I have new stuff up on the RedBubble shop! Shirts: www.redbubble.com/i/t-shirt/Pentaceratops-The-Northern-One-by-PainterRex517/36912898.FB110?ref=explore-for-you-recently-viewed www.redbubble.com/i/t-shirt/E-D-G-E-Logo-by-PainterRex517/46695716.IJ6L0 Stickers: www.redbubble.com/i/sticker/Killer-Tadpole-Sticker-by-PainterRex517/34259828.EJUG5 www.redbubble.com/i/sticker/Pentaceratops-The-Northern-One-by-PainterRex517/36912898.EJUG5
Maybe the chin structures were a target point for the chicks to peck at when begging for food? Many sea birds today have a different colors spot on the parent's lower beak, for just this purpose.
Dimorphadon is adapted to beach combing. It could land and sweep up crabs, carrion and insects along the beaches, with Caelestiventus would act similarly among the rocks and dunes of its territory. The comparison to the owl is very apt, I think.
3:05 Sorry, that is nowhere near the size of a golden eagle (the one you depicted) and even further from the largest extant birds of prey. This pterosaur was rather the size of a red tailed hawk.
@E.D.G.E my theory is that it’s a aquatic pterosaur diving down into the water of a pond, waterhole or river swimming around catching dragonfly nimfs and small fish before flying out of the water to eat its meal on its perch and drying its wings like a cormorant And my second theory is that it lived like modern day seabirds high on rocky outcrops over a pond, waterhole or river up away from danger and like modern day seabirds the male looks after the chicks and the female goes hunting for food.
I believe that the keel isn't for flight through air but a way to keep my jaw stable in water. It's teeth look like other fish catchers. When at speed I could see this as a way to save energy and torque on the organisms neck.
Are you referring to skimming? You should watch my video on the Rhamphorhynchus vs. Aspidorhynchus fossil. I talk about how skimming is such a maladaptive behaviour that only one living animal is known to do it, and the adaptions needed to be able to do it would be so obvious in the skeleton of an animal that scientists would know what they were looking at could actually skim.
Wouldn't that cause its jaw to break? due to the skull likely being very frigile, And it doesn't show adaptations for the life-style your suggesting, and the teeth? what about dimorphodon? or any other Similar Pterosaur.
When these pterosaur fellows are tiny, I can imagine their proportions being pretty cute. But the big ones, for some reason, are fucking horrific to me. So gangly, big-headed, weird... Terrible things. Nasty. Creepy. Cool? Yes. A wonder of nature? Absolutely. Abominations? Also yes.
That keel must be structurally functional like our own chin: surely reinforcing the bite, those toothed beaks are no-nonsense sophisticated engineering, no room for "display" weights there.
Plenty of room for displays. That thin piece of bones is extremely thin and wouldn't have added much bone or weight at all. Plenty other pterosaurs have similar structures on all different parts of their skulls (midline, over the cranium, on the tips of the snouts, etc.).
@@EDGEscience - Forget for a second pterosaurs and dinosaurs, think human chin. I guess you can imagine it as a "display" (manly chin or whatever) but its primary function is not that at all: it is to provide a reinforcement of the jaw that allows us to bite with greater strength than our chinless archaic relatives and that way to allow for a flatter face and possibly even larger brains. It is a very distinctive signature of our species H. sapiens, basically if you have a human lower jaw you can discern whether it belongs to our species or not by just looking at that feature, which has a very clear structural role. My take is that such fliers as these pterosaurs evolved a similar feature for similar reasons (which seem very much related: good bite with the most slender possible frame), the evolutionary pressure is clear, you even mentioned they used their rear teeth as molars probably, for me there is little doubt (but in wait of mechanical research, of course).
Sure. But dinosaurs and pterosaurs are so far removed from mammals and humans that you simply can't compare them. Neither of these groups nor their cousins, ancestors, or descendants have musculature all the way out at the end of their jaws (they don't have real chins, only pieces of bone).
@@EDGEscience - They are animals and they are really not that different from us in what matters here: reinforcing bite while removing weight. In fact fliers like them should be even more interested than us in this process. Convergent evolution is a thing.
How could something like that end up at a prominent morman college? Maybe I'm just mistaken but i would have expected them to destroy it or paint some stupid picture of a fictional creature they made up to fit their narrative. I guess having people interested in the true biology of a thing working on pulling it from the earth can help keep it from obscurity sometimes.
