fckn impossible to find out for sure. look at birds for example. they are their closest living relatives and in most species the males are bigger. sometimes they are the same size. and with a lot of birds of prey the females are actually larger. i think the most likely thing is that it differs from genera to genera. maybe even species to species.
It's harder here. Because while Triceratops and Torosaurus have quite clearly visible aparts traits, Saurophaganax and Allosaurus barely have skeletal differences, with only the size being very differents at adult following the two.
@@dudotolivier6363 This. Saurophaganax is also known from EXTREMELY poor remains, which makes it even harder to get a good grasp of exactly how it fit into the Allosaur picture. Personally, my guess is that it's just another species of Allosaurus that was larger than the others, or it might just represent an especially large Allosaurus individual.
@@Krona-fb4dn In what sense? that the remains exist? sure. But there is indeed still debate as to if Saurophaganax has enough anatomical differences from Allosaurus to be classed as it's own genus.
I've said it before and I'll said it again, you'd think being an Allosaurus but BIGGER would automatically validate some popularity but it's forgotten so often. Which is funny because it's the oldest megatheoropod we know of. The First.
I'll give Horner some credit, even though he was barking up the wrong tree here, the idea that maybe Torosaurus was just a fully grown Triceratops isn't a totally insane thought, especially when you take into account the findings with Pachycephalosaurs. That being said, it should have taken a simple look at various specimens of each to find that we clearly have fully mature Triceratops, and they don't look like Torosaurus.
I think he probably got a bit too much confidence after all the evidence he got backing his claim that Nanotyranus, Dracorex, and Stygimoloch were invalid.
@Dinomario2007 Fair point, however I feel like this is a "separate the art from the artist" kind of deal. The man is totally a creep and should largely be ignored now, but he did contribute massively to the science, so entirely avoiding him as a source is going to be pretty difficult.
@Dinomario2007how is Horner a rapist? PS: I forgot, use the UA-cam reply function, I don't think I can receive the notifications the way you tagged me.
The next paleomyth should be on why Megalania may allegedly be still alive. Nah I’m kidding, that probably won’t happen, though I do plan to discuss this rumour. I perhaps Tim should discuss Tarbosaurus being the same as T. rex.
@@jeffreygao3956 Megalania is 100% in the same case than Megalodon. Its great size (biggest monitor lizard and lizard ever discovered so far) wasn't to made it more cool and beautiful. It was a apex predator, targeting, hunting and eating very large preys. Mainly giants marsupials such Diprotodon and Procoptodon, among plenty others larges or medium-sized animals from the Australian Megafauna. With such prey items being totally gone since the period/point where the Last Ice Age even start (and not at the end of it as many believe it by error), Megalania disapeared due to losing it food on which it feed and which allowed it to subtain its large and consuming body. And being unable to hunt smaller, faster and less nutritive preys, that the others smaller monitor lizards them were able to hunt. So, yes, Megalania is totally extinct. Except if the Komodo Dragon end up being, who know ?, to be actually a dwarf form/population of it. Yes, here, in such case, Megalania is alive. But it's a common theory that need to be proved. Already, it not impossible. Since monitor lizards, whatever their size are extremely good swimmers. So having some Megalania going in the Philippes islands areas and surroundings is viable. Plus, Australia at time was wider and larger, called Sahul back then, due to the seas level being lower back thel. So, going in the islands where Komodo Dragons are today was easier back then. And here, as always both for herbivores and carnivores on insulars areas, they could have entirely develop Insular Dwarfism. A trend extremely common and well recorded (if we had elephants the size of Palaeoloxodon namadicus becoming smaller than a medium sized dog on a island, so a giant carnivorous lizard species twice or third the size of a Komodo Dragon should be fine). So, such scenario that Megalania could be none others than the Komodo Dragon ? Yes ? That possible. But as I said upper, must be verified. In addition that it's possible that a population of a species becoming restricted on a island can quickly become its own apart species, while the mother species remain alive on the mainland. And the two apart, mother and daughter species, but apart noneless species, coexisting in term of geological time. So, even if the Komodo Dragon is one day find out to actually descend from Megalania, it have become its own apart species. Which, this last specific point, is justly the current and accepted concensus. And as such, at the end, Megalania still extinct as a species. Sorry, but it's how life is.
Tarbosaurus wouldn't be the "same" as T.rex even if it was a species of Tyrannosaurus. It lived in a different place, at a different time and had many features that clearly distinguish it from Tyrannosaurus. Very, very close relatives for sure, but not the same genus.
The thing about Horner is that when he's right he's right. But then he makes five other questionable choices that just give me a headache. Yes. Young dinosaurs can have completely different physiques than their older counterparts. But that doesn't mean every dinosaur is just 6 or 12 dinos going through various age ranges. That would be a very limited and sparse ecosystem.
