>>5098966
Nah they 100% had lips, get over it lil JPfag kek
>10/10 video
>10/10
LMAOOO sure thing bud

if trex had no lips, how did I make out with one

>>5098973
That was his pussy lips

>>5098967
JP dinos had lips. The raptors and dilo even moved their lips when they snarled.

this only makes sense if you believe that they had their jaws smashed close so tightly to point they would’ve been damaging their oral tissue inside the mouth.

>>5099031
Explain the indentations at the roof of the mouth if they didn't do this.

I am on the lips side of the debate but i hate when people act as if lips on theropods are a proven fact and not a hypothesis. People really need to learn the distinction between those two terms.

>>5098966
Impossible, animals can't have exposed teeth or else they would break >>5094297

>>5099035
deformity that occurs during fossilization. Stan in particular has his teeth falling out exposing the roots and his overbite isn't natural, his left and right mandible are two different sizes. the indentations were made when the skull got compressed.

>>5099039
correct, teeth are perfectly fine being exposed to the elements. but the reason why lips exist is to keep the oral cavity and everything beyond it moist and free of infection. that latter part is important because if your wondering how crocodiles get around not having lips to keep their mouths moist while also staying out of the water for extended periods of time like during aestivation? they have a palatal valve, that semi aquatic adaptation also allows them to seal their throat to prevent their insides from being exposed to the elements. so they can allow their gums and tongue to dry out without a worry in world. this also brings up a interesting question on whether or not any dinosaurs had this adaptation? spinosaurids could be a candidate.

>>5099128
Why can't faggots explain things like this instead of making up shit that can be disproven by looking at a cat?

File: Charles Knight.jpg (748.3 KB)

748.3 KB JPG

>>5099038
I was on the lips side until the video in OP.
I think it's silly that the lips side treats lips as modern and accurate and no lips as outdated, when a lot of outdated paleoart depicts dinosaurs with lips since they were just seen as big lizards. Ironically now that we know how different they were from lizards, lizard features are getting brought back.

>>5099128
If T. rex closes it's jaws tight enough to where it had indents from it's bottom teeth on the roof of it's mouth, then would it even need lips to keep their oral cavity moist?

File: IMG_0293.png (86.9 KB)

86.9 KB PNG

>>5099143
see >>5099091 and give this a read.
https://qilong.wordpress.com/2014/03/17/the-emaciated-tyrannosaur-a-reply-to-ford-1997/
stans skull is very well preserved but not perfect, it even has two holes punched in the front of its mouth. this simplified cross section shows a normal skull compared to compressed and deformed skulls. maybe rex and other long toothed theropods could've had the tips of their teeth poking out of their lips like various fanged animals but who knows.

>>5099132
it’s called effort posting and it requires anons to actually watch the video, ask themselves questions like how do crocodiles stay on land without lips, and doing the bare minimum of research to answer said question.

>>5099128
How do birds deal with this problem? Not all species have tight fitting bills.

>>5099159
honestly after looking at several different kinds of birds it seems like the vast majority of birds do have tight fitting beaks, even crossbills have tight fitting beaks. the only exceptions seem to be hornbills which seem to naturally wear the inside front part of their beak down since they use it for climbing, and large macaws which also wear their beaks down from climbing, manipulating objects, and having big bite forces. macaws do have dry mouths but that’s more so of a manipulation adaptation since they use their boned tongue as a finger to help manipulate the hard food they eat.

>>5099239
Macaw tongues are fucking creepy

File: The Emaciated Tyrannosaur – a Reply to Ford 1997.png (91.5 KB)

91.5 KB PNG

>>5099151
Your illustration seems to neglect the point in the video mentioned at 8:11 - 9:05. Stan had teeth growing out from beneath his teeth, thus pushing them out further.

>>5099302
That is true, so it definitely could’ve been possible that *if* T.Rex did have lips a various number of teeth could’ve been sticking out as they were getting replaced then. But I still don’t think I’m convinced that T.Rex could close its jaws so tightly to the point lips couldn’t have room to exist.

>>5099358
>I still don’t think I’m convinced that T.Rex could close its jaws so tightly to the point lips couldn’t have room to exist.
almost half of known T. rex teeth have wear all along the sides where the top and bottom teeth rubbed against each other.

there wasn't any space between the teeth for lips. The teeth touched rubbed against each other

>>5099359
>The teeth touched rubbed against each other
Do you think that was painful?

>>5099359
in the video Peter says the exact opposite, if the teeth rubbed together then we would see wear inside of the maxillary and outside of the dentary but instead he shows the teeth have the opposite condition where the maxillary has wear on the outside and the dentary has wear on the inside. he argues that this from tooth on bone wear that comes from the dentary teeth coming into contact with the upper palate but the way I see it is that this tooth wear is simply from feeding.

>>5099369
They were big dinos

File: Screenshot_2026-02-07-17-52-16-98_e4424258c8b8649f6e67d283a50a2cbc.jpg (263.1 KB)

263.1 KB JPG

>>5099358
>>5099143
What about a middle ground approach where they had partial lips that still left the lower half of the teeth visible (pic related).