That is a curious case, huh? I never really thought about it, but yeah that school is a religiously zealous place, but they have a museum of paleontology where I assume the facts aren't twisted since many of the scientists who work there are well-known and write up descriptions which don't try to represent religious bias.
How can we POSSIBLY know that it saw in colour simply by its brain casing? Possibly its eye sight worked in totally different ways to us. Maybe the eyes were mono but dedicated to very high resolution.
I'm not an ophthalmologist, but we know modern birds and many reptiles can see in color like us (not exactly like us, but in the visible light spectrum), so it's not a big stretch.
@@EDGEscience It's a MASSIVE stretch! Just looking at humans, which we all experience from the inside, you can't say definitely that human ancestors perceived the world the same way we did say 2 million years ago. The entire issue of visual perception is not even closed regarding all modern animals, so to look at the skulls of animals that lived 200 million years ago and say "Well we know that modern birds kind of see like us so these bird antecedents also saw in colour" is a huge overreach, that makes as much sense as saying "I'm not well adapted to living in trees so early hominid ancestors weren't either." So many baked in assumptions, and ignoring the existence of evolution entitrely.
Mat Broomfield pterosaurs were archosaurs, and all archosaurs we know of had great color vision. Anchiornis, a dinosaur (therefore an archosaur) we know the color of, has bright red display feathers. There is absolutely no reason why pterosaurs would evolve different vision, especially because they are vision based hunters. Sure visual perception has the potential to change drastically, but it doesn’t mean it always does, there needs to be evolutionary pressures to change. Past archosaurs have similar enough brains to present archosaurs, we can tell they had color vision. What you propose is that it’s wrong to assume that pterosaurs had color vision because we can’t know for sure, (even though we have some pretty great evidence for it) but most of what we know about prehistoric animals is evidence based assumption, and the only evidence you have saying that we don’t know what their vision was like is that it COULD have been different. Thats like it’s a massive leap to assume prehistoric mammals had fur because modern mammals do. Basal traits remain in the animal, unless it is pressured to change, which pterosaurs weren’t. Your theory is not based on any evidence and is contrarian nonsense.
The warning is for UA-cam, not for kids like you. UA-cam doesn't allow ads hence payment of creators that make videos for kids. It is a good law, back when I was a kid ads were directed to kids and it was exploitive, but the law tends to hurt creators on UA-cam because they can get a big fine making videos that could be interpreted as for kids and then monetizing it to get paid for their work. The creator is covering his behind to make sure his videos are not seen as kid videos so he will not be fined for allowing ads on the videos.
I was just having a discussion talking about anurognathids that could have evolved either Bat or Owl like treats with these pterosaurs having a face that could be adapted to either life style if they go down one of these evolutionary paths MAYBE even both.
It’s unlikely for pterosaurs to evolve owl like traits, because the dish shaped face of owls is to help with hearing, and anurognathids and other pterosaurs relied on sight. Bat traits are more likely, unless you mean echolocation, because once again anurognathids weren’t hearing based, but sight based. We have a pretty good idea of what anurognathids looked like because of exceptional fossil preservation, so extensive integuments and soft tissues like in owls or bats are very unlikely, especially developing both bat-like and owl-like traits. Anurognathids were most likely nocturnal insect hunters, but probably did not have faces resembling owls and bats, because they used sight and we have great fossil preservation of them. Also evolutionary pants? Owl like treats? Maybe double check what you’re writing before posting it.
I understand that pterosaurs primarily rely on eye sight & so far that’s what fossil record shows us & yes I’m aware of what the fossil record has preserved for Anurognathids. I’m just trying to have a interesting conversation or food for thought here 💭 on the evolutionary possibilities for Pterosaurs & which family of these amazing animals were mostly likely to evolve these specific evolutionary traits. Anurognathidae is form 164-122mya or mid jurassic to early cretaceous, but there’s still the mid & late cretaceous period, Which when you think about it’s kinda around 57 million years give or take. Which is more then enough time for at least one pterosaur grouping to have evolved these traits. I’m not saying that there were pterosaurs that did evolve to become perfect evolutionary converged bats/owls of there time. Again I’m just trying to have interesting conversation about this idea. I saying this knowing there’s so far no evidence for it. You can’t rule that out since the fossil record is also full of holes.
