The kicker is that as Victoria was within the Antartic circle at the time they could have just been like: This is southern Australia. Its really cold. Dinosaurs live here.
@TyrannoNoddy
3 жыл бұрын
Yeah, even when I was younger I quickly realised it was actually depicting Australian fauna. I think they labeled the setting as Antarctica because of the rift valley, but also because "dinosaurs in Antarctica" sounds more exciting and unusual. Given the connection of the continents it IS somewhat reasonable to assume Antarctica probably had similar fauna to what we've found in Victoria, but as you said, that's only a hypothesis. On that note, I should mention that Walking with Dinosaurs (and the whole Impossible Pictures library) have always been funny with geography and have taken lots of liberties. Probably the most unusual one for me is Utahraptor... in Europe. The dinosaur is not only named after an American state, but the oversized Ornithocheirus flies over North America anyway, where there's iguanodonts. The Walking With series is probably still my favourite bunch of palaeo docu/mockumentaries out there, simply for being able to achieve that nature documentary feel even if it meant they had to do a lot of speculation. I'm not even sure many other documentaries have even tackled South Polar dinosaurs since then, I can only think of the Cryolophosaurus in Dinosaur Revolution and there was a recent one that focused specifically on Antarctic Mesozoic fauna. I forget the exact name but I know they showed it at the IMAX theatre here at some point? Unfortunately I'm not only tight on money but we also have our pandemic meaning we can't see stuff anyway. :P On another note, on the topic of Walking with Dinosaurs... I know remakes aren't that popular but I actually wouldn't mind if someone tried to make a modernisation of Walking With Dinosaurs, in the same style as before (aka NOT like that movie that was ruined by the terrible voice overs) but just with updated effects and scientific knowledge. If they did the same settings it would be even cooler to see how things evolved. Obviously with the Spirits of the Ice Forest equivalent you'd run into problems because you have the differing Eumeralla stages. For example, if you want Leallynasaura, you'd have to sacrifice Koolasuchus and if you wanted Koolasuchus, you'd need a different ornithopod. Not sure what the best approach would be (especially since so much of what's been found here is so fragmentary), but it's something I find interesting to think about.
@PrehistoricAustralia
3 жыл бұрын
You’re spot on about the Rift Valley! Spoilers! Haha that’s my theory I propose in Part 2 😉 I definitely agree, though, that sensationalism was probably the main reason the Walking with Dinosaurs production team chose to make the episode’s setting “Antarctica”. Antarctica sounds more exciting given the environmental/climatic contrast between modern and prehistoric Antarctica. I think it’s reasonable to assume that families of animals and plants would have shared distribution across Australia and Antarctica. This is (mostly) supported by the fossil record. Individual species, on the other hand (such as Leaellynasaura amicagraphica or Koolasuchus cleelandi), should not be assumed to have wider distribution until we have the fossil evidence to prove it. I agree! 😁 I also adore the nature documentary style of Walking with Dinosaurs. More paleo documentaries should portray dinosaurs as natural animals rather than hyper aggressive monsters. I also think a Walking with Dinosaurs remake with up to date science would be awesome. As much as I think it would cool to see an episode focus on how far our understanding of Leaellynasaura has evolved, I think the programme would be better off focusing on a new time and place, such as Late Cretaceous Alexander Island/Vega Island in Antarctica (75 MYA I think the fossil sites was dated to). I think the Antarctica paleo documentary you’re thinking of is called “Dinosaurs of Antarctica”. It was released this year and I’ve been meaning to watch it. Thanks for watching TyrannoNoddy! Hope you enjoy Part 2 😊
@VadimOzaki
3 ай бұрын
When I first watched the episode about the Ornithocheirus, I remembered it wrong: it seemed to me that the Utahraptor was shown in North America, where it should be😯 In the same episode, Asian Saurophthirus is shown. Probably the largest geographical inaccuracy of Walking with dinosaurs is Thrinaxodon. It is known from South Africa and Antarctica, not Arizona. Furthermore, it was discovered in Lower Triassic so it was already extinct at the time setting of New Blood.
