[a / b / c / d / e / f / g / gif / h / hr / k / m / o / p / r / s / t / u / v / vg / vm / vmg / vr / vrpg / vst / w / wg] [i / ic] [r9k / s4s / vip / qa] [cm / hm / lgbt / y] [3 / aco / adv / an / bant / biz / cgl / ck / co / diy / fa / fit / gd / hc / his / int / jp / lit / mlp / mu / n / news / out / po / pol / pw / qst / sci / soc / sp / tg / toy / trv / tv / vp / vt / wsg / wsr / x / xs] [Settings] [Search] [Mobile] [Home]
Board
Settings Mobile Home
/an/ - Animals & Nature

[Advertise on 4chan]


Thread archived.
You cannot reply anymore.


[Advertise on 4chan]


File: alligator-walking-02.jpg (405 KB, 1400x914)
405 KB
405 KB JPG
>Um Dinosaurs can't pronate their hands because crocodilians can't pronate their hands
>Crocodilians literally walk with pronated hands
Is this a fucking gaslighting attempt or something?? I'm starting to think most paleontologists and redittors don't actually know what the word "pronation" means.
>>
>>4169685
I think you just spoke with journoscum, redditors, and deviantart users, AKA brainless eaters, not paleontologists.
>>
>>4169685
>Swiggity Swooty
>>
File: alligator non-pronated.png (2.39 MB, 1400x914)
2.39 MB
2.39 MB PNG
>>4169687
Dude, this is a mainstream paleontological belief. And it's based on claiming something that isn't even true of LIVING animals. It's yet another fucking nonsense belief about dinosaurs that a small number of people came up with which defies reality, then everyone just picked it up and ran with it so they could be "in the know". If these morons were right, this is how an Alligator would actually walk. Obviously this isn't the case.

>A dumb swamp beast can do bunny hands but highly evolved theropods with grasping hands can't
Okay retards.
>>
Is there any belief about dinosaurs "paleontologists" have come up with in the past 30 years which ISN'T complete bullshit?
>>
>>4169685
>Dinosaurs can't pronate their hands because crocodilians can't pronate their hands
That's not why you drooling moron
kys
>>
File: 1650165464742.png (2.01 MB, 1080x871)
2.01 MB
2.01 MB PNG
>>4169704
>A dumb swamp beast
Don't ever talk to me or my husband again.
>>
>>4169685
>I'm starting to think most paleontologists and redittors don't actually know what the word "pronation" means.
A lot of them unironically know relatively little about living animals, that's for sure. Which is an increasing problem among scientists across the board...you'd be surprised at how much a lot of them don't know if it's outside their range of study.
>>
>>4169736
this age of materiality gadgetism overspecialization is ending itself
>>
>>4169733
Here's a paper: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0074842

And here's the idiot author explaining how he's never seen an alligator: https://matthewbonnan.wordpress.com/2013/09/18/dinosaur-hand-and-forelimb-posture-might-have-been-more-diverse-than-previously-hypothesized/
>>
>>4169736
This is INSIDE their range of study. That's more what I'm talking about. Most STEMtards don't even understand their own field at the level of a fucking 5 year simply paying attention when going to the zoo. Then they write authoritative papers with wide-reaching consequences AND ARE WRONG at an elementary level. This kind of shit is becoming the norm. And stupid fucking STEMqueers and demorats wonder why nobody believes in science anymore.

Have you considered actually doing some correctly?
>>
>>4169752
>Here's a paper
that says dinosaurs couldn't pronate their hands because they couldn't cross the radius and ulna
not because crocodiles can't.
>here's the idiot author explaining how he's never seen an alligator
He specifically says they studied crocodiles while working on the paper

also your OP pic isn't hand pronation

you're stupid. Please consider not talking
>>
>>4169754
>can't understand anatomy
>thinks anatomists are wrong
pottery
>>
>>4169761
You're amazingly retarded. Like can't pass a Turing test retarded. Unfortunately, I find there are a LOT of you around these days. All you do is repeat what authors of papers wrote without actually analyzing it.
>>
>>4169772
>All you do is repeat what authors of papers wrote without actually analyzing it.
You make up complete bullshit and then pretend that's what scientists are saying.

you are very stupid. You didn't even read the paper, you didn't read the blog you posted, and you don't know what hand pronation is.

you're a complete waste of time.
>>
>>4169761
>also your OP pic isn't hand pronation
It literally is. Chin ups is supination, pull ups is pronation. Whether the bones cross is another issue, but the hand facing down is pronation, hence "prone."
>>
>>4169780
>the hand facing down is pronation
in humans that's ALMOST true

you get really close to understanding something and then you fuck up wildly.
>>
>>4169780
I'll give you a hint