@@EDGEscience Thanks. It was a tree that went extinct about 66 million years ago and was a relative of Cycads. Its another species that bit the dirt in the Dinosaur die out...although remnants lasted in pockets..but i guess the climate chang caught up to them.
@@EDGEscience your content isn't even controversial to sensorship..you don't swear...you don't use innuendos...please just explain. I'm not interrogating you im asking why you feel its nessasary. Don't take utube comments to heart as much as you seem you do. I enjoy your content it just seems like your exaggerating the content you bring.
Not at all. Pterodactyl is not an actual animal, just a long outdated name for pterosaurs. And Celestiventus is not an ancestor to all pterosaurs, even if that’s what you mean. If you mean a direct lineage, that’s not how evolution works.
Drake Petty yes, but when more pterosaurs where discovered, the term pterodactyl was retired. Pterodactyloid is a term used to describe the more derived short tailed pterosaurs, but Caelestiventus is a long tailed Rhamphorincoid
We are in a pandemic, that means: *Go into public spaces* *Lick everything* *Cough/spit/sneeze on everyone* *Hug everyone* *Touch everything and then your face* *Spread pestilence* *Summon a Great Unclean One* *Please your Grandfather*
I have new stuff up on the RedBubble shop!
Shirts:
www.redbubble.com/i/t-shirt/Pentaceratops-The-Northern-One-by-PainterRex517/36912898.FB110?ref=explore-for-you-recently-viewed
www.redbubble.com/i/t-shirt/E-D-G-E-Logo-by-PainterRex517/46695716.IJ6L0
Stickers:
www.redbubble.com/i/sticker/Killer-Tadpole-Sticker-by-PainterRex517/34259828.EJUG5
www.redbubble.com/i/sticker/Pentaceratops-The-Northern-One-by-PainterRex517/36912898.EJUG5
Btw ch and cch like in Fabio Vecchia is pronounced like k and ck in English, so Vecchia sounds like Veckia not Vetchia
"Most pterosaur bones...they look like roadkill."
He did it. He boiled pterosaur fossil preservation to its bare essentials.
This proves the existance of ancient soft-bodied ancestors of modern cars.
Uncle Kane the tiberium main horses. you’re thinking of horses.
You had to. It's sad..
Magic dust . they can turn.. It's the timing before the turn
Boil the dirt too.
Maybe the chin structures were a target point for the chicks to peck at when begging for food? Many sea birds today have a different colors spot on the parent's lower beak, for just this purpose.
Good spec-bio idea. Seems like something oddly specific for an animal to dedicate an expensive piece of bone for.
ooo cool idea
Dimorphadon is adapted to beach combing. It could land and sweep up crabs, carrion and insects along the beaches, with Caelestiventus would act similarly among the rocks and dunes of its territory. The comparison to the owl is very apt, I think.
It looks like a toothy puffin! (totally gonna draw it with puffin patterns)
NO! DON'T DO THAT! It's the worst pterosaur paleoart meme ever, there are hundreds of puffin dimorphodonts!
Joschua Knüppe and them having puffin patterns doesn’t even make sense, they most likely occupied different niches!
But doing it for fun is always alright!
Bruv art can be for fun not just for scientific purposes
A small Pterosaur with Giganotosaurus head 😂
I wish we could genetically recreate the pterosaurs.
They were amazing.
Will we spare any expense?
@@alexandermackie7621 Not if I am in charge.
We don't know what colors they were, but it would be awesome if these animals evolve once again, even though it's impossible
It is so amazing that you can now print and scan fossils now like with paper.
paper? I think they have that, but plastic is easier
E.D.G.E it just shows you how far technology has advanced over the decades
E.D.G.E I think they meant that you can now print and scan 3D things in the same way that we could with paper
Watch with a Guardian? I don’t know ... Hey, Rocket, wanna watch a video with me?
3:05 Sorry, that is nowhere near the size of a golden eagle (the one you depicted) and even further from the largest extant birds of prey.
This pterosaur was rather the size of a red tailed hawk.
Great video! love early pterosaurs.
10:10 - When this music starts playing, my brain is thoroughly programmed to expect L.A. Beast to throw up soon...
Caelestiventus is a very fascinating pterosaur great video.
I know this...
You cant eat salad with those teeth ;)
The Animal looks like a threatening being; sometimes smaller animals could be hell of fighters or irritators(lol) too; like badgers
A great example would be one of today's dinosaurs, known as "geese".
