47:14 to he honest I never saw this as censorship, I feel like it’s more so that the model is so detailed into looking realistic that making it possible for that model to be torn apart and animated in a realistic way would be difficult, not to mention expensive

@BugsandBiology

6 ай бұрын

That’s very true as well. I’d rather “censored” gore than poorly rendered gore. Especially in a show like PhP, where any sub-par CGI sticks out like a sore thumb.

A few notes: Mosasaurus being referred to as twice the size of T-Rex is in reference to its mass, with the average T-Rex being about 8 tons or so, whereas the average Mosasaurus Hoffmannii of 15 meters or so would be more like 15 tons. It is roughly twice the size by that metric. In reference to being "arguably the greatest marine predators of all time", that's in reference to the mosasaur family, not Mosasaurus itself. And that is definitely a valid appraisal, it's not just as size matter, especially in light of the revelatory science they did that concluded Mosasaurus could accelerate to incredible speeds in a matter of seconds. Mosasaurus were without a shred of a doubt the most formidable predators of the cretaceous oceans at most trophic levels. Additionally, referring to for example Tarbosaurus individuals as a "Tarbosaur" is perfectly valid, because Tarbosaurus does not at all refer to a specific animal, it refers to a genus, and a genus may include a variety of species within it. Homo is a genus and to it belongs 13 species including Homo Erectus, Neanderthalensis and Sapiens. Plus, modern animals are in documentaries referred to by a sort of slang. Lion isn't a scientific term, they are the species Panthera Leo. Prehistoric animals don't have this, they just have the scientific names. Trying to remedy the issue of taxonomic confusion by referring to the genus like saying "Tarbosaurus" all the time instead of ever calling them "Tarbosaurs" makes about as much sense as being satisfied with referring to Lions in documentaries as "Panthera". What "panthera" are you talking about? Lions? Jaguars? Tigers? Leopards? They're all of the genus Panthera. One needs to accept that in order to actually get it taxonomically correct in a dinosaur documentary, you could never just call Tarbosaurus by its genus name, you would have to refer to the species name every single time. So should David Attenborough have called them "Tarbosaurus Bataar" every single time he mentions them by name? Obviously not, that would be beyond stilted and awkward. There isn't a real solution to this until extinct animals get named in the same way that extant ones do and so a taxonomic lack of specificity are gonna be inherent to prehistoric documentaries. Calling them "Tarbosaurs" instead of "Tarbosaurus" doesn't comparatively fail to convey any important information to the viewer and is thus perfectly valid. Which puts the similar X-fish thing into context, given that they already referred to them by the genus name and are basically using "X-fish" in the same way one would call Panthera Leo a "Lion". The point about speculation is valid in the way that all speculation is treated equally in the narration, however you cannot escape that this and documentaries like it will never be more than artistic renditions of the past, and since Prehistoric Planet is done in the style of the other Planet documentaries that David Attenborough does, I think speaking in this way is a valid trade-off between immersive filmmaking and scientific accuracy. The show ends every episode by referring you to the bonus featurettes talking about the science and speculation they do, they know what they are doing, which is why I believe this to be very deliberate. In my opinion, the show is made a better documentary by making this slight tradeoff because it makes it more engaging and entertaining and thus more capable of accomplishing its artistic goal of spiking and changing public interest in the topic without sacrificing too much accuracy.

@sohamshetty09

5 ай бұрын

The mosasaurs part also did not make sense in this video. No seriously. Just because mosasaurs was the largest aquatic predator does not mean it was not formidable. Mosasaurs was still powerful animals that fed on a variety of prey. They were highly intelligent animals that regularly fought other members of their kind and were surprisingly fast and agile. Unlike some predators like macropredatory whales, mosasaurs were well adapted to changing environments thanks to a higher reproductive rate. Mosasaurs may not have been as large, but made up for it with powerful jaws and impressive speed. A combination of size, speed and intelligence is what made them successful. There is no awesome bro moments here. I just hope bugs and biology doesn’t not keep that fact in mind as a similar line of thinking was there in loop.

@juanyusee8197

4 ай бұрын

I feel that's the benefit of having speculative behaviours in palaeo-nature documentaries such as Prehistoric Planet and Walking with... Trilogy over traditional paleodocs such as PaleoWorld, not only it better sells them as actual animals, but the ones in Prehistoric Planet actually encourages viewers out-of-the-box thinking to viewers based on modern animal behaviour, something paleodocs with the traditional format wouldn't be able to do.

That outro reminding us to appreciate the beauty and diversity of birds was beautifully wrought. I did not expect an "our prehistoric planet" to be thrown in there in such a way, and the elegance of the way it was performed was very praise-worthy.

