+Harry Upton you have video proof of the illusion of purple. what your actually seeing is a mixture of pixels that you perceive as purple i.e there's no proof Barney is purple
+Awakened2Truth - Disciple of Jesus the Christ all your hard work is for nothing. its a fact that birds are dinosaurs and 60% of all the dinosaurs had feathers. you are just wrong, sorry. dinosaurs aren't reptiles besides that they are archosaurs who evolved into birds. you didn't tell reality its your inaccurate opinion :/
+Nuna fish We may never figure that out. But we're leaning towards more *every* dinosaur having proto-feathers. There is some information arising showing that proto-feathers occur outside of the dinosaur family tree, so dinosaur ancestors must have had it too. Interesting. But of course this hasn't been confirmed.
+Nuna fish There must still be pigments and or nano structures to give you the colour If there's a way to see what was there then the colour can be known.
+Roscoe Horse Actually, dinosaurs walked the earth 66 million years AGO. They existed for over 160 million years, the earliest ones being identified from around 230 million years ago.
+oxXORainierOXxo Tayam I think the color of those dinosaurs come from their skin, not feathers Like you have black hair but you are not black Sorry about my english.
Can we appreciate the bg music and the multiple references they made in this video? It made it that much more enjoyable to watch it, not that this wasn't an interesting topic already
2:24 Doesn't it also work for the case when the wavelength is twice the distance between the two reflections, because the wave travels that distance twice (once forward and another backward)? In that case it's also correct when the wavelength equals the distance between the two reflections, but you can construct all of the cases from the wavelength equals twice the distance case, where you can only construct half of the cases from the wavelength equals distance case (for anyone wandering, I'm talking about finding harmonics).
I always asked myself that! Good to know! I've never understood how all those dinosaurs had no feather, for example, the pterodactyl in Jurassic Park. I used to think that if some other beings ever found our bones, they would think we had no nose or ears.
Red have a long wave length thats why you can see red color even if its far away, and thats also why most caution sight is red so driver can see it far
This is exactly why i respect scientists! I don’t know what to say exept for that they are really great. I’m sure that it’s very hard on them to discover that. Also, I just can’t believe dinosaur used to be got feather!! For a spilt second, it makes me get scientific mind with a thirst for knowledge!
There is no single wavelength of light that makes purple. Purple is a response in our visual system to seeing both red and blue light mixed together. The long wavelength end of the spectrum is red light and the shorter wavelengths go through blue, violet, and ultraviolet. While in ordinary conversation people use the terms purple and violet interchangeably, in physics they are two distinctly different phenomena. This is why we have the "purple paradox." We see purple light, even though there is no wavelength that corresponds to it.
for jurassic Park their explanation is that they are using frogs dna (in the first movie) and several other types of dna (in the most recent) to create the dinos, which is why they dont have feathers (mentioned in the most recent movie)
I don't recall microraptor having ever been thought to be piscivorous (it was an arbooreal short distance flying/gliding carnivore that ate small mammals, lizards, smaller dinosaurs, insects, ect) but I could be wrong
In Jurassic park there was this whole scene about cloning Dinosaurs and replacing missing DNA with that of frogs - also it's not a historical film, it's more of a futuristic Sci-fi thing (but without overdone space stuff) I'm not a huge Jurassic park fan or something - but I remember this being explained thoroughly, so get ur facts straight
The spirit of dinosaurs lives on in birds. In the ice age, there were huge birds called terror birds in South America. Nowadays there are emus who literally won a war against Austrailia.
I wrote the script and want to address a problem I created. I was careless when I wrote the title and implied that we "know" what color dinosaurs were. The word also appears in the script- this was also careless. I am aware of the work "Trey the Explainer" referenced below, and by the low standard for "knowledge" that I established, he is right that we "know" that velociraptor had feathers. That said, I would still say "velociraptor probably had feathers". I wish I had established a higher standard for "knowledge", in which case the video would be titled something like, "How do scientists figure out what color dinosaurs were?"
