There is no way they could reach the conclusions they did (Clad in fur and boasting feet adorned with lightly hooved appendages ensheathed in keratin) with this information.
This bothers me about many scientists. Based almost entirely on speculation, they offer their opinions on what something might have looked and behaved like, when the best and most scientifically correct answer they could and should give is “I/we don’t know”.
“Being a contrarian I looked up to see how they put this animal together. From about 4 skull fragments and a handful of teeth.”
This reminds me of the old TV show “Quincy” which was about a medical examiner. In one episode he had a leg bone, and from just that bone he reconstructed the entire person. If my memory is correct, the model he made of the person was good enough so the leg bone could be ID’d to a real person. From then on I knew the show was full of BS.
Full of BS just like the creation of this threads monster.
More fake science.
***From about 4 skull fragments and a handful of teeth.***
Kind of like the Piltdown man who turned out to be a fake and the Peking Man for which no bones except skulls are found. The body bones disappeared in WWII.