"pronation" is a verb, not a noun

a posture is not a verb
>>
>>4169790
Pronate is a verb. Pronation is a noun that describes that verb.
>>
>>4169790
ok retard
>>
>>4169793
>Pronation is a noun that describes that verb.
incorrect

nouns don't describe verbs in english.

and even if the noun were used as a verb, that's not how paleontologists are using it so you're not understanding what they're saying.
>>
File: 1651723834385.jpg (73 KB, 640x625)
73 KB
73 KB JPG
>>4169776
>>
>>4169795
>ok retard
you are very dumb

painfully stupid
>>
>>4169797
Can you show me how you "pronation" your hand? Or would you pronate your hand and then describe it as in a state of being known as "pronation?" Please stop embarrassing yourself.
>>
>>4169799
You just realized I was right and got nothing to say.

it's fine. You do this all the time.
>>
>>4169801
>makes retarded esl post about grammar
>gets called retard
>>
>>4169802
>describe it as in a state of being known as "pronation?"
wrong again

the state of being pronated is "pronated," not "pronation."

"pronation" is the action of pronating.
>>
>>4169806
pronation is a state of being
>>
Are we really having a debate over what is a verb and what is a noun right now? Nupaleofags are fucking up paleontology. Let's stay on task.
>>
>>4169807
That's where you fuck up, right there

pronation is an action, not a state

it is a verb, not a noun
>>
File: 1650308488526.jpg (611 KB, 1987x1588)
611 KB
611 KB JPG
Explain this, "scientists."
>>
>>4169809
If you're going to say an animal can't do something we need to know if it's an action or a state

OP's entire fuck up was confusing an action for a state.
>>
>>4169811
Some alligators are cooler than others.
>>
>>4169810
the verb is pronate
I pronationed is incorrect
>>
File: 1632849101608.png (30 KB, 347x506)
30 KB
30 KB PNG
Esl-kun stop it.
>>
>>4169814
You're retarded. I am OP. Pronation is not a fucking hard thing to understand unless you're living on mount stupid in the Dunning-Kruger universe.
>>
>>4169816
>the verb is pronate
ah, you don't know about conjugation

pronation is also a verb, just a different tense and subject. Keep reading, you're learning, my dear bot
>>
>>4169818
>Pronation is not a fucking hard thing to understand
so explain it

I wanna see you claim it's easy and then do it wrong.
>>
>>4169819
That's not what conjugation is you fucking monkey. "Pronated," "pronating," and "pronates" are conjugation. You already got btfo, please stop.
>>
>>4169819
But my dear anon, whether or not he knows what conjugation is, doesn't change the fact that you can't do conjugaTION.
>>
>>4169821
Hand palm up - supination
Hand palm down - pronation

Now go on a 30 minute rant about how mad you are that I exposed your stupid nupaleo belief for fraud.
>>
>>4169825
clever, I kek'd
>>4169826
Thank you

that's correct in humans or when comparing to humans.

It's entirely wrong when talking about reptiles or comparing to reptiles.

You don't know this, so you fucked it up.
>>
>>4169797
So paleontologists are using the word wrong? You're not doing a great job convincing anyone that OP is wrong about paleontologists being dumb then.
>>
>>4169832
>So paleontologists are using the word wrong?
Pronation is the act of turning a limb towards the centerline of the body.

if you have bunny hands to begin with, and can't turn them towards the centerline of the body, you cannot pronate, even if your hands are pronated compared to a person's hands.
>>
And I thought the scales/scutes argument was retarded
>>
>>4169833
>paleontologists use a word in completely different context than anyone else uses it
>therefore everyone else is the problem!
Ah, and here we come to the crux of our problem, my dear paleo-schizo.
It's not so much that you guys are dumb. It's that you have poor communication skills and act as obtusely as possible at all times. Part of a scientist's job is (or should be) to not just make discoveries but actually communicate those discoveries clearly. You collectively have failed to do this, and once again it all goes back to the 'tism.
Sad, many such cases.
>>
>>4169841
it was.

and it's the same 2 anons arguing

OP is literally retarded and purposefully picks fights with paleontologists just to get his ass kicked. It's how he learns things.
>>
>>4169843
I have corrected this particular mistake hundreds of times on /an/

you simply failed to understand.
>>
>>4169843
One last thing, and this should be obvious

Ceratopsians and other quadrupedal dinosaurs walked with their toes forward and palms down, just like alligators.

This should give you some clue that the authors weren't calling this posture "pronation." Somebody was clearly saying something you didn't understand.
>>
>>4169851
Which means nothing when the subject at hand was THEROPODS.
Most people who are familiar with basic anatomy will hear "pronation" (or pronate, pronated, or any other variant thereof) and assume that what is meant is hands held in a palm down fashion. This holds for humans, ceratopsians, crocodilians, and rabbits, among others. It's a fairly safe assumption to make.
Your ilk will happily say theropods can't pronate and then turn around and say
>wtf bro, no we never said theropods can't hold their palms down, why would you think that?
>you have to be using the esoteric meaning of the word that we were thinking but not explaining or you are le stupid
Do you know what a self-fulfilling prophecy is?
>>
>>4169862
>Which means nothing when the subject at hand was THEROPODS.
correct.