If dinosaurs were to stand out, they would most likely not survive for long. Even predatory dinosaurs would use these colors to camouflage themselves, to ambush prey. And the rarest colors would be blue, that some dinosaurs like spinosaurs would use to camouflage themselves into the water to ambush any prey that might come to the water for a drink.
Actually you are right. There is evidence showing that pressure and temperature over time can change melanosome structures in fossils... news.yale.edu/2013/03/27/true-colors-some-fossil-feathers-now-doubt meaning that these may be good guesses on dinosaur coloration, but likely not 100% accurate (like the video claims).
phxtonash The fun thing is that those million years bullshit, is bullshit. They probably still lived 500 years ago. Some kings had dinosaur's (dragons) as 'pets'. Also were there dragon slayers, yes firespitting dinosaur slayers. And there are still African tribes that say they have seen such dinosaurs. Nobody has ever proved these things are millions of years old.
So does this mean that any dinosaurs with feathers, we can figure out what color they are? Because there are some dinosaurs with feathers, but I think its more for the bird type dinosaur right?
+XshadowringX All dinosaurs have the possibility of having feathers, some a lot more than others, but whether we can determine what colour they are depends on how well the feathers have fossilized and what kind of feathers they are. There might be some dinosaurs which are less avian that have a kind of feather we cannot define.
Does it really? I haven't seen anything about finding the color of scaled dinosaurs. In theory, of course, the dinosaurs must have had pigments in their scales, but in practice, do we have any fossils with preserved pigments in scales?
Seriously though, it's one of those little things that just makes me twitch every time. And it happens so often I don't have the patience to not be a dick about it. Most of the time
when the nanometers of the color of a light are about equal and reflect off the melenasome, is that the color we see the object as? does anyone understand?
Actually, we don't know if they didn't. Scientists discovered that a dinosaur that was from the same family of dinosaurs as stegosaurus also had feathers. This suggests that the common ancestor between feathered theropods and dinosaurs related to stegosaurus also had some sort of proto-feather
A certain author of the books that certain films were based on actually brought up in said books a point that the "dinosaurs" were incorrect due to several reasons, including genetic manipulation.
That's a fair point, though it doesn't erase the fact that the earlier films and books were still much more closer to the science then the current franchise, and you'd think that since _Jurassic World_ and its sequels are supposed to take place more or less in the modern day, they'd have left behind the whole frog DNA thing a while ago and would've switched to using avian genomes by now.
Not that I'm arguing for the movie, because I do believe that you're right in the regard that the latest movies could be more accurate, but I think I know the reason they left things the way they were, at least the for the people in the Jurassic World cannon, not the actual writers or directors. They already had the base genetic blueprints for most of the dinosaurs from the first movie. Why spend millions if not billions to create a new one when the original worked well, excluding a few complications, they could now prepare for. Then Rexy was the same T-Rex from the first one so they really can't change her. Now I think the books were better regard to science, not suprising since Michael Crichton was a doctor. The books clearly stated that not all the dinosaurs were made from Amphibian DNA. Only a select few, and only those could change gender and breed. I also liked the fact they did try to take extra precautions against breeding by trying to render all specimens infertile, and fail. Also, hey look. The t-Rex can see you if you stand still, "chomp." I also liked the fact of addressing behavior issues due to the difference between inherited behavior and learned behavior. It was a further dividing line between the "true" dinosaurs and the "theme park monsters." The movies are good, but leave problems the size of Texas, where as the books have a better coverage and understanding of the science, consequences, limitations, and drawbacks of genetics.
Old method: If it looks like a lizard, its colour was green.
But dinosaurs and pterosaurs are the ancestor of birds
(But the base/skin color could've been the same of lizards)
lonelyrainCloud its a joke
lonelyrainCloud jesus it’s a joke
@@byebye9455 it's a joke. And no, pterosaurs were not bird's ancestors.
