Life On Our Planet

[Infinity Blade]

Sept 12, 2023 6:31:47 GMT 5 Exalt said:

Are there any particular animals, time points, or locations that you would want to see in this, or in a paleodoc in general?

For a paleodoc in general I’d like to see:

- Texas Red Beds explored in more detail (so not just Dimetrodon and Edaphosaurus, but also Diadectes, Ophiacodon, Platyhystrix, etc.)

- Tapinocephalus Assemblage Zone (Moschops, Anteosaurus, Jonkeria, Tapinocephalus, etc.)

- Kayenta Formation (Dilophosaurus, Sarahsaurus, Scutellosaurus, etc.)

- Wessex Formation (Iguanodon, Neovenator, Riparovenator, Ceratosuchops, Eotyrannus, etc.)

- Rattlesnake Assemblage of the John Day Fossil Beds (Indarctos oregonensis, Machairodus lahayishupup, Teleoceras, Hemiauchenia, etc.)

- Pleistocene Malta & Sicily (Leithia, Palaeoloxodon falconeri, Hippopotamus pentlandi, Cygnus falconeri, etc.)

[Exalt]

I've not heard of the vast majority of these things, so they're certainly hard to argue with.

I'm very curious to learn how the name, "Rattlesnake assemblage", came to be.

[Infinity Blade]

Rock formations are apparently often named for some feature of the geographic region they’re in. So I’m assuming the name comes from the fact that there are actual rattlesnakes living in there. Enough so that the NPS website warns visitors of their presence in the John Day Fossil Beds.

www.nps.gov/joda/planyourvisit/safety.htm#:~:text=Snakes,rattlesnake%20and%20the%20prairie%20rattlesnake.

[Exalt]

BTW, do you believe that Cygnus Falconeri could fly, or not? It seems to be a subject of debate.

[Infinity Blade]

Sept 15, 2023 5:56:49 GMT 5 Exalt said:

BTW, do you believe that Cygnus Falconeri could fly, or not? It seems to be a subject of debate.

I see no reason to doubt that it had limited to no flight ability. One scientist who studied its remains in the 80s thought it likely had little to no ability to fly (Northcote, 1982). When she studied a different extinct Maltese swan species (C. equitum) later on, she said there was no evidence for flightlessness in that one (Northcote, 1988), unlike C. falconeri, so I assume that she was able to distinguish between a good and bad/non-flier. The fact that there were no large predators on Malta at the time would be consistent with this.

Also, this isn't *definitive* proof of flightlessness, but there's some undescribed material from C. falconeri that indicate it had small carpal knobs (Pavia et al., 2017). While flying birds with spurs or knobs on their wings do exist (e.g. spur-winged goose), these weapons are more costly in flight than doing without (Menezes & Palaoro, 2022). There were also other extinct birds that are thought flat-out to have been flightless with specialized weapons on their wings and feet (e.g. Xenicibis, Rodrigues solitaire, Garganornis, Cnemiornis). So the fact that C. falconeri had these too makes me want to lean further towards it being a poor or non-flier, using its wings more for fighting than flying.

[Exalt]

I almost made a joke about this being a world whee swans are bigger than elephants, but the elephant in question probably still weighed a lot more, didn't it?

EDIT: Oh god, if pygmy elephants and/or mammoths were still alive, people would totally try to get one as a pet, wouldn't they?

[Infinity Blade]

Sept 15, 2023 7:59:29 GMT 5 Exalt said:

I almost made a joke about this being a world whee swans are bigger than elephants, but the elephant in question probably still weighed a lot more, didn't it?

EDIT: Oh god, if pygmy elephants and/or mammoths were still alive, people would totally try to get one as a pet, wouldn't they?

Elephant definitely weighed a lot more. But it's still fun to see art of the swan standing up to it or driving the elephant away.

Could you imagine some fool trying to keep a dwarf elephant as a pet or touching it at a roadside zoo and getting mowed over for their troubles?

[Exalt]

Well, a few months ago we saw a T.rex calculate risk and decide to leave the Quatzalcoatlus be. Granted, there were two of them, but anything that can fly must be far smaller than T.rex, even with how derived the Azhdarchid body plan is.

[Exalt]

Oh yeah, minor correction: I said before that if each episode is an hour long, LOOP would be "longer than the entirety of Walking with."