The fact that Triceratops and Torosaurus having a mostly sympatric distribution can be explain that they had a niche partitioning thank to a different diet. As its the case for the Black Rhinoceros and White Rhinoceros in Africa today and before the start of their hunting in colonial times. That how two nearly identical and close taxa/species managed to coexist togethers, and avoiding competition between them. Elephants such African, Asian species, Palaeoloxodon, Mammoths, Mastodonts, Stegondonts, and elephants-like Proboscidean such Deinotherium were pretty good back at their glory days to both coexist between them. Mammoths and African Elephants were grazer, eating mostly grasses and low vegetation on the ground ; Palaeoloxodon and Asian Elephants were browsers, eating bushes, trees branches or twigs; Stegodonts were mixed-feeder, eating both grasses and bushes, trees branches to be more generalist; Mastodonts were mostly browser conifers eater specialists, eating mostly conifers trees vegetation; and Deinotherium was a high browser folivore, eating only branches and leaves at the top of the trees like giraffes do. I don't know what precisely both Triceratops and Torosaurus ate as diet. But it sure that at least some niche partitioning have occured between the two.
I gotta admit. As much of a bizarre man as he is. Jack isn't afraid to push some out there ideas. No one else would've thought to bring up the idea that different species were merely growth stages. Is it always right? No. But I do think it could be a thing to look into again someday. Given there's so many species of dinosaur. The idea some are merely growth stages isn't as wild as say a Meg still living today. Speaking of possible Paleomyths. I recall hearing a story about how Protoceratops inspired the Gryphon. Is there any truth to it? Or did a different prehistoric beast inspire the gryphon?
I recall Mark Witton was skeptical about Protoceratops fossils having anything to do behind the inspirations for griffins and besides many mythical animals do not require us to resort to fossils to explain them.
Considering recent findings, it would be cool to have a video discussing the sounds dinosaurs would have made now that we know at least some of them had a larynx. Maybe not a full paleomyth, but a discussion video at least.
I actually work at Museum of the Rockies part time, so I've met John Scannella a few times. He's a pretty nice guy. If you ever want to see a ton of Triceratops and T. rex, come to Bozeman, MT. We also have a couple things where John himself presents information (in video form). One is part of an entire line of Triceratops skulls from baby to adult.
Could you do one on Bruhathkayosaurus? Both on its validity and possible weight? One minute I see it’s valid the next it’s not? Just would be nice to have a clear, well-made and reliable video covering the obscure Titanosaur. Love your videos btw!
Possibly it depends on the species and what things they hunt. Hunter of big game possibly have those iconic stereotypical strategy, while hunter of tiny animals just hunt alone because it simply unpractical to share something that can be swallowed whole
I found this topic interesting. Is it possible that torosaurus is actually just the male form of triceratops while triceratops is the female form? How would paleontologists determine something like that? 😮
I’m no palaeontologist but I don’t think there’s a 100% guaranteed way of proving or disproving the theory since a lack of evidence could just mean we haven’t found the evidence yet. But a good start to identifying the validity of that claim would be to see if you find triceratops in areas you don’t find torosaurus and vice versa. If they were just different genders of the same animal then you’d find trike and torosaurus fossils nearby to eachother. According to some brief searching, triceratops and torosaurus have different ranges with some overlap so it would seem like torosaurus is still a seperate genus and not a male trike since there are places where you find triceratops but not torosaurus and vice versa. But again maybe in the future we will find fossils that back up the theory but as of now it’s unlikely
Wait, I’ve got 3 paleo myths I wanna cover, Did Concavenator use its hump to store water like a camel? Was Carnotaurus Bigger than Baryonyx? And could Baby Therapods pronate their wrists but lose that ability when they grow up?
Paleomyth ideas: was the triassic kraken a thing? Did carnotaurus bash horns? Could spino kill t rex? Was therizinosaurus a carnivore? Are crocodillians living dinosaurs? Could raptors open doors/ is the jp raptor based on utahraptor? Ill add more if i think of them
Possible (if smaller than estimated) No No No No Maybe + my paleo myth is spinofaarus somewhere in the fossil record/or why there is few fossils of the drepanosaurs?
Here's my answer 1.Probably but not as big as it you think 2. no but it's probably lightly shoving each other with it but never hit hard 3. Definitely no 4. It's opportunistically eating meat at best 5. Definitely not 6. This answers is depend, Novel is obviously based on Deinonychus but Movies probably based partially on Utahraptor since it's recently discovered at the time
Torosaurus underrated fr. Lived alongside Trike, fought rexes all the same. Has the biggest skull of anything to ever walk (that we know of) (11 foot skull btw).
Next Paleomyth: - Did raptors hunted in packs? - Did T-Rex had feathers? - Were raptors THAT smart? - Did Sauropods really used their tails as whips? - Was Ceratosaurus really got outcompeded by Allosaurus? - Did Terror Birds really got outcompeded by Smilodons? - Did Stegosaurus really used its plates for thermoregulation?
If I had a nickel for every time a marginosaphalian(I’m not sure how to spell that) was stated to be a different growth stage of another marginosaphalian,I’d have 2 nickels.It’s not a lot but it’s weird that it’s happened twice right?