@@cosmopoiesecriandomundos7446 They're just reptiles adapted for flight.
How did we know Barney was purple?
they don't want you to know
+Waldemar Marzan We have video proof
+Waldemar Marzan That's the only color the traumatized children would scream.
+Harry Upton lol!!!!!!!
+Harry Upton you have video proof of the illusion of purple. what your actually seeing is a mixture of pixels that you perceive as purple i.e there's no proof Barney is purple
Some guy: The dislikes are all *insert religion here*Me: Nah, the dislikes are just people mad that dinosaurs aren't big scaly lizards anymore.
Very true.
+Awakened2Truth - Disciple of Jesus the Christ All this, and its wrong! XD
+rogue123987 As a bird and dinosaur lover, this doesn't affect me :D
Smaug Yay!
+Awakened2Truth - Disciple of Jesus the Christ all your hard work is for nothing. its a fact that birds are dinosaurs and 60% of all the dinosaurs had feathers. you are just wrong, sorry. dinosaurs aren't reptiles besides that they are archosaurs who evolved into birds. you didn't tell reality its your inaccurate opinion :/
How f****** awesome is it that common birds get their colours from nano-structures that can perfectly deconstruct visible light?
+Blake Hagar Pretty awesome.
***** right you are sir
I know this was written 4 years ago, but did you censor the word "frick"?
@@sunshibe8811 they probably meant f**king, but as their name suggest they probably didnt bother putting the correct amount of asterisks lol
How the fuck do scientists even figure this shit out, this is incredible
+Mr. Tulip
well you know... with science XD
It's just technology is getting better and better compared before.
i know right? its very creative of them to actually figure out ways to see patterns that coincide with everything in nature.
+Mr. Tulip science, bitch
+Mr. Tulip Science, female dog.
Thinking. A LOT
try and error
playing around with x-ray analysis
The people at Ted-Ed deserve a Nobel Prize for all the incredible work they're doing. Thank you for your service to humanity, Ted-Ed!
True(☞ ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)☞
Personally, I think feathered dinosaurs look cooler anyway.
Nah
@@hhshsksks9593 yah
and sadly chickens arent cool
A feathered T-rex looks less scarier in my opinion and more like a giant kiwi bird.
@@hhshsksks9593 but wut abouth Beg chicken.
TED-Ed never disappoints.
Keep it up.
This is the same reason for Peacock's feather colour as well. Nice video!
What about dinosaurs with scales and no feathers?
+Nuna fish We may never figure that out.
But we're leaning towards more *every* dinosaur having proto-feathers. There is some information arising showing that proto-feathers occur outside of the dinosaur family tree, so dinosaur ancestors must have had it too. Interesting. But of course this hasn't been confirmed.
+Nuna fish There must still be pigments and or nano structures to give you the colour If there's a way to see what was there then the colour can be known.
+Roscoe Horse Actually, dinosaurs walked the earth 66 million years AGO. They existed for over 160 million years, the earliest ones being identified from around 230 million years ago.
Thanks a lot for the answers! They're all really interesting ^_^
+oxXORainierOXxo Tayam I think the color of those dinosaurs come from their skin, not feathers
Like you have black hair but you are not black
Sorry about my english.
Can we appreciate the bg music and the multiple references they made in this video? It made it that much more enjoyable to watch it, not that this wasn't an interesting topic already
Wow, it's amazing what information is contained in a fossil!
Everyone knows dinosaurs where pink and had large noses and ears duhh
Icon Panik and he loves you
looks like being ted ilustrator is the best job ever
That voice is soothing. It makes me sleep at night.
We've learned a lot since JP 1 in 1993....
I could make a chemistry joke but I wouldn't get a reaction...