@BugsandBiology

6 ай бұрын

Thanks! While I overall felt this video dragged on too much, I’ll admit I was quite happy with how the ending turned out.

You took pretty much every word out of my mouth. The only thing I slightly disagree on is the speculation being indistinguishable from the facts being an issue. It's just the caveat when doing a cg dinosaur documentary, we'll never know everything, Though like you said, it's a nitpick. I also completely agree with people being too attached to walking with dinosaurs to give prehistoric planet's format it's merits and overlooking WWD's issues. Probably my new favourite video of yours.

@BugsandBiology

9 ай бұрын

Thanks! I do agree that the speculation issue is largely unavoidable in “immersive” dinosaur documentaries. And PhP struck a good balance by having numerous uncovered segments. My main issue is that there’s a lot of people who seem to think palaeontologists/paleo artists are basically pulling things out of their behinds, and I kinda wish PhP did more to address that. But S2 incorporating the uncovered segments into the episode proper was definitely a major step in the right direction.

@ichthyovenator3351

9 ай бұрын

@@BugsandBiology Absolutely! If you want a good chuckle or some anger, look at the 1 star reviews of PhP, they're some of the goofiest incoherent messes I've seen.

@BugsandBiology

9 ай бұрын

The most painful one for me was The Telegraph (I think) giving PhP a lower rating than Stephen Fry’s “Dinosaur”.

@wesmcinerny4524

5 ай бұрын

Hey, the Walking With series is still entertaining, regardless.

@ichthyovenator3351

5 ай бұрын

@@wesmcinerny4524 absolutely

PHP outdid the Trilogy of Life. Absolutely agreed on Hatzegopteryx’s multifaceted depiction on Season 2, and that the T. rex hunt scene is easily the first GOOD version of such a scene in media yet (if only we had scenes like this for other theropods).

@BugsandBiology

9 ай бұрын

Definitely agree that it outdid WWD, and the trilogy as a whole. I can’t help but suspect nostalgia is a major player in why many people are so attached to WWD that any deviations from its formula are seen as “failures”.

@bkjeong4302

9 ай бұрын

@@BugsandBiology This so much. I have literally seen people actively defend some of the worst aspects of the Trilogy of Life, presumably due to nostalgia. I’d like to note that even the PhP Mosasaurus is somewhat oversized by around 5 tons or so (it’s in the realm of possibility for the very largest individuals but the show implies, and later states, that as being the normal size).

@BugsandBiology

9 ай бұрын

I did mention that in the review, alongside how one of the uncovered segments says they’re “arguably the greatest marine predators ever” even though they couldn’t hold a candle to Livyatan, O. megalodon or the Triassic ichthyosaurs.

@bkjeong4302

9 ай бұрын

@@BugsandBiology Fair enough. Speaking of which, we need decent depictions of these animals (especially the ichthyosaurs, given how everyone insists they were all small-prey specialists) in paleomedia as well.

@BugsandBiology

9 ай бұрын

Honestly there’s such a massive list of animals that have been poorly represented in media. And I don’t just mean getting limited attention, in some cases they’re outright downplayed. Postosuchus, Arthropleura, Carcharodontosaurs, Ceratosaurus, Phorusrhachids…the list goes on.

This is beautiful! Your channel has sparked a newfound fascination for me.

@BugsandBiology

9 ай бұрын

Thanks! It’s always such a pleasure hearing that I’ve sparked an interest for other people.

I tbh would love a show based on prehistoric park idea with all the good things prehistoric planet has

@BugsandBiology

6 ай бұрын

A documentary that combines PhP’s accuracy/visuals with the format of Nigel’s old shows has been a dream of mine for ages.

@dr.archaeopteryx5512

6 ай бұрын

God, that would be pretty awesome. Probably the most amazing piece of media to ever get made. But then again, if I was in charge of media, a new Prehistoric Park clone would be coming out at least every fifth year or so.

What makes these times so exciting, paleo wise, is the co-incidence of recent brilliant science/knowledge with incredible CGI to bring these times back to life.

Very glad I came back to this one when I realised I never finished it. The Catholic Church joke alone was enough for the near hour I've been listening

This is genuinely my new favorite video of yours, and I don’t mean that lightly… you truly gave me an even greater sense of appreciation for this documentary than I already had, and towards the end nearly brought me to tears when describing the beauty of nature and the celebration of creatures from long ago. I agree with the majority of what you said, though I definitely feel as if the speculative aspect of the documentary isn’t really that much of an issue as if it weren’t for speculation, then the documentary would honestly seem to tread water with others of its kind and be a bit bland, though we can’t be sure if any of the speculations are necessarily accurate, they most definitely do wonders for portraying dinosaurs as actual animals and not simply mindless bland creatures with no unique adaptations at all. You should absolutely do more documentary reviews, I also enjoyed the monster bug wars one a lot!! You definitely have a great ability to articulate your points clearly and concisely and in an entertaining way. Also the line “so much child predation that it could give the Catholic Church a run for its money” made me laugh for a solid five minutes lmao.

