Jump to content




Welcome to Unexplained Mysteries! Please sign in or create an account to start posting and to access a host of extra features.


- - - - -

Biggest Carnivorous Dino Finally Confirmed


  • Please log in to reply
79 replies to this topic

#76    Archosaur

Archosaur

    Psychic Spy

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,008 posts
  • Joined:01 May 2007

Posted 06 May 2007 - 09:37 PM

Quote

what puzzles me is this: if the carniverous Dinosaurs attained such unbelievable sizes then it is obvious that they had access to a great quantity of easily available food. The Dinosaurs upon which the carniverous Dinosaurs depended must have, themselves, existed in vast numbers - which does not make sense. Even if all the Earth's surface comprised one land mass in the form of Gondwanaland the fact that the higher temperatures that prevailed during the Jurassic stopped the formation of ice in the form of Glaciers and perhaps even at the poles so sea levels would have been at least 120 metres higher than they are today which means that even if all the Earth's land existed in one mass,much of that land would have been submerged.
The land mass available to the Dinosaurs may have been less than what is available to us today so how could the land available to the Dinosaurs have possibly supported them in such apparently gigantic numbers?

"Asian elephants are grazers (Africans are browsers). A full-grown Asian elephant eats approximately 150-200 pounds of food and drinks 30-50 gallons of water every day. Both Asian and African elephants will walk 30 to 50 miles daily in search of food, water, and preferred climate. "
We are talking here of an animal that reaches a maximum weight of around 13 tons but averages 6-8 tons fully grown. Asian Elephants are smaller.
But if we start making a comparison with the larger non- meat eating Dinosaurs which apparently achieved weights of up to 100 tons and,again, apparently herded in large groups (they must have done in order to protect themselves from other Dinosaurs and they were egg laying dont forget which means they would have been vulnerable to attack from a large variety of scavengers) then the quantity of food they would have required to sustain them in one day must have been quite staggering.
For instance - a herd of say 50, 70 ton vegetarian Dinosaurs would have required at least 82,500 LBS of vegetable matter per day in order to sustain them and would have cleared an estimated 5 square miles of food bearing land every day!!!!!!!!!!
Now, I would accept these figures if perhaps only a few herds of the larger Dinosaurs existed, but they must have in reality existed in very large numbers as they had 150 million years to evolve so we may be looking at herds numbering tens of thousands!!!!!!
And another factor has to be worked into this - the largest Dinosaurs must have been very restricted as to the type of land they could cross. A creature weighing 70-100 tons would have been denied access to mountainous or very soft ground which again. restricts the amount of food available to them.Swampy regions would have been entirely denied to them as would lake shores and river beds.

Actually not only are the carnivores huge, but you must also consider that we have dug up quite a number of them. Fossilization is normally a rare event, were it not for the Le Bria Tar Pits we would not have nearly as much data on early mammalian carnivores.

Clearly, to support such carnivores, the herds and the plants to support the herbivores had to exist on a whole different scale. And this seems to be what we are finding. The sad truth is, today's world is almost a desert compared to the age of dinosaurs.



#77    wooopla

wooopla

    Alien Embryo

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 1 posts
  • Joined:09 May 2007

Posted 09 May 2007 - 06:18 AM

o.k this is Realy starting to bug the crap out of me draconic chronicler i dont hate you or nothing But your  Quote " Go back through the thread if you like and see the links to real scientific sites that confirm this"   hello are you 5 or somthing this is the internet Nothing is scientific on the internet i love spino dont get me wrong but its the longest 100% hands down and gigantosaurs is still the Biggest by the mass of it you dont compare a snake and a Rino and say the snake is bigger dude if you want to give Proof of your Clam YOU get a scientific  Video Proof of spino is bigger not Wikki half of Wikki says is BS  Like Globle Warm is BS



#78    draconic chronicler

draconic chronicler

    Majestic 12 Operative

  • Banned
  • 6,229 posts
  • Joined:27 Aug 2005
  • Gender:Not Selected

Posted 11 May 2007 - 04:58 AM

Quote

o.k this is Realy starting to bug the crap out of me draconic chronicler i dont hate you or nothing But your  Quote " Go back through the thread if you like and see the links to real scientific sites that confirm this"   hello are you 5 or somthing this is the internet Nothing is scientific on the internet i love spino dont get me wrong but its the longest 100% hands down and gigantosaurs is still the Biggest by the mass of it you dont compare a snake and a Rino and say the snake is bigger dude if you want to give Proof of your Clam YOU get a scientific  Video Proof of spino is bigger not Wikki half of Wikki says is BS  Like Globle Warm is BS


So are you saying the latest Spino fossil cited in numerous websites is just a fantasy? If the "internet doesn't count", I am sure the very next published dino book will document it.  For your information, a spino approximately one third longer than every other theropod would in all liklihood also be the heaviest.  



#79    draconic chronicler

draconic chronicler

    Majestic 12 Operative

  • Banned
  • 6,229 posts
  • Joined:27 Aug 2005
  • Gender:Not Selected

Posted 11 May 2007 - 05:17 AM

Quote

Actually not only are the carnivores huge, but you must also consider that we have dug up quite a number of them. Fossilization is normally a rare event, were it not for the Le Bria Tar Pits we would not have nearly as much data on early mammalian carnivores.

Clearly, to support such carnivores, the herds and the plants to support the herbivores had to exist on a whole different scale. And this seems to be what we are finding. The sad truth is, today's world is almost a desert compared to the age of dinosaurs.


Actually, the large carnivores are not particularly common.  I didn't think there more than a dozen or so T Rexes ever found, and although many spino teeth are found, only two more or less identifiable animals.  

If dinos had a mammalian metablolism, then yes, the amount of food they must intake would be almost impossible, but the large ones at least were probably ectotherms.  I seem to recall one model that proved it would have been impossible for the large sauropods to be endotherms, for even if they fed 24 hours a day, their relatively tiny heads could not intake enough food to sustain such huge bodies.  And we see the largest of all theropods (Spino), with a sail, which seems to be an ectothermic strategy to raise and lower body temperature.  And if Spino was cold blood, all of the other large carnosaurs probably were also.


#80    Archosaur

Archosaur

    Psychic Spy

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,008 posts
  • Joined:01 May 2007

Posted 11 May 2007 - 05:30 AM

Quote

Actually, the large carnivores are not particularly common.  I didn't think there more than a dozen or so T Rexes ever found, and although many spino teeth are found, only two more or less identifiable animals.  

If dinos had a mammalian metablolism, then yes, the amount of food they must intake would be almost impossible, but the large ones at least were probably ectotherms.  I seem to recall one model that proved it would have been impossible for the large sauropods to be endotherms, for even if they fed 24 hours a day, their relatively tiny heads could not intake enough food to sustain such huge bodies.  And we see the largest of all theropods (Spino), with a sail, which seems to be an ectothermic strategy to raise and lower body temperature.  And if Spino was cold blood, all of the other large carnosaurs probably were also.

Good point with the sail. While there is still controversy about whether they were warm or cold blooded, the sail makes a strong argument to a cold blooded biology. Still, with all of the giant animals and plants, it looks like the earth never really recovered fully, that this world just has less life to it.






1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users