@VadimOzaki
3 ай бұрын
I once saw a documentary show about Arctic dinosaurs. The attention there was focused on Albertosaurus, Pachyrhinosaurus and, it seems, on Troodon. I don't remember the name of the show, but I watched it before 2012.
@valentinfejes
3 жыл бұрын
Thanks to "The Great Dinosaur Atlas" I already know all the bigger creatures from that episode (except Koolasuchus, of course)... So as a child I thought it was set in Australia, not Antarctica... I also thought that the reason of the longer winter season was Australia's location, which was so close to the southern polar regions. Australia's map from the book showed that "Allosaurus" as well! "Spirits of the Ice Forest" was the first one I saw and quickly became my favourite episode!
@PrehistoricAustralia
3 жыл бұрын
I’ll have to check out that book 😊 My son is getting into dinosaurs now so I’m sure he’d love it haha. I’m glad I’m not the only person who found Spirits of the Ice Forest to be their favourite episode! 😁
@valentinfejes
3 жыл бұрын
@@PrehistoricAustralia "The Great Dinosaur Atlas" was my gateway drug to paleontology, so make sure that this will be his first one too! 😉 It's quite outdated, but big, full of beautiful illustrations, maps, skeletons or other fossils - and cycling people! 😄
@speedracer2008
Жыл бұрын
Rapator could have played the role of the polar allosaur, as it lived in Australia at the time.
@PrehistoricAustralia
3 жыл бұрын
Hi folks, just wanted to post that the in-text reference that appears onscreen at 8:10 is incorrect. It was meant to be attributed to: Poropat, S, Martin, S, Tosolini, AM, Wagstaff, B, Bean, L, Kear, B, Vickers Rich, P & Rich, T 2018, ‘Early Cretaceous polar biotas of Victoria, southeastern Australia-an overview of research to date’. My editor is only human - we all make mistakes haha! Thank you for your understanding :)
@mikorupondsumisu6883
2 жыл бұрын
I love Spirits, but the Antarctica setting always bugged me since I had worked on one of the Leaellynasaur sites and knew the show was wrong. Either that, or I was in Antarctica and didn't even know it...
@VadimOzaki
3 ай бұрын
Nice video. I agree with everything you said👍🏻 It's interesting to note that this episode was filmed in New Zealand, where my favorite The Lost World of 2001 would later be filmed using the same technologies as WWD. Some scenes for Time of the Titans and Giant of the Skies were also filmed here.
@rileyernst9086
Жыл бұрын
Only just found your channel. Could not believe my luck. Keep up the great work. 👍 Now down to business; i think it is totally reasonable to show Victorian fauna as Antartican. Both Antartica and Victoria were joined at this time and I'd actually find it surprising if they did not share fauna. Especially since dinosaurs seemed to have migrated several times through Antartica and into Australia. Abscence of evidence is not evidence of abscence and if titanosaurs can cross through to colonise Australia a few million years before i am pretty sure some small ornithichians and giant amphibians might spread back the other way. Whilst no muttaburrasaurus material is known from Dinosaur cove there is what looks to be medium sized ornithipodian foot prints. It would not be outrageous to speculate this could be a Southern Australian relative of M.Langdoni. Also at the time of production there was no such thing as megaraptoradae, these things were barely known to science, and thought to be allosaurids. The idea of a dwarf forest dwelling neovenator/carcharodontosaur(allosaurid) is totally reasonable for the Aptian/Albian especially from the POV of being in the late 90s. Although the idea of it being Allosaurus is a bit ludicrous(although there is Asfaltsovenator from south America and possibly allosaurus material from the Tendaguru beds). But that was the science of the time. Some things i DO find strange and jarring about the episode is the muttaburrasaurus are described like you'd expect them to describe sauropods; they travel long distances and 'strip forests' bare. And the Allosaurus is both described as a polar specialist, AND an Australian migrant.
