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.


- - - - -

Who terrorizes the tyrannosaurs ?


  • Please log in to reply
12 replies to this topic

#1    UM-Bot

UM-Bot

    News, media and articles

  • 6,196 posts
  • Joined:21 Mar 2001
  • Gender:Male

  • Beep Boop

Posted 22 November 2013 - 02:20 PM

A newly discovered dinosaur is believed to have been more than a match for the relatives of T. rex.

Quote

Known as Siats meekerorum, the 40ft long meat eater lived around 98 million years ago and would have been a formidable rival to any other predatory dinosaurs of the time. Living 30 million years before Tyrannosaurus rex, Siats is believed to have dominated its ancestors long before the tyrant lizard itself appeared on the scene.

Read More: http://www.unexplain...he-tyrannosaurs

This is an official comment thread for a main site news story, article or video.
Please keep comments civil and on topic.
Thank you.

#2    krypter3

krypter3

    Extraterrestrial Entity

  • Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 433 posts
  • Joined:10 Feb 2013
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Australia

Posted 22 November 2013 - 02:46 PM

Looks exactly like a T-rex...exactly how do they tell if this is a different species altogether.  I mean sure it liked a long long time before hand, but it literally looks (to someone who doesn't study dinosaurs obviously) a T-rex.  Anybody here a dinosaur lover?  Because I'm thinking why name it a new species, it could just be a early version of the T.

Edited by krypter3, 22 November 2013 - 02:48 PM.


#3    Euphorbia

Euphorbia

    Odd Plant Grower

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,295 posts
  • Joined:19 Jul 2010
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Somewhere east of San Francisco

  • You can't just choose to believe something.

    Believing in something doesn't make it true.

Posted 22 November 2013 - 03:01 PM

View Postkrypter3, on 22 November 2013 - 02:46 PM, said:

Looks exactly like a T-rex...exactly how do they tell if this is a different species altogether.  I mean sure it liked a long long time before hand, but it literally looks (to someone who doesn't study dinosaurs obviously) a T-rex.  Anybody here a dinosaur lover?  Because I'm thinking why name it a new species, it could just be a early version of the T.

It looks like a Tyrannosaurus rex because it is a Tyrannosaurus rex. The picture in this article is the same picture of Tyrannosaurus rex on Wikipedia.....

Get three coffins ready.

My mistake, four coffins.

Separation of corporation and state!

#4    ShadowOfMothman

ShadowOfMothman

    Alien Embryo

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 58 posts
  • Joined:29 Sep 2012
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:All of time and space. Everything that ever happened or ever will.

Posted 22 November 2013 - 04:09 PM

View PostEuphorbia, on 22 November 2013 - 03:01 PM, said:

It looks like a Tyrannosaurus rex because it is a Tyrannosaurus rex. The picture in this article is the same picture of Tyrannosaurus rex on Wikipedia.....

View Postkrypter3, on 22 November 2013 - 02:46 PM, said:

Looks exactly like a T-rex...exactly how do they tell if this is a different species altogether.  I mean sure it liked a long long time before hand, but it literally looks (to someone who doesn't study dinosaurs obviously) a T-rex.  Anybody here a dinosaur lover?  Because I'm thinking why name it a new species, it could just be a early version of the T.
Actually, it's pretty clear, just from the picture, that this animal is not related to T. rex. You can clearly tell from the shape of its skull its a carcharodontosaur. And even if it was an earlier "version" of T. rex it would still be considered a different species.

View PostEuphorbia, on 22 November 2013 - 03:01 PM, said:

It looks like a Tyrannosaurus rex because it is a Tyrannosaurus rex. The picture in this article is the same picture of Tyrannosaurus rex on Wikipedia.....
The dinosaur in the picture is not a T. rex. It has a different skull shape and longer arms, with three fingered hands. T. rex had a more robust skull, shorter arms, and only two fingers on each hand.


#5    Euphorbia

Euphorbia

    Odd Plant Grower

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,295 posts
  • Joined:19 Jul 2010
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Somewhere east of San Francisco

  • You can't just choose to believe something.

    Believing in something doesn't make it true.

Posted 22 November 2013 - 04:26 PM

View PostShadowOfMothman, on 22 November 2013 - 04:09 PM, said:

Actually, it's pretty clear, just from the picture, that this animal is not related to T. rex. You can clearly tell from the shape of its skull its a carcharodontosaur. And even if it was an earlier "version" of T. rex it would still be considered a different species.


The dinosaur in the picture is not a T. rex. It has a different skull shape and longer arms, with three fingered hands. T. rex had a more robust skull, shorter arms, and only two fingers on each hand.