@BugsandBiology

6 ай бұрын

I probably should’ve articulated myself a bit better on the speculation part. By that point in the making of the video, I was starting to think “wow, this thing is going to end up really long” so was trying to speed through stuff a little. Basically, I preferred instances where speculation was not the main focus of a scene. For example, in the Triceratops segment from Forests, the entire sequence revolves around a completely speculative behaviour and thus has very little educational value. On the contrary, the Hatzegopteryx hunt utilised speculation better in my opinion. There was plenty of it, such as the pterosaurs’ supposed intelligence and their decision to spread out across the clearing to flush out any remaining prey. However, the actual focus of the scene wasn’t the speculation, it was Hatzegopteryx’s position as an apex predator, which is far more well-supported. So essentially, the focus of the scene is something strongly based off scientific knowledge, and the speculation is utilised to add more “flavour”. That in general is why I preferred S2 over S1.

@PrisPrivate

6 ай бұрын

@@BugsandBiology Fair enough, I just feel like the speculation adds more immersion and makes them feel more like animals!! Though I definitely do understand your point better now

@juanyusee8197

6 ай бұрын

​@@BugsandBiologyBesides a much of the S2 segments (Hatzeg hunt, Isisaurus segments, Rex night hunt, etc.), I think the _Mononykus_ segment in S1 is also a perfect blend of science and speculation perfectly mixing together.

Bravo, Jackson. You had me (figuratively) applauding and cheering by the end.

I love how they portrayed the mosasaurus as an actual animal that would pick up it's fights and not attack a T Rex that is capable of defending itself in the water.

@BugsandBiology

Ай бұрын

Yeah definitely. A much more nuanced and realistic depiction than the typical "mosasaur dramatically leaps out of water to grab an adult theropod" portrayal.

@justinianthegreat1444

Ай бұрын

@@BugsandBiology yes, it made the mosasaur into a very cautious animal that would not attack a healthy adult therepod that can cause it injuries. Animals don't act like monsters that attack healthy adult individuals especially when the said target is a predator

I never left my dinosaur phase!

@BugsandBiology

6 ай бұрын

That’s great! At one point I thought dinosaurs were for kids. When in reality, one of the most “adult” things you can do is love what you love and stop giving a damn what other people think.

This is not a series this is art!

Went though a dinosaur phase in childhood? I'm in my 40s now and dinosaurs are still a fascinating obsession! So glad my son also finds them equally as fascinating!

you should be feeling very proud of this one, absolutely amazing description.... thank you very much

I really enjoyed the Walking With Monsters series which is pre-dinosaur. Such an amazing array of animals, it’s an era I’d love to see more of in a documentary style series.

@BugsandBiology

2 ай бұрын

Walking with Monsters was a childhood favourite of mine. Gotta get around to reviewing that someday.

@rosekay5031

2 ай бұрын

@@BugsandBiology that would be great 👍

Answer: yes.

that ending was beautiful

Damn, the ending segment brought a tear to my eye

I hope that future seasons cover more than just the Late Cretaceous the early to middle parts of that period would be nice to see along with the Jurassic Fantastic video.

BUGS That ending made me tear up in a way that I haven't teared up since I first watched that Hatezgopteryx fly off into the sunset. Well Played, Sir.

@BugsandBiology

6 ай бұрын

Cheers, I must admit I was rather happy with what I’d come up with for the ending. I knew my longest video by far would have to have a strong finish.

Brilliant review of a brilliant series. Thank you :)

@BugsandBiology

6 ай бұрын

Glad you enjoyed it!

Oh, wasn't expecting you'd end with my bird edit. Cool :) Anyway, thank you for this wonderful review. It's nice to see someone actually exploring the core of the show in such detail, rather than over-nitpicking on whether or not species X might have been slightly more muscular or not. As you said yourself, in an age dominated by JP-like dinosaurs, even the worst of PP is still miles above the dinosaurs we usually see in big media in terms of accuracy - superfically or behaviourally. And I couldn't agree more: the Planet Earth format is indeed one of Prehistoric Planet's greatest strengths, even if it does diffuse the scientific clarity a bit. Overall it is very well executed paleo art. Now, I don't know if you like requests or not, but I'd love to see you do a dragonfly video in future. They're my favourite arthropods so I can't help but ask hehe. Have a nice one!

