Talk:Phorusrhacos

How do you??
How do you pronounce Phorusrhacos? -- e. 23:21, 26 April 2006 (UTC)

'FOR-rus-RAH-kos' (at least that's how Kenneth Branagh pronounces it in Walking With Beasts). Jerkov 21:07, 8 June 2006 (UTC)

50,000 years ago?
The Walking With Beasts book says Phorusrhacos didn't go extinct until 50,000 years ago; is this true? Pretty damn recent. Jerkov 21:09, 8 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Some relatives of Phorusrhacos lived up to 50,000 years ago (the one from Florida I think, forget the genus). P. itself is only known from the Miocene.Dinoguy2 21:30, 8 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Thanks. Jerkov 21:55, 8 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Dinoguy2, the Florida guy way Titanis walleri. The 50000 figure is apparently based on faulty dating. Dysmorodrepanis 15:44, 30 June 2006 (UTC)
 * From the upcoming research results by McFadden et al:
 * "[T]he refined age of Titanis is late Hemphillian in Texas (~5 Ma) and late Blancan (~2.4 to 2.0 Ma) in Florida . No evidence currently exists for latest [ Rancholabrean (15000 years ago)] Titanis in North America." Dysmorodrepanis 13:49, 19 October 2006 (UTC)

I think the Walking With... guys think that Phorusrhacos is the same as Titanis. On the website, that's what it says, and in the Walking With... encyclopedia it states the name Titanis is "redundant". Dora Nichov 07:33, 9 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Well, they should read the thorough review by Alvarenga & Höfling. See page. Dysmorodrepanis 13:35, 19 October 2006 (UTC)

Uhh, don't get it. Dora Nichov 09:57, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
 * That the opinions of TV producers can't really be compared to actual published science? ;) Dinoguy2 14:28, 23 June 2007 (UTC)

Mesembriornis
Mesembriornis is listed here as a junior synonym, and yet has its own page. If the synonymy is not generally accepted, it should probably be removed from the list to the discussion section. If it is generally accepted... ditto. Dinoguy2 14:33, 23 June 2007 (UTC)

10,000 BC film

this bird is depicted in the film10000 BC film......i was wonderingif the bird was actually around then? the article doesntmention when it dide out

i also would have expected the film to be in thepopular culture section —Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.2.187.90 (talk) 04:34, 8 December 2010 (UTC)
 * First, I saw this film and they never identified what genus or species it was. It could have been any large terror bird or gastornithid or mihirung, or something vaguely like any of these that the film makers invented. Second, there were no birds resembling this present in Europe in 10,000 B.C. in real life. They died out well before that time. The last terror birds (Titanis walleri) lived in Florida and died out about 2 million B.C. The last large, carnivorous birds that looked similar to terror birds died out in Australia between 50,000 to 20,000 B.C. MMartyniuk (talk) 04:51, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

Etymology
According to Ben Creisler, the translation we give, is rather off the mark: http://dml.cmnh.org/2012Jun/msg00306.html

Should we fully replace it?--MWAK (talk) 14:14, 1 July 2012 (UTC)


 * Perhaps we should. But how to reference Ben's explanation?--Mr Fink (talk) 16:12, 1 July 2012 (UTC)


 * The citation policy provides some rules for this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Citing_sources#Webpages Obviously, the link can be added too. However, the old — and it seems, undisputedly wrong — translation is sourced. Should we nevertheless completely remove it or mention it as an historical instance of a wrong translation?--MWAK (talk) 05:14, 2 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Certainly we should also mention the wrong translation, too. It's done for Megalania being constantly mistranslated as "the great butcher"--Mr Fink (talk) 12:29, 2 July 2012 (UTC)


 * I added the information from his contribution and kept a reference to the old translation.--MWAK (talk) 11:42, 4 July 2012 (UTC)