Prehistoric Prognostications 2014: The Final List

The masses have spoken, and here is the final collection of predictions for the year in paleontology to come. I'll recap those from the writers of LITC first:

Marc:
A new pterosaur fossil is unearthed that sports flamboyant, gigantic soft tissue crests all over its body, and is accompanied by a string of unossified baby skeletons. David Peters is therefore shown to be right all along, pterosaurs are declared lizards, ceremonial bonfires are held of the existing pterosaur literature, and riots break out in institutions across the globe. Mark Witton is forced to walk the streets of Portsmouth with a bell around his neck, flagellating himself with a whip.

Do I have to have a serious one? Oh, I don't know, definitive feathers are found on an animal further down the tyrannosauroid family tree. There you go.

Niroot:
I went and thought and came up with something considerably less silly than I had anticipated after all: soft tissue evidence for 'cheeks' in a hadrosaur, with implications thereby for other ornithischians.

Asher:
Feathered sauropod. If only because the bitching from anti-feather people will be truly glorious to watch if and when it happens.

Secondarily-flightless Azdarchid. It seems too obvious not to exist somewhere (probably an island animal, if it ever existed.) My guess is either a medium sized animal or a real giant, something larger than anything else in the ecosystem.

More Deinocheirus material would be nice. I suspect there's probably going to be some cool carcharodondosaur material as well--they seem to come out of the woodwork with some regularity every year, and it's always fun when they do.

Bruhathkaysaurus and Amphilicoelias. Full skeletons. Sprawled out in all their huge, brain breaking glory. Expect the apocalypse to occur shortly afterward, and the elder dinosaur gods to come back and take their revenge on the world of man.

A firming of the hypothesis that most protobirds had leg-wings. It seems to be pretty well accepted at this point, but it'd be nice to see it firmed up some more.

David:
I'm going to go against my urge to do something integument-related and predict a ceratopsid "mummy" with eggs intact.

...and now on to commenters. Some excellent ones in here. I hope we get as many as possible!

Paul Heaston:
I'm always hoping for a truly epic "frozen in time" battle. We have the famous Gobi combatants, the Acrocanthosaurus/Paluxysaurus(Pleurocoelus) trackway, and recently the more debatable Nanotyrannus/Triceratops thing. But I'd like to see a half-dozen Ceratosaurs swarming a brachiosaur or something. Or Therizinosaurus slapping a tarbosaur silly. Probably no chance of those two, but come ON scientists! Give us something!

Elijah Shandseight (who also posts predictions here):
Since the feathered sauropod has already been cited, there are other interesting critters that just await to be found: a new stegosaurid, a carnivorous silesaurid, a giant troodontid (there are many giant coelurosaurus around, and I wouldn't be surprised if there giant species in Troodontidae), a big psittacosaurid, an oviraptorosaur from South America, a Lambeosaurinae from Australia and a macropredatory ichthyosaur with short skull (there's already Thalattoarchon, but I mean something more like a Dakosaurus-mimicking genus).

Thomas Diehl:
Given that thyreophorans are still missing a major overhaul, I'll go with evidence that Stegosaurus' plates were covered in two fatty humps running the length of its body. Also, marine spinosaurid. Though given that I think the claws were for locomotion, pulling the animal forward in the mud, this might be somewhat unlikely if I'm right.

Craig Dylke:
Some evidence of definite omnivore Ceratopsians.

Henrique Niza:
I would say evidence of feather-like structures on neovenatorids.

Duane Nash:
Evidence of coprophagy in sauropodlets.

Hugh:
A mass burial site reveals that sauropods really did spend their lives floating around in rivers and shallow coastal waters, using their long legs to anchor themselves against the current/tide as they slept.
A more serious thing I'd like to see discovered: evidence that a small maniraptoran used sticks or thorns as tools to extract insects or small prey. (Not shaped or firehardened! Just poking implements as used by modern birds.)