@BugsandBiology

9 ай бұрын

The original plan was to get some footage of birds myself, but I failed dismally in that regard… just filled my camera with five-second, blurry snapshots. Also I just realised I forgot to credit your edit in my description - gonna change that now! Glad you appreciate the angle I took with the review too. I think too many people focused on the nitpicks that they barely touched on the overall merits of the documentary. As for dragonflies, they can be very hard to get good close-up footage of, but next time I have a chance, I’ll definitely give it a shot. It’s spring in Australia, so things are starting to get more active now.

@PaleoEdits

9 ай бұрын

@@BugsandBiology You probably already know this but, early morning is when insects seem most agreeable for photography, after the cool of night. And when the nymphs emerge could be a great window too, as the transformation into imago could take a little while. I know almost nothing of australian dragonflies so this has me even more intrigued now!

@BugsandBiology

9 ай бұрын

I did briefly show Australia's biggest dragonfly species in one of my videos from Kuranda (think it was the second or third). Kinda wish I'd gotten more footage while I was there.

@PaleoEdits

6 ай бұрын

@@BugsandBiology Actually coming back here, it's a bit of shame that this love letter of a video hasn't cought on as well (yet).

Who knew when you get competent Paleontologists to help make these documentaries you get excellent results 👌

@juanyusee8197

5 ай бұрын

And palaeoartists too.

@Voltorb1993

5 ай бұрын

Not only get them, but actually goddamn listen to them. Too many documentaries do take competent paleontologists on board, only to all but ignore their suggestions.

honestly, this video was so great i really expected it to have more views lol. i really enjoyed watching this though!! awesome work

@BugsandBiology

9 ай бұрын

I think the main reason for the low views is that it’s quite different from my normal content in terms of topic. Although I have done a couple paleo videos ages ago. Hope this vid picks up someday - would love to broaden my audience and make more videos about prehistory further down the line.

@dinozyx

9 ай бұрын

@@BugsandBiology id love to see some more paleo videos , im always watching as many of them as i can!!

Thank you! Fantastic presentation!

@BugsandBiology

9 ай бұрын

Glad you enjoyed!

Yessss I’ve been waiting for this vid lol

@BugsandBiology

9 ай бұрын

You and me both. Man, I’m a big procrastinator.

Great video. Thanks.

To be fair, you're WOW edit actually has some real basis. Bateleur eagles make a sound like that while displaying feathers. Tsavo used to do it while being held on my arm. So did Shadow.

Himalayasasaurus is only known from very fragmented remains. It’s size estimates are very speculative. Adults of large species of Mosasaurus had twice the estimated mass of a Tyrannosaurus rex. Size is based on mass and not length. Xiphactinus is colloquially referred to as the X-fish, so it’s literally the same as saying T-rex.

@BugsandBiology

6 ай бұрын

The remains of Himalayasaurus, while fragmentary, are (from what I’ve seen) from various parts of the body, which give a better idea of overall proportions. Plus closely related ichthyosaurs are known to have attained similarly enormous, or even greater sizes. Then there’s Shonisaurus, which is known from more complete remains, and is now suspected to be much more raptorial than previously thought.

Goddamn that ending speech made me tear up

@BugsandBiology

6 ай бұрын

Given the length of the video, I felt it was important to give it a strong finish. Glad you appreciated it!

Best Prehistoric Planet review I’ve watched

@BugsandBiology

3 ай бұрын

Thanks! Personally thought I rambled a bit too much.

@hspg

3 ай бұрын

@@BugsandBiologyYou made some good points. I personally think anthropomorphized animals and dramatic storylines aren't the best way to approach nature documentaries

This could explain why there are a lot of legendary stories and myths about dragons living near volcanos.

In the light of Netflix's Life On Our Planet, your point on how having a story-driven narrative can impede the educational value of a palaeodocumentary in 44:44 remains relevant (and makes me appreciate Prehistoric Planet's format even more than I already did), with how LOOP's absolutely regressive WWM-level take on how evolution worked severely damaged its educational value on trying to tell the story of life on Earth, perpetuating long-outdated misconceptions such as Smilodon outcompeting and predating terror birds into extinction.

@BugsandBiology

7 ай бұрын

Absolutely agreed. LooP made the flaws in the narrative-driven paleodocumentary format ever more apparent, and like you, I appreciated PhP’s standard nature documentary format even more afterwards. Admittedly, I think some episodes of PhP jumped around a bit too quick (namely Forests) with most of my favourites (like Islands and Badlands) generally spending a little more time in a given location, but the show’s format remains much more effective at providing a balanced portrayal of prehistoric species, even if I wished some sequences weren’t so fleeting.

@juanyusee8197

7 ай бұрын

@@BugsandBiology Agreed on all points! And yeah it's also a reason why I found Forests to be one of the weaker episodes. I also think S2's "less is more" approach in regards for having less segments per episode compared to S1's episodes helped with the pacing, besides the fact that Islands and Badlands did have segments with "recurring" casts.