Great movie 🔥 and so, let kick another paleo myth, was Megalodon, then, does Megalania lives on Wasteland's in Australia nowadays 😎 or Hadrosaurs as defenceless meatbox for large carnivores 💀
I found this topic interesting. Is it possible that torosaurus is actually just the male form of triceratops while triceratops is the female form? How would paleontologists determine something like that?
A great way to bypass scientific paywalls that is not often talked about is to ask the original authors for a pdf of the paper you are interested in reading.
Now, I'd be lying if I said I didn't fall for this myth. But while I was at it, I ended up coming up with a myth of my own, that Torosaurus was actually the “male” while Triceratops was the “female”. Pretty crazy, huh?
Raptors obviousely had a social structure very differents following the taxa and species. They were like Canid. Some were social, others less or mostly solitary. Even mostly solitary species can end up regroup and help each others in a temporary pack to pack hunting a large preys. That also a question of gender. Since specimens following their sexes will adopt a more or less social behavior. Cheetahs are a good example here. Females are strickly solitary. And hunt alone. But them and their offsprings, when the latter near adults, can hunt in pack larger games. While males, always brothers, always stuck in pack and usually hunt large preys. The common and now widespread excuse argument that Raptor weren't social and made pack hunting only because they weren't mammals is a great bullshit to even Heard with our ears.
I think, to me at least, it’s clear these two are separate genera. Since how in some locations only one or the other are found, that wouldn’t make sense if they were both growth stages of the same animal.
Also MALLON et al., 2022 found two specimens of subadult Torosaurus cf. T. latus from the late Maastrichtian of the Scollard and Frenchman Formations of Canada. Btw Scihub is a great way to get access to paywalled content if you haven’t already used it.
I know veryu little about dinosaurs, but if Dino's horns are like "real" hornes and does not regrow, grow entire life then it would be really weird to change shape of horns from Triceratops to Torosaurus.
Indeed, torosaurus was a real animal, but it probably lived in different habitats. That way triceratops would not compete against torosaurs. It’s also imply that triceratops I believe was larger and heavier and torosaurus was less longer, but it had a bigger skull, then triceratops.
you should cover Paleo myth about the Bones of Dinosaurs been the Remains of Dragons, or atleast it was the thier bones that inspired the legends of dragons. not sure if its a Paleomyth but a fun topic for it plus comming from me of course i did how to keep a Dragon Short flim with DragoGen´s Dragons been GMO Dinosaurs(akin to the I-Rex)
@redraptorwrites6778 for the next video, can you do whether Saurophaganax is a basal Carcharodontosaurid or an Allosauroid? It's been up to debate a lot, and I know you're the right guy to end the debate correctly.
Nah really it’s just the smaller species then yes like below the height of a dog ( note : I meant the more smaller species of hadrosaurs not the big ones)
Hadrosaurs aren't defenseless, but it would be easier for a Tyrannosaurus to kill and Edmontosaurus than it would be to kill a Triceratops or Ankylosaurus because Triceratops has horns and Ankylosaurus has armor and a club tail.
@@orionmclaughlin5680Even so, they could kick and smack a Tyrannosaurus with enough force to cause some serious injury, lets not forget they were of similar size
Another idea for a paleomyth: is "species identification" a working explanation for hard-to-explain morphological features on fossil animals? Personally I find that very sus.
What if you plotted number of specimens vs maturity level (age) of the specimens of triceratops/torosaurus and compared it to the same curve of other large herbivores like rihinos or elephants. If 20% of rhinos are fully mature, then 20% of triceratops should have torosaurus shaped skulls.
The awnser is simple here : While listed as Dubious currently, Troodon still by default exist even today as I speak. As "Dubious" absolutely don't mean "Invalid". And while the genus is restricted to a single teeth said undiagnostic, there ANY definitive evidences/proofs that show Troodon is in reality another genus previousely coined/created/named before its own genus. (Which already is problematic, because Troodon is the first Troodontid ever named, so if synonymized with another genus, it's Troodon that will take priority). So, as such, there still greats chances that it was its own apart animal, even if we haven't yet definitives evidences showing it. So, it is 50/50%. Also, given that several well preserved specimens of Stenonychosaurus were put inside Troodon a good century before Stenonychosaurus was itself created, and as such the Troodon name was applied to them, it's possible to take these specific specimens and made one of them the new Holotype (called in such case a Neotype) for Troodon. (Which of course will made Stenonychosaurus Invalid it) As scientists did for Diplodocus when the original Holotype species became dubious and that they choosed another specimen from another species proved to be valid to maintain the genus.
@@kirill7129 Yes, David Varrichio and cie, and another team of scientists (that I haven't the name right now), are the two main scientists team supporting Troodon. Legitimaly and at reasons. Even if it's unlikely that end up discovering new fossils materials of Troodon to consolidate its genus, as to reconized a troodontid specimen remains as a Troodon tooth from it must be compared to the one of Troodon we have to see if they match (which is impossible since the latter is said to be undiagnostic), there will however never any others discoveries that can support in any way possible the potential definitive invalidity of it (so far extremely far to be proven as I put forward in my first comment). While a little sad, it still better to remain dubious yet still by default a existing animal forever and for eternity, than to be definitively Invalid for good ! It's how things are.
