Nanuqsaurus - The Northern Tyrant 

One would think you were more into clowns

Lol

It’s a shame most of us are only taught about them so early in school, because it makes people write dinosaurs off as kid stuff. Archiving pre-history is important

Based on your user name, one might think you had a lot of weird thoughts in your lifetime.

Tom C Well, you definitely aren't wrong lol.

The Poke'Saurus it’s not a lizard it’s a bird

picklickwick well that’s what it’s name means sooo

@@DirtyJeans Ironic since its not a polar bear or a lizard.

@@picklickwick birds are reptiles

Zion Ray no they’re not. Birds/Dinosaurs are warm blooded animals with unique and complex biological systems and organs and the unique, signature skin covering of feathers. Reptiles are the opposite of all that, and feature only scales, which differ from the type of scales found on birds and dinosaurs in the areas they lack feathers.

Checks out.

Fun fact, penguins live only at south

I'm not a penguin🐧🚫

No not at all

Than get eaten

@@frostbitetheannunakiiceind6574 Then*

@@frostbitetheannunakiiceind6574 I'll be a happy turd.

Meee toooooo 🤙

Same here, not a common dream though.

Bad assed!

To be fair, I think that was an artistic liberty taken by the artist.

That well be cool to learn about To no what it did with it live

About its white winter fur, i was looking for a bipedal reptile that lives in an icy region for my mayincatec fantasy.

Yeet tie r annus

@@Crusader-Ramos45 dinosaurs are not reptiles so you wont find one here.

But they are reptiles...😂

Same

Thought it would bring a little bit of humour to the video. :)

Unfortunately didn't know about it! :)

Henry the PaleoGuy you probably weren’t aware but Nanuqsaurus is not considered a sister taxon to Terataphoneus based on new research I don’t blame you for not knowing since it was a recent revelation

*now

Looks brilliant. Typical of the greats... You guys are seldom satisfied with your work, while we love it.

Very interesting theory, makes sense to me

The whole feather idea has been taken to far

of the 55 sets of t-rex skeletons found, NONE HAVE FEATHERS, yet scientists are taking artistic license and adding them. Someone explain why.

@@cvhinson1 , many of the same family or close families have feathers. Another point is that they have evolved into birds. (Btw this is simple things that I can remember so it might not be the most accurate.

@@highlandus sure, because the science shouldn't be based on factual evidence and informed theories but rather your level of comfort regarding the information. what's your idea of realistic dinosaur depiction, a land before time?

They still are featherless. There was a movement that pushed back against that "theory". If anything, most findings are guesses at best. There is even an argument now that Triceratops (one of my faves) may have been a juvenile Torosaurus. BTW, I think Pluto has been renamed or in the process of being renamed a planet. SMH

@@timg1099 There's been dinosaurs who have been discovered with feathers next their bones though hasn't there? Anything to do with dinosaurs is a guessing game. That tricerotops being a juvenile of torosaurus sounds like one. You have to wonder if paleontologist discovered fossils of polar bears and grizzlies/brown bear that were millions of years old they would come up with the conclusion that grizzlies are juveniles of polar bears as they live around the same time and same location. Lions and tigers also have very similair skulls and look so different and live differently as one is a pack hunter and the other solitary. Paleontologist might make same mistake with them as asiatic lions are found in india just like tigers.

@@toby772 The few with feathers are exactly that, a few. Since when does this account for a good portion of the majority? This feather argument has been going on and is taken as and spoken of as FACT vs a hypothesis let alone a "theory" (or forbid) a law. Other than that, you've pretty much fleshed out what I've said regarding dinosaurs. The issue that I have is that people tend to hear something and take it as ultimate gospel vs looking at the evidence themselves and questioning how it fits on a bigger spectrum. "Oh you see that 3 meter bone right there? It belonged to a FACT-osaurus. The only one of its kind ever found, drastically incomplete. And it had feathers. Yeah that's right, that 3 meter bone that belonged to a multi-tonned animal had feathers! You want to know why? Because we found a complete fossil of something way smaller that had them and we ran with it. Thus they ALL (dinosaurs) had them. " That isn't a guessing game. That is totally different. Beyond assumption. Somewhere along the line the theory became scientific law and is being shouted at the public while weighted counter arguments are being whispered. I like dino's as much as any, but I like being able to think, reason and research for myself even better.

illerac84 and there were only 2 sexes

Most are featherless. Most feathered dinosaurs are birds, non avian maniraptorian dinosaurs, maniraptiform dinosaurs, and some Coleosaurians .

Stop.

Go.

I don't get it

Was great to find that image. :)

,💕💕😂😂

What about the as bad furry Dinosaur?

How is it silly? Just because Earth was warmer during the Mesozoic doesn't mean winters didn't exist. That's just ignorant.