@juanyusee8197

7 ай бұрын

@@BugsandBiology Also side note, but I found it funny and ironic on how I actually found Life On Our Planet to be pretty unengaging (compared to Prehistoric Planet where each episode hooked me from start to end), even though the former was a lot more narrative-driven than the latter.

@BugsandBiology

7 ай бұрын

Yeah I don’t get the whole “must have a riveting story to keep me engaged” mentality that I see in a lot of criticism directed at PhP. Like I said in the review, PhP’s format has been the norm for nature documentaries for decades - it’s hardly some radical new formula. And it’s more reflective of nature; nature doesn’t have grand, overarching narratives, animals just live in the moment and do animal things.

@juanyusee8197

6 ай бұрын

@@BugsandBiologyFully agreed! If anything I'd go so far to say that sometimes having a grand, overarching narrative hampers the authenticity and immersion, as many docs that do try to tell that often feels (and is) "doctored" than those without.

I hope u review river monsters in the future

@BugsandBiology

9 ай бұрын

It’s definitely a possibility. I’m always hesitant about reviews due to unpredictable copyright issues though.

Honestly sounds like people who give those criticisms you mentioned at the end should just stick with mindless content like jurassic park. If they can’t see the reasoning behind a nature documentary they should just not watch them. T-rex vs quetz scene is one of my favourite scenes in the whole series. It does a great job of showing how interactions don’t always go as one would expect. Sure, a quetz is a toothpick to a rex, but sometimes animals lose their nerve and decide the effort isn’t worth it. It again helps portray the rex as a real animal and not some overconfident murder puppet like in jurassic park

@FraserFir-sb4lk

4 ай бұрын

The Quetzalcoatlus and T. rex scene doesn't bother me that much at all. I've seen turkey vultures intimidate black bears and blue jays and mockingbirds go ham on multiple animals many times their size/mass from bears to deer to large birds of prey like red-tailed hawks and eagles. I think a lot of the people complaining about that scene need to set aside their childish preconceived notions and actually spend time observing animals in nature. Stuff like this happens all the time.

Since you've done such a great job with Prehistoric Planet and Life on our Planet, do you think you can do a review on the Walking with Series?

@BugsandBiology

5 ай бұрын

Yeah I definitely will. But probably not Walking with Beasts, as I have very little knowledge on prehistoric mammals.

@adamzabielski3685

5 ай бұрын

@BugsandBiology At least give it a try please. Not reviewing WWB for a Walking with Series review just feels left out

I haven't seen Prehistoric Planet yet, since I believe the series isn't available in my country yet (plus a lack of Netflix on my part) and I'm hoping it will so I can watch it subtitled (or even dubbed) with my parents, the same way I first watched Walking With Dinosaurs all those years ago as a child. So I can't really comment on your assesment of the series itself, though it does look lovely. What I will comment on is that I don't quite agree with your take on WWD's Postosuchus, or rather, I don't quite see the negative light the series' portrayed the animal in that you bring up in the video. I don't recall I ever thought of the animal in the series as "slow" or "lumbering" in a negative sense as a child. It may not have been fast in comparison to other animals in the episode like the coelophysis, but I thought it was made clear to the viewer that this was merely the result of a different and heavier morphology, not because the animal was somehow inferior to its contemporaries. Even if it wasn't a swift or agile animal, I always thought the episode did well to portray how this was offset by its hunting strategy, namely being a succesful ambush predator. I am aware that since WWD's release our understanding of Postosuchus has changed a lot, such as it being bipedal instead of quadrupedal, but it was in line with the science of the time, as far as I know. WWD's Postosuchus is outdated, yes, but I don't fully understand where your impression that it was also a mean-spirited portrayal comes from. Perhaps nostalgia is tainting my view; I admit I haven't seen the series in well over fifteen years, so perhaps my memory is leaving out some egregious details. I hope this comment doesn't come across as overly negative; this was a great video overall, it's just that the Postosuchus detail stood out to me as odd enough (from my point of view) to comment on.

@juanyusee8197

5 ай бұрын

The Postosuchus was initially portrayed as formidable, but after it got a minor leg wound from being poked in the leg by a Placerias tusk, it somehow led to her suffering from agonizing pain and suffering lasting for months which ended up costing the Postosuchus her life. Meanwhile, the Diplodocus in the following episode suffered from deeper wounds by an Allosaurus in the climax, yet the narrator was like "Eh, she'll be fine lol."

This is definitely just a me thing as well as a nitpick (not of the video). But i felt that the movements of mosasaurus were a bit too "rapid". Didn't really sell on how huge they were, i saw a similar problem with other animals in the show but this one stuck out the most to me.

