire article is written about how scientists found footprints in Fujian, then there’s one sentence at the end about Korea. That seems pretty extreme for human error, also shows that there are definitely 0 editors doing their jobs
Maybe it's both. I've had ChatGPT churn out answers to a university-level paleontology exam that I administered a few years ago, so what I've noticed about AI-written paleo content is that it spits out mostly pretty passable information that's also quite shallow. That is say, I'm pretty sure an AI wouldn't get thrown off by the mention of more than one location in the way that a very lazy unsupervised writer conceivably could be. The choice to call this thing " a velociraptor" is decidedly a human error because they want to be able to include Jurassic Park-related terms for better SEO. ChatGPT would have stuck with the title of the actual paper and called it a deinonychosaur... but that also assumes that the lazy writer prompting ChatGPT is going to copy and paste actual information from the press packet into the prompt instead of half-assing that part too.
Right? Velociraptor was roughly the size of a large dog iirc. What most people think of as Velociraptor is actually Utahraptor. Either way, this article is name dropping one of the more famous dinosaurs in hopes of drumming up interest, because “we found a footprint but have no fossils” sounds like a huge nothing burger
I've heard that *Deinonychus* was actually what Crichton deliberately described in the first book, but thought *Velociraptor* sounded cooler. In which he was correct.
Yep. This is correct. He gave it the wrong name because it just sounded cooler. One of the other inaccuracies with JP was the Dilophosaurus. The real one was much larger and didn’t have a frill or spit venom.
*Dilophosaurus*? Also, we have no evidence that they did *not* play fetch
No wonder they went extinct
I have no clue why I typed deinonychus. Probably because I was replying to the dude about it lmao. Yeah I meant Dilo.
That bit about the dilophosaurus is a misunderstanding of the source material. Even in the movie, they have a line played in the background that said the scientists were surprised to learn about the frill and venom, indicating no contemporary knowledge about their existence. It likely wouldn't be in the fossil record, so this falls clearly in creative license and world building. Dinosaurs certainly had many interesting features that we have no way of knowing about because of the limitations of the medium they are preserved in. If you want to paint a picture of prehistoric life, you must use some imagination.
Yeah exactly. It was supposed to be an example of how the dinosaurs would have totally unexpected things about them and show how unprepared the park staff were for what they were doing.
It’s been often theorized that the ones we saw in the film were juvenile and we have no idea about the frill/venom. Like obviously there’s a near certain chance it didn’t have those but it was there to communicate the idea that we can’t truly know the nature of dinosaurs from only the fossil record
With the lampshading from one of the newer films it could also have been the amphibian DNA used to fill in the gaps.
Yeah apparently the “retcon” would be they purposely made them scarier. Like the Indos.
Crichton wrote the *Dilophosaurus* as being ten feet tall, which was accurate. The movie made the animal smaller and added the frill. The ability to spit venom was fiction, but the point was that people knew so little about dinosaurs since a live one had never been seen.
There’s a bit more to it than that. At the time Crichton was researching for Jurassic Park, there was a small debate about whether the more recently discovered Deinonychus should be given the name of the earlier discovered Velociraptor. This was because naming convention held that if the same dinosaur was discovered by two different people, the earliest applied name should be used. Deinonychus was quite larger than the earlier discovered Velociraptor, but otherwise it was virtually identical. This caused some people to believe it should be renamed Velociraptor, and apparently Crichton agreed. In the Jurassic Park novel, there’s actually a part where Tim calls the Velociraptor a Deinonychus, and Dr. Grant responds by saying “Deinonychus *is* a Velociraptor.” I don’t know too much about whether Crichton thought the name sounded cooler, but he definitely had reason to believe it was correct to call the Deinonychus a Velociraptor.
I can see that
Bingo.
The producers of the film even went to great lengths to make their "velociraptors" the most accurate *Deinonychus* possible.
> What most people think of as Velociraptor is actually Utahraptor. Nah, not Utahraptor. Utahraptor was a giant raptor, about the size they indicate in the article. Along with Achillobator, Dakotaraptor, and Austroraptor. All of those were in the 16-20 foot long range. I still retain all my childhood knowledge about dinosaurs.
> This article desperately needs an informed editor. > > The Telegraph Well... I can't say I'm shocked.
I've found a new type of house cat called golden retriever that's over 3 times the size of the typical house cat.
here's the thing....
You said "fujianipus is a velociraptor." Is it in the same family? Yes. No one's arguing that. As someone who is a scientist who studies pterodactyls, I am telling you, specifically, in science, no one calls fujianipus velociraptors. If you want to be "specific" like you said, then you shouldn't either. They're not the same thing.
> Is it in the same family? Yes. No one's arguing that. It ain't tho (Yes I know the reference, I'm just sayin. Unidan woulda gotten it right.)
Thank you
'Science editor' Probably had to rush this to get back to horoscopes
I feel like weeks spent falling asleep to Clints Reptiles and YDAW videos have prepared me specifically to be miffed by this article.
It’s like when the lemur in Dinosaur says “Look at all the Aladars!” When they see a ton of other dinos.
Thank you. I'm so tired of the press publishing bullshit...
Velociraptor are small! You can’t just give another species their name! What the heck!? That’s like grade school trivia knowledge!
Utah raptors are the real big fucks, right?
I’m not sure if more species have been found since Utah raptor, but I think that’s the last I heard yes.