@andrewobrien8325
Жыл бұрын
14:30 If I can offer a sort of weak defence to Walking With Dinosaurs....I honestly think this is a case of Walking with Dinosaurs' closing statement in the episode being the reason for it's choice of setting "Life at the poles is a remarkable evolutionary achievement for the dinosaurs" and despite how unfair it is(And I do agree it should have been Australia), it's just easier for people to think about the setting being a land mass we can easily associate as "COLD". Australia has a reputation for a couple things but hot is one of them, so again even though I think it's a much better counterbalance to show how things have changed since then....the BBC and Impossible Pictures likely wanted the achievement and change to be at the front of people's minds. TBH I think March of the Dinosaurs did a better job with this concept than Walking with Dinosaurs did(Though I still think Walking With Dinosaurs achieved a more complete picture than any documentary before and very few since have achieved but also did it in a more entertaining fashion). Also to be honest I think since the continents were connected they were sort of hinting at these were Aussie animals too(TBF it's a very aussie thing to have an animal with a weird feature like Muntbarasaurus and a living fossil like koolasuchus isn't it? I'm sorry was that too rude of me?)
@theraptorore1785
3 жыл бұрын
A very fascinating episode!! Here's a thought, could the polar allosaur be a Cryolophosaurus
@PrehistoricAustralia
3 жыл бұрын
Thank you TheRaptorOre17 :) Glad you found it fascinating! It would be awesome if Walking with Dinosaurs had covered Early Jurassic Antarctica. Then it could have featured Cryolophosaurus :D
@theraptorore1785
3 жыл бұрын
@@PrehistoricAustralia ok, good to know!!
@Ozraptor4
2 жыл бұрын
The "polar allosaur" is based on an isolated astragalus which is extremely different to that of Cryolophosaurus.
@theraptorore1785
2 жыл бұрын
@@Ozraptor4 my bad, what genus is the Crylo?
@arandomnerd2432
Жыл бұрын
@@theraptorore1785 I last heard that it was related to dilophosaurus but they might have found evidence that chances it that I don't know of
@danielegyed840
3 жыл бұрын
Yep, it is safe to say that this episode is actually most likely set in Australia, since all of the taxa that make an appearance are known from fossil material found there. As one commentator here already noted, I too think that the decision to present the location as Antarctica can be attributed to sensationalism. Today the region around the South Pole is one of the most inhospitable and challenging environments on this planet from our human point of view, and the fact that some 100 million years ago there was a very different landscape inhabited by dinosaurs is even more thought-provoking. If you seek more attention from your audience, choosing this setting over the actual localities in Australia is a promising step to maximize that "wow-factor". It is very understandable for a person from Australia, and especially a paleontology-enthusiast at that, to be frustrated because of this, but I guess the producers had other things in mind. WWD in general does not seem to take geographic distribution of certain taxa very seriously.... Based on the fossil evidence that is available in this moment, I believe that the Early to "Mid"-Cretaceaus fauna of Australia (and that of other places like parts of Patagonia) could be viewed as somewhat representative for the assemblages of animals that would have inhabited Antarctica at that time. Small neornithischians (whether elasmarians (a group that was erected in 2007, quite a while after the production of WWD) are part of the "true" Ornithopoda or not isn't entirely figured out yet, or is it?) seem to have been quite common throughout the Southern hemisphere during this period and have even been reported from the Maastrichtian of Western Antarctica. Of course, Leallynnasaura itself is only known from Australia, and the true geographic distribution of this genus is not known. But as the main protagonist of "Spirits of the ice forest", it would be kinda odd not to label it as a specific taxon, as something more tangible that has a bit more substance than just "a member of this or that group that probably lived there". And charsimatic little Leallynnasaura being described from fairly complete remains and having such an interesting name with the female suffix ("-saura") compared to others ("-saurus"), presents itself as an ideal candidate for that role. Also, consider that this episode came out in 1999 and the whole process of researching and figuring out all the stuff relevant for this installment had to be done even earlier. At that time many of the small Southern neornithischians weren't even described and named. Even five years ago a good portion of them had yet to be described. Leallynnasaura was, phylogenetically speaking, viewed as just another "hypsilophodont", and the digital model used for it in the show can be also seen in the episodes 2 and 6, as well as in "The ballad of Big Al" depicting taxa such as Nanosaurus (then "Othnielia") or Thescelosaurus (although those reuses could be also explained as a consequence of limited budget and not just scientific thinking at the time). So then, from a certain ppoint of view, it seemed even more reasonable to show these small bipedal herbivores in Antarctica, because