Giraffatitan:
1. A new dinosaur belonging to an entirely new group (preferably some sort of carnivorous ornithischian)
2. Quills/Protofeathers on an ornithopod or thyreophoran.
3. A quilled/feathered primitive ornithodiran or even just archosaur (by that I mean I'd like to find at least some feathery integument on a primitive ornithodiran OR primitive archosaur if we're extra lucky).
4. A at least partially complete Spinosaurus (crosses fingers for 18(or more) meters in length).
5. A Jurassic Rauisuchian.
6. Some sort of Pterosaur mummy or at least good skin impressions.
7. New Amphicoelias material or some fossils from whatever made the Broome trackway.
8. A T. rex with a femur cracked open by a Triceratops beak.
9. Some new polar dinosaurs. (Especially contemporaries of Cryolophosaurus)
10. A stegosaurid or diplodocid in Mid-Late Cretaceous rocks. 11. A Megalania sized Tegu somewhere in South America or a giant varanid on Hateg.
12. A new Holtz' Dinosaurs or book in similar style! (preferably with illustrations by Luis Rey (not photomanipulated either, yuck), Doug Henderson, John Conway, and C.M. Kosemen.

20firebird:
1. Definite evidence of omnivorous ceratopsians.
2. More mummies! :D
3. More of little-known dinosaurs like Utahraptor and Amphicoelias fragillimus (for A. fragillimus it's more proof it existed in the first place).
4. A sauropod with quills or protofeathers.
5. A spinosaur or abelisaur with feathers.
6. More giant feathered dinosaurs in general.

Nick Porter:
Skull-mendous remains from an early eudromaeosaurid that isn't Deinonychus. Fingers crossed for a pre-Barremian example to shed some light on how the group evolved.
Good remains from an early definite neovenatorid.
New oxygen isotope findings reveal semi-aquatic lifestyle in a non-spinosaurid dinosaur, hopefully an ornithischian of some kind.
Unambiguous "missing link" between basal marginocephalians and pachycephalosaurs.

Talcott Starr:
I don't know if it's geologically possible for something like this to last for tens of millions of years, but I'm still holding out hope (and 2014 feels lucky to me) that someone will find a Pompeii-esque site that gives us casts of dinosaur feathers/skin/body shapes.
I'd also like to see the improbable discovery of a dinosaur from Ohio (so far as I can tell, the only way that could happen is if one managed to fall through a chasm into an aquifer).
Neither of those are really predictions, so much as dreams, but at least I didn't include time travel on the list.
That's for 2015.

Matthew Haynes:
More Anklyosaurus
Complete Spinosaurus
Fuzzy juvenile sauropod
Body imprints of neoceratopsians showing bristles
More attempts at de-extinction (fingers crossed)
North American spinosaurs
More Asian ceratopsids

Mark Robinson:
Better trackways and soft tissue preservation shows that dinosaurs from all major groups had webbed feet and were aquatic.
Evidence that the rate of radioactive decay for all elements was up to six magnitudes greater in the past. All prehistoric life is now estimated to be less than 6000 years old.
Feathers on anything other than a bird (definition varies conveniently) turn out to be collagen fibres after all.
Marc's already mentioned the two I would've said forrealz (altho' I would limit the pterosaur to a single fleshy cranial extension) so I will say definitive feathers in a sub-adult albertosaurine.

Luis Miguez:
Well, it's easy: More chinese diminutive birdie-things. Sure.