Theropods held their hands at the sides, palms in facing the centerline of the body just like humans. So the two terms mean exactly the same when talking about theropods and humans.

The paper you or some other retard posted was NOT talking about theropods, and OP's pic is also NOT a theropod.

I understand why it's confusing to you, but this was your chance to try to learn something by looking up terms you didn't understand instead of ranting about how paleontologists are retarded.
>>
>>4169862
Also we never said theropods can't pronate.

That's another mistake I've corrected here hundreds of times.

we specifically said raptors COULD pronate their hands and the entire internet ignored that part.
>>
Theropods could not pronate their hands.
Sauropods always pronated their hands.
Most quadrupedal ornithopods always pronated their hands.
Ceratopsians could half-way pronate their hands.
>>
>>4169870
some theropods could pronate their hands a little
Quadrupedal dinosaurs could not pronate their hands at all. Neither can alligators afaik.
>>
>>4169831
NO, it fucking is not. The word doesn't change because it's an alligator. It is YOU who are fucking the hell right up. And what's worse is this EXACT SAME form of pronation is said to be "impossible" in Coelurosaurs, which are the only dinosaurs with free front limbs equipped with fully functional hands, yet Crocodilians can do it and they don't even fucking have hands.
>>
>>4169885
>The word doesn't change because it's an alligator.
Correct. It means the same thing no matter what animal we're talking about

you just don't know what it means
>>
File: pronation carpenter.png (60 KB, 378x597)
60 KB
60 KB PNG
>>4169885
>this EXACT SAME form of pronation is said to be "impossible" in Coelurosaurs
We specifically said it's possible.

here's the figure.
>>
>>4169833
>>4169843
See: >>4169885

You're giving paleontologists WAY too fucking much credit here. Paleontologists are using the word exactly the same as everyone else, they're just wrong about what they're observing because their dumb, overeducated, cloistered academics who've never been to a fucking zoo.

Alligators LITERALLY do fucking bunny hands. It's in the OP image.

>>4169851
Correct. The stupidest part of this argument is that THE ONLY FUCKING GROUP of Dinosaurs with free front limbs equipped with functional hands is the one """paleontologists""" have convinced everyone can't use them. If this retarded theory is correct, the forelimbs of a Triceratops are more useful for manipulating plant matter than those of an Ornithomimus. Simply retarded.

>>4169864
>Theropods held their hands at the sides, palms in facing the centerline of the body just like humans.
>Raptors are just like me!
And I'm positive this is where they got this fucking stupid idea. It's the only thing that makes any sense.

>The paper you or some other retard posted was NOT talking about theropods, and OP's pic is also NOT a theropod.
The point is, this is a common view in paleontology, based on pure niggerbrained speculation which defies all logic, anatomy and reality and misuses words to attempt to be right.

>>4169869
>Also we never said theropods can't pronate.
Yes you did. And that's why we've gathered here today to insult you.

>we specifically said raptors COULD pronate their hands and the entire internet ignored that part.
Pretty sure raptors were specifically the group you targeted THE MOST to tell people they couldn't pronate.
>>
>>4169889
Remain silent, NPC.
>>
>>4169897
You've been thoroughly beaten and now are just saying the same bullshit but louder.

fuck off.
>>
>>4169685
I understand the non-pronated hands. But I never understood why their wrists are depicted facing straight down at a 90 degree angle relative to their arms. That looks broken, how does that even function???
>>
>>4169895
What paper is this?
>>
>>4169903
the one everyone cites when they say theropods can't pronate their hands.
>>
>>4169902
It doesn't and it's a lie. In a lot of newer Dromaeosaur and Pterosaur illustrations they've got their fucking fingers twisted backwards it's so bad.
>>
>>4169904
Pretty sure there's more than one. I just posted a different one earlier in the thread.
>>
>>4169908
yes, he wrote several, for different publications.

This one is available only in the book but used to be free online.
>>
>>4169909
The one I posted wasn't written by Carter.
>>
>>4169908
oh, you meant the one not about theropods

got it.

Carpenter wrote a series of studies on theropod arms. The one I posted the image from is now only found in his book.
>>
>>4169914
Nigger, we've got multiple papers claiming Dinosaurs can't pronate, including ones we fucking know did, and you still want to fucking nitpick? Grow some fucking balls and admit you just want to push your fantasy as truth.
>>
>>4169902
>But I never understood why their wrists are depicted facing straight down at a 90 degree angle relative to their arms
It's because they really, really want to remind you that they're related to birds. It's purely agenda driven.
>>
>>4169916
>we've got multiple papers claiming Dinosaurs can't pronate,
so cite them and I'll explain how you failed to understand them.

