Follow TV Tropes

Following

History Trivia / PrehistoricBeast

Go To

OR

Changed: 97

Removed: 283

Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
Removed what appeared to be an instance of complaining.


* ScienceMarchesOn: ''Monoclonius'' is a dubious taxon due to its remains being indistinct from those of ''Centrosaurus''. It would be better if it was identified as ''Centrosaurus'' instead.
** Although ''Centrosaurus''/''Monoclonius'' did not live 65 million years ago, when the film was set. They should have either gone with ''Triceratops'', or set the piece 75 million years ago and use a tyrannosaur from that time period, such as ''Gorgosaurus'' or ''Daspletosaurus''.

to:

* ScienceMarchesOn: ''Monoclonius'' is a dubious taxon due to its remains being indistinct from those of ''Centrosaurus''. It would be better if it was identified as ''Centrosaurus'' instead.
** Although
instead. Also, ''Centrosaurus''/''Monoclonius'' did not live 65 million years ago, when the film was set. They should have either gone with ''Triceratops'', or set the piece 75 million years ago and use a tyrannosaur from that time period, such as ''Gorgosaurus'' or ''Daspletosaurus''.set.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None


** Although ''Centrosaurus''/''Monoclonius'' did not live 65 million years ago, when the film was set. They should have either gone with ''Triceratops'', or set the piece 75 million years ago and use a tyrannosaur from that time period, such as ''Gorgosaurus''.

to:

** Although ''Centrosaurus''/''Monoclonius'' did not live 65 million years ago, when the film was set. They should have either gone with ''Triceratops'', or set the piece 75 million years ago and use a tyrannosaur from that time period, such as ''Gorgosaurus''.''Gorgosaurus'' or ''Daspletosaurus''.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None


** Although ''Centrosaurus''/''Monoclonius'' did not live 65 million years ago, when the film was set. They should have gone with ''Triceratops''.

to:

** Although ''Centrosaurus''/''Monoclonius'' did not live 65 million years ago, when the film was set. They should have either gone with ''Triceratops''.''Triceratops'', or set the piece 75 million years ago and use a tyrannosaur from that time period, such as ''Gorgosaurus''.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None


* ScienceMarchesOn: ''Monoclonius'' is a dubious taxon due to its remains being indistinct from those of ''Centrosaurus''. It would be better if it was identified as ''Centrosaurus'' instead.

to:

* ScienceMarchesOn: ''Monoclonius'' is a dubious taxon due to its remains being indistinct from those of ''Centrosaurus''. It would be better if it was identified as ''Centrosaurus'' instead.instead.
** Although ''Centrosaurus''/''Monoclonius'' did not live 65 million years ago, when the film was set. They should have gone with ''Triceratops''.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None


* ScienceMarches: ''Monoclonius'' is a dubious taxon due to its remains being indistinct from those of ''Centrosaurus''. It would be better if it was identified as ''Centrosaurus'' instead.

to:

* ScienceMarches: ScienceMarchesOn: ''Monoclonius'' is a dubious taxon due to its remains being indistinct from those of ''Centrosaurus''. It would be better if it was identified as ''Centrosaurus'' instead.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None

Added DiffLines:

* ScienceMarches: ''Monoclonius'' is a dubious taxon due to its remains being indistinct from those of ''Centrosaurus''. It would be better if it was identified as ''Centrosaurus'' instead.

Top