So, you're trying to tell me you're a dinosaur expert and Wikipedia inserted an incorrect picture?

Do you have any proof to back up these claims?

Get three coffins ready.

My mistake, four coffins.

Separation of corporation and state!

#6    pj bandit

pj bandit

    Alien Embryo

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 66 posts
  • Joined:18 Apr 2010
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:Belfast, NI

  • lets start changing the world

Posted 22 November 2013 - 04:31 PM

http://en.wikipedia....i/Tyrannosaurus here take a look or yourself, its from Carnegie museum of natural history.


#7    LimeGelatin

LimeGelatin

    Alien Embryo

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 93 posts
  • Joined:23 Jul 2008
  • Gender:Not Selected
  • Location:Indiana

  • Don't make doing what's good for you contingent on the responses doing so will get you from other people.

Posted 22 November 2013 - 04:44 PM

Asteroids, volcanoes, and cold weather also do the trick... -LoLzzz


#8    Leonardo

Leonardo

    Awake

  • Member
  • 18,400 posts
  • Joined:20 Oct 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:UK

  • Hell is a guilty conscience

Posted 22 November 2013 - 05:14 PM

View PostEuphorbia, on 22 November 2013 - 04:26 PM, said:

So, you're trying to tell me you're a dinosaur expert and Wikipedia inserted an incorrect picture?

Do you have any proof to back up these claims?

View Postpj bandit, on 22 November 2013 - 04:31 PM, said:

http://en.wikipedia....i/Tyrannosaurus here take a look or yourself, its from Carnegie museum of natural history.

I believe SoM is referring to the artistic impression of Siats meekerorum in the Telegraph article, whereas you two are referring to the photo of a T. rex skeleton mounted at the Carnegie Museum, in the article here on UM.

Two different pictures showing two different dinosaurs. SoM is correct in his statements that the picture in the Telegraph clearly shows a carcharodontosaur. The blade-like teeth immediately distinguish it from a Tyrannosaur.

Edited by Leonardo, 22 November 2013 - 05:16 PM.

In the book of life, the answers aren't in the back. - Charlie Brown

"It is a profound and necessary truth that the deep things in science are not found because they are useful; they are found because it was possible to find them."  - J. Robert Oppenheimer; Scientific Director; The Manhattan Project

"talking bull**** is not a victimless crime" - Marina Hyde, author.

#9    Euphorbia

Euphorbia

    Odd Plant Grower

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,295 posts
  • Joined:19 Jul 2010
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Somewhere east of San Francisco

  • You can't just choose to believe something.

    Believing in something doesn't make it true.

Posted 22 November 2013 - 05:21 PM

OK, I see the problem. The picture in the UM article shows a Tyrannosaurus rex, not the dinosaur in question. You have to go to the original article by the Telegraph for the real picture.

http://www.telegraph...aurs-found.html

Get three coffins ready.

My mistake, four coffins.

Separation of corporation and state!

#10    woopypooky

woopypooky

    Apparition

  • Member
  • PipPip
  • 269 posts
  • Joined:26 Apr 2007

Posted 23 November 2013 - 10:22 AM

looked exactly like t-rex, except it has furs


#11    Frank Merton

Frank Merton

    Blue fish

  • Member
  • 17,137 posts
  • Joined:22 Jan 2013
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam

Posted 23 November 2013 - 10:35 AM

I strongly doubt T. Rex had any competitors in its time frame and its range.  Other dinosaurs that could have given it competition lived other times and other places.  The only animal it would have had to fear then was another T. Rex.


#12    ShadowOfMothman

ShadowOfMothman

    Alien Embryo

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 58 posts
  • Joined:29 Sep 2012
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:All of time and space. Everything that ever happened or ever will.

Posted 23 November 2013 - 01:41 PM

View PostLeonardo, on 22 November 2013 - 05:14 PM, said:

I believe SoM is referring to the artistic impression of Siats meekerorum in the Telegraph article, whereas you two are referring to the photo of a T. rex skeleton mounted at the Carnegie Museum, in the article here on UM.

Two different pictures showing two different dinosaurs. SoM is correct in his statements that the picture in the Telegraph clearly shows a carcharodontosaur. The blade-like teeth immediately distinguish it from a Tyrannosaur.
That's exactly what I meant. Thanks for clearing this up :tu:


#13    ZaraKitty

ZaraKitty

    Psychic Spy

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,202 posts
  • Joined:10 Mar 2012
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:Australia

  • I can see it in their eyes, they've already died.

Posted 13 December 2013 - 01:42 PM

T-rex won out by being hairless and one finger-less? Take that earlier apex predator!

The internet is a series of tubes, and those tubes are full of cats.




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users