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.


- - - - -

T-Rex was a scavenger?


  • Please log in to reply
88 replies to this topic

#46    DemonWatcher

DemonWatcher

    Extraterrestrial Entity

  • Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 413 posts
  • Joined:08 Sep 2005
  • Gender:Male

  • I am a Watcher who must endure, in order to see I must abide by the laws of time.

Posted 26 October 2005 - 04:36 AM

Seeking, you are only making yourself look like an ass, and believe me i do it alot, but you take the cake.
DC, Essence, and Frogfish, have shot down what you said because accepted scientific evidence show Tyranosaurus Rex, as being a Hunter, not a Scavenger, though he may have done that if he was injured, sick, or other wise unable to hunt, just like predators will do in our time.
T-Rex could hide, especially since it has been shown that rex fossils have been found around what once were forested areas, that the fossil record has shown to be very thick in th amount of flora available, easy hiding place, just like tigers do.
Besides why have a powerful bite if you are going to eat carrion only, all you need are sharp teeth, not powerful jaws with sharp teeth.

I am a Watcher by birth, and so it should not surprise any when my observations are truthful.

History is where you confuse the long since deceased
And irritate the h**l out of the living.~ Golden Hawk

#47    seeking

seeking

    Poltergeist

  • Member
  • 2,678 posts
  • Joined:28 Jul 2003
  • Location:Connecticut

  • Unthinking faith would be a good question to ask the creator of the human mind.

Posted 26 October 2005 - 07:11 AM

[quote]"This doesn't mean T. rex was too slow to prey on large herbivores such as horn-faced Triceratops or duck-billed Edmontosaurus. All were elephant-sized, and all were likely poor runners. Remains indicate T. rex ate those animals, but whether it killed or scavenged them is still a mystery."
FROM THAT LINK OF YOURS.
http://www.dinosauria.com/jdp/trex/gracile.htm
http://www.enchantedlearning.com/subjects/.../Trexdiet.shtml
http://www.bbc.co.uk/science/horizon/2004/trexqa.shtml[/quote]

[/quote]
that quote is comparing the trex's running speed against the "preys" running speed, trex needs the speed to strike as well as the coordination to strike to be an ambush predator.


[quote][quote]you know i have seen mice do that, however thats because the snake is camoflaged, also the mouse does not recognize the snake as being dangerous becasue they are bred with no worries....in the wild its a different story.[/quote]

HAPPENS IN THE WILD TOO...[/quote]


nope, sorry, all wild animals are born with the natural instincts to detect potential dangers, feeder mice are domesticated

[quote][quote]those snaps on animal planet are not hunting strikes, they are warning strikes, theres no way you wuold be able to dodge a snake like that, and if you can, you are of a rare kind.[/quote]

THERE IS NO DIFFERENCE[/quote]


theres no difference between a warning strike and a real strike? are you out of your mind? were are you getting your information from? your own imagination?


[quote][quote]the animals you are using as comparisons all have speed, trex has none, what animals today are very large and slow that hunt? just answer me that one question.[/quote]

bUT, T-REX DID HAVE SPEED, AND IT WAS FASTER THAN ITS PREY  ITS FUN REPEATING THESE