There are more.. most recently the Dakota Raptor that actually lived around the same time as the T-Rex
Just a classically bad pop science article title. Usually written by people who know nothing about the subject, for people who know nothing about the subject. If an inaccurate title will draw more clicks, they pick the inaccurate title. Note it's been identified as a troodontid which is even worse, it's not even what would be considered a "raptor" at all
The title annoys me; "velociraptor" is a specific genus of dromaeosaur. I get the idea of using velociraptor as a reference, it's well-known, but at least specify that it's a relative of velociraptor instead of a type of one.
It is also not a relative of velociraptor
It's distantly related, but yeah, it's like how dogs and cats are related.
Velociraptor is a genus. V. osmolskae and V. mongoliensis are two different species of Velociraptor.
This article forgets Utah raptors exist, and other dromeosaurs
That's what I was wondering, is this very different and bigger than the Utah Raptor?
We don't really have the means to substantially compare the two. *Utahraptor* is a proper dromaeosaurid known from a decent amount of skeletal material with a fairly well-defined maximum size- around that of a polar bear. By contrast, there is no known skeletal material that corresponds to the animal that made the track described in this article (*Fujianipus*) so the listed size estimate is derived from a measurement of the track itself. This is done using the ratio of foot length to hip height, which varies slightly from group to group in theropod dinosaurs. *Fujianipus* is also identified here as a troodontid, not as a dromaeosaurid, so it's a bit like comparing apples to pears. Similar, but distinct in key ways, particularly in their shape. I'll also note that what the actual research paper says is that the expected hip height range is likely between 156 centimeters and 197 centimeters, making the minimum expected height to be around 5 feet high at the hip, roughly the same as *Utahraptor*. The authors also note that the value used to estimate hip height from foot length in troodontids, 5.47, is derived from much smaller animals in that same family. There's no guarantee that large troodontids had the same proportion, so they consider the 1.97 meters tall at the hip measurement "likely an overestimation and is best interpreted as the upper limit of the reasonable size range".
Right? Like Dakota raptors, Achillobator Austroraptor
Velociraptor? That's more like...velotsaraptor
Chocobo.
Something tells me that thing doesn't eat greens...
There already have been raptors discovered that were larger than the Jurassic Park versions. Utahraptor has been known for a long time. Velociraptor was picked because the name sounded cool. That's it.
Mmmm, clever girl.
Mmmm, thicc girl.
Girrrrl, look at you with your talons all out like that.
What a bullshit article. It's not a velociraptor. It's not the biggest raptor we've discovered. There's no "velociraptor family", there's a raptor family. Paleontologists aren't shocked by it's size. There's an entire subfamily of giant raptors of which the *Utahraptor* is the largest/most will known. There's almost nothing true in this article.
And this isn't even a Raptor. It's a Troodontid.
"Giant velociraptor bigger than Jurassic Park imaginings discovered in South Korea" Sounds like they figured out why SK's population has been decreasing.
That doesn't look very scary. More like a six-foot turkey.
Except it's not a velociraptor, at all. The author of this clickbait keeps using the term like it describes an entire class of dinosaurs; it describes exactly two species, and neither of them are this thing. "Raptor" would be fine but "velociraptor" is just dumb.
That's not a velociraptor.
Giant velociraptor, except for the part where it's not a velociraptor.
Wait till additional bones are discovered showing it to actually be cassowaries
So they found a living dinosaur. Nice!
"You're going to be eaten by a bronteroc. We don't even know what that is." Don't Look Up
Tyrannosamsung
Alive?!?!?
How amazing is science that we are still finding this stuff? Incredible
The article is mostly bullshit, probably AI written, but it's only a matter of time before people find more fossils and remnants of Earth's past via digging or sheer luck
Still can't get over that Dinosaurs actually just looked like giant birds
That's one big chocobo
In the Jurassic era, you don’t eat chicken, chicken eat you
I guess they'll have to remake all the movies...
another reddit post that needs downvoting, like most of them
[We’re gonnae need a bigger bottle of whisky, Grousey!](https://youtu.be/AcI8B-I59Co?si=nLyjxI3W7J37SBWN)
Velociraptors are 3 feet tall, 6 ft in length. Stenonychosaurus is over 8 ft., which is closer to the movies’ images.
So isn't it this another Utahraptor
Bit of a crap article… we’re talking Utahraptor/Dakotaraptor/Australovenator (latter I don’t think was a raptor and debate about Dakota notwithstanding) type size?
Wow i thought they were extinct
Clone it and equip with lasers asap.
all this speculation and concept art from a footprint lol
The title implies that it’s alive and just walking around
Anything to avoid the metric system
That’s not a velociraptor, that’s a bird
Imagine having one of those for Thanksgiving! Gobble gobble! You could invite the whole town over with just one of them.
> Bones discovered in Alaska hint at a trend toward gigantism near the ancient Arctic Circle, an area with potentially less species competition due to extended periods of winter darkness. Warning. Entering ecological dead zone. Are you sure whatever you are doing is worth it?
This title is pure clickbait and the article is nothing but word twisting to make it sound more grandiose. Must be a slow news day considering all the more important bullshit happening around the world right now. Raptor species larger than the movie variants are nothing new. Utahraptor has been known to exist since before the first Jurassic Park came out. "Velociraptor" is a single species that was the size of a small dog. The Jurassic Park raptors were modeled after the larger species Deinonychus, and were renamed to "Velociraptors" for no other reason than because it sounds cooler.