@juanyusee8197

4 ай бұрын

Given the amount of anatomical experts (including Dr. John Hutchinson and Scott Hartman) involved in the series, it could be a case of "Reality is Unrealistic" TBF. The animation movement of large theropods and especially sauropods are in fact light years better than how they moved in WWD for example, with the sauropods in particular actually reflecting how actual sauropods moved based on their footprints.

As a Paleonard I absolutely agree

@BugsandBiology

6 ай бұрын

Yep! And thanks for sitting through (presumably) the whole thing.

Bloody Oath (I was gonna full send it by KZread Would instantly kill me If I use the full phrase I lived in Straya for 2 years Let's just say I've come to love this part of Gondwana)

Okay but what was that stop motion dinosaur film from the beginning? Because I have been trying to find that again ever since I lost the VHS and I CANNOT

Fantastic and awesome video! Great overview as well on the series, though regarding the inaccuracies and speculation, thankfully wasn’t as much of it in the series. Also would really be cool to have a series on the Pleistocene of Australia where the last of the terrestrial ziphodont crocodiles persisted and were the top apex predators along with the giant varanids at the time and giant constrictor snakes. And these giant long legged galloping land crocodiles besides having ziphodont dentition, had very vaulted tall and deep skulls with laterally directed orbits and forward facing nares, powerful necks held high, modified pillar pelvis, and more heavily armored with Heavily keeled limbs and a rounded shorter tail. Quinkana was one of these land crocs, and another recently found one with a mostly complete skull of a new taxon of Pleistocene ziphodont land croc was found in Queensland, and is more similar morphologically to baurusuchus and had Very vaulted skull, has yet to be fully published, and even megalania the other top apex carnivore of the Australian Pleistocene wasn’t the only known giant varanid living during the Pleistocene of Australia, it’s a new unnamed species that is intermediate in size between a Komodo dragon and megalania, and interestingly Komodo dragons evolved in Australia and were living with megalania, a giant linage of constrictor snake, and giant long legged ziphodont land crocs. Also the mekosuchines which comprise of these highly diverse crocodiles survived in the South Pacific region until very recently. Up until 2,500 years and we’re dwarf fully terrestrial species that were semi arboreal to. Also Australia also had giant ankylosaur, glyptodon mimics or land turtles that evolved Convergently with these other Armored groups and were heavily armored skulls with horns, and spiked clubbed tails with bony rings as added protection much like a glyptodons called meiolania. Also hope to see a documentary on the carboniferous and when sea scorpions were abundant. Also Pleistocene Australia and miocene South America as well, which in South America during that time had the largest Cenozoic Carnivore since trex, barinasuchus the terrestrial sebecid crocodylomorph.

Prehistoric Planet is great, though it does have some minor errors - for example, it incorrectly portrayed hadrosauroids as fully quadrupedal rather than as facultative bipeds. However, the Walking With series is still very entertaining regardless. Same goes for the Meteor Studios/Evergreen series (which includes When Dinosaurs Roamed America, Before We Ruled the Earth, and Dinosaur Planet).

@juanyusee8197

5 ай бұрын

AFAIK the idea of hadrosaurs being facultative bipeds is at least disputed or not as well-supported as many think. (See: Gregory S. Paul's Myths on Dinosaurology paper in 1991, still available to view on his website, which noted that hadrosaur forelimbs were ungulate-like and suitable for progression at all speeds, and it is possible that many seemingly bipedal trackways were made by individuals on all fours). Another problem with the notion of hadrosaurids as facultative bipeds is that their predators (especially tyrannosaurids) are able to outrun them even if they ran bipedally, so them running quadrupedally would have probably aided them better to outmaneuver the bipedal theropods, especially when it comes to turning and changing direction (The Truth About Killer Dinosaurs demonstrates that). Basically while the notion of hadrosaurs being facultative bipeds is a common trope because may help them run faster, running on all fours would most certainly better help them get away from a predator by outmaenuvering them, cos they sure as shit ain't gonna outrun a tyrannosaurid.

@juanyusee8197

5 ай бұрын

Basically while there are defo minor errors in Prehistoric Planet, I wouldn't put much stock in the common trope of hadrosaurs being facultative bipedal, as it's rather based on poorly-made assumptions from the limb proportions without considering other aspects of their anatomy (like scapular rotation) at best. There's a reason why Dinosaur Planet (which Greg Paul did serve as the anatomical consultant) also did not portray hadrosaurs as facultatively bipedal, the evidence for it is weak.

@wesmcinerny4524

5 ай бұрын

@@juanyusee8197 But the possibility of them being gallopers on all fours is not 100 percent confirmed either.