they (as an at that time much more widely supported monophyletic Hypsilophodontidae) were known from basically all over the world and also from an enormous temporal range. And, with the somewhat similarly aged Australian Leallynnasaura "right next door" it seems even more legitimate to include it in a program about Anarctica 106 mya. Of course now that exact logic doesn't really hold up anymore, but I hope you get my point. Then there is Muttaburrasaurus, and phylogenetically speaking we have the same situation as with Leallynasaura. Muttaburrasaurus was initially believed to be a taxon within the very inclusive Iguanodontidae, a family that, just like hypsilophodonts is now largely considered to be paraphyletic. But in the 90ies even the single genus Iguanodon was thought to have had a global distribution (isn't that even literally said in the fourth episode of WWD?). So again, with that logic it did not seem too far off to include Muttaburrasaurus in Antarctica, and this time the audience is told that it is not supposed to be a permanent residence for them and that "they have been migrating 800 kilometers down the coast of Australia" hinting that the locality where the actual fossils were found may lie well within the geographic range of the genus proposed by the series. Details aside, how realistic is it to show this dinosaur in Antarctica based on current knowledge? Muttaburrasaurus is a basal member of the Rhabdodontomorpha clade, and it being Australian is not particularly helpful for answering this specific question, as some of its closest known relatives, the true rhabdodontids appear to be endemic to Europe. Fortunately there is Fostoria, another medium sized ornithopod from Australia, that may incidentally be a basal rhabdodontomorph as well according to a study from 2020. So in thelight of this paper, I could personally imagine that this type of dinosaur (broadly speaking) also occured in parts of Antarctica around that time, although right now Australia is the only continent where they definately lived. However, in that case I would rather use Fostoria as a base for a potential model of an Antarctic rhabdodontomorph instead of Muttaburrasaurus for several reasons. I would be more careful with chigutisaurids though. Their fossils may have been found all over former Gondwana, but there is a huge time gap between Koolasuchus and its next oldest relatives. There are the Australian Siderops and some indeterminate South African remains dating back to the early parts of the Jurassic, and then there is Koolasuchus from the Aptian of Australia, the youngest known and probably also last member of this group. I don't know if they would have been around in Antarctica at that time.... I mean, for what we know Koolasuchus itself (and subsequently Chitugisauridae as a whole) was probably extinct by the time of 106 mya. By the way, if I am correctly informed, the mammal in "Spirits of the ice forest" is supposed to be Steropodon galmani which, surprise surprise, is also known exclusivly from remains found in Australia (the Griman Creek Formation of New South Wales to be exact). But I have no doubt that its relatives were present in prehistoric Antarctica (even though they certainly wouldn't have looked like extant coatis ;)) Regarding the "polar allosaur", I am a bit confused to be honest. I sometimes see it being referred to as Australovenator wintonensis, however that one was described almost a decade after the show was produced and aired. I feel like this association with the animal featured in WWD is at least partially a result of Australovenators reputation as "the most complete theropod from Australia". It is one of the most popular dinosaurs known from the continent after all. Well, that doesn't matter since the socalled "allosaur" is specifically based on the "A. robustus" theropod material form Cape Paterson, that most likely does not belong to the genus Australovenator itself and probably is not even contemporaneous geologically speaking. While belonging to Megaraptora seems to be the most common explanation for the identity of this mysterious predator I've also seen it being proposed as a possible abelisauroid (another dinosaur group that is known from many Gondwanan members, one of them even hailing from the Eumarella Formation). It is further interesting to me, that Welles noticed some similarities to Ornithomimosauria upon examining that "A. robustus" specimen. And, if I recall correctly, certain noasaurid taxa have been mistaken for and originally classified as ornithomimids (thinking of Elaphrosaurus and Afromimus for example), due to certain convergencies between those two otherwise distantly related theropod families. So, could "A. robustus" actually be a noasaurid abelisaur? I don't know, it is just a thought that popped into my head after a quick research of that specimen. On the other hand, what do I know? I could be terribly wrong here. What do you think? Anyway, the main antagonist in that WWD episode is inspired by fragmentary remains of a theropod found in Australia, not Antarctica, further proving the point of this video. Megaraptorids and abelisauroids would have almost certainly been present in Antarctica during the Cretaceous however, so at least that isn't so terribly out of place. All in all, I agree with the proposal made in this video and am looking forward to part two!