I'll try to use small words.
>>
>>4169918
It's actually because they're missing most of the lateral carpus and when they have portions of it,
it includes a semilunate carpal that allows the fingers to only pivot 90 degrees down at the base.

and yes, that's similar to birds. Not a surprise.
>>
File: 1644586901327.jpg (154 KB, 1024x576)
154 KB
154 KB JPG
>>4169921
Forelimb Biomechanics of Nonavian Theropod Dinosaurs in Predation

HOLY SHIT is THIS the pile of shit that kicked this off? I have to admit, I wasn't sure which one was the first paper to offer this shitbrained belief into the world, but this is the OPENING SENTENCE of the abstract:

>Theoretical models of theropod forelimb biomechanics are often tainted with preconceived ideas.
>>
>dude replying to myself lmao
meds, now
>>
>>4169925
that's the one.

As I posted, it said raptors could pronate their hands and you fucking morons read that to mean the exact opposite.

you're really quite dumb.
>>
>>4169927
Well...are you taking them?
>>
>>4169928
Literally the SECOND sentence of the abstract:

>Actualistic modeling using specimens and casts, coupled with CAT-scans and dissections of extant vertebrate forelimbs, demonstrates that forelimb motion in theropods is considerably less than hypothetical models indicate.
>>
>>4169931
keep quote mining, that one didn't have the punch you think it does.

better yet buy the book. I make $0.13 every time someone buys one.
>>
>>4169932
How am I quote mining, you braindead zombie? I haven't even left the abstract yet and it's already laughable. How can teh range of theropod forelimb motion be "less than hypothetical models indicate" and also be in favor of pronation. We already believed in pronation. But I really want to dig in to see how stupid this paper gets.
>>
>>4169935
>How can teh range of theropod forelimb motion be "less than hypothetical models indicate" and also be in favor of pronation
keep reading, you're learning
>>
>>4169935
>I really want to dig in to see how stupid this paper gets.
I have the full pdf if you need it.
>>
Oh my god, is Carpenter where we get this "actually T. rex used it's arms against prey" bullshit too? Wow, that's some track record. This is why we need to ban paleontologists from studying Theropods.

>>4169942
Already reading it.
>>
>>4169945
>is Carpenter where we get this "actually T. rex used it's arms against prey" bullshit too?
he's not a fan of horner, just like you.
>>
>>4169734
Built for big crocodile dick.
>>
>>4169945
I remember reading about Carpenter a lot in my books as a kid in the 80s and early 90s. Did a lot of work with ankylosaurs if I remember right.
I guess no one is infallible though.
>>
>>4169948
I remember working for Carpenter when he was writing that paper, and nobody is infallible.
>>
neat, resident schizo taught me something new. Thanks, anon.
>>
>>4169961
NP. Thanks for reading
>>
>>4169950
Lol
>>
Started taking notes, but got real board with the Carter paper. The entire thing is lazy and 1: ignores the fact that both crocodilians and quadrupedal Dinosaurs all had pronated hands. And 2: Just assumes that theropods hands are being reconstructed correctly, flat in a plane with the radius and ulna, when that isn't how a Crocodilians hands are arranged at all and they pronate. The claim that "powerful adductors pulling on mechanically strong forelimbs, implies that the forelimb of Tyrannosaurus was actively used in predation" is hilarious and retarded though. The fuck was it grabbing? Pterosaurs out of the air that flew too close to its chest?
>>
>>4170013
cope
>>
>>4169685
They thought of prolapse like their gay gaping faggot anus
>>
File: ArchosaurGates.png (7 KB, 468x235)
7 KB
7 KB PNG
>>4169685
The "hands" in your pic look pronated because the shoulder joint is oriented differently and the legs are sprawled out to the side. Dinosaur arms were straight down perpendicular to the ground and if the animal in your pic's legs were oriented similarly it wouldn't be able to achieve that angle.
>>
>>4169685
he cute
>>
>>4169902
Honestly can't find anything on it but I know in general wrists are the most difficult part of skeletons to get right even in creatures we know in life like humans. Nothing really fully connects and everything just kinda slides over eachother in a really complex way. I'd imagine without any tissue it'd be hard to know exactly how a dinosaur's wrist works. Not impossible but not simple and solid imo.

Also quick funny thing to note, my dad had to memorize all the names of all the bones in the human wrist in X-ray school (There's like ~20 iirc) and he came of with an acronym for it. Doesn't matter though since the names he was taught have since changed so it's totally useless lmao.
>>
File: 1601997831678.jpg (53 KB, 640x849)
53 KB
53 KB JPG
>>4169685
Theropods were bipedal, their hands weren't used for walking like they are by crocodilians. Dinosaur limbs aren't comparable to the limbs other reptiles in any way, really. Their unique limbs and posture is one of the defining features of the family.

