https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-025-09167-9
>Here we present Mirasaura grauvogeli, a small-sized diapsid from the Middle Triassic epoch (about 247million years ago) with a distinctive crest formed by elongate integumentary appendages extending serially along its back, similar to those of the poorly understood Triassic reptile Longisquama
>Despite its superficially bird-like skull, Mirasaura is not closely related to avemetatarsalians but instead belongs to the exclusively Triassic reptilian clade Drepanosauromorpha
>Melanosomes preserved in its integumentary appendages are consistent in geometry with melanosomes of feathers but not those of reptilian skin or mammalian hair
>Nevertheless, the morphology of the integumentary appendages and phylogenetic placement of Mirasaura indicate that they are not structurally homologous to feathers or other integumentary appendages in living amniotes
Thoughts?

>>5021388 (OP)
>Despite its superficially bird-like skull, Mirasaura is not closely related to avemetatarsalians but instead belongs to the exclusively Triassic reptilian clade Drepanosauromorpha
>Melanosomes preserved in its integumentary appendages are consistent in geometry with melanosomes of feathers but not those of reptilian skin or mammalian hair
>Nevertheless, the morphology of the integumentary appendages and phylogenetic placement of Mirasaura indicate that they are not structurally homologous to feathers or other integumentary appendages in living amniotes

hmmm... they sure are trying to convince us that they're not related to birds. What reason could they have to be so insistent?

>>5021394
>What reason could they have to be so insistent?
To dissuade retards like you from putting feathers on it

>>5021388 (OP)
Well, the day I feared has finally arrived. (((Westerners))) are now openly doctoring fossils just as blatantly as the Chinese. I'm just going to put aside the fact that just looking at the thing it looks fake. The fact is Longisquama does not have these features and the plant (probably a fern) it is associated with literally already has its own name (Mesenteriophyllum kotschnevii) and is found in the same formation not associated with the reptile.

Paleontology is now officially dead. And as we all predicted, it was feather fags and Bob Bakker that killed it. Thanks, CIA.

Any further papers written on paleontology can now be considered fanfiction.

>>5021440
Also, and this is a pretty important detail I forgot to mention, Longisquama is not a Drepanosaur. It's probably a Pterosauromorph. So the approximately 300 authors of this paper think this is 2010 and they can just pass off open bullshit as science when pretty much everyone is skeptical now. They want people to believe that two totally unrelated groups of reptiles evolve the exact same structure during the Triassic.

>>5021450
>They want people to believe that two totally unrelated groups of reptiles evolve the exact same structure
edaphosaurus and dimetrodon would like a word

>>5021440
Literally how dumb are you? That got discarded all the way back in 2012.
>Buchwitz & Voigt (2012) argue that the structures of Longisquama are not plant remains, because all of the structures except for the last in the holotype PIN 2584/4 are arranged regularly, and that they are not preserved as carbon films, the usual mode of preservation for plants in the Madygen Formation.

>>5021440
>Mesenteriophyllum kotschnevii
Never mind the fact Longisquama’s spines are connected to the vertebrae or that Mesenteriophyllum sp. don’t have prominent horizontal veins
>>5021450
>It's probably a Pterosauromorph
I didn’t know David Peters was on /an/
>when pretty much everyone is skeptical now
It’s just you. Your imaginary friends don’t count

ANY FURTHER PAPERS WRITTEN ON PALEONTOLOGY CAN NOW BE CONSIDERED FANFICTION.

PERIOD.

That's it. That's the end of the discussion. You got your way, you turn to the entire field into a joke filled with lies and anti-science. It's dead now. Us actual paleontologists will now be moving on without you fake assholes addicted to pop culture. No you're not allowed back in. Make all the stupid movie monster art you want. This is over now.

paleontology has fallen
billions must be fossilized
*pushes big red button*

>>5021644
You can put as many capital letters as you wish, doesn't change the fact you're schizo-ing out.

>>5021644
If a paper came out showing that Spinosaurus had normal legs, T. rex didn’t have lips or Utahraptor had no feathers you would be frothing at the mouth though

>>5021644
>Us actual paleontologists
You've promoted yourself pretty high up the ladder from the days when uncle bob fired you from your museum janitor job.

we should talk anatomy some time, I have a feeling you still don't know shit about the topic.

>>5021644
>>5021666
Look guys it’s a mental illness showdown

>>5021632
>I didn’t know David Peters was on /an/
I'm rather convinced he is paleoschizo

>>5021697
Its the same guy having a DID episode

He thinks he’s random people. I bet its the same schizo that larps as people from /dog/.

>Cool new discovery
>REE THIS IS A CIA PSYOP PALEONTOLOGY IS FAKE! PALM FRONDS! *begins arguing with self*
One day this guy will kill himself

There's also a Longuisquama that doesn't have any fern fronds attached. It's called Kyrgyzsaurus, so there goes that bullshit.

>>5021882
>Lizard with big decorative scale-derived structure has relative without big decorative scale-derived structure
your need for everyone to be wrong, to an absurd degree ("all paleontology is fake and everyone is in on it, it's le CIA") and for yourself to be right is an actual mental disorder

and by actual i mean it fits in with autism, delirium, and mental retardation

>>5021882
the remains:

>>5021856
Retards don't kill themselves.
They lack the self-awareness to be embarrassed

>>5021885
>>5021886
Kyrgyzsaurus is a true Drepanosaurid, Longisquama is more basal. But even if we assume they’re the same thing that doesn’t rule out the back spines. They could be sexually dimorphic like the sail of a basilisk for all you know