Well, that's difficult because Troodon just depends on people's perception of Troodon. There's an animal that shed those teeth and that animal existed. However, those teeth are undiagnostic so it's impossible to find a skeleton of the same species because...you can't tell of it's the same animal. Sooo...there's not much of a testable hypothesis, just scientists arguing (or sometimes ignoring the problem)
@@redraptorwrites6778 I know that there is a maxilla of a theropod from Judith River Formation kept in the Royal Ontario museum who’s teeth and age match Troodons holotype. I think there should be some studies done on it. Maybe it could become troodons neotype? 🤷♂️
Love the channel, but you started this with a bias. I know you don't like Mr. Horner, but he is a hero to me - but I am old (60yo). But the Toro Trike thing is prob not right. However, cut Jack some slack - hell my Dad was 52 when he married my Mum at 17. Life is funny sometimes, and it is wrong to impose one's belief structure on a situation which one, perhaps, does not have an appreciation of the situation. Just saying. Anyhoo - keep up the good work!!!!! xxx
Next Paleomyth: are females theropods bigger than males?
Depends on the theropod.
What about if the megafaunal extinction at the end of the Pleistocene epoch or when people first arrived on Madagascar was human caused.
“That idea is just the worst”
fckn impossible to find out for sure. look at birds for example. they are their closest living relatives and in most species the males are bigger. sometimes they are the same size. and with a lot of birds of prey the females are actually larger. i think the most likely thing is that it differs from genera to genera. maybe even species to species.
@@theflyingdutchguy9870 Yea not “FEmaLes aRE aLWAyS bIgGer” it is impossible to know!
Saurophaganax's validity as it's own genus would be a cool topic for this series.
It's harder here.
Because while Triceratops and Torosaurus have quite clearly visible aparts traits, Saurophaganax and Allosaurus barely have skeletal differences, with only the size being very differents at adult following the two.
@@dudotolivier6363 This. Saurophaganax is also known from EXTREMELY poor remains, which makes it even harder to get a good grasp of exactly how it fit into the Allosaur picture. Personally, my guess is that it's just another species of Allosaurus that was larger than the others, or it might just represent an especially large Allosaurus individual.
It's valid.
@@Krona-fb4dn In what sense? that the remains exist? sure. But there is indeed still debate as to if Saurophaganax has enough anatomical differences from Allosaurus to be classed as it's own genus.
I've said it before and I'll said it again, you'd think being an Allosaurus but BIGGER would automatically validate some popularity but it's forgotten so often. Which is funny because it's the oldest megatheoropod we know of. The First.
Next Paleomyth: can Parasaurolophus breath fire?
that’s just a paleo fact
PERFECTION XD
Duan Gish isn't a reliable source.
All fun and games until nanotriceratus walks in
Dear God...
I'll give Horner some credit, even though he was barking up the wrong tree here, the idea that maybe Torosaurus was just a fully grown Triceratops isn't a totally insane thought, especially when you take into account the findings with Pachycephalosaurs. That being said, it should have taken a simple look at various specimens of each to find that we clearly have fully mature Triceratops, and they don't look like Torosaurus.
I think he probably got a bit too much confidence after all the evidence he got backing his claim that Nanotyranus, Dracorex, and Stygimoloch were invalid.
Imo it probably could've gotten "back to formula" because the idea itself makes some sense at first glance
@Dinomario2007what rapists?
@Dinomario2007 Fair point, however I feel like this is a "separate the art from the artist" kind of deal. The man is totally a creep and should largely be ignored now, but he did contribute massively to the science, so entirely avoiding him as a source is going to be pretty difficult.
@Dinomario2007how is Horner a rapist?
PS: I forgot, use the UA-cam reply function, I don't think I can receive the notifications the way you tagged me.
Honestly, Saying Torosaurus are Older Triceratops is like saying Cape Buffalos are Older Spanish Fighting Bulls
The next paleomyth should be on why Megalania may allegedly be still alive. Nah I’m kidding, that probably won’t happen, though I do plan to discuss this rumour. I perhaps Tim should discuss Tarbosaurus being the same as T. rex.
At least it’s mildly plausible. Varanus priscus could still live today with the fauna now and it probably had parthenogenesis.
@@jeffreygao3956I don’t know about that one. It seems unlikely to still be around.
@@joshuaW5621 Very unlikely.
@@jeffreygao3956 Megalania is 100% in the same case than Megalodon.
Its great size (biggest monitor lizard and lizard ever discovered so far) wasn't to made it more cool and beautiful.
It was a apex predator, targeting, hunting and eating very large preys. Mainly giants marsupials such Diprotodon and Procoptodon, among plenty others larges or medium-sized animals from the Australian Megafauna.
