# Why do scientists believe dinosaurs were reptiles?

**URL:** <https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-scientists-believe-dinosaurs-were-reptiles/282476>\
**Category:** Factual Questions\
**Created:** [December 31, 2004, 8:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-scientists-believe-dinosaurs-were-reptiles/282476 "2004-12-31T20:32:55Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 2\
**Page:** 2

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Kyla](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/eada6e/32.png) [@Kyla](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kyla)\
**Post date:** [January 1, 2005, 6:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-scientists-believe-dinosaurs-were-reptiles/282476/21 "2005-01-01T18:18:16Z")

</div>

> [@Darwin's Finch](#):
>
> Horner may well be a looney toon, but I would be very surprised if any dinosaur paleontologists believed that as a rule dinos were “cold-blooded”. At worst, the evidence is ambiguous one way or the other. At best, we have significant evidence that at the very least, those dinos on the path to bird-dom were probably endothermic. With the most recent Chinese proto-bird finds, the fossils suggests that at least some dinos had a feathery covering, the purpose of which was most likely insulation.

This is very interesting - thanks! I wouldn’t want to give anyone the wrong information. I’ll double check my info and ask a paleontologist as soon as I can for an appropriate response for that question. Like I said, it’s a common one and I am not a paleontologist, just a civilian who thinks dinosaurs are cool.

A couple glasses of wine and tiredness induced me to say that the museum scientists think Jack Horner is a looney toon - I don’t want to misrepresent them and I apologize. I have the distinct impression, however, that they (well, Dr. Makovicky) disagree with his ideas in large part.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![GeoDude](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/eb8c5e/32.png) [@GeoDude](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GeoDude)\
**Post date:** [January 2, 2005, 9:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-scientists-believe-dinosaurs-were-reptiles/282476/22 "2005-01-02T21:05:13Z")

</div>

If I may be alowed to nitpick just a little bit, “Dr.” Jack Horner is not a Ph.D. In fact, Jack Horner is not even a Master or a Bachelor–he has no formal degree at all! Yes, friends, he’s basically just an amateur paleontologist done good (as I recall, he got lucky and found the world’s first documented dinosaur eggs).

My cite is Jack Horner’s very own CV:

[http://museum.montana.edu/www/paleocat/2003/JackVita2003.html](http://museum.montana.edu/www/paleocat/2003/JackVita2003.html)

At least a few years ago, Jack’s biggest maverick stance with respect to dinosaurs didn’t have anything to do with the cold-versus-warm blood debate (there is broad consensus that they were warm blooded), but rather over T. rex. Jack’s forwarded the proposition that T. rex wasn’t the ferocious predator that she’s usually depicted to be, but rather a lowly scavanger and opportunist–the metaphorical ancestor of the buzzard rather than the falcon.

[Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-scientists-believe-dinosaurs-were-reptiles/282476.md?page=1)