Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

A dinosaur with a remarkably preserved face

arstechnica.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 64 posts

Re: A dinosaur with a remarkably preserved face

#11

Post by anyfoo »

blendergeek wrote: post #8
algem wrote: post #4

Where are the feathers?!? Looks just like a dragon.

From what I understand, it was more the Therapods that are thought to have had feathers. This is an ankylosaur which was a heavily armored dinosaur.

Regardless of whether this specific dinosaur is thought to have feathers or not, I was wondering if feathers would survive the fossilization in the first place? Is there anything intrinsic to feathers that would make them different in that regard, then, say, the skin (which apparently is relatively well preserved)?

Re: A dinosaur with a remarkably preserved face

#12

Post by austinjp »

smusamashah wrote: post #10
hcrisp wrote: post #3

I remember seeing this in a Nat Geo article back in 2017. More pictures available here: http://www.natgeo.com/nodosaur

This is pay walled. Where else I can see it's more and clear pictures. I failed to find a face in the original article.

Link to the header image from article, as far as I can tell since I'm on mobile:

https://i.natgeofe.com/n/e5966d6a-e93c-4f3d-839f-a228f34fdb3...

Re: A dinosaur with a remarkably preserved face

#13

Post by jimsmart »

smusamashah wrote: post #10
hcrisp wrote: post #3

I remember seeing this in a Nat Geo article back in 2017. More pictures available here: http://www.natgeo.com/nodosaur

This is pay walled. Where else I can see it's more and clear pictures. I failed to find a face in the original article.

> I failed to find a face in the original article.

The second image in the original Ars Technica article shows the side view of its head/face very clearly. According to the caption: its head is still partly enclosed in the concretion it was found in — which IMO gives it the appearance of having its head resting on a rock.

After looking at that, and the third image — an artist's rendition of how it might have looked when alive — the first image should make more sense: its snout is at the front of the image, the bulges of both its eye sockets are clearly visible slightly further back, and the creature looks like it is laying down (and has been somewhat flattened) facing towards the camera, looking slightly to the right of the photographer.

HTH.

Re: A dinosaur with a remarkably preserved face

#14

Post by logicallee »

version_five wrote: post #9
logicallee wrote: post #5

For what it's worth, I didn't like reading this article. Something about it seems wrong.

About the subject or the writing style? I thought it was an interesting article, especially for ars

About the writing style, for example talking about looking a dinosaur in its "face". It is jarring and I didn't like reading it.

Re: A dinosaur with a remarkably preserved face

#15

Post by metadat »

smusamashah wrote: post #10
hcrisp wrote: post #3

I remember seeing this in a Nat Geo article back in 2017. More pictures available here: http://www.natgeo.com/nodosaur

This is pay walled. Where else I can see it's more and clear pictures. I failed to find a face in the original article.

Ask and ye shall receive.

JS-free archive link:

https://archive.today/NrUsT

<3

Re: A dinosaur with a remarkably preserved face

#16

Post by version_five »

logicallee wrote: post #14
version_five wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

About the subject or the writing style? I thought it was an interesting article, especially for ars

About the writing style, for example talking about looking a dinosaur in its "face". It is jarring and I didn't like reading it.

Yes ok I see your point. I didn't find it deal breaking but I understand how something like that could be

Re: A dinosaur with a remarkably preserved face

#17

Post by satvikpendem »

logicallee wrote: post #14
version_five wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

About the subject or the writing style? I thought it was an interesting article, especially for ars

About the writing style, for example talking about looking a dinosaur in its "face". It is jarring and I didn't like reading it.

Why? Animals have faces too.

Re: A dinosaur with a remarkably preserved face

#18

Post by dTal »

anyfoo wrote: post #11
blendergeek wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

From what I understand, it was more the Therapods that are thought to have had feathers. This is an ankylosaur which was a heavily armored dinosaur.

Regardless of whether this specific dinosaur is thought to have feathers or not, I was wondering if feathers would survive the fossilization in the first place? Is there anything intrinsic to feathers that would make them different in that regard, then, say, the skin (which apparently is relatively well preserved)?

Feathers have in fact "survived" fossilization, notably those attached to several whole-body archaeopteryx fossils (scare quotes around "survive" because the original material is gone, it is only the shape which survives)

Re: A dinosaur with a remarkably preserved face

#19

Post by httgp »

austinjp wrote: post #12
smusamashah wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is pay walled. Where else I can see it's more and clear pictures. I failed to find a face in the original article.

Link to the header image from article, as far as I can tell since I'm on mobile: https://i.natgeofe.com/n/e5966d6a-e93c-4f3d-839f-a228f34fdb3...

Holy smokes this looks like it’s straight out of House of the Dragon.
Post reply on HN