@Drake Petty Considering Pterosaurs are indeed on the Spinosaurids menu :]
I’m 13 and I don’t think nature is disturbing I actually love evolution and nature
Same
@E.D.G.E my theory is that it’s a aquatic pterosaur diving down into the water of a pond, waterhole or river swimming around catching dragonfly nimfs and small fish before flying out of the water to eat its meal on its perch and drying its wings like a cormorant
And my second theory is that it lived like modern day seabirds high on rocky outcrops over a pond, waterhole or river up away from danger and like modern day seabirds the male looks after the chicks and the female goes hunting for food.
Content warning: this video contains nature.
Great Video!
Now the question nobody asks: did those toothed Pterosaurs have lips?
I believe that the keel isn't for flight through air but a way to keep my jaw stable in water. It's teeth look like other fish catchers. When at speed I could see this as a way to save energy and torque on the organisms neck.
Are you referring to skimming? You should watch my video on the Rhamphorhynchus vs. Aspidorhynchus fossil. I talk about how skimming is such a maladaptive behaviour that only one living animal is known to do it, and the adaptions needed to be able to do it would be so obvious in the skeleton of an animal that scientists would know what they were looking at could actually skim.
Wouldn't that cause its jaw to break? due to the skull likely being very frigile, And it doesn't show adaptations for the life-style your suggesting, and the teeth? what about dimorphodon? or any other Similar Pterosaur.
A video about Megalosaurs, Torvosaurs and all would be appreciated: how they lived an what niche they occupied
@Drake Petty I guess
Excelent piece! Thnk you!
Sees thumbnail: its dimorphodon!
actually Reads the title: Damn it😞
When these pterosaur fellows are tiny, I can imagine their proportions being pretty cute. But the big ones, for some reason, are fucking horrific to me. So gangly, big-headed, weird... Terrible things. Nasty. Creepy. Cool? Yes. A wonder of nature? Absolutely. Abominations? Also yes.
Title of this vid is just ... *chef’s kiss*
That keel must be structurally functional like our own chin: surely reinforcing the bite, those toothed beaks are no-nonsense sophisticated engineering, no room for "display" weights there.
Plenty of room for displays. That thin piece of bones is extremely thin and wouldn't have added much bone or weight at all. Plenty other pterosaurs have similar structures on all different parts of their skulls (midline, over the cranium, on the tips of the snouts, etc.).
@@EDGEscience - Forget for a second pterosaurs and dinosaurs, think human chin. I guess you can imagine it as a "display" (manly chin or whatever) but its primary function is not that at all: it is to provide a reinforcement of the jaw that allows us to bite with greater strength than our chinless archaic relatives and that way to allow for a flatter face and possibly even larger brains. It is a very distinctive signature of our species H. sapiens, basically if you have a human lower jaw you can discern whether it belongs to our species or not by just looking at that feature, which has a very clear structural role. My take is that such fliers as these pterosaurs evolved a similar feature for similar reasons (which seem very much related: good bite with the most slender possible frame), the evolutionary pressure is clear, you even mentioned they used their rear teeth as molars probably, for me there is little doubt (but in wait of mechanical research, of course).
Sure. But dinosaurs and pterosaurs are so far removed from mammals and humans that you simply can't compare them. Neither of these groups nor their cousins, ancestors, or descendants have musculature all the way out at the end of their jaws (they don't have real chins, only pieces of bone).
@@EDGEscience - They are animals and they are really not that different from us in what matters here: reinforcing bite while removing weight. In fact fliers like them should be even more interested than us in this process. Convergent evolution is a thing.
Great video - thanks a lot for sharing!
Wait... That diastema... You could put a bridle on them? 😍
I was extinct once, it was terrible. :^(
Blessed. Hybrid
You’d think that their olfactory lobe would be more developed if they were such a scavenger..
Every carnivorous animal is also a scavenger, which is why I included that as just one part of its possible diet.
This video makes me wanna watch it without a parent or guardian
A 1.5m wingspan is more like the size of a really big seagull
How could something like that end up at a prominent morman college? Maybe I'm just mistaken but i would have expected them to destroy it or paint some stupid picture of a fictional creature they made up to fit their narrative. I guess having people interested in the true biology of a thing working on pulling it from the earth can help keep it from obscurity sometimes.