@@KhanMann66 that's what I thought as well, how dumb must you be

Dinosaurs didn't wear toques and scarfs.

They didn't wear feather coats either.

@Casey Thorne Aw man, are you telling me that picture of dinosaurs wearing clothing isn't accurate? Because judging by the content on your channel, I honestly can't tell if you're serious or not right now. :D

That's scientific jargon for you! Hopefully your learned something new!

The one at 3:30, I presume. It's on google if you search up the Western interior seaway during the Creataceous.

Tyrannosauriod. Not tyrannosaurus. They're not the same.

@@KhanMann66 I thought they wound part of the Tyrannosaurus tree

The same. :)

It's mostly by comparing those fragments to more complete fossils of animals that appear to be close relatives.

This is a seperate genus to Tyrannosaurus. A different species of the genus Tyrannosaurus would still have the genus name, but would have a different species name.

Derived means more changed, while ancestral means less changed (basal or primitive). We don’t really think of things as being “more or less evolved” in biology, just what the adaptations are, how effective they are, and how recent they are.

And so do polar bears and orcas

I'm pretty sure at this point it's pretty accepted that dinosaurs in general were warm blooded.

@@Deoix9877 There are still arguments for ectothermic and partially endothermic species, as well. However, it does seem obvious that when you go far enough north, land dwelling reptiles become rare. It is something I am still learning about.

@The Dinosaur Heretic The arguments have lasted for years about different species. The dinos were around for a long time and show a lot of evolutionary change. Of course, it is obvious that the dinos that evolved into birds were endothermic. Why would a critter need insulating feathers if it were cold blooded?? You are pretending to know things that are not known, for what appear to be egocentric reasons. Dinos evolved from reptiles. It is not known when the first endothermic or partly endothermic animals evolved. I made a very simple statement and some insecure people here saw it as an opportunity to pretend to be paleontologists. The very first proto mammals had many traits that modern mammals do not have. I made a very simple statement, a true statement, that some of you want to be arrogant assholes about, trying to demonstrate how bright and well educated you are. Get your ego out of this and it will be a lot easier to learn more. Dinosaurs were around and evolving for a very, very long time. Now, kindly take your ego and fuck off. You are wasting my time for no good reason. i was around in the early days of this discussion when Scientific American was printing early arguments for endothermic dinos. I always like the terrestrial dinos found in the very far north because they absolutely had to be warm blooded. They are also relatively recent discoveries. Now go talk to yourself,

@@macnutz4206 dude, the only person being an asshole here is you. You said your point of view and me and the other person tried to engage in conversation with our own points of view. That's how debating works, you know, one of the basis of modern science At no point anyone has been disrespectful to you, all he did were ask for your sources, to see if you were actually right, and adapt their point of view in base of that You are the one who decided to take that as an ofense and started insulting and being disrespectful. Wich ultimately takes away credibility to anything you are trying to say, since it gives the image that you are unwilling to defend your point of view and unable to handle criticisim towards it. But, since you want to act all mighty, it might interest you to know that current evidence points at the ancestor of ALL dinosaurs to already be feathered, since pterosaurs, wich were the closest relatives to the dinosaurs, also seem to be covered in dinofuzz, wich could very likely mean that it was a trait that apeared before either of the two groups apeared. Therefore, is logical to think that all dinosaurs were endothermic, since, as you said, feathering doesnt make sense on a cold blooded animal I would sugest you try to come to terms that people can have ideas that contradict your own, instead of getting butthurt anytime someone's just mentions the oposite, or even just asks you what made you have that opinion.

Colin Mathura-Jeffree Davidosaurus??? That's a wierd name for a dinosaur.

No dinosaur ever had fur. It's a trait found only in mammals and their relatives.

They certainly are! First one must understand that "reptile" doesn't have the same meaning in modern classification of animals that it used to. Birds evolved from certain theropod dinosaurs, so they are still technically dinosaurs. Dinosaurs, as well as crocodylomorphs (crocodiles and their wide variety of extinct relatives) and pterosaurs (pterodactyls and their wide variety of extinct relatives) all evolved from a particular group of true reptiles called archosaurs. Because of this, despite the fact that modern crocodiles and lizards for example may resemble each other superficially on the outside, crocodiles are genetically closer to birds. One of the important things about modern taxonomy (classification) is that you cannot outgrow your ancestry. Hence, despite having feathers, being warm blooded and challenging what the laymen thinks of as "reptilian," birds, along with all dinosaurs, are still considered reptiles. Mammals on the other hand, were never true reptiles at any point with their ancestry splitting before the first "true reptiles" evolved. We do however, have a closer ancestry with reptiles than reptiles do with amphibians.

Inferences from other related animals.

It is, but would rather do this instead. :)

dhanush chandra nakkalakunta xD

It's not t rex. But yes its supposed to depict a similarity to the animal despite us not knowing what it actually looked like