Time to stir up a really dumb debate in FRD as part of my research for skin-making >:3
So there I was, lying in bed thinking about gay dragons, when I realized. Tundras. Obelisks. Gaolers. They all are very obviously furred. But reptiles on our planet don't ever have fur.
Meanwhile, there is both a mammal who lays eggs (platypus) and a mammal who is scaly (pangolin).
So it begs the question. Are these breeds even reptilian? Or are they mammals??
And if so, wouldn't that mean that other breeds with hair (e.g. Pearlcatchers) are also mammals? Have we been deceived in our false faith in supposed reptilians??
yes i'm aware that dragons need not fit under human taxonomical classifications. but also part of why I want to know is because I need to know what to use as a reference picture for drawing a skeleton for a FR dragon
Time to stir up a really dumb debate in FRD as part of my research for skin-making >:3
So there I was, lying in bed thinking about gay dragons, when I realized. Tundras. Obelisks. Gaolers. They all are very obviously furred. But reptiles on our planet don't ever have fur.
Meanwhile, there is both a mammal who lays eggs (platypus) and a mammal who is scaly (pangolin).
So it begs the question. Are these breeds even reptilian? Or are they mammals??
And if so, wouldn't that mean that other breeds with hair (e.g. Pearlcatchers) are also mammals? Have we been deceived in our false faith in supposed reptilians??
yes i'm aware that dragons need not fit under human taxonomical classifications. but also part of why I want to know is because I need to know what to use as a reference picture for drawing a skeleton for a FR dragon
Neither. Dragons were inspired by large bones found in fossil records by early civilizations, i. e., dinosaurs. Birds are dinosaurs. Kiwis have a two branched feather structure that looks like hair.
Dragons are birds.
Neither. Dragons were inspired by large bones found in fossil records by early civilizations, i. e., dinosaurs. Birds are dinosaurs. Kiwis have a two branched feather structure that looks like hair.
Dragons are birds.
I mean... in the spirit of dumb debate-
*dumps giant stack of books on the table* DINOSAURS!
There are fossils with proto-feathers, which can look quite fur-like, and debate over whether or not dinos were warm-blooded- well, the non-bird ones, anyways- so! Clearly dragons are just dinosaurs with extra steps!
(Being slightly less silly about things- the skeletons I use for references when drawing dragons vary by species, but I like monitor lizards for Bogs, pythons for Coatl (as well as birds), and big cats for most of the other breeds, if that helps?)
I mean... in the spirit of dumb debate-
*dumps giant stack of books on the table* DINOSAURS!
There are fossils with proto-feathers, which can look quite fur-like, and debate over whether or not dinos were warm-blooded- well, the non-bird ones, anyways- so! Clearly dragons are just dinosaurs with extra steps!
(Being slightly less silly about things- the skeletons I use for references when drawing dragons vary by species, but I like monitor lizards for Bogs, pythons for Coatl (as well as birds), and big cats for most of the other breeds, if that helps?)
|
|
She/Her, FR +0
No worms in my username-
R e n a i w o m
I like being pinged, but not mass ones.
I often process thoughts by writing... Trying to TL;DR more.
_______________________________
|
Hatchery
|
Neither. Mammals and reptiles all fall under tetrapoda- which has a limbs limit of 4 or less. Most flight rising dragons have six limbs.
Also, some reptiles do have integument! Not fur, currently, but birds are a reptile and they do have feathers.
Pterosaurs also had integument, though this was actually somewhat more fur-like than feather-like. These pycnofibers probably wouldn’t have been very colorful.
What ACTUALLY constitutes a mammal, rather than fur or endothermy, is the ability to produce milk. Afaik no flight rising dragons produce milk.
So I’d say flight rising dragons are a lineage of hexapodal vertebrates with more similarities to reptiles than to mammals.
Neither. Mammals and reptiles all fall under tetrapoda- which has a limbs limit of 4 or less. Most flight rising dragons have six limbs.
Also, some reptiles do have integument! Not fur, currently, but birds are a reptile and they do have feathers.
Pterosaurs also had integument, though this was actually somewhat more fur-like than feather-like. These pycnofibers probably wouldn’t have been very colorful.
What ACTUALLY constitutes a mammal, rather than fur or endothermy, is the ability to produce milk. Afaik no flight rising dragons produce milk.
So I’d say flight rising dragons are a lineage of hexapodal vertebrates with more similarities to reptiles than to mammals.
[quote name="retrodetective" date="2024-03-24 21:34:43" ]
Neither. Dragons were inspired by large bones found in fossil records by early civilizations, i. e., dinosaurs. Birds are dinosaurs. Kiwis have a two branched feather structure that looks like hair.
