Gorgon - Ancient Animal 

The permian is underrated!

My dimetrodon tattoo agrees with you

Yeah ur mom was the apex this time too

You're*

@@Eastern-Asia Fascinating

A trick : you can watch movies at flixzone. Me and my gf have been using them for watching a lot of movies lately.

@Luca Khari yup, have been using flixzone} for since november myself :D

👍👍👍

Whoa?

I mean sure, but to be fair, "reptile" is pretty ill defined. Look at crocodiles, birds and lizards (and other diapsids) for example. You can put crocks and birds easily into a scientifically sensible group, i.e. clade, without including the lizards, but it's not so easy (impossible) to put lizards and crocks into a clade without also including birds. Yet, colloquially, lizards, snakes, crocks, turtles, etc. are reptiles and birds are not.

@@SomeOne-vq4fo Birds aren't even reptiles to begin with, they're something altogether different, in all sorts of ways. But scientific categories do amount to hard-to-define categories at that.

​@@chissstardestroyer Birds, crocks & dinos share a common ancestor that other reptiles don't. They are placed in a group called archosaurs. In evolutionary terms, crocks are more closely related to birds than they are to lizards, tuatara, etc. (lepidosaurs), for example. Similar to you being more closely related to your 1st cousin than your 2nd cousin. > But scientific categories do amount to hard-to-define categories at that. Sometimes, but not in this case. Cladistics is about shared common ancestor. So the group/clade is defined as the common ancestor + all of it's descendants. That's it, really. Sure, you can define a reptile (say scaly, cold blooded, 4 legged - even if it had atrophied in snakes - animal), but you can never put it as a single separate branch in the tree of life.

@@SomeOne-vq4fo Yes, they do, but that does not make them all even reptiles, some are, and some aren't; for instance, all reptiles are cold blooded, they don't use their food to regulate their inner body temperature, whereas birds do, so they have a much higher caloric intake need per hour.

You were right about not being true mammals but they were not reptiles they were stem-mammals or proto-mammals

Will & Dave on the Common Descent podcast can explain things better than I can. They do a good job of making paleontology interesting - in fact, sometimes, they get off track with movie & pop culture references so much they're a couple of laughing hyenas ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-FPQFptTCNmY.html

Yes?

What about sharks though? Lol. I get what you mean

I thought that mass extinctions decreased the quantity of animal body-plans

@@dibershai6009 effectively they do, but eventually species get so specialized that it’s virtually impossible for certain ecosystem roles to be displaced without some major event taking place. That’s what OP was talking about

It took about 100 million years for the biodiversity to recover from the end-Permian mass extinction event.

Binusiom wumdano.

Check out Dr. Polaris' channel, he loves Gorgonopsids too!

8 tonne carnivores like trex is not overrated.

I dont know my 300 win mag would tear a hole through this thing, thanks for watching!

We only getting started🔥👍🏻

@@NORTH02 yup.

Actually, Australian primates (people) are the apex predators.

I literally just screenshot the art of google, thanks for watching!

Sources say they laid eggs but I’m not aware of these sources backgrounds so take it with a grain of salt

Back then or in scientific literature today?

@@mambojambo4870 Both back then, and in scientific literature today.

Somewhat lol I mean it's closer to you than dinosaurs

Just because an animal may superficially appear like another animal doesn't mean they are related. I am no paleontologist so I will not point the error in your comment but you can do your own research.

Thanks! I am making a wider variety nowadays. Thanks for watching!

Ok.