😂😂
NaH, go for it
+Krisztián Szirtes
He does not have a joke...hes a lying butt worm
+graymoe2007 And when I did, you missed it :/
+Krisztián Szirtes HeHe
I would love to have subtitles on TED-Ed next time. :)
turn them on then
2:24 Doesn't it also work for the case when the wavelength is twice the distance between the two reflections, because the wave travels that distance twice (once forward and another backward)?
In that case it's also correct when the wavelength equals the distance between the two reflections, but you can construct all of the cases from the wavelength equals twice the distance case, where you can only construct half of the cases from the wavelength equals distance case (for anyone wandering, I'm talking about finding harmonics).
Nice video, please do more about paleontology and dinosaurs. Awesome science and animals
0:12 MeepMeepus? haha
It's like the Road Runner. XD
Questions I've never thought before, glad I saw this
Scientists:
Finds a 2 feet fossil of dinosaur...
Names it "micro"raptor
I always asked myself that! Good to know! I've never understood how all those dinosaurs had no feather, for example, the pterodactyl in Jurassic Park. I used to think that if some other beings ever found our bones, they would think we had no nose or ears.
This is so awesome! Love learning
knowledge
egdelwonk
Lopvmfehf
HAhujbyze859erzv !_'"
understand cliff
Red have a long wave length thats why you can see red color even if its far away, and thats also why most caution sight is red so driver can see it far
Great job Ted ed
thank you… your work is wonderful...
This is exactly why i respect scientists! I don’t know what to say exept for that they are really great. I’m sure that it’s very hard on them to discover that. Also, I just can’t believe dinosaur used to be got feather!! For a spilt second, it makes me get scientific mind with a thirst for knowledge!
Scientists are truly carrying the world on their backs. All kinds of scientists.
Omg this video answers what I have been wondering about
There is no single wavelength of light that makes purple. Purple is a response in our visual system to seeing both red and blue light mixed together. The long wavelength end of the spectrum is red light and the shorter wavelengths go through blue, violet, and ultraviolet. While in ordinary conversation people use the terms purple and violet interchangeably, in physics they are two distinctly different phenomena. This is why we have the "purple paradox." We see purple light, even though there is no wavelength that corresponds to it.
love the cartoon style
I kinda hate it.
"Clever girls" AHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH. love it. great video :'D
Happy New Year
I hope we see this in movies
Loving that sneaky Jurassic park reference! :D
Poor Muldoon :l
this was amazing
Why do people think feathered dinosaurs are lamer? Microraptor is basically a 4-winged raven and that's totally cool
for jurassic Park their explanation is that they are using frogs dna (in the first movie) and several other types of dna (in the most recent) to create the dinos, which is why they dont have feathers (mentioned in the most recent movie)
that is stupid
3:55 is that supposed to be Alan grant and Ellie sattler and 4:04 is jurassic park
Thats really difficult job to explain information so it can be easy to understand like u just did.
I feel smarter already. Thanks
So what about the Dinosaurs that did not have feathers? (like the T-rex) How did we know their color?
they did have feathers man i study astrophysics but i know about dinos too
Meepmeepus with road runner sound effect....noice touch
I don't recall microraptor having ever been thought to be piscivorous (it was an arbooreal short distance flying/gliding carnivore that ate small mammals, lizards, smaller dinosaurs, insects, ect) but I could be wrong
You know, I've always wondered this...
i love the cartoony art style
Very educating, thanks.
In Jurassic park there was this whole scene about cloning Dinosaurs and replacing missing DNA with that of frogs - also it's not a historical film, it's more of a futuristic Sci-fi thing (but without overdone space stuff)
I'm not a huge Jurassic park fan or something - but I remember this being explained thoroughly, so get ur facts straight
Wut
Hi Ted Ed, do you have any videos talk about colour blind ?
The spirit of dinosaurs lives on in birds. In the ice age, there were huge birds called terror birds in South America. Nowadays there are emus who literally won a war against Austrailia.
1:18 _carrots aren't always orange_
Seriously, wild carrots can be all kinds of colours, like purple or white. I have eaten a purple carrot before.
