There is no evidence that T.Rex ever had feathers as an adult.....feathers only make sense on smaller dinos. Why don't people ever want to see Brachiosaurs with feathers? Easy. It makes no sense because they are too big and don't need them. Same applies to large theropods for the most part. Lack of feathers has already been addressed in the game, films and books by the "null allele problem" that Wu cannot seem to solve. It was also addressed in JW directly that all the animals if they had pure genomes would look and behave quite differently and that nothing in JP has ever been natural. Why alter that canon now? No feathers!
Yes, a T-rex or Brachiosaurus would only be as feathered as an elephant is hairy: it makes little to no sense without an extreme cold weather.
As for the in-universe justification, I get it, I'm just saying it's something I'd love to see.
It wouldn't alter the canon as long as they don't include them in a movie...
(would you call the Stegoceratops, Spinoraptor and Ankylodocus canon?)
Images specifically about T-rex because
- I found this funny-looking purple dino and I wanted to share it, noting that the Tyrannosaurus lacks a vivid pattern.
- Someone saw it and (very understandably) said "PLEASE NO", so I included a pair of more reasonable suggestions.
- The T.rex is probably the most iconic JurassicPark dinosaur, among the Velociraptor.
Speaking of the books, I'm reading the first JurassicPark novel, and it has a lot of "dinosaurs are birds" moments. If Crichton had written feathered dinosaurs as an artistic liberty back in 1990, he would be considered a visionary like Jules Verne.
Back to the feathers theme, just a little observation: the Indominus, the Indoraptor and the Velociraptors from JurassicPark3 do have quills.
BTW, a very good observation the lack of any feathered Brachiosaurus (or any sauropod, by the matter) reconstruction, I've never thought of that