You're the same pedantic, definition-debating schizo retard who shits up each thread. I can tell from the way you write. For some reason you believe you know more than palaeontologists, and while the field is certainly prone to making trends out of dubious findings, paleontologists base their opinions on studies detailing what range of movement the animals physiology would've allowed, and then on animals that are physiologically similar.
Modern crocodilians are an extremely specialized, extremely small order of reptiles that was once a highly diverse clade called pseudosuchia. These were separate from the clade to which all dinosaurs belonged to. They were both archosaurs, but that's as far as similarities go.
Birds pose a similar problem, in that they are highly specialized, but unlike crocodiles, birds are theropods. Birds lack hands, but they're bipedal and lightweight just like their ancestors, and totally unlike the quadrupedal, semi-aquatic crocodiles.

So, the evidence for non-pronation (or whatever word you think would be more fitting) is:
>Most studies on theropod forelimb articulation shows they couldn't face their palms to the ground.
>Theropods had little need to face their palms to the ground.
>Modern theropods cannot face their palms towards the ground.
>Certain groups of theropods, such as dromaeosaurs, are known to have had wings that pronated wrists would get in the way of.
>Most theropods had very small forelimbs, being able to pronate their wrists would be pointless.

Now, the evidence provided to oppose the idea that theropods couldn't pronate their hands.
>Alligators walk on their palms.

This won't stop you, though. If this was 30 years ago, you'd be arguing for tail-dragging.
>>
File: Crocodilian hand bones.jpg (735 KB, 2048x1320)
735 KB
735 KB JPG
>>4170431
Uh-uh. Look at an alligator's hand bones. Then compare them to how an Allosaur's hand bones are reconstructed. The orientation's totally different. See how the plane of the hand is oriented perpendicular to the radius and ulna. In a Theropod this would ALWAYS be reconstructed parallel. But who's to say that orientation is correct?
>>
>>4170611
>Most studies on theropod forelimb articulation shows they couldn't face their palms to the ground.
Yet every other Dinosaur could. And they only used their hands to walk.

>Theropods had little need to face their palms to the ground.
Says you. Who the fuck are you to say what a Theropod needed to do with their hands? You think T. rex was grappling prey with its nubs. You probably also think Alvarezsaurids were clawing at termite mounds with thier tit-nails.

>Modern theropods cannot face their palms towards the ground.
What a fucking retard. Modern "Theropods" as you call them don't have palms.

>Certain groups of theropods, such as dromaeosaurs, are known to have had wings that pronated wrists would get in the way of.
So all Theropods must have wings. And this is the exact moment Mesozoic paleontology went off the rails.

>Most theropods had very small forelimbs, being able to pronate their wrists would be pointless
An objective lie, followed by a repetition of the assumption you already made. But you don't care. You're convinced because you like to fit in, faggot. This isn't about facts. It's about your comfort level. You're a retarded NPC.
>>
File: Allosaur arm.jpg (31 KB, 500x329)
31 KB
31 KB JPG
>>4170652
>>
>>4170659
are you still talking?
holy shit
>>
File: 1637903628857.jpg (67 KB, 800x526)
67 KB
67 KB JPG
Alligators are cool
>>
>>4170832
I am and shall continue to.
>>
>>4170659
You're contradicting yourself here, as I should have expected.
You accuse me of claiming that:
>T. rex was grappling prey with its nubs
and
>Alvarezsaurids were clawing at termite mounds with thier tit-nails
(You spelled "their" wrong. I bet you'd argue that you know more than the English teacher if he corrected you.)
Yet you go on to criticise me for stating that most theropods likely didn't use their small forelimbs often enough to warrant a high degree of motion. Not only do you contradict yourself here, but you also misunderstand my first point and replace it with a complete strawman. They didn't need to face their palms to the ground because they didn't use them to walk or bare weight, and there's not really anything else that a pronated hand is better at than a non-pronated one, and yes, theropods did have small arms. What could an Allosaurus do with its hands that it couldn't do better with its mouth? The mouth is at the front, the arms are underneath. No matter what way the hands face, they aren't gonna be able to reach anything without careful positioning by the dinosaur trying to use them. You act as if this is a foolish assumption yet provide no counter argument.

>Yet every other Dinosaur could. And they only used their hands to walk.
Correct. Almost all other dinosaurs had pronated wrists (most couldn't un-pronate them, by the way), and almost all other dinosaurs also walked on their front legs at least sometimes. The reason that theropods are the only dinosaurs that don't have their palms facing the ground is the same reason that theropods are the only dinosaurs that don't walk on their hands. What does an alligator use its hands for, Anon, apart from walking?
>>
File: Bird Hand.png (2.47 MB, 1280x1192)
2.47 MB
2.47 MB PNG
>>4170659
>>4170980

>What a fucking retard. Modern "Theropods" as you call them don't have palms.
Birds are theropods. The fact that birds are theropods is so obvious that even in the 1800's we knew they were the descendants of dinosaurs. By modern cladistics, this means they are theropods, the same way you and I are primates (unless you're willing to debate that, as well). Anyway, all birds have at least one finger on each hand, and the ones that have several cannot face them downwards.

