|
Post by schnautzr on Aug 31, 2009 22:46:05 GMT
Dude...the textbook for my operating systems class has dinosaurs on it...not just any dinosaurs, either...cool ones. It's got several I can't identify. Anyone know what they are? (I think I've asked this before...but I don't remember the answers) raptor = Dilophosaurus? hadrosaur = ? ovivorous theropod = Gallimimus? feathered theropod = Epidendrosaurus? tyrannosaur = CarnotaurusSee the cover on Amazon.com
|
|
|
Post by Dino589 on Aug 31, 2009 23:07:26 GMT
That's cool! So you're asking what's on the cover? I would say what you have so far is correct. The 'raptor' is definetly a Dilo. That theropod on the midde-right is probably an ornithomimid of sort sort. Its very vague, though I would have to assume its Gallimimus due to that fact is has more recognition than it's fellows. The feathered one looks more like Scansoriopteryx, however it could easily be Epidendrosaurus as well. The 'tyrannosaur' is definetly a Carnotaurus. As for that hadrosaur you havn't labeled, I can only think it is an Ouranosaurus due to the fact that no other hadrosaur or iguanodontian has that magnificant 'fin' on the back.
Edit: Your avatar seems to have gone kablooey or something.
|
|
|
Post by schnautzr on Aug 31, 2009 23:12:14 GMT
Did you zoom into the picture? It should be an image that's larger than your screen if you view it correctly...most browsers shrink the image and you have to click on it to zoom to actual size. I pulled a really hi-resolution image that I can make out even better than I can the actual book's cover.
Edit: Here's why it went kablooey:
|
|
|
Post by Dino589 on Aug 31, 2009 23:17:14 GMT
Yes, that is what I did. And ah, so that is why it's not showing up.
|
|
mantooth02
Researcher
Dieter the Saurornitholestes [F4:ManTooth02]
Posts: 134
|
Post by mantooth02 on Sept 1, 2009 16:58:30 GMT
Since when is dilophosaurus a "raptor"?
|
|
|
Post by schnautzr on Sept 1, 2009 19:56:27 GMT
Uh...wasn't really sure the best way to refer to it...I suppose "theropod" would have been more accurate, although less precise.
|
|