The Scientific Accuracy of Walking With Dinosaurs - Episode 1: New Blood
Video Statistics and Information
Channel: Ben G Thomas
Views: 1,388,632
Rating: undefined out of 5
Keywords: Biology, Science, Paleontology, Palaeontology, Dinosaurs, Animals, Nature, Wildlife, Ben, Thomas, Prehistory, Anatomy, Fossil, Bones, News, 7Daysofscience, Days, of, postosuchus, coelophysis, cynodont, thrinaxodon, placerias, lisowicia, dicynodont, peteinosaurus, plateosaurus, kenneth branagh, bbc, archosaur
Id: 7b2T6JXcjo4
Channel Id: undefined
Length: 22min 24sec (1344 seconds)
Published: Sun Nov 03 2019
Please note that this website is currently a work in progress! Lots of interesting data and statistics to come.
Very cool video. I'm watching now.
I didn't know that Coelophysis was strikingly dimorphic, but I'm a bit cautious, so I'm curious how this was determined? There is a common trap to group robust/bigger specimens as male and gracile/smaller specimens as female. This has a tendency to exaggerate dimorphism. (This is a huge problem in paleo anthropology.) Did they have good evidence that the robust specimens were male before they grouped them as male?
Keep in mind this came out years ago and was based on the current understanding of this animal plus with some creative liberty to make the animals seem more alive.
I've been following Ben G Thomas for a while now, and I'm impressed by the quality of his videos. YouTube videos is my main source of palaeontologic knowledge as I'm too unfamiliar with the scientific words used in official papers.
And even though he is quite critic about many of WWD's flaws, he also points out many times that some of them were found out after the show was made, and you can tell he has an immense love for the series. I think we all want a WWD remake, and "New Blood 2" would be incredible with 2019 knowledge. Though if you ask me, I would choose Ischigualasto Formation over Chinle, but that's just me :P.
You canβt really judge the scientific accuracy of something made 20 years ago with the knowledge we had 20 years ago. It was accurate to our scientific knowledge at the time (excluding maybe feathers on theropods, thatβs been floating around for a long, long time), of course itβs going to be wildly inaccurate now.
Tbf, BBC did Planet Dinosaur after this which tried harder to be more scientific based.
I was really put off by the scene in which Cynodonts eat their young to escape the Coelophysis.
How did we know Cynodonts would do such a behavior? What evidence do we have for it?
Anyone else angry at the episode's depiction of dinosaurs outcompeting everything else? Even in 1999 this was being questioned.