>So all Theropods must have wings. And this is the exact moment Mesozoic paleontology went off the rails.
I never said that. In fact, I took specific care to make sure I used the phrase "certain groups", since most groups of theropods didn't have wings. I used dromaeosaurs because earlier on you tried to tell us that Deinonychus could pronate its hands.

I disagree with many paleo-opinions, but I also agree with many of them, because instead of mindlessly accepting or contradicting, I think for myself, and determine whether or not an idea makes sense.

You, on the other hand, refuse to ever change your mind. You're an NPC stuck in the past, and your AI is getting pretty outdated.
>>
>>4170983
No birds are birds. Now go away, retarded featherfag. Your kind aren't wanted around here.
>>
So what? Dinosaurs are bird
>>
>>4170611
>You're the same pedantic, definition-debating schizo retard who shits up each thread. I can tell from the way you write.
You are correct, he is that schizo

I am the paleontologist that spends entire threads arguing definitions with him.

generally that's because he has misunderstood a single word and then goes on a rant about how stupid paleontologists are because he doesn't speak their language.

In this case it's "pronation," which the general dinofan public thinks means "bunny hands," but to paleontologists usually means "pigeon toes" or "walking on the inside of the hand" when discussing horses or alligators or other quadrupeds, but does in fact mean "bunny hands" when talking about humans or theropods.

He also misunderstood your use of the word "palm (of the hand)" itt but I didn't bother to correct him because teaching him one anatomical term per thread is more than enough.
>>
>>4171922
A very simple example of this is the human foot.

A human foot is normally held in a "pronated" posture compared to a hand. That is, compared to the resting posture of the hand, the foot is rotated 90 degrees towards the centerline of the body. The sole is facing down just like the palm of the pronated hand faces down.

However this isn't pronation because IT'S THE NORMAL RESTING POSTURE for the foot. Pronation would be rotating the foot even more towards the centerline of the body. Humans can barely pronate their feet, and when we do it appears as pigeon toes and/or walking on the inside of the foot.

Same goes for alligators and horses and bunnies and all quadrupedal dinosaurs. Their normal hand position isn't pronated, even if appears pronated compared to a human. Pronation would be taking the normal condition and rolling it towards the center of the body. Which would appear as pigeon toes or walking on the inside of the hand. Just as in human feet.

Because pronation isn't a particular posture, it's just taking the resting posture and rotating it towards the centerline of the body. Just like supination isn't a posture, it's just taking the normal resting posture and rotating it away from the centerline of the body.
>>
>>4169685
>>4169704
Man I love alligators and crocodiles. What great looking creatures. Living fossils, all of them are very cool.
>>
>>4171922
All these paragraphs of text and you still don't seem to grasp what the fuck the word "pronated" means.
>>
>>4171941
>Because pronation isn't a particular posture
Yes it is, you fucking retard. Do us all a favor and light your worthless degree on fire and do the same for your peers.
>>
Also I just realized this but isn't it weird that gators/crocs some of the few predators that have eyes on the sides of their face instead of in the front?
>>
>>4171941
OP also misses the bigger point to all this

the reason pronation and supination of the human hand is interesting is because it's like our opposable thumbs... It's an adaptation to manual dexterity for tool use that most animals don't have.

And when we study theropod arms we're certainly interested in how they became bird wings, but that's not our main purpose. Before they became wings they still had to be useful for something, and studying how they could and could not move gives us insight into how theropods were using their arms. That's the actual point. We are trying to guess what they were using their arms for based on their range of movement.

it was not opening doorknobs.
>>
>>4171952
>Yes it is, you fucking retard.
compelling argument.
>>
>>4171952
Get on google

when I say your foot is pronated, does it mean:
1. It's in a normal posture
2. it's rotated towards the centerline of the body

I don't know if you're actually smart enough to understand this, you're one of the stupidest people I've had the pleasure of talking with over the years.
>>
>>4171963
BOTH. Now here's AGAIN, where you seem to be fucking up. Yet another fucking midwit with a STEM degree who can regurgitate everything he's been taught like a good little boy, but lacks any sort of critical thinking skills.

It literally doesn't matter how you define it. Crocodiles have pronated hands. AND FURTHER there's no guarantee you're reconstructing Theropod hands correctly to begin with. You ASSUME you are. And if the hand is twisted? Then the animal can pronate - pick a fucking definition - and you were WRONG.
>>
>>4171967
you disagreement is with the English language, not paleontologists.