@onionhater5887
2 жыл бұрын
Well, they said it was an “allosaur”, not an allosaurus. Megaraptorans are possibly allosaurs, so they aren’t 100% wrong
@harnawazboparai8751
3 жыл бұрын
Insightful, as someone who grew up watching Walking With Dinosaurs this was entertaining and informative to watch and listen to! It definitely seems more that the episode should be set in Australia rather than Antarctica. Perhaps the creators chose to place it in Antarctica to make it more “dramatic” or “attention grabbing” for the non-science viewers much like how they exaggerated the wingspan of Ornithocheirus and the size of Liopleurodon. They did mention early in the episode that Australia and Antarctica were together at the time. But I wonder... maybe fossil evidence for Antarctica at the time wasn’t particularly as big as it was in Australia. So perhaps they used Australia’s extinct biodiversity as a means of compensating for the lack of fossils in Antarctica at the time? This is just me speculating more so than giving an answer. Who knows what the creators were discussing for the making of Spirits of the Ice Forest at the time. Anyways, this was a great episode! Looking forward to part 2!
@PrehistoricAustralia
3 жыл бұрын
Glad you enjoyed this video! 😁 I definitely agree that sensationalism is the reason the production team chose to make the episode’s setting “Antarctica”. What is interesting is that, even by 1999, there were a number of Antarctic dinosaurs that had already been discovered from Late Cretaceous rocks. So there was literally no reason to use Australian dinosaurs in an Antarctic setting 😂 Hope you enjoy my speculation in Part 2 😉
@harnawazboparai8751
3 жыл бұрын
@@PrehistoricAustralia Interesting, even more puzzling with why they didn’t choose Australia for the setting or use Antarctica’s fossilized biodiversity. If you don’t mind asking, what fossilized dinosaurs and other megafauna were in the Antarctic fossil record at the time? Feel free to send me published papers and web links if need be! 😁🧐
@keerthivasannambiraju955
Жыл бұрын
it is bit unrelated but some aspects of this episode has raised me serious doubts. 1. No fossils have yet been found in Antarctica from the early cretaceous, the only fossils that have been found there came from either 186 MYA or 70 MYA. Having said this though, the original idea for the episode was that animals migrated between Australia and Antarctica seasonally. 2. I did comment in another video about the "polar allosaur" possibly being Rapator, which did live 106 MYA but it would have lived in what is now lightning ridge. 3. If Australia and South America did have Megaraptorans, why have they not been found yet in Africa, Madagascar and India yet, since the continents were still connected 106MYA and that Megaraptorans did live alongside Abelisaurids and Titanosaurs in South America by the end of the cretaceous at least.
@IAmAGyroGamer
Жыл бұрын
Funny enough, the American broadcast version of Walking With Dinosaurs, narrated by Avery Brooks, corrected this issue by having titles stating this segment is in Australia.
@peterbreis5407
Жыл бұрын
Marketing by the BBC? Europeans and Americans would think "Not us, just for Aussies. But Antarctica that's weirdly interesting!"
@rileyernst9086
Жыл бұрын
I think that the fossil data tells us that they wanted to make a show based in Antartica. But we had no antartican dinosaurs from the Cretaceous at the time so they had to borrow some from next door.
@VadimOzaki
3 ай бұрын
Remains of Antarctopelta were found in 1980’s. However, its age is the latest Cretaceous and the animal wasn’t named until 2006. Frankly, a better solution would have been to show real Antarctic dinosaurs that lived in the Early Jurassic. Cryolophosaurus was described before this show was created so it would have been great to see the opposite side of the Earth soon after the Triassic. But the authors apparently liked the Cretaceous period more.
@ewoutbruneel4031
Жыл бұрын
They need to dig up more Antartica grounds for fossils!!!
@VadimOzaki
3 ай бұрын
I guess that in Antarctica everything is too frozen and therefore difficult to dig there. But in the future, this continent has many surprises in store for us. Since the glaciers are now melting, over time the conditions for excavations there will become better.
Пікірлер: 32