Talk:3216: Bazookasaurus

F1RST P0ST!!SlimothyJ (talk) 14:34, 6 March 2026 (UTC)

zeroth panel. 82.13.184.33 15:18, 6 March 2026 (UTC)

negative one like 96.225.18.27 15:34, 6 March 2026 (UTC)

I think we should add what type of dinosaur is it based off, but i'm certainly not a dinosaur guy so i don't know. As a firearm guy (i don't own gund don't worry) i'm offended at the fact that that isn't a bazooka and more like a cannon. 45.178.0.39 16:47, 6 March 2026 (UTC)

I tried looking for examples (I'm sure I've read multiple such - not just a single dinosaur) but the only results I was getting back were about Pokémon fossils, which wasn't exactly helpful... 82.13.184.33 16:54, 6 March 2026 (UTC)

So there is Spicomellus, where there is debate over whether it was weaponry, display, or both, and Stegosaurus, where it may have been primarily thermoregulation-related (and high vascularization is part of the evidence to support this). Can't find any clear-cut cases where it's not disputed though. 82.13.184.33 17:08, 6 March 2026 (UTC)

There is a Pokémon called Genosect, which is a revived prehistoric Pokémon with a cannon on its back. The cannon was added by modern scientists working for a criminal organization though.--2600:100A:B1CC:B09C:6C09:24FF:9AC2:AA9B 20:02, 6 March 2026 (UTC)

Despite the "Bazookausaurus" name, the structure is not actually referred to as a bazooka, only a "weapon". It might have been named by a paleontologist who didn't have much experience with the specific names of heavy weaponry, and the species' name could plausibly stay the same even after it became clear that the weapon wasn't actually a bazooka. Even the "-saurus" suffix itself actually means "lizard", which is now widely known to be an inaccurate description! 104.39.200.58 21:06, 6 March 2026 (UTC)