Daemonosaurus: One Of The Most Unusual Dinosaurs Of The Triassic Period 

Typical mammals...

How embarrassing

@@roccotaco1843 imagine if that was its original nickname by the other dinosaurs…

🤣😁hey

that's a best case scenario, really

😂q

Groanasaurus...

Prohucomceratops

Quality joke right here

I think it might have been a baby eater. I dont think the teeth look suited for fish. They look like they are too far apart but i might be wrong

That was my first thought as well but nothing else about it says fish eater.

I am glad you enjoyed it.

Contamination

Because we don't know exactly what they looked or acted like, therein lies the fun! The fun of research, investigation, finding the clues and connecting the dots, with eventual conclusions, then putting the pieces together, to find a picture that has otherwise been lost to time. Maybe I'm just a nerd, but what kind of study, could be more exhilarating, than that? I mean, a fossil is basically a screanshot from history, oftentimes tens of millions, even hundreds of millions of years ago. It's fascinating. I don't know, maybe I'm just a hands on kind of person. I enjoy the work part. The not knowing something, is a big part of that. I love not knowing. I think knowing everything would be the most boring state of existence I could imagine.

or maybe it lived in forests that are roofed by big trees

ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-QBIWMgPZo2Q.html 🤣🤣🤣🤣

Thank you.

@@chimerasuchus your welcome

@JZ's Best Friend I don't think they're under the impression they'll be bigger than me one day. I think they're just hoping for food treats.

Wait, who's his brother?

Flipped StuG, the narrator in this video.

Right now there is only one Daemonosaurus specimen, so it being a mutant is not impossible.

they didnt find arms, neck, ribs, and skull.

Zero arm material for Daemonosaurus.

There is no evidence for that assumption

The norm? Never heard of that in my life

Quite possible. I know cats can get real interesting looking teeth while their adult ones are comming in. Cats also often have a double fang phase they go through before the baby fangs fall out. Something similar would explain this critters seemingly mismatched teeth.

​@@lorefreak94 Cats are mammals. We're talking about dinosaurs, and dinosaurs are reptiles. Usually, reptiles with teeth either have the same set for their entire life, or their teeth are continually lost and replaced during the course of their life. So OP's hypothesis might be inaccurate.

It is in New Mexico.

Flipped StuG. He used to make videos about a game called War Thunder.

Yeah? That's your own bias speaking. It's unscientific to do so, if there is no evidence for it. Even moreso if you slap feathers and lips onto animals, that are not from the very derrived, late Cretaceous Theropod lineage. The already dodgy 'phylogenetic entanglement' argument is completely impotent here. If you like dinosaurs dranw in that style, fine. But don't pretend it's somehow scientific more accurate to slap lips and feathers onto literally anything.

@@Scipionyxsam did I say "scientific"? no I did not

@@Scipionyxsam Nevertheless there is a growing body of evidence for both ...if YOU haven't read or seen it that makes no difference it's there...unless you just want your usual gaming dinos?

"phylogenetic entanglement" isn't a term. Are you referring to phylogenetic bracketing? Because there are not any fossilized scale impressions of early dinosaurs either. And as mentioned in another, comment, a paper from a few years ago found that some early dinosaurs couldn't survive without feathers.

@@chimerasuchus I'm ESL you'll have to excuse my mistakes. I don't speak your mother tongue as well as you do. I mixed up the terms from our respective languages. Mea culpa. See I adressed your points in the other comment section.

Probably not. There are no features linking Daemonosaurus to the poposauroids but many shared with other early dinosaurs.

It is a real possibility. So, why not? Just a little bit of speculation.

@@tjarkschweizer It's extremely implausible. This is a basal dinosaur living more than 100 million years, before feathers became widespread and that only in a very specific branch of derived theropods which he is not even part of. There is no evidence for it and no phylogenetic entanglement, that would even vaguely imply such a look. It's an unscientific paleoart trend to slap feathers onto everything. Nothing more.

The presence of feathers in the first dinosaurs is more than mere speculation. Feathers appear in three of the four major ornithodiran clades (Theropoda, Ornithischia, and Pterosauria), which suggests they could be ancestral to the clade. With their ancestrally small body size and high metabolism, the thermal insulation provided by feathers would have been, at the very least, quiet helpful for the first ornithodirans. Obviously, there were dinosaurs that were fully or mostly scaly. However, these are almost entirely large species who would not have not benefitted from the thermal insulation provided by feathers. Worse, it would have greatly increased their risk of overheating. So any dinosaur evolving large body size would need to loss, or at least heavily reduce, any feathers they had. We know for a fact this happened in some dinosaur lineages, like the tyrannosaurids, who were the direct descendants of fully feather species. A similar trend in seen in today's mammals, with large species in warm environment being a lot less hairy than relatives that are smaller in live in cooler environments. Even ostriches have fewer feathers than most other birds. Additionally, the first members of the the Sauropodomorphs, the fourth major ornithodiran clade, with preserved integument were already massive enough to require a mostly scaly body. Therefore, there is a reasonable chance feathers were present in the first dinosaurs. Of course it is not certain that the first dinosaurs had feathers, but neither is it certain that they were predominantly scaly. Both are valid hypothesizes, which is reflected in the art in this video

I wondered the same thing. Is there any actual evidence of feathers from that early?

Because artists follow trends.

Their teeth weren't that big compared to skull size and they weren't sticking out at such an angle.

@Red Robotic they're born like that, with adult arms and then just grow into them. The genes for the arms stopped evolving eons before.