@juanyusee8197

5 ай бұрын

​@@wesmcinerny4524Maybe not galloping like seen in Dinosaur Planet, but trotting like the hadrosaurs seen in Prehistoric Planet seems much more reasonable: remember that the wrists of hadrosaurs have ungulate-like locking mechanisms when extended, which increases the functional length of their forelimbs, again supporting a fully quadrupedal mode of locomotion. It's certainly much more reasonable than the idea that hadrosaurs would sacrifice their biggest advantage over their predators in a chase (being much better at turning corners when on all fours) AND making themselves more susceptible to being knocked off their feet as an escape plan, especially since they'd still be slower than their predators even if they ran bipedally, so there's much less reason to think hadrosaurs ran bipedally just from a functional perspective.

@juanyusee8197

5 ай бұрын

​@@wesmcinerny4524I forgot to mention: Scott Hartman, one of the advisors of the series, also agrees with Greg Paul in that the idea of hadrosaurs being facultative bipedal is weak too for the record, so there's that.

how was the copyright hammer like ;) glad u survived ps. fist like/comment on a youtube vid scrached off the bucket list lol

@BugsandBiology

9 ай бұрын

It was a roughly 30 second segment that was causing all the issues, so I replaced it with still images. Glad that was all I had to change.

@vitorbonifacio3550

9 ай бұрын

@@BugsandBiology ah everyone angers the algorithm gods eventually lol finished watching, like usual was excellent' must watch that show. btw lol on last joke on vid XD

Bro Imagine An Accurate Prehistoric Planet Spinosaurus

Are you Australian? I’m trying to figure out how to watch Prehistoric Planet. Where did you watch it?

@BugsandBiology

4 ай бұрын

Yes, I’m Australian. I watched it using the free trial on AppleTV.

@Airelda

4 ай бұрын

@@BugsandBiology thank you!

The show going for a Planet Earth style dont mean that isnt a somewhat disapointing decision. The show is amazing, but i would rather prefer we spend more time in the same location instead of jumping all around. Specially when we revisit the same place, but cut with other places in between. Even worst when the same place is spread among diferent episodes or even seasons. As for the "soft tone", i think the problem isnt the lack of violence, but instead the lack of blood. We ser a lot of death, but we rarely see blood. Thats what gave some people the impression the show is "soft".

@BugsandBiology

9 ай бұрын

I think the format is fine, but there were a couple episodes (notably Forests), where they jumped around a bit too fast. S2 I think was overall better with pacing, in spite of the shorter runtime. I actually kinda preferred when they returned to the same locations in an episode; it did a good job at wrapping the episode up and bringing it full circle. Especially how it was done in Coasts, Islands and Badlands.

@OrdemDoGraveto

9 ай бұрын

@@BugsandBiology I would prefer If ALL the segments of the same place were back to back before moving to another place. So that we can actually get a feel of that enviropment and all the species in It.

@BugsandBiology

9 ай бұрын

I don’t see a problem with mixing things up a little. Plus what you suggested would be almost impossible for any formations that don’t have an abundance of named/described species. Carnotaurus, for example, is pretty much the only described dinosaur in its habitat with an actual name. In order to fit that into a drawn-out, WWD-style episode, you’d either have to bring in species from other locations, or add a bunch of speculative ones, both of which are problematic for obvious reasons.

@OrdemDoGraveto

9 ай бұрын

@@BugsandBiology Its not a problem per say,.just something disapointing. When ou are interested in a place, It cuts to another one. Makes me initially dislike places because It cut the previous one that I was enjoying learning about.

@juanyusee8197

7 ай бұрын

While I get some of the lack of blood/gore complaints for some of the feeding/scavenging scenes (Freshwater Rex segment comes to mind), I feel it's massively overexaggerated/blown out of proportion for most of the hunting and fighting sequences. For every blood-caked hunt that happens in nature, there's as much hunts and kills that you don't get to see much (if at all) blood. Add to the fact the show rarely shows much feeding after a kill, adding more gore to those scenes would have just needlessly eat away at the budget for the sake of adding needless gore.

They made 2 seasons so quickly and that's great. I'm only disappointed it's stuck behind the paywall of Apple TV. The Walking with Series got so popular because it was openly shown on public television. Having high ratings meant that they were allowed more money and resources to branch out and do more spin offs, such as WWM and WWB. And the funniest thing is I was too young to watch the Walking with series live on TV, but early KZread was able to provide me with episode for free lol. And in the case of Prehistoric Planet, with the exception of clips, any kid that wants to watch the full show would need to pay or pirate it. Or have their parents do that for them.

@BugsandBiology

5 ай бұрын

It’s a shame Prehistoric Planet’s very limited accessibility means it’s unlikely to have the same effect on the public’s view as the Walking with Trilogy.

@takenname8053

5 ай бұрын

@@BugsandBiology Exactly!

The qzatco vs trex was a bit rare im sure to happen thts why its controversial. When do u see a bear running away from vultures .vultures or birds wil almost always wait not scare predators off but its not impossible because it does hapen sometimes

@BugsandBiology

5 ай бұрын

The difference is, the mobility disparity is even more stacked against the rex than it is in any modern analogues. A T. rex couldn’t jump, or swipe with its forelimbs, and, unlike a vulture, a Quetz is very nimble on the ground in addition to being able to fly.

@wingedhussar1453

5 ай бұрын

is quatz so nimble as we know tho.it seemed cumebersome aswell with its limbs@@BugsandBiology

@BugsandBiology

5 ай бұрын

Azhdarchids in particular were very competent on the ground.

zzzzING! LMAOOOO!!

my biggest issue is you said "4 square handball" it is called downball, what is this disrespect to the holy artform of school age Australians everywhere

@BugsandBiology

9 ай бұрын

Guess it must depend on locality. We always called it handball, and the ball we used was rubbery, not downy.

I use to have book about dinosaurs as a child. I threw it out cause I figured it was outdated.

@BugsandBiology

5 ай бұрын

All my Dino books are way outdated, but I still have them for nostalgia’s sake. Fun to read, even if the info is basically worthless.

You say Prehistoric Planet is better than the walking with series but it covers nothing of the Paleozoic and Cenozoic which is questionable.

@BugsandBiology

6 ай бұрын

Why does it need to? Is it also “questionable” that Planet Earth focused only on the present day? It gave us an extremely in-depth look at the Late Cretaceous, something that no other documentary has done. Plus it lacked the sensationalist narrative of the Walking with Trilogy.

@juanyusee8197

6 ай бұрын

Honestly this is an utterly inane and nonsensical complaint since it misses the point of what Prehistoric Planet is trying to achieve: Showing life during a specific period of time (the Maastrichtian)

@thedarkmasterthedarkmaster

6 ай бұрын

@@BugsandBiology Sure but I would say it's still a dishonest comparison If prehistoric Planet covered the same time periods then yes I would agree with you that it would be a better documentary series but until soemthing like that happens I can't compare the two. "Plus it lacked the sensationalist narrative of the Walking with Trilogy." This is absolute nonsense as layed out by unnatural history the "narrative" you speak of was based on the BBC's other documentaries made at the time. Then again given @juanyusee8197 point it seems I have struck a nerve for daring to criticize prehistoric planet, hopefully one day the cultists will realize people are allowed to dislike your favorite piece of paleomedia.

@BugsandBiology

6 ай бұрын

Why does the narrative being based off other BBC documentaries make it any less flawed? Doesn’t change the fact that it misrepresents evolutionary history, and the portrayal of certain animals like Postosuchus and Quetzalcoatlus suffered as a result. Also no one is being a “cultist” about Prehistoric Planet. Every single review of the documentary you can find will lay out some criticism, including this one. Honestly, the Walking with Trilogy gets the “cult” treatment far more. Ever since PhP came out, people were upset that the show did its own thing instead of rehashing the Trilogy’s format, as though the only way to make a good paleodocumentary is to follow WWD’s style to a T. And in spite of its many flaws, WWD is still often touted as an untouchable gold standard among paleodocumentaries.

@juanyusee8197

6 ай бұрын

​@@thedarkmasterthedarkmasterSorry, but the Walking with... Trilogy did have sensationalist narratives, and I say this as someone who enjoyed and grew up with it. WWM is the absolute worst at it with its arthropods vs. Vertebrates narrative, but WWD and WWB also had them especially with how they treat "Rise and Fall" narratives (New Blood, Death of a Dynasty and Sabre-Tooth in particular were egregious at those)

Prehistoric Planet: BEST Dinosaur Documentary? Are you asking your viewers if this video is the best, well bad news for you: it isn't it. Sorry.

@BugsandBiology

5 ай бұрын

In many objective metrics, it is.

I hope if we get a third season they move away from the pure Maastrichtian focus. Even if it's still within the Cretaceous an extended timeline would be welcome.

@BugsandBiology

5 ай бұрын

I’d love that too, but I can understand the difficulties that’d be involved, especially when it comes to background flora. Wouldn’t mind if they moved forward in time as well.

@juanyusee8197

5 ай бұрын

​@@BugsandBiologyA friend of mine who knows a lot about paleoflora had said anything older than somewhere in the Aptian (when angiosperms cease being a minor component in the environment) would require a fully CGI/heavily CGI-modified environment ala. Jungle Book 2016.