With such prey items being totally gone since the period/point where the Last Ice Age even start (and not at the end of it as many believe it by error), Megalania disapeared due to losing it food on which it feed and which allowed it to subtain its large and consuming body.
And being unable to hunt smaller, faster and less nutritive preys, that the others smaller monitor lizards them were able to hunt.
So, yes, Megalania is totally extinct.
Except if the Komodo Dragon end up being, who know ?, to be actually a dwarf form/population of it.
Yes, here, in such case, Megalania is alive.
But it's a common theory that need to be proved.
Already, it not impossible. Since monitor lizards, whatever their size are extremely good swimmers.
So having some Megalania going in the Philippes islands areas and surroundings is viable.
Plus, Australia at time was wider and larger, called Sahul back then, due to the seas level being lower back thel.
So, going in the islands where Komodo Dragons are today was easier back then.
And here, as always both for herbivores and carnivores on insulars areas, they could have entirely develop Insular Dwarfism.
A trend extremely common and well recorded (if we had elephants the size of Palaeoloxodon namadicus becoming smaller than a medium sized dog on a island, so a giant carnivorous lizard species twice or third the size of a Komodo Dragon should be fine).
So, such scenario that Megalania could be none others than the Komodo Dragon ?
Yes ?
That possible. But as I said upper, must be verified.
In addition that it's possible that a population of a species becoming restricted on a island can quickly become its own apart species, while the mother species remain alive on the mainland.
And the two apart, mother and daughter species, but apart noneless species, coexisting in term of geological time.
So, even if the Komodo Dragon is one day find out to actually descend from Megalania, it have become its own apart species.
Which, this last specific point, is justly the current and accepted concensus.
And as such, at the end, Megalania still extinct as a species.
Sorry, but it's how life is.
Tarbosaurus wouldn't be the "same" as T.rex even if it was a species of Tyrannosaurus. It lived in a different place, at a different time and had many features that clearly distinguish it from Tyrannosaurus. Very, very close relatives for sure, but not the same genus.
The thing about Horner is that when he's right he's right. But then he makes five other questionable choices that just give me a headache. Yes. Young dinosaurs can have completely different physiques than their older counterparts. But that doesn't mean every dinosaur is just 6 or 12 dinos going through various age ranges. That would be a very limited and sparse ecosystem.
If you ever return to the topic of Megalodon, a better myth would be whether it looked like an oversized great white.
Ben G Thomas did a video about that if you want to see it.
@@AgroAcro I know that. i just want to hear his take on the subject.
Not exactly since the square/cube law means you can't just scale up or down something and call it a day.
The fact that Triceratops and Torosaurus having a mostly sympatric distribution can be explain that they had a niche partitioning thank to a different diet.
As its the case for the Black Rhinoceros and White Rhinoceros in Africa today and before the start of their hunting in colonial times.
That how two nearly identical and close taxa/species managed to coexist togethers, and avoiding competition between them.
Elephants such African, Asian species, Palaeoloxodon, Mammoths, Mastodonts, Stegondonts, and elephants-like Proboscidean such Deinotherium were pretty good back at their glory days to both coexist between them.
Mammoths and African Elephants were grazer, eating mostly grasses and low vegetation on the ground ; Palaeoloxodon and Asian Elephants were browsers, eating bushes, trees branches or twigs; Stegodonts were mixed-feeder, eating both grasses and bushes, trees branches to be more generalist; Mastodonts were mostly browser conifers eater specialists, eating mostly conifers trees vegetation; and Deinotherium was a high browser folivore, eating only branches and leaves at the top of the trees like giraffes do.
I don't know what precisely both Triceratops and Torosaurus ate as diet.
But it sure that at least some niche partitioning have occured between the two.
I gotta admit. As much of a bizarre man as he is. Jack isn't afraid to push some out there ideas. No one else would've thought to bring up the idea that different species were merely growth stages. Is it always right? No. But I do think it could be a thing to look into again someday. Given there's so many species of dinosaur. The idea some are merely growth stages isn't as wild as say a Meg still living today.
Speaking of possible Paleomyths. I recall hearing a story about how Protoceratops inspired the Gryphon. Is there any truth to it? Or did a different prehistoric beast inspire the gryphon?
I recall Mark Witton was skeptical about Protoceratops fossils having anything to do behind the inspirations for griffins and besides many mythical animals do not require us to resort to fossils to explain them.
Considering recent findings, it would be cool to have a video discussing the sounds dinosaurs would have made now that we know at least some of them had a larynx.
Maybe not a full paleomyth, but a discussion video at least.
I actually work at Museum of the Rockies part time, so I've met John Scannella a few times. He's a pretty nice guy.
If you ever want to see a ton of Triceratops and T. rex, come to Bozeman, MT. We also have a couple things where John himself presents information (in video form). One is part of an entire line of Triceratops skulls from baby to adult.
Wow, small world! I wish I could visit.