Matthew Inabinett:
Keep in mind these are just things I'd like to see that seem likely, not just what I'd like to see. That list is waaaaay too long:
1. definitive evidence of feathers on a coelophysiod
2. definitive evidence of complex feathers on an ornithischian
3. definitive evidence of feathers on a tyrannosaurine
4. fragmentary remains of a new giant (30+ m) sauropod
5. one or more new carcharodontosaurids
6. relatively complete remains of a 12-14 m span azhdarchid
7. more heterodontosaurids, maybe a carnivorous one
8. more bizarre palaeofauna from Madagascar
9. more (preferably really bizarre) palaeofauna from Antarctica
10. a giant (12+ m) abelisaurid
11. bizarre (very short-necked, very long necked, unusually large, unusually small, armoured, really weird-skulled, etc) diplodocoids
12. more relatively complete pachycephalosaur postcranial remains
13. a truly giant (20+ m) pliosaur, think WWD-proportions here
14. a giant (4+ m) compsognathid

Well, alright then! That will wrap up the prognostications for this year. Next December, we'll take another look at the list and see if any of these came true. Thanks for participating, and here's to a great 2014!

Forewarned is forearmed

Image courtesy of SimplyWallpaper.net

I was with Marc on that solemn journey to the 'Shiny Multiplex Enormodome' to see the Walking with Dinosaurs film. There is very little that I can add to his review, given that we are pretty much in exact agreement and Marc has already mentioned all the points he and I discussed in the post-movie debriefing. Nor do our opinions differ greatly from the near-universal verdict that it is, in effect, a stunning visual treat marred by inane dialogue.

Having gone to it with this already in mind, however, I didn't find that dialogue quite as intolerable as I had anticipated (though, make no mistake, I would have longed for its absence to begin with), a view shared by some reports, including those of Darren Naish and Gareth Monger. The latter found it easy enough to mentally 'switch off'. Like Marc, I even found Alex's narration surprisingly palatable in some parts, and perhaps that should have been the extent of the script, if it was felt necessary at all. The whole was fairly endurable enough until the fight between Patchi and his brother, Scowler, during which the exchange took an evisceratingly embarrassing turn in resembling a scene from a dreadful high school drama. The sequence, much like so many others, would have been entirely spared this indignity had it been speech-free. Even the arguably sillier visual jokes and slapstick would have worked organically and induced fewer groans if the silent storytelling had been left untouched. The soundtrack complaint extends to a degree to the music. My genuine enjoyment of the orchestral score was abruptly bridled by the sudden introduction of Barry White when Patchi first encounters Juniper amid a cloud of butterflies, for example. Incidentally, later in this sequence -- and quite after the Barry White had been dispensed with -- I was amused to recall David's mention of Cyrano de Bergerac as the pudgy young Patchi trotted back day after day to the waterfall in hopes of meeting the rosy Juniper again, but I digress...

 It might be superfluous of me to say more with regard to the beauty of the animals and the animation, but it is worth emphasizing once more. I refer you once again to Marc's description in lieu of my gushing further on the rendering of skin, scales, and feathers, or the palpably alive movement of flesh and muscle.

If the bathos between the sublime visuals and the ridiculous soundtrack is galling for dino-geeks, then, how much more so is it for the artists behind the creation? If it is true that the executive Pooh-Bahs bowed to the opinion of test screen audiences in the retroactive introduction of the script, then my heart is doubly heavy. My frustrations with the greater public's penchant for turning tea into soda are too great to mention and certainly too close to home in my own profession. Nobody can be at a loss to follow so simple a story, or to identify -- and identify with -- the characters, so well conceived and delineated in their designs. I wonder, were folks always so dense when they watched the numerous dialogue-free Pixar shorts? And what of Wall-E? Or what of Lotte Reiniger's The Adventures of Prince Achmed? The list goes on.

I conclude by reiterating Marc that 'the artistic and scientific talent behind this film do deserve our support'. The plain fact of the matter is that the hope of more such films being made in future does rest upon sales, and perhaps we may hope, however feebly, that the collective intelligent response to this film may bend a few ears of the powers-that-be. Thus forewarned, go and see this film, and hold fast to its merits.

Missing Kenneth Branagh

I never thought I'd miss Kenneth Branagh quite as much as I do now. Nevertheless, having solemnly journeyed to my local Shiny Multiplex Enormodome to see the Walking With Dinosaurs movie, it's the slightly over-earnest tones of thespian Kenny that I long for. For you see - and forgive me if you've heard this already - WWD 3D features dinosaurs that talk. And talk. And talk.

