this is just great

OK so this blog may or may not involve the fact that i'm not actually what i try to be in this blog (a dinosaur scientist, meaning a dinosaur that talks science and try's to make sense) any way let's start the thing

Have you ever went trough an existential crisis? Well i am experiencing one right now due to some guys that can not mad up their mind on where my species falls in the phylogeny of dinosaurs. 

So I'm a Siats meekerorum, on short a dinosaur, and some of you guys can't really figure me out, in fact due to that i can't really figure me out either, because you guys are saying that my species is a species of, quote: "large neovenatorid theropod dinosaur", but than, you say that my species is close related with Megaraptor which has a dubious inclusion in the phylogeny of Tetanurae due to the fact that all of the megaraptorids have traits from both Coelurosauria and Carnosauria. 

And due to the fact that in most of the classifications my own species is included in Megarptora I don't really know what the heck I am, so can you help me?

PS: Please excuse the language or the fact that I failed to post in a long time on this blog

Why are the dinosaurs pointles?

To answer to this question will be simple, but I want to make you understand some of the term I'll use to say the answer, so first of all:

• THEY are not marker fossils, you will ask why, well to answer to that I will say what a marker fossil is, and it is a fossil that appear in a wide range of place and can be found easy on the terrain and most important it gives you the relative time and space when the rock in which was found has formed, OK you will say that the dinosaur didn't appeared from the beginning of the earth, true but still they had a life spawn as a species to great to be good markers.
• THEY are not great environment indicators, a great environment indicator is a fossil that can show you what changes happened and make it adapt to the new condition, either by speciation or by adding new traits, you will tell me that this is the case of dinosaurs, but no, actually they hadn't changed so much to make them a different species or give them a trait that can define them as good environmental markers

Well this are the main types of index fossils and dinosaurs are'n included in then the situation is approximatively the same for all the vertebrates or chordates, the only differences are some species of fishes and some early reptiles, as so as some early types of chordates.
So you will say that "OK so dinosaur and couple of other vertebrates are not good index fossils, but they are good at something though right?" unfortunately no, they leave great track fossils, and other type of fossils but this will only help you if you are a geologist and need to see the top of the bottom of a rock layer or if you are a evolution biologist and may show you the transformation that occur in the transition of species but no good for palaeontology because most of the palaeontologists study the formation of the time and because palaeontology is just a tool to correctly define some geological problems as oil traps or the extent of geological time.
And they are not a good building fossil to, the best fossils that are of this type are the molluscs and corals and in some case the sponges

Got annoyed buy stupid redditors

Recently I've made a reddit account and asked about why people are terrified of the terrorism problem and no by the nature, the answers that I received made me think about the hypocrisy that characterize mankind. They said that the nature is unpredictable and the efforts of stopping it are useless. Is it true?... I personally don't believe it cause the science say the exact opposite. S what is your opinion on this matter?Please answer here: https://www.reddit.com/r/AskReddit/comments/3cs5g7/why_every_one_so_afraid_of_terrorism_bun_no_of/

a great party friend you must see he's blog

my dear friends tis is the facebook page of one of my best friends calin the nuts: https://www.facebook.com/nebundupapovesti
and this is hi facebook account: https://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100009388763210

Why to revive extinct species and why we should not do this

 Some of you may had already know about the scientists that managed though out molecular biology to recreate dino snouts in chicken. Well even if I love the dinosaurs I think that some things are better left dead and I'm not saying this because of my religion, I'm saying this because even if genetic modification in other beings than human is let say accepted it still can have bad consequences.
 For example if we can clone all the animals from the ice age what environment could sustain them when we are destroying our ecosystems willingly and without remorse, think what this would cause:

1. lack of space needed to sustain the animals
2. ecological disasters
3. an open conflict with hunters and poachers which will force the scientists to make endless copies of the animals only for them to hunt an have trophies
4. open conflict with authorities because of the fact that some animals may escape from the special made areas of study

 This are just some of the problems that can occur from this kind of things.

 Anyway here are just two of the places were you can find infos about the subject
http://phys.org/news/2015-05-tweaking-beak-retracing-bird-dinosaur.html
http://www.livescience.com/50802-chicken-embryos-with-dinosaur-snouts-created.html

this is my other facebook page

https://www.facebook.com/MihaiEminescuMementoMori?ref=hl
use it carefuly

we have a facebook

this is the facebook page https://www.facebook.com/SiatsMeekerorum?ref=hl