I goofed there. I meant the "Trilogy of Life." I forgot about Cavemen and I wasn't counting the spin-offs or Nigel Marven stuff. I think that you all knew what I meant, but I have to correct myself.

[Infinity Blade]

Official trailer

[dinosauria101]

Sept 25, 2023 23:56:53 GMT 5 Infinity Blade said:

Official trailer

This takes the words out of my mouth just as much as the teaser. Breathtaking.

[Exalt]

I just swooped in to post it, but of course, I was beaten. I was excited to see the glyptodonts. Was the footage of modern animals for dramatic effect, I wonder? Or maybe episode 8 will have extant species alongside the comparatively recently extinct ones.

Those cave lions may not know what is good for them...

Any thoughts on how the species look so far? Besides the white cave lions and long Dunk.

[Infinity Blade]

Sept 26, 2023 3:49:42 GMT 5 Exalt said:

I just swooped in to post it, but of course, I was beaten. I was excited to see the glyptodonts. Was the footage of modern animals for dramatic effect, I wonder? Or maybe episode 8 will have extant species alongside the comparatively recently extinct ones.

Those cave lions may not know what is good for them...

Any thoughts on how the species look so far? Besides the white cave lions and long Dunk.

Kind of disappointed by the Triceratops ngl. The Edmontosaurus look better and worse in some shots IMO, while the T. rex invariably looks pretty great.

[Exalt]

Sept 26, 2023 4:46:45 GMT 5 Infinity Blade said:

Sept 26, 2023 3:49:42 GMT 5 Exalt said:

I just swooped in to post it, but of course, I was beaten. I was excited to see the glyptodonts. Was the footage of modern animals for dramatic effect, I wonder? Or maybe episode 8 will have extant species alongside the comparatively recently extinct ones.

Those cave lions may not know what is good for them...

Any thoughts on how the species look so far? Besides the white cave lions and long Dunk.

Kind of disappointed by the Triceratops ngl. The Edmontosaurus look better and worse in some shots IMO, while the T. rex invariably looks pretty great.

What don't you like about the Triceratops?

[dinosauria101]

Why don't I comment with some words that haven't been taken from my mouth? Might as well elaborate as to why I believe this is the worthy Trilogy of Life successor: the trailer has completed the list of reasons why I think so.

Some of you may have seen in the Prehistoric Planet thread that I said it's not solely a comparable overall rating determining whether I think a documentary is a worthy successor to the Trilogy - apparently, and understandably, appearing contradictory to the weight given to entertainment in my reviews.
What I believe is needed, besides sufficient overall entertainment/rating, is:

1) An evolution-driven narrative
2) A sufficiently comprehensive depiction of said narrative - ie: a good deal of exploration into each time period 
3) A linear manner in which the episodes can be smoothly watched 
4) Long, comprehensive individual animal - or at least ecosystem - arcs
5) Excellent CGI

I think the best example of this to get the point across that all those are needed, is Prehistoric Park. As you will all find out when I write it those entertainment reviews (and probably figured out already), I rate it right up there with the Trilogy.
Yet I would say it falls short in the majority of the other categories needed:

1) The narrative is bringing back animals we have lost to extinction - that's most definitely not evolution-driven.
2) Obviously 2) is not applicable given the lack of 1)
3) Nigel chooses animals based on what the animals are instead of when they lived. An example of the discontinuity we get here is T. rex being brought back to begin the program, 4 episodes before Arthropleura.

Furthermore, it's not just that the narrative of Prehistoric Park doesn't fit in line with an evolution theme. It's so enormously different from existing palaeodocumentary narratives (except maybe Primeval's narrative) that in my opinion it sets the stage for worthy successors of it to be made the same way the Trilogy of Life did back in 1999-2005. 

But now that I've explained why a documentary would not make the cut, why don't I explain where I'm getting my impressions of LOOP making the cut - trailer and otherwise?

1) Obviously it checks this box, as was explicitly stated in the trailer.
2) Not explicit but gives a strong impression of checking this box given the variety of animals from a time period theropod mentioned.
3) Explicit from the introductory article.
4) Presumably the case given the hour long episodes.
5) Any of the videos confirm this.

theropod , given that those discussions in the PP thread about the worthy successor statement were our own, you might be interested to know what the criteria I have in mind is.