One of the main reasons I doubt the validity of lips is the amount of face biting these animals engaged in. We know that T Rex engaged in intra species fighting very often with the face being the main target. Lips just seem like a liability that would leave an infected wound if bitten off

>>5099424
>middle ground approach
So, Jurassic Park was right all along?

>>5099476
There is a video of a paleontologist talking about this. He explains how design wise, the JP T Rex is fairly accurate, unlike the velociraptors and the dilophosaurus.
https://youtu.be/XyKbB73HExE?si=3k-f0__zU67nP3Bt
https://youtu.be/2EecNnBbgXA?si=8LukIsbFs6nqvJr5

>>5099546
For the trillionth time, the Jurassic Park compies, dilophosaurus, and velociraptors are intentionally inaccurate. They knew what they were doing. Both Crichton and Spielberg knew what they were doing. It's not an accident, it's not ignorance. It serves a narrative point. The entire moral of Jurassic Park is that mankind does not know what to expect from Nature and is not in control of it. It's also why the carnotaurus can change colors like a squid.

>>5099574
None of those videos are talking about the compies, dilophosaurus or velociraptors

>>5099574
Are the compies really inaccurate for the time? they look pretty standard 90's tiny theropods

File: Manusuchus commission novel accurate Jurassic Park Velociraptor.png (1.9 MB)

1.9 MB PNG

>>5099574
Crichton's animals are a bit puzzling in a few places, though. For example he based the idea of Deinonychus being a species of Velociraptor on Gregory S. Paul, when Paul was drawing feathered raptors at the time. I think it would have better served the narrative point of nature being unexpected to have made the raptors feathered.
Also, both the T. rex and Velociraptors in his novel have forked tongues like lizards; the raptors flick theirs to taste the air on two occasions.

>>5099608
To be fair to him, feathered raptors were only a suggestion back then

>>5099609
They were less of a suggestion than Deinonychus' genus being changed to Velociraptor, yet Crichton still went with that.

>>5098966
>using Varanids as a comparison is bad because they’re so distantly related
>here are some examples of mammals with exposed teeth to support our idea
Holy fuck the retardation. Paleontologists really are manchildren with the same style of biases as paleoschizo

>>5099613
The mammals were used to show that exposed teeth don't get damaged.

>>5099618
They do get damaged though. Also shit like elephants have ivory which is more pliable and less likely to break or crack than. The argument that Varanids are a bad comparison because they’re unrelated is even more retarded because it’s not based on phylogenetic distance to begin with, it’s a physiological comparison

>>5099618
>exposed teeth don't get damaged
They do. That’s why most mammal tusks grow continuously. Elephants are a particularly good example because their favoured tusk gets worm down more

>>5099600
They have a poisonous bite and it's an important part of the narrative of scientists fucking around and finding out in the book. Same with the Dilophosaurus spitting. The fucking raptors could bite through steel. It's kind of amazing how often this retarded "conversation" (reddit attention seeking behavior) comes up from people who've never read nor understand the book.

>>5099608
Crichton and likely Spielberg also realized that feathers are for trannies and since they wanted the majority of movie-goers to give them money, instead of an insanely vocal clique of outsourced glowniggers, they made the right call.

Dinosaurs don't have feathers. Hoaxes aren't Dinosaurs and neither are birds.

>>5099620
And here's where this "debate" always breaks down and all the retards ignorant of comparative anatomy and paleontology (most "people", including most "paleontologists") expose themselves for the fucking incompetent ignoramuses they are. Elephants without enamel on their tusks is a new evolutionary trait and for some reason seems to track with the cooling of the planet at the beginning of the Pleistocene Ice Age. Multiple Elephant families had enameled tusks just fine for millions of years.

>>5099627
That's probably because people usually talk about the movie (where the only jarring one is the dilo)

>>5099628
Just ignore him; it's paleoschizo.

>Elephants without enamel on their tusks is a new evolutionary trait and for some reason seems to track with the cooling of the planet at the beginning of the Pleistocene Ice Age
What? Proboscideans had dentine coated tusks by at least the Oligocene

>>5098966
Shocked it took you this long to make a thread about this video. I’m disappointed
>>5099636
>paleoschizo fails to do a 2 minute google search
What else did you expect from him

>>5099637
I'm actually not paleoschizo; I was waiting expecting him to be the one to make a thread about this video, too, but I suppose Larson's arguments are too scientifically sound and not schizophrenic enough for him to use. Or maybe it didn't show up in his YouTube recommendations.

>>5099574
>It serves a narrative point. The entire moral of Jurassic Park is that mankind does not know what to expect from Nature and is not in control of it.
It's also worth noting that the dinosauars in JP aren't considered authentic even within the story itself, on account of being chimeras made with DNA from various other organisms: i've never watched the film so don't know if this scene made it in, but in the book this is explicitly pointed out, iirc with Wu proposing to Hammond that since the dinosaurs aren't perfectly "realistic" anyway, the park could be more commercially successful if they're modified to better reflect normies' preconceptions of what the dinosaurs will be like.