Talk v teeth. Image from here.

Apparently the victim of test screenings attended by morons and/or jittery studio heads, WWD 3D is, as every other review thus far has noted, a film spoiled by disastrous dire-logue. If only the apparently telepathic dino-speak were occasional, they might have got away with it. Alas, the pachyrhinosaur protagonists of the piece see fit to yammer away over absolutely everything. It's as if the writers are afraid that kids today are so psyched up on refined sugar and Moshi Monsters that they'll lose interest if so much as a minute passes without a character sounding off.

What's most galling about it, for us dino geeks, is that underneath the dialogue-by-machine and misplaced pop music, there is an absolutely stunning piece of palaeoart in motion. Make no mistake - these are far and away the most accurate dinosaurs yet to appear on film, and more than that they are a convincing presence in the world they inhabit. The backgrounds are live action, and yet the CG animals appear completely at home. They are also rendered with the utmost love down to the tiniest scaly (or feathery) detail, which is hardly surprising given the artistic talent involved. Animals only have to walk into frame for one to be struck by the realistic movement of muscles beneath skin, and when they bellow, their flesh strains and their guts shake beautifully. The feathered animals - and there are plenty of them, including dromaeosaurs and troodonts - are gorgeous, and easily the best yet seen on screen.

It's a pity, then, that the animals aren't allowed to simply be animals. As has been noted elsewhere, it's often dishearteningly obvious that the film was never intended to have such extensive dialogue. Of course, there is a very light level of anthropomorphism evident in the character design - real reptiles never have such expressive, mammalian eyes (with white sclerae and all) - but the animals nevertheless have a highly realistic appearance, and were all real-world contemporaries. Disney's Dinosaur this ain't, and a little artistic license is certainly forgiveable to sell the narrative to an audience with a built-in mammalian bias.

What's less forgiveable is the characters' need to narrate every aspect of their lives, as if children in the audience would be too stupid to figure out what's going on, or what the characters' motives are. I'm not known for being especially fond of children, but I feel the need to stick up for them here - they're really not that dumb. Furthermore, most child dinomaniacs want to see dinosaurs being dinosaurs - fighting and stomping and just looking grand - not chatting away like schoolkids. Even when protagonist Patchi goes nose-to-nose with his bullying brother Scowler - a perfect moment to let the audience revel in the spectacle - Scowler persists in chastising Patchi for "trying to steal his girl". Awful, cringeworthy stuff.

At various points, the creatures' constant chatter jars with what was obviously intended to be an animalistic response to a situation. When Littlefoot's mother dies in The Land Before Time, he is, as an anthropomorphised cartoon character with a human personality, expectedly distraught. When (spoilers) Patchi's father is killed by a tyrannosaur right in front of him, he and his brother appear to breezily brush it off within about five minutes. It doesn't make sense - but it would have done if the characters didn't speak, and were treated more like animals. Likewise for a stampede scene, in which the characters appear to blindly panic in contradiction of the dialogue - like animals would.

The simplistic plot would be a breeze to follow without the dialogue, and it's clear that this is what was originally intended. Take the speech away (save perhaps for John Leguizamo's surprisingly likeable narrator), and I have no doubt that a far more charming film would result. Tellingly, the audience's favourite moments at the screening I attended were completely dialogue-free (including an amusing trio of bickering azhdarchid pterosaurs).

There is much to savour in this film. Dinosaur enthusiasts will delight in the (all too brief) opportunities to gaze upon stunning vistas teeming with impeccably realised and researched prehistoric lifeforms. The dinosaurs are impressive, the landscapes are impressive - it's a visual treat. The artistic and scientific talent behind this film do deserve our support, and if it weren't for the moronic jabbering, I'd recommend it unreservedly. As things are, I'm crossing my fingers for a 'dialogue-free' option on the DVD. Or perhaps a replacement Kenneth Branagh track.