Very informative.
I wrote the script and want to address a problem I created.
I was careless when I wrote the title and implied that we "know" what color dinosaurs were. The word also appears in the script- this was also careless.
I am aware of the work "Trey the Explainer" referenced below, and by the low standard for "knowledge" that I established, he is right that we "know" that velociraptor had feathers. That said, I would still say "velociraptor probably had feathers".
I wish I had established a higher standard for "knowledge", in which case the video would be titled something like, "How do scientists figure out what color dinosaurs were?"
ah yeah, i was wondering "we don't, why are you implying that we do?". thanks for answering the question!
Geniuses, all of them. Just, genius.
This whole time we have been looking at naked dinosaurs...
last scene was from Jurassic park 1
Wow he got how the velociraptor looked like correct instead of showing that other featherless dinosaur
Please do why was purple was considered a royal colour
Rebecca Hammond because it was expensive, im guessing beacuse it was hard to make?
I ask my self will I ever need to refer back to this.
I was thinking about this topicwhen i was 5 and than forgot about it...
But now i dont need sleep, i need answers
*holds hand out like Chris Pratt in Jurassic world*
Simple awnser: we don't, we just color them after reptiles (and more recently birds)
Yes.
How do we know what dinosaurs sounded like???? It's not like we had a recording or anything
If dinosaurs were to stand out, they would most likely not survive for long.
Even predatory dinosaurs would use these colors to camouflage themselves, to ambush prey.
And the rarest colors would be blue, that some dinosaurs like spinosaurs would use to camouflage themselves into the water to ambush any prey that might come to the water for a drink.
Could you imagine being chased by a Velociraptor that looks like a rooster?
There is no such thing as purple light, but the rest of the video was great!
I have a close friend who is a paleontologist and his name is Ross Geller
I feel like the dislikes are from cultists that are too closed minded to accept the overwhelming evidence of the dinosaurs existence
How do we know that over millions of years the distance does not change? They are probably right but science changes all the time. I keep a open mind.
Actually you are right. There is evidence showing that pressure and temperature over time can change melanosome structures in fossils...
news.yale.edu/2013/03/27/true-colors-some-fossil-feathers-now-doubt
meaning that these may be good guesses on dinosaur coloration, but likely not 100% accurate (like the video claims).
phxtonash The fun thing is that those million years bullshit, is bullshit. They probably still lived 500 years ago. Some kings had dinosaur's (dragons) as 'pets'. Also were there dragon slayers, yes firespitting dinosaur slayers.
And there are still African tribes that say they have seen such dinosaurs.
Nobody has ever proved these things are millions of years old.
Wilfred Vreugdenhil
Ever heard of carbon dating?
So does this mean that any dinosaurs with feathers, we can figure out what color they are? Because there are some dinosaurs with feathers, but I think its more for the bird type dinosaur right?
It was never stated that it's limited to feathers only.
+XshadowringX All dinosaurs have the possibility of having feathers, some a lot more than others, but whether we can determine what colour they are depends on how well the feathers have fossilized and what kind of feathers they are. There might be some dinosaurs which are less avian that have a kind of feather we cannot define.
Is it the same with dinosaurs without feathers?
So, does this only work for feathered dinosaurs?
Vanessa McGrew no it also works with scales
Does it really? I haven't seen anything about finding the color of scaled dinosaurs. In theory, of course, the dinosaurs must have had pigments in their scales, but in practice, do we have any fossils with preserved pigments in scales?
Why yes: Psitaccosaurus.
What about dinosaurs not having feathers , how do they determine the colour ?
so is it the same idea for the skin too ? You only mentioned feathers.
I have always wandered this😊
good video!!!
Daffy: Stho thats't my ancesthor!
i had a dream of a dinosaur/bird that was completely black with a yellow and a magenta field connected on each wing
you know if the films wanted a terrifying velociraptor, I think the inaccuracy was needed
and how did those reflect black? black isnt a color from rainbow
Just go with an earthy, greyish brown with a hint of green. Safest choice.
