720

I dunno, still might be aliens with this one. (mander.xyz)

submitted 1 year ago by fossilesque@mander.xyz to c/science_memes@mander.xyz

70 comments fedilink hide all child comments

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[-] baseless_discourse@mander.xyz 72 points 1 year ago

I remember someone mentioned online that the reconstruction of animals are more complicated than just tracing the bone line.

I am very interested if some experts are willing to tell us more.

[-] agent_flounder@lemmy.world 58 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Since none chimed in (in the past 6 minutes) , I, an idiot, will share what I think I know. When reconstructing the faces of people from a skull, either with clay or software, they model the various tissues--muscles, fat, skin, etc according to models based on samples. How they would do this for a creature that isn't very like any current living creature I don't know. It is probably educated guesswork?

I just read an article on this process for a neanderthal and in that particular instance they used data from humans since I guess it was close enough.

But, for example (referencing a recent meme) how do they know spinosaur had a sail and not a hump back and neck muscles like a buffalo?? Seriously though I'm sure they can tell which bones have attachment points, how much force they can withstand, etc.

[-] snooggums@kbin.social 46 points 1 year ago

Over the last few decades there have been massive improvements on telling which bones have attachment points for muscles and hints at how strong the muscles are likely to be, but it takes a long time to replace all of the existing artwork with newer and more accurate artwork.

Even with improvements to the muscle structure, any part of the body that has fatty buildup like breasts would be missed without soft tissues being preserved. I am fairly certain that a hippos nose and lip area wouldn't have enough detail to reconstruct accurately. Heck, tyrannosaurs most likely had lips to cover their teeth, but that is based on other animals with similar teeth all having lips to protect the teeth from dryness and rot that doesn't apply to crocodiles who live in a very wet environment.

[-] Hillock@kbin.social 17 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

As another idiot, there is a difference between tusks and teeth. They are different, tusks don't contain enamel for example and I think aliens could also determine this difference. It's rare for teeth to stick out like in the reconstruction.

They would also be able to determine that hippos can open their mouth extremely wide. Making it more likely for the long "fangs" to be at least partially covered and not exposed like the tusks of elephants.

[-] lugal@sopuli.xyz 17 points 1 year ago

Often, dinosaurs are depicted with mouths showing their tooth. This is debated and more and more scientists think they had closed mouths, like most animals today.

Other than that, the proposition of fat is very hard to reconstruct. Reconstructing a hippo you would have other mammals in mind and reconstructing dinosaurs, scientists take reptiles but they could as well take birds so this is a big question.

For context: I'm an idiot too