Prehistoric Prognostications 2014

Edmontosaurus with a fleshy "cock's comb." Tsintaosaurus given a proper crest. Deinocheirus triumphant. 2013 brought us plenty of surprises. Those unexpected discoveries are part of what makes paleontology so much fun to follow: find the right spot to excavate, and who knows what the rock will reveal?

Which gave me the idea to start a new annual series here at Love in the Time of Chasmosaurs: Prehistoric Prognostications. To kick off the predictions, the LITC crew will weigh in first.

Marc:
A new pterosaur fossil is unearthed that sports flamboyant, gigantic soft tissue crests all over its body, and is accompanied by a string of unossified baby skeletons. David Peters is therefore shown to be right all along, pterosaurs are declared lizards, ceremonial bonfires are held of the existing pterosaur literature, and riots break out in institutions across the globe. Mark Witton is forced to walk the streets of Portsmouth with a bell around his neck, flagellating himself with a whip.

Do I have to have a serious one? Oh, I don't know, definitive feathers are found on an animal further down the tyrannosauroid family tree. There you go.

Niroot:
I went and thought and came up with something considerably less silly than I had anticipated after all: soft tissue evidence for 'cheeks' in a hadrosaur, with implications thereby for other ornithischians.

Asher:
Feathered sauropod. If only because the bitching from anti-feather people will be truly glorious to watch if and when it happens.

Secondarily-flightless Azdarchid. It seems too obvious not to exist somewhere (probably an island animal, if it ever existed.) My guess is either a medium sized animal or a real giant, something larger than anything else in the ecosystem.

More Deinocheirus material would be nice. I suspect there's probably going to be some cool carcharodondosaur material as well--they seem to come out of the woodwork with some regularity every year, and it's always fun when they do.

Bruhathkaysaurus and Amphilicoelias. Full skeletons. Sprawled out in all their huge, brain breaking glory. Expect the apocalypse to occur shortly afterward, and the elder dinosaur gods to come back and take their revenge on the world of man.

A firming of the hypothesis that most protobirds had leg-wings. It seems to be pretty well accepted at this point, but it'd be nice to see it firmed up some more.

David:
I'm going to go against my urge to do something integument-related and predict a ceratopsid "mummy" with eggs intact.

So, in the comments, feel free to add to this list. Though we've stuck to Mesozoic dinosaurs, don't be bashful with predictions about other eras of Earth's history. I'll compile them all into a post for New Year's Eve, and we'll check in next year to see who has come closest to whatever new paleontological reality 2014 brings. Of course, paleontology's revelations are often "known" in the community due to the long delays common between discovery of fossils and their description. We'll just have to go by the honor system, I think. No cheating, if you know of something that will blow our minds, keep mum and see if any of the rest of us came within spitting distance.

Happy Holidays!

Sepia ink and gouache on recycled paper, 229 x 193mm.
Opening the image in a new tab for full viewing is recommended. :)
Further details can be found here.

This illustration was commissioned by the Science Faculty of the University of Alberta for their holiday card this year. It revisits an older Holiday Hadrosaur theme of mine, only with an Edmontosaurus rather than a Parasaurolophus this time, for obvious reasons. A Pachyrhinosaurus and a pair of Troodon round off the sympatric saurian cast. If you are familiar with my work, you may also recognise the recurring turbaned figure in one of the handlers.

In the wake of completing this illustration, the discovery that Edmontosaurus actually had a rooster-like fleshy comb (old news to every Chasmosaurs reader by now, I'm sure) was finally published. You may imagine how I felt. And there was poor Victoria Arbour, co-author of the paper and the very person instrumental in securing me this commission, unable to breathe a word of it to me whilst I was working on the drawing. I have expediently decided that my Edmontosaurus here is female (her name is Cybele). I can stick with that for now.

Happy holidays!