The problem with your made up language is now that you've labeled crocodile hands "pronated" you now have no word to describe what would happen if it rotated inwards. So you have to make up another word for that or live your life speaking a language that cannot describe that action and so many other useful things.
>>
>>4171967
>>4171971
The other problem with your made up language is getting other people to use it.

In the case of "pronated" I'd guess you have most of the internet on your side. But medical doctors and veterinarians and other anatomists aren't going to use the word your way because it's less useful than the way we use it.
>>
>>4171967
Anatomy is actually full of cases like this, and you've found a lot of them and wrote threads about them.

Another one we've argued on /an/ in the past is hands vs. feet. "Quadruped" literally means having 4 feet, but anatomists don't call the front feet of quadrupeds "feet." We call them manus- hands.

This is because the meaning of a term in anatomy doesn't change when the usage of the organ changes. Bat wings, alligator front feet, human hands, they're all hands (manus).

The meaning is standardized to fit multiple situations. Because it's generally more useful to describe which limb (front or back) rather than how the limb is used (foot or wing or flipper).

"Pronated" is one of these cases. It refers to a different posture depending how the limb is used, simply because the term is standardized to mean a type of rotation of the limb, not just the position one specific type of limb is in if rotated in that manner. Pronation of the human manus does not produce the same result as pronation of the human pes, nor does it produce the same posture in an alligator manus. Simply because the term refers to a direction of rotation rather than just the resulting posture.
>>
>>4171998
>This is because the meaning of a term in anatomy doesn't change when the usage of the organ changes
It literally does. A wing is specifically a flying organ. That's why raptors don't have wings. They have arms. That's why Penguins don't have wings. They have flippers.
>>
>>4172003
>A wing is specifically a flying organ. That's why raptors don't have wings. They have arms. That's why Penguins don't have wings. They have flippers.
Yes, you're reading backwards.

in anatomy, there is no such thing as a wing or a flipper or a front foot.

those are all manus.

there are other branches of science where those terms are used, but anatomy isn't one of them.
>>
>>4172003
There's also the difference between formal language and informal.

Two obvious examples are "leg" and "arm." Leg and arm mean something completely different from what you imagine in formal anatomical language. But anatomists often use the terms in an informal sense as well. It's up to the reader to use context to decide if the anatomist is saying "leg" or "arm" in the formal sense or informal.

If you don't know this, reading anatomy gets very confusing.
>>
>>4172009
I assure you, "wing" and "flipper" are correct anatomical terms.
>>
>>4172011
>I assure you, "wing" and "flipper" are correct anatomical terms.
thanks for your assurances. They mean exactly shit.

I will educate you- anatomical terms for animals are very literally based on human anatomy, and humans don't have wings or flippers so neither do other animals.
>>
>>4172011
The name of an organ does not change based on how it's used.

otherwise humans wouldn't have hands, they'd have piano stroking appendages and page turners and steering wheel graspers and 4chan shitposting sticks and the name of the organ would change hundreds of times per day.
>>
>>4172016
You're a tiresome pedant, as all college-educated morons.
>>
>>4172021
OP demanded pedantry when he misunderstood a technical term and then called other people stupid because he can't read.
>>
File: irony-1-1.jpg (59 KB, 1200x628)
59 KB
59 KB JPG
>>4169685
>I'm starting to think most paleontologists and redittors don't actually know what the word "pronation" means.
>>
File: mess.jpg (266 KB, 1280x720)
266 KB
266 KB JPG
>>4171191
Birds are dinosaurs, and you're a primate (and a faggot). If you don't believe that birds evolved from dinosaurs then you're either blind or retarded and you should kill yourself ASAP.
Maybe you're trolling, but there are plenty of people who really believe this so here goes:
Certain families of theropods had feathers, and certain others didn't. Theropods that have no skin impressions or close relatives can be portrayed with whatever integument makes sense for their size and climate. Other dinosaurs didn't have feathers, but some had small areas of quills or hair-like structures on parts of their bodies. Accepting this isn't being a featherfag, it's just not being a scalefag.

Featherfaggotry is:
>refusal to accept new studies that suggest certain dinosaurs were mostly scaly
>criticising paleoart where dinosaurs that are not thought to be feathered are not depicted as being feathered
>arguing that megatheropods would've needed feathers
>promoting designs that are inaccurate BUT have feathers
>>
>>4172021
>You're a tiresome pedant, as all college-educated morons.
so when you think a college grad has made a mistake they're retarded and when you realize it was you that made the mistake they're pedants.