Dragons are birds.
[/quote]
me forgetting the existence of kiwis. this is so sad
ty though!! I'll take that over mammals tbh lol
retrodetective wrote on 2024-03-24 21:34:43:
Neither. Dragons were inspired by large bones found in fossil records by early civilizations, i. e., dinosaurs. Birds are dinosaurs. Kiwis have a two branched feather structure that looks like hair.
Dragons are birds.
me forgetting the existence of kiwis. this is so sad
ty though!! I'll take that over mammals tbh lol
oh dang I didn't get to be met with actual non-meme scientific answers so quickly lol thanks yall
oh dang I didn't get to be met with actual non-meme scientific answers so quickly lol thanks yall
dragons are wholly a separate class of life because they are created directly by a god and haven't been subjected to the same evolutionary pressures that created sornithian life. i mean that in the fact that they did not evolve from any prior life, they're still subjected to evolutionary pressures considering moderns are the current descendants of older species. ancients aren't their ancestors and this is going to get weird the moment we get the light ancient (its assumed they'll be the breed created after imperials to avoid a retcon).
dragons are wholly a separate class of life because they are created directly by a god and haven't been subjected to the same evolutionary pressures that created sornithian life. i mean that in the fact that they did not evolve from any prior life, they're still subjected to evolutionary pressures considering moderns are the current descendants of older species. ancients aren't their ancestors and this is going to get weird the moment we get the light ancient (its assumed they'll be the breed created after imperials to avoid a retcon).
First, reptillia is a bit of a broken clade at this point - it's impossible to make a group of related animals that includes crocodiles, turtles, and lizards that doesn't include birds - and then when you consider the descent of synapsids and diapsids and "mammal like reptiles" in the fossil record like Dimetrodon and Andrewsarchus, you can't even be sure that mammals aren't reptiles anymore. Like, hair and feathers are both derivative of the structures that form scales, just specialized into different structures. The original concept of reptile has kind of broken down on the genetic/ancestry level, and only works on expressed characteristics.
But also, Sornieth isn't Earth, so none of the life there is going to have a shared descent line with anything on Earth. Maybe they're comparable in physical traits because it turns out that spines feet and teeth are pretty solid choices for dealing with the basic physical laws, but putting them into the same categories as we do with Earth life would be misleading - because genetically they're gonna be completely unique animals with their own ancestry and traits.
But in short, it really depends on how you define mammal/reptile - modern understanding of phylogeny kind of renders the distinction moot, especially when applied to Non-earth organisms. So they're neither mammal nor reptile but a secret third thing, which is called Dragons.
First, reptillia is a bit of a broken clade at this point - it's impossible to make a group of related animals that includes crocodiles, turtles, and lizards that doesn't include birds - and then when you consider the descent of synapsids and diapsids and "mammal like reptiles" in the fossil record like Dimetrodon and Andrewsarchus, you can't even be sure that mammals aren't reptiles anymore. Like, hair and feathers are both derivative of the structures that form scales, just specialized into different structures. The original concept of reptile has kind of broken down on the genetic/ancestry level, and only works on expressed characteristics.
But also, Sornieth isn't Earth, so none of the life there is going to have a shared descent line with anything on Earth. Maybe they're comparable in physical traits because it turns out that spines feet and teeth are pretty solid choices for dealing with the basic physical laws, but putting them into the same categories as we do with Earth life would be misleading - because genetically they're gonna be completely unique animals with their own ancestry and traits.
But in short, it really depends on how you define mammal/reptile - modern understanding of phylogeny kind of renders the distinction moot, especially when applied to Non-earth organisms. So they're neither mammal nor reptile but a secret third thing, which is called Dragons.
Dear god....... @Natron @Requacy <-- Gotta ping these guys cuz we've talked about this before!!
In my mind, dragons best match gorgonopsian or therocephalian therapsids VISUALLY... but like also completely different because they have wings lol. So I guess more reptilian-mammalian of course, but since they're all dragons, they've got to be related no matter how diverse they are
Titanophoneus v
[img]https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/6/63/Titanophoneus_chart2_DB15.jpg/1920px-Titanophoneus_chart2_DB15.jpg[/img]
Alopecognathus v
[img]https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/8/84/Alopecognathus_angusticeps_DB.jpg[/img]
Dear god....... @
Natron @
Requacy <-- Gotta ping these guys cuz we've talked about this before!!
In my mind, dragons best match gorgonopsian or therocephalian therapsids VISUALLY... but like also completely different because they have wings lol. So I guess more reptilian-mammalian of course, but since they're all dragons, they've got to be related no matter how diverse they are
Titanophoneus v
Alopecognathus v