>>5099623
>They do. That’s why most mammal tusks grow continuously.
Dinosaurs continuously replace their teeth.
Also, the issue isn't just wear but that their teeth will become unusable or something due to the damage.

>>5099635
I have to say it's very funny how he went on an autistic rant about Jurassic Park just because someone mentioned some aspects of the T. rex are correct

>>5099678
How the fuck have you not watched the movie? are you 10?

>>5098966
Yeah I’m not convinced at all. Like what was said before this reeks of the same kind of bias as Horner really wanting T. rex to be a scavenger or Longrich’s whale mosasaurs. Paleontologists are human and usually autistic so it’s not a surprise they get attached to an idea

>>5099627
>Elephants without enamel on their tusks is a new evolutionary trait
Ivory tusks were a thing before true elephants even existed

>>5099699
I never got to watch many movies growing up, and as an adult I never really got around to doing much catching up

I think that people are desperate to give dinosaurs lips because there's a modern trend of trying to actively remove anything that might make them look "to cool" because it makes them feel more intelligent to do so and that somehow making them look lame means you're viewing them as real animals instead of movie monsters because you're just so enlightened

>>5099734
>stop demasculating my dead lizards

>>5099735
I also dislike that I can't make this argument without sounding like a GRRRR FEATHERS ARE WOKE retard
You can swing too far in both directions

>>5099734
The whole movie monster thing is blown way out of proportion to begin with

>>5099737
you're just so enlightened
you sit a fence as though it were a penis

>>5099746
Why do retards here call being reasonable fencesitting?

>>5099751
people are fed a nonstop deluge of media telling you that you are either on the right team or the wrong team, to the point of demonizing the middle ground
retards are much more affected by propaganda

>>5099709
Horner's scavenger T. rex was a piss take and I applaud him for it. Tyrannosaurus is for trannies. It's right in the name.

>>5099711
Go ahead and name them please.

>>5099777
It seems he has experience with denying that someone's a predator

>>5099778
Gomphotheres and Deinotheres

>>5099627
>Crichton and likely Spielberg also realized that feathers are for trannies and since they wanted the majority of movie-goers to give them money, instead of an insanely vocal clique of outsourced glowniggers
Yeah, big issue back in the 90s.

>>5099777
>Tyrannosaurus is for trannies
Trips confirm. Theropodlets mogged once again. BVLL anky reigns supreme

>>5098966
>source
>some guy on Jewtube
I will simply believe the opposite.

>>5099851
P-schiddy was an egg in his infant mother's ovary when that movie came out. His grandparents saw JP in theaters.

he has no idea what america was like in the 1990's because he wasn't alive.

>>5098984
Cloaca lips?

>>5099897
You haven't seen the recent papers showing that T-Rexes had a juicy pink pussy that they used to drain prey before eating it?

Is there any known animal whose maxilla has space for the mandible teeth to fit into, as they showed for the T. rex? Because, as some have said, it is quite possible that this is just a result of fossilization.

>>5101881
yeah

File: IMG_6832.png (624.8 KB)

624.8 KB PNG

>>5101881
Alligators, to a much lesser extent.

And every tyrannosaur has these depressions. It’s not taphonomic- looking at some papers would have saved you from repeating this question several times now.

File: porosus.jpg (188.5 KB)

188.5 KB JPG

>>5102139
>lower teeth stab directly through your skull and out the other side
Man it must suck to be a crocodile

File: Sulawesi babirusa (Babyrousa celebensis) at Jihlava Zoo in Jihlava, East Bohemia, Czech Republic.png (1.1 MB)

1.1 MB PNG

>>5102360
This is why it's so absurd to see some paleoartists bring up "comfort" as an argument for why dinosaurs had lips. Evolution doesn't give a fuck about "comfort," it cares about survival, and if being in discomfort it's entire life gives an animal a survival advantage, then it will evolve to be in discomfort it's entire life.

Babirusa's tusks can grow into it's skull and pierce it's brain, but it exists because it lives long enough to reproduce effectively. The disadvantages of having tusks that can pierce it's own skull are outweighed by the advantages, apparently.

>>5099734
>>5099737
>>5099743
Yeah I've noticed how some of these reddit types act like any depiction of a dinosaur that isn't it being drawn like a pudgy dog napping on the ground being derided as "awesomebro"

>>5104541
It's endlessly funny how those people claim they want dinosaurs to be portrayed "like hecking real animals" and then clearly know nothing about real animals

>>5099359
Why would lips require space between the top and bottom teeth? The inside of the top teeth would rub against the outside of the bottom teeth. If it had lips they would meet outside the top teeth

>>5098966
Are lips on T-Rex left or right wing?

>>5104586
Worse, the lips are “centrists” that are actually just right wing but pretend to be more enlightened and holier than thou