You're a vile piece of shit, I'll give you that.
>>
>>4170663
Nonono. This is wrong. Theropod arms looked like chicken wings because birds evolved from Theropods, trust me.
>>
>>4172976
>change the topic quick before everyone sees how stupid I was in this thread
too late idiot
>>
>>4169734
Whoever drew this likes Monster Hunter.
>>
>>4169685
Why does this gator look gray? Aren’t they usually green?
>>
>>4172976
Places that don't give you the tips along with the rest of the wing have no right claiming they serve wings.
>>
>>4170652
There isn't pronation in this photo, you can see the arm is angled way up to make this hand position possible proving my point.
>>4170663
Just like the crocodile pic the wrist is fused and not designed for much movement, but the arms aren't angled way up like the previous pic because they didn't need to be, and thus the angle of "pronation" as you call it wouldn't be possible. You literally proved me correct lol.
>>
>>4169685
>Um Dinosaurs can't pronate their hands because crocodilians can't pronate their hands
Nobody says that shit.
Wow. Quadrupedal archosaurs have front limb articulations that work in similar ways. What a surprise.
>>
>>4172964
I'm glad your angry. Would you consider killing yourself over it?
>>
>>4173134
You're blind as shit. Also don't know anything about crocodilian hands, which there's no excuse for. The fucking OP image has an alligator doing bunny hands and images of crocodilian hand bones from every angle are widely available.

>"didn't need to be"
There's that assumption bullshit masquerading as fact again. Amazing how often that comes up from nufag "paleontologists". At this point, paleontology is gaining all the reputation of solid methodology of Egyptology. When do we get to the point you market dino bones like the chinks do to fix broken dicks? I mean as often as you suck their microdicks, I suspect we're already there.
>>
>>4173154
>Nobody says that shit.
Except they do literally all the fucking time. They even try to say that quadrupedal dinosaurs don't "really" pronate. Even though they clearly fucking do.
>>
>>4173983
lol cope and seethe retard
https://matthewbonnan.wordpress.com/tag/pronation/
>"Statistical analysis of radius geometry shows that dinosaurs most often have a straight radius bone with a non-circular head (the part that allows movement at the elbow), a shape similar to those of lizards, crocodiles, and birds. These animals cannot actively pronate their hands, and in lizards and crocodiles this radius geometry is correlated with a non-erect forelimb posture."
>>
>>4174085
Again, crocodilians LITERALLY have pronated fucking forelimbs. YOU LOSE. Get fucking over it.
>>
>>4174091
There is literally not a single naturalist who would agree with you. It is very well known that crocodiles cannot pronate their wrists. They simply lack the geometry for it. Sorry you seem to think pronation is something different than what it is.
>>
>>4174096
Your loss.
>>
File: jurassic world nedry.jpg (74 KB, 595x678)
74 KB
74 KB JPG
>>4174091
>4 days in
>still looking like a fool
>>
I have a hunch that OP is a scalie getting turbo autistic about making his dinosona.
>>
>>4174122
This thread is simple. We're told endlessly that Theropods can't do "bunny hands". One of the reasons being that crocodilians supposedly can't. The OP pic has a crocodilian doing bunny hands. Every other post has been cope by faggots.
>>
ESL thread.
>>
>>4174124
the entire thread is you trolling /an/ with your own stupidity, whether real or pretend

Personally I hope you're just pretending to be an idiot, I'd hate to think we have a literal potato posting dinosaur threads all day every day. That's just sad.
>>
Paleo pseuds mad as fuck.

I shit on your Theropods.
>>
>>4169685
>Um Dinosaurs can't pronate their hands because crocodilians can't pronate their hands
No one has ever said this, you stupid fucking mong. Dinosaurs couldn't pronate their hands because it was anatomically impossible for them to do it.
>>
>>4174146
They literally have with linked papers.

>Dinosaurs couldn't pronate their hands because it was anatomically impossible for them to do it.
You're arguing with several other retards on your side who claim nobody has said this. So which one of you idiots is right? ALL quadrupeds walked with pronated forelimbs. ALL of them. AND the ancestors of Dinosaurs all did too, which implies that even the bipedal ones would have.
>>
>>4172913
>Paleo art

>dinosaurs

Kill your self
>>
>>4172913
Humans evolved from fish, so humans are fish. I prefer non-human fish, myself. They have prettier colors. Cladistics is for faggots.
>>
>>4174172
>They literally have with linked papers.
show us the quote then you lying sack of puke
>>
>>4169841
It's always the same couple of people sperging out in paleo threads. I'm always simultaneously entertained by the tard fights as well as irritated to hell since they always shit up perfectly good paleo threads.
>>
>>4174305
>>4169752
>>
>>4174369
that's not a quote retard
>>
>>4169811
>Yep sounds good see ya later
>>
>>4169685
nice gator
>>
Could a raptor use a gun?
>>
>>4175114
Should a raptor use a gun?
>>
>>4169685
I feel the urge to wrestle him.



Delete Post: [File Only] Style:
[Disable Mobile View / Use Desktop Site]

[Enable Mobile View / Use Mobile Site]

All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.