I reccomend doing the nanotyrannus as the 10th episode
'Almost as bad as his jumping on students moment' darn💀
Could you do one on Bruhathkayosaurus? Both on its validity and possible weight? One minute I see it’s valid the next it’s not? Just would be nice to have a clear, well-made and reliable video covering the obscure Titanosaur. Love your videos btw!
Well torosaurus is real and always well. I hope you do a video on debunking ceratopsian horns being fragile.
Paleo myth ideas: Cretaceous dicynodont
And Stygi being a sub-species to pachy instead of being a growth stage
I addressed the Stygi bit at the end of my Pachy ontogeny video. Maybe
If they're separate species, could some of our specimens be hybrids?
Nanotyrannus would also be a good topic for a Paleomyth Video.
12:50 Jack- will you cut that out! best part of the video
Maybe you could do dromaeosaurid "pack" hunting next.
Debunk the general public thinking that pterosaurs are birds, or ancestors to birds
Triceratops & Torosaurus were the White & Black Rhino’s of the Hell Creek.
For a Paleo Myth, it could be cool to see you tackle the idea of making a "chicken"saurus which has gotten some actual press before.
Great video as always. Maybe you could do one for dromaeosaurs pack hunting. Not sure if it's really a myth but it's worth discussing
Possibly it depends on the species and what things they hunt. Hunter of big game possibly have those iconic stereotypical strategy, while hunter of tiny animals just hunt alone because it simply unpractical to share something that can be swallowed whole
And your wish came true and got labeled “Back to formula!”
I found this topic interesting. Is it possible that torosaurus is actually just the male form of triceratops while triceratops is the female form? How would paleontologists determine something like that? 😮
I’m no palaeontologist but I don’t think there’s a 100% guaranteed way of proving or disproving the theory since a lack of evidence could just mean we haven’t found the evidence yet. But a good start to identifying the validity of that claim would be to see if you find triceratops in areas you don’t find torosaurus and vice versa. If they were just different genders of the same animal then you’d find trike and torosaurus fossils nearby to eachother. According to some brief searching, triceratops and torosaurus have different ranges with some overlap so it would seem like torosaurus is still a seperate genus and not a male trike since there are places where you find triceratops but not torosaurus and vice versa. But again maybe in the future we will find fossils that back up the theory but as of now it’s unlikely
2:08 From the definitions I've seen in books, they use the perforated lizard definition
being from rapid, near the hell-creek formation i can say its also my fav
Paleo Myth: Are Pterosaurs, like Quetzalcoatlus too large to actually fly, or fly affectively?
Next Paleo Myth:how did spinosaurus hunt/could spino swim.
Wait, I’ve got 3 paleo myths I wanna cover,
Did Concavenator use its hump to store water like a camel?
Was Carnotaurus Bigger than Baryonyx?
And could Baby Therapods pronate their wrists but lose that ability when they grow up?
I was just about to ask you about this subject! I came back from museum of the Rockies and learned some fossil theories can be challenged
Paleomyth ideas: was the triassic kraken a thing?
Did carnotaurus bash horns?
Could spino kill t rex?
Was therizinosaurus a carnivore?
Are crocodillians living dinosaurs?
Could raptors open doors/ is the jp raptor based on utahraptor?
Ill add more if i think of them
Possible (if smaller than estimated)
No
No
No
No
Maybe
+ my paleo myth is spinofaarus somewhere in the fossil record/or why there is few fossils of the drepanosaurs?
@@Spinofaarus_boi yea
Here's my answer
1.Probably but not as big as it you think
2. no but it's probably lightly shoving each other with it but never hit hard
3. Definitely no
4. It's opportunistically eating meat at best
5. Definitely not
6. This answers is depend, Novel is obviously based on Deinonychus but Movies probably based partially on Utahraptor since it's recently discovered at the time
@@toyohimeyeswatatsuki6917 well it was meant to be as more general questions that I already know the awnsers to, so like misconceptions
Guess I'm gonna feature this underated Dinosaur in my future project.🙂
I was looking for more paleo myth videos and it seems I have watched them all! I love this series.
Torosaurus also appeared in Dinosaur king
Torosaurus underrated fr. Lived alongside Trike, fought rexes all the same. Has the biggest skull of anything to ever walk (that we know of) (11 foot skull btw).
Another paleo misconception,are all compsongnathids just hatching charcharodontosaurids or are they still a legit family
Next Paleomyth:
- Did raptors hunted in packs?
- Did T-Rex had feathers?
- Were raptors THAT smart?
- Did Sauropods really used their tails as whips?
- Was Ceratosaurus really got outcompeded by Allosaurus?
- Did Terror Birds really got outcompeded by Smilodons?
- Did Stegosaurus really used its plates for thermoregulation?
These are all awesome ideas!
Triceratops: who are you?
Torosaurus: i am you, but with HOLES
At this point do a mega episode on dinosaurs that may have been other dinosaurs
Wait I’ve got a Paleomyth idea, was Patagotitan bigger then Argentinosaurus.
Dang! Will there be no Paleo myth getting Perfection until the end of time?