*which
"What" is singular
what if I say "what are those?" In this context what is plural. in what context did he say it?
What colour. It should, in fact, be which colours. Dinosaurs were not all the same colour, and one dinosaur was often not even a single colour itself
+The Cake is not a Vlog in that case you're right, but you should've specified from the beginning. they don't say what just once during the video
But that would require effort D:
Seriously though, it's one of those little things that just makes me twitch every time. And it happens so often I don't have the patience to not be a dick about it.
Most of the time
What happened to the closed captions?
Sinosauropteryx is orange and white
"Purple light?" I thought purple was a combination of red and blue. Did you mean to say "violet" light?
You're right, as in Infrared and Ultraviolet
agreed captain :)
I didn't notice ;(
Weeeeeeelllllllllll...when speaking to laymen...
ThePCguy17 It would have been just as easy to say "blue," so we're not really gaining any simplicity by giving up accuracy.
Shawn Ravenfire I was more suggesting that the vast number of people wouldn't notice than that they were correct to use the word.
Ugh, I love science.
R.I.P. good old Jurassic Park ;(
Balance between Camouflage fur/skin pattern and inner selection one?
All I wanted to know was how do we know what color dinosaurs were? and I get a bloody lecture on light.
when the nanometers of the color of a light are about equal and reflect off the melenasome, is that the color we see the object as? does anyone understand?
So dinosaurs skin color is still unknown right?
I wish you good luck and don't be disappoint from negative comments 😊
Also, velociraptor was not 6 feet tall.
what about non-feathered dinosaurs?
How do they determine the color of dinosaurs without feathers, like a Stegosaurus?
+McKenna Burchett the same technique applies to scales, not just feathers.
+The Doctor Plays Video Games
🙄🙄
[The Doctor Plays Video Games] If that was a joke it sucked pretty bad.
stegosaurus mabey had hair like feathers
Actually, we don't know if they didn't. Scientists discovered that a dinosaur that was from the same family of dinosaurs as stegosaurus also had feathers. This suggests that the common ancestor between feathered theropods and dinosaurs related to stegosaurus also had some sort of proto-feather
U need more than 20 feathers. What if its not solid color? What if it has circle pattern?
A certain author of the books that certain films were based on actually brought up in said books a point that the "dinosaurs" were incorrect due to several reasons, including genetic manipulation.
That's a fair point, though it doesn't erase the fact that the earlier films and books were still much more closer to the science then the current franchise, and you'd think that since _Jurassic World_ and its sequels are supposed to take place more or less in the modern day, they'd have left behind the whole frog DNA thing a while ago and would've switched to using avian genomes by now.
Not that I'm arguing for the movie, because I do believe that you're right in the regard that the latest movies could be more accurate, but I think I know the reason they left things the way they were, at least the for the people in the Jurassic World cannon, not the actual writers or directors.
They already had the base genetic blueprints for most of the dinosaurs from the first movie. Why spend millions if not billions to create a new one when the original worked well, excluding a few complications, they could now prepare for. Then Rexy was the same T-Rex from the first one so they really can't change her.
Now I think the books were better regard to science, not suprising since Michael Crichton was a doctor. The books clearly stated that not all the dinosaurs were made from Amphibian DNA. Only a select few, and only those could change gender and breed. I also liked the fact they did try to take extra precautions against breeding by trying to render all specimens infertile, and fail. Also, hey look. The t-Rex can see you if you stand still, "chomp." I also liked the fact of addressing behavior issues due to the difference between inherited behavior and learned behavior. It was a further dividing line between the "true" dinosaurs and the "theme park monsters."
The movies are good, but leave problems the size of Texas, where as the books have a better coverage and understanding of the science, consequences, limitations, and drawbacks of genetics.