That is a curious case, huh? I never really thought about it, but yeah that school is a religiously zealous place, but they have a museum of paleontology where I assume the facts aren't twisted since many of the scientists who work there are well-known and write up descriptions which don't try to represent religious bias.
It's a skinny monkey bat with a giant bird head and protruding teeth 😫
Can you do a video on Parasaurolophus or Edmontosaurus? Any ornithopods would be great
Hey edge can you make a video all about dimorphodon
How can we POSSIBLY know that it saw in colour simply by its brain casing? Possibly its eye sight worked in totally different ways to us. Maybe the eyes were mono but dedicated to very high resolution.
I'm not an ophthalmologist, but we know modern birds and many reptiles can see in color like us (not exactly like us, but in the visible light spectrum), so it's not a big stretch.
@@EDGEscience It's a MASSIVE stretch! Just looking at humans, which we all experience from the inside, you can't say definitely that human ancestors perceived the world the same way we did say 2 million years ago. The entire issue of visual perception is not even closed regarding all modern animals, so to look at the skulls of animals that lived 200 million years ago and say "Well we know that modern birds kind of see like us so these bird antecedents also saw in colour" is a huge overreach, that makes as much sense as saying "I'm not well adapted to living in trees so early hominid ancestors weren't either." So many baked in assumptions, and ignoring the existence of evolution entitrely.
@@Martial-Mat bruh
Mat Broomfield pterosaurs were archosaurs, and all archosaurs we know of had great color vision. Anchiornis, a dinosaur (therefore an archosaur) we know the color of, has bright red display feathers. There is absolutely no reason why pterosaurs would evolve different vision, especially because they are vision based hunters. Sure visual perception has the potential to change drastically, but it doesn’t mean it always does, there needs to be evolutionary pressures to change. Past archosaurs have similar enough brains to present archosaurs, we can tell they had color vision. What you propose is that it’s wrong to assume that pterosaurs had color vision because we can’t know for sure, (even though we have some pretty great evidence for it) but most of what we know about prehistoric animals is evidence based assumption, and the only evidence you have saying that we don’t know what their vision was like is that it COULD have been different. Thats like it’s a massive leap to assume prehistoric mammals had fur because modern mammals do. Basal traits remain in the animal, unless it is pressured to change, which pterosaurs weren’t. Your theory is not based on any evidence and is contrarian nonsense.
Sky piranhas... Dont give SciFi any ideas.
Bro how come Dr. Mark Witton gets to be so good at art and paleontology
These are awesome videos
i’m 12.9 years old and watched this video without a guardian
So edgy *get it?
The warning is for UA-cam, not for kids like you. UA-cam doesn't allow ads hence payment of creators that make videos for kids. It is a good law, back when I was a kid ads were directed to kids and it was exploitive, but the law tends to hurt creators on UA-cam because they can get a big fine making videos that could be interpreted as for kids and then monetizing it to get paid for their work. The creator is covering his behind to make sure his videos are not seen as kid videos so he will not be fined for allowing ads on the videos.
Awesome vid, good quality
I miss the original intro that used the Prehistoric Park theme song.
Me too, but that would be uncreative and using something that was already used for the purpose of paleo.
And likely copyright reasons, but..it never caused Problems before.
Pterosaurs be like:
1. Smoll lizard boi
2. ????
3. Pterosaur
Excellent video!
Not gona lie, i wonder if that 3D model is available to download somewhere.
I was just having a discussion talking about anurognathids that could have evolved either Bat or Owl like treats with these pterosaurs having a face that could be adapted to either life style if they go down one of these evolutionary paths MAYBE even both.
It’s unlikely for pterosaurs to evolve owl like traits, because the dish shaped face of owls is to help with hearing, and anurognathids and other pterosaurs relied on sight. Bat traits are more likely, unless you mean echolocation, because once again anurognathids weren’t hearing based, but sight based. We have a pretty good idea of what anurognathids looked like because of exceptional fossil preservation, so extensive integuments and soft tissues like in owls or bats are very unlikely, especially developing both bat-like and owl-like traits. Anurognathids were most likely nocturnal insect hunters, but probably did not have faces resembling owls and bats, because they used sight and we have great fossil preservation of them. Also evolutionary pants? Owl like treats? Maybe double check what you’re writing before posting it.
I understand that pterosaurs primarily rely on eye sight & so far that’s what fossil record shows us & yes I’m aware of what the fossil record has preserved for Anurognathids. I’m just trying to have a interesting conversation or food for thought here 💭 on the evolutionary possibilities for Pterosaurs & which family of these amazing animals were mostly likely to evolve these specific evolutionary traits. Anurognathidae is form 164-122mya or mid jurassic to early cretaceous, but there’s still the mid & late cretaceous period, Which when you think about it’s kinda around 57 million years give or take. Which is more then enough time for at least one pterosaur grouping to have evolved these traits. I’m not saying that there were pterosaurs that did evolve to become perfect evolutionary converged bats/owls of there time. Again I’m just trying to have interesting conversation about this idea. I saying this knowing there’s so far no evidence for it. You can’t rule that out since the fossil record is also full of holes.
So proto feathers or nah? Fur? Nothing? Naked murder chicken?
Love to see the Houston Museum represented
I remember you saying you will make this video back in 2018
I believe it's pronounced eye-eat-a-saur. The Dr who studied them and gave a Royal Tyrell Museum speech pronounced it that way.
True, but that doesn't totally make a lot of sense when you look at the word.
@@EDGEscience maybe they eat a lot of saur? ;)
Wait? Those birds from The Groods.were real????
Yep
How the hell did a pseudo-science diploma mill like Brigham-Young "University" get a hold of such an important fossil specimen..!?
Even considering how light weight the skull is, the wings *look* too small to allow it to fly.
In the illustrations? That may have been simply an artifact of the artist. Either way, it did.
Great music!
It looks little bit like the dimorphodon but from triassic
What has this world come to, when s dino video comes with a disclaimer? Really?
Am i the only one who thinks the skull looks like that of a Skeksis?
@E.D.G.E Primal Rift request Giraffatitan brancai
Me being 14 *laughing and screaming intensifies*
What tree did you say?..I want to look it up.
Bennettitales
@@EDGEscience Thanks.
It was a tree that went extinct about 66 million years ago and was a relative of Cycads. Its another species that bit the dirt in the Dinosaur die out...although remnants lasted in pockets..but i guess the climate chang caught up to them.
Where is this unfit for children? You say that in every video but im not getting where it is applied.
Why has not a single comment understood I'm covering my ass? It bewilders me.
@@EDGEscience your content isn't even controversial to sensorship..you don't swear...you don't use innuendos...please just explain. I'm not interrogating you im asking why you feel its nessasary. Don't take utube comments to heart as much as you seem you do. I enjoy your content it just seems like your exaggerating the content you bring.
It's just a failsafe to cover my ass. I don't really include it anymore.
Excellent
If only its skull was found, how so is that its body is so small?
Most pterosaurs have smaller bodies. They didn't need big ones.
7:14 what's that dog is eating 🤔
he cromch chewy boyne
*W O O D*
pterosaur bone
I'll watch this video... OUTSIDE
But... but....I'm essential workforce....I wish I could stay at home and practice social distancing, but sadly I must work....
Preacher thanks!
Can you give some facts about the ordosipterus
Cool
Dude have you ever heard of dinosaurs?
Interesting
Soooooooooooooooooo, they looked like Pokemon?
Cause they didn’t evolve bruh
So that's where the Pterodactyl came from
Not at all. Pterodactyl is not an actual animal, just a long outdated name for pterosaurs. And Celestiventus is not an ancestor to all pterosaurs, even if that’s what you mean. If you mean a direct lineage, that’s not how evolution works.
Drake Petty yes, but when more pterosaurs where discovered, the term pterodactyl was retired. Pterodactyloid is a term used to describe the more derived short tailed pterosaurs, but Caelestiventus is a long tailed Rhamphorincoid
The Croods, Anyone?
天風翼龍，天國的風（The wind from heaven）。
Do giraffatitan
🙄 and don't forget to wash your hands and socially distance and wear a mask
Better than BGThomas
This video has the most unfitting title.
We are in a pandemic, that means:
*Go into public spaces*
*Lick everything*
*Cough/spit/sneeze on everyone*
*Hug everyone*
*Touch everything and then your face*
*Spread pestilence*
*Summon a Great Unclean One*
*Please your Grandfather*
Lmao
Spare us the social distancing garble and just do your video. You lost me at 35 seconds when you still hadn’t gotten to anything..
You're one person, I can do without your subscription if you're that offended
Barrel Rider? Is that name meant to have a double meaning and be kinda dirty? "That Thot is a total barrel rider" hmmmm....