Next paleomyth:is Barney its own genus or only a subspecies of Beast wars Megatron 😂
Could Torosaurus be the male form of Triceratops? If I was a Triceratops I would want a bigger head to impress the girls 😊.
I hope the next Paleomyth is about Argentinosaurs being the biggest Dinosaur or he’s isn’t anymore
If I had a nickel for every time a marginosaphalian(I’m not sure how to spell that) was stated to be a different growth stage of another marginosaphalian,I’d have 2 nickels.It’s not a lot but it’s weird that it’s happened twice right?
I'd like to see more on Spinosaurines validity, as it's very interesting to discuss about what was or not Spinosaurus.
Great movie 🔥 and so, let kick another paleo myth, was Megalodon, then, does Megalania lives on Wasteland's in Australia nowadays 😎 or Hadrosaurs as defenceless meatbox for large carnivores 💀
The latter can be debunked by the phrase “Hadrosaurs are POWERFUL!”
A cool myth would be if Dromeosaurus hunted in packs or if they used their sickle claw for slicing
Yas, a new Paleo Myth vid!
4:53 I think that for scipionyx we need to wait until we find a maybe italian Carcharadontosaurus
4:53 scipionyx... well, I'll wait for a video about him
I found this topic interesting. Is it possible that torosaurus is actually just the male form of triceratops while triceratops is the female form? How would paleontologists determine something like that?
A great way to bypass scientific paywalls that is not often talked about is to ask the original authors for a pdf of the paper you are interested in reading.
0:33 Me: (Visibly Groans and cringes)
I think the relationship between Torosaurus and Triceratops would be like Black rhinoceros and White Rhinoceros in Africa
Next Paleomyth : was Sarcosuchus being the biggest crocodile in existence?
Now, I'd be lying if I said I didn't fall for this myth. But while I was at it, I ended up coming up with a myth of my own, that Torosaurus was actually the “male” while Triceratops was the “female”. Pretty crazy, huh?
As a Trike lover myself, DOWN WITH TOROSAURUS!!!
How about " Did raptors really hunt in packs?"
Raptors obviousely had a social structure very differents following the taxa and species.
They were like Canid.
Some were social, others less or mostly solitary.
Even mostly solitary species can end up regroup and help each others in a temporary pack to pack hunting a large preys.
That also a question of gender.
Since specimens following their sexes will adopt a more or less social behavior.
Cheetahs are a good example here.
Females are strickly solitary. And hunt alone. But them and their offsprings, when the latter near adults, can hunt in pack larger games.
While males, always brothers, always stuck in pack and usually hunt large preys.
The common and now widespread excuse argument that Raptor weren't social and made pack hunting only because they weren't mammals is a great bullshit to even Heard with our ears.
this was one that I was confident would be false, can we get wha wha whaaa for Mr. Horner
What if they’re male and female variants of the same species?
I think, to me at least, it’s clear these two are separate genera. Since how in some locations only one or the other are found, that wouldn’t make sense if they were both growth stages of the same animal.
Next Theory: Is The Titanoboa Still Alive
No! Just no…
Tbh, after the Scavenger Rex fiasco, I've not been particularly confident in Horner's theories, so to see this one be disproven is unsurprising to me
More horner slander Im all for it
Also MALLON et al., 2022 found two specimens of subadult Torosaurus cf. T. latus from the late Maastrichtian of the Scollard and Frenchman Formations of Canada.
Btw Scihub is a great way to get access to paywalled content if you haven’t already used it.
I know veryu little about dinosaurs, but if Dino's horns are like "real" hornes and does not regrow, grow entire life then it would be really weird to change shape of horns from Triceratops to Torosaurus.
Indeed, torosaurus was a real animal, but it probably lived in different habitats. That way triceratops would not compete against torosaurs. It’s also imply that triceratops I believe was larger and heavier and torosaurus was less longer, but it had a bigger skull, then triceratops.
I'd love to see an Episode about BYU 9024 and whether it is a Supersaurus or Barosaurus.
you should cover Paleo myth about the Bones of Dinosaurs been the Remains of Dragons, or atleast it was the thier bones that inspired the legends of dragons.
not sure if its a Paleomyth but a fun topic for it plus comming from me of course i did how to keep a Dragon Short flim with DragoGen´s Dragons been GMO Dinosaurs(akin to the I-Rex)
@redraptorwrites6778 for the next video, can you do whether Saurophaganax is a basal Carcharodontosaurid or an Allosauroid? It's been up to debate a lot, and I know you're the right guy to end the debate correctly.
When are you gonna do the rest of the land before Time series?
I see Torosaurus as its own species.
0:33 personally more of a morrison guy myself
Red raptor, I have a question to you. What is your opinion on the dinosaur Stenonychosaurus? Do you like it?
Another paleo myth: is Dakotaraptor valid species or a chimera
My boi Torosaurus
Good afternoon.
Torosaurus!
@@explodingdynamite7319based
Can you do a paleo Myth video on Raptors pack hunting ?
Wish come true!
When will part three of the NY Natural History Museum review come out?
Plot twist: _Triceratops_ and _Torosaurus_ are different sexes of the same genus. =P
Opinion on KYORYU game trailer
It could be a TV show I think too.
I think it's nature wasn't truly revealed.
Next myth: Were Hadrosaurs defenseless?
Nah really it’s just the smaller species then yes like below the height of a dog ( note : I meant the more smaller species of hadrosaurs not the big ones)
Easily debunked with the saying: Hadrosaurs are POWERFUL!
Hadrosaurs aren't defenseless, but it would be easier for a Tyrannosaurus to kill and Edmontosaurus than it would be to kill a Triceratops or Ankylosaurus because Triceratops has horns and Ankylosaurus has armor and a club tail.
@@orionmclaughlin5680 Hadrosaurs must have relied on social herds structure, size, their tails and to flee dangers against T-rex and others theropods.
@@orionmclaughlin5680Even so, they could kick and smack a Tyrannosaurus with enough force to cause some serious injury, lets not forget they were of similar size
I dont know how this would work, but can you please do some video on utahraptor?
I like utahraptor.
Haha me too, but I'm not sure exactly how to fit in Utahraptor lol
I have an idea. do were utahraptors (and other raptors) pack hunters or solo ambush hunters. That would be great!@@redraptorwrites6778
I’ve got an idea! Can you please make a video on Bahariasaurus? 🥺
Another idea for a paleomyth: is "species identification" a working explanation for hard-to-explain morphological features on fossil animals? Personally I find that very sus.
What if you plotted number of specimens vs maturity level (age) of the specimens of triceratops/torosaurus and compared it to the same curve of other large herbivores like rihinos or elephants. If 20% of rhinos are fully mature, then 20% of triceratops should have torosaurus shaped skulls.
Can you make one in Troodon?
The awnser is simple here :
While listed as Dubious currently, Troodon still by default exist even today as I speak.
As "Dubious" absolutely don't mean "Invalid".
And while the genus is restricted to a single teeth said undiagnostic, there ANY definitive evidences/proofs that show Troodon is in reality another genus previousely coined/created/named before its own genus.
(Which already is problematic, because Troodon is the first Troodontid ever named, so if synonymized with another genus, it's Troodon that will take priority).
So, as such, there still greats chances that it was its own apart animal, even if we haven't yet definitives evidences showing it.
So, it is 50/50%.
Also, given that several well preserved specimens of Stenonychosaurus were put inside Troodon a good century before Stenonychosaurus was itself created, and as such the Troodon name was applied to them, it's possible to take these specific specimens and made one of them the new Holotype (called in such case a Neotype) for Troodon.
(Which of course will made Stenonychosaurus Invalid it)
As scientists did for Diplodocus when the original Holotype species became dubious and that they choosed another specimen from another species proved to be valid to maintain the genus.
@@dudotolivier6363 thanks! I have been supporter of Troodon along with famous paleontologist David Varrichio.
@@kirill7129 Yes, David Varrichio and cie, and another team of scientists (that I haven't the name right now), are the two main scientists team supporting Troodon.
Legitimaly and at reasons.
Even if it's unlikely that end up discovering new fossils materials of Troodon to consolidate its genus, as to reconized a troodontid specimen remains as a Troodon tooth from it must be compared to the one of Troodon we have to see if they match (which is impossible since the latter is said to be undiagnostic), there will however never any others discoveries that can support in any way possible the potential definitive invalidity of it (so far extremely far to be proven as I put forward in my first comment).
While a little sad, it still better to remain dubious yet still by default a existing animal forever and for eternity, than to be definitively Invalid for good !
It's how things are.
Well, that's difficult because Troodon just depends on people's perception of Troodon. There's an animal that shed those teeth and that animal existed. However, those teeth are undiagnostic so it's impossible to find a skeleton of the same species because...you can't tell of it's the same animal. Sooo...there's not much of a testable hypothesis, just scientists arguing (or sometimes ignoring the problem)
@@redraptorwrites6778 I know that there is a maxilla of a theropod from Judith River Formation kept in the Royal Ontario museum who’s teeth and age match Troodons holotype. I think there should be some studies done on it. Maybe it could become troodons neotype? 🤷♂️
SUPER NICE
Yay
Love the channel, but you started this with a bias. I know you don't like Mr. Horner, but he is a hero to me - but I am old (60yo). But the Toro Trike thing is prob not right. However, cut Jack some slack - hell my Dad was 52 when he married my Mum at 17. Life is funny sometimes, and it is wrong to impose one's belief structure on a situation which one, perhaps, does not have an appreciation of the situation. Just saying. Anyhoo - keep up the good work!!!!! xxx
Ofcourse it's Jack Horner, it always is
Cool
what no this cant be
Tinky winky
Don't.. Don't restart this shit again. This "debate" was disproven years ago.
Seriously... You should check out Dinosaurs Decoded for dinosaur documentary rating.
I might get there but I get to discuss the controversies more in depth like this.
Makes sense... Thank you.