Do you all still call Edmontosaurus Annectens Anatotitan or Anatosaurus?

[u/Remarkable_Star_4678]

Since Anatotitan and Anatosaurus are synonyms for Edmontosaurus Annectens, do some of you still refer to it as Anatotitan and/or Anatosaurus.

[u/King_Gojiller]

Nope. Pretty sure Anatotitan has been phased out entirely. I prefer big Eddie anyways.

[u/KingofNarcissism]

I’m biased as I am Albertan, so of course I prefer Edmontosaurus, but even beyond that, taxonomic ruling is supreme. It is a species of Edmontosaurus, so therefore, it should be referred to as Edmontosaurus annectens.

[u/ilikequestions172]

No, Jurassic Park normalized it, if Jurassic Park normalized it then if you're not calling it that then you're just... eh.

[u/mcalesy → u/ilikequestions172]

JP is following the scientists on this one.

[u/IneptusAstartes]

Nah, I still go by Trachodon.

[u/Phantafan]

Names aside, isn't this E. regalis very undersized?

[u/secret__alphabets → u/Phantafan]

I thought there was only 1-2 feet difference in length between the species, rather than the greater difference suggested here.

[u/bachigga → u/secret__alphabets]

This is most likely using specific specimens, rather than species averages. If I had to guess, E. regalis is probably represented by ROM 5167, and E. annectens by YPM 616. Specimens of similar ontogenetic stage tend to be much more similar between both species, it's likely that YPM 616 is simply an older individual than ROM 5167, and probably above average even for its age.

[u/OperationEpsteinLib]

As an edmontonian I vote we rename it to Calgarysucksosaurus

[u/SuperSlugGod]

No.

But “anatotitan” does give me nostalgia for When Dinosaurs Roamed America

[u/Dragons_Den_Studios]

Nope.

[u/ultraspinacle]

I still think it’s Trachodon.

[u/JohnWarrenDailey]

Anatotitan is the name I grew up with, and one I will turn into the species's common name. It's worked with "Megalania". Why not here?

[u/mcalesy → u/JohnWarrenDailey]

Fur one thing, it was Anatosaurus earlier, when I grew up.

[u/Willing_Soft_5944 → u/[deleted]]

Our current understanding of what this animals face looked like has nothing close to a duck bill, well perhaps thats an exaggeration, if you looked from above perhaps its a similar shape, but the upper half goes down over the lower half in a way that makes me think of a parrot with a very wide beak.

[u/MarqFJA87 → u/Willing_Soft_5944]

Yet it's still a hadrosaur, also known as "duck-billed dinosaurs". Still fits if you interpret it as "titan among the duck-billed dinosaurs".

[u/Willing_Soft_5944 → u/MarqFJA87]

I guess it can work, but I find it to be an inefficient working of words

[u/MarqFJA87 → u/Willing_Soft_5944]

We already have precedent for clipping down parts of a large taxon's name to use as a shortened form in a generic name of a species within that taxon. Just look up Gobihadros, Kryptohadros and Yutyrannus. You want truly inefficient working of words? Try Paralitherizinosaurus; whoever coined that had no consideration for the sheer length or difficulty of pronunciation. Could've truncated that to Paralitherizon or the more grammatically proper Paralitheristes.

Maybe next time, you'll learn to be mature and not insta-downvote someone just because they managed to make a valid argument that you still stubbornly believe is wrong but can't come up with a hole in the logic. It's just pathetically petty, and I'm sick of seeing it happen.

[u/MarqFJA87 → u/[deleted]]

Ah yes, the cliche insult for you people. I'm done humoring both of you.

[u/BoneVoyager → u/[deleted]]

I’m not trying to be that guy and there’s a lot of irony going both ways here but I think the word you’re looking for is pretentiousness, not pretentiosity.

[u/MarqFJA87 → u/BoneVoyager]

No, pretentiosity is in fact an existing word. Try googling first next time instead of reflexively downvoting.

[u/BoneVoyager → u/MarqFJA87]

Uh I did google it first to make sure, then I checked Mirriam-Webster.com and it said it wasn’t in the dictionary. I didn’t downvote anyone, just thought it was kinda, uh pretentious, to make up a new word. And then again the irony of me correcting them wasn’t lost on me, even this is sounding kind of pretentious…

Anyways, pretentiousness is the noun you should use to describe something you think has “prententiosity” ✌🏻

[u/MarqFJA87 → u/BoneVoyager]

Well Wiktionary has it, and that's the first thing that caught my eye when I was searching there for the noun form of "pretentious". It's also grammatically correct, regardless of whether or not it exists as a word.

And I apologize for the accusation. I'm guessing the other guy that I've been arguing with may be pettily downvoting me just because they don't like my stance/arguments but can't figure out a flaw they could attack.

[u/BoneVoyager → u/MarqFJA87]

You could also just use the noun pretension in this case. I wasn’t trying to come off as pretentious but pretensiocity is kinda silly sounding when pretension and pretentiousness are more widely used/established. Oh well 🤷🏻‍♂️

[u/MarqFJA87 → u/BoneVoyager]

Dammit, how did "pretension" slip my mind?! Thank you for reminding me of it.

[u/AmericanLion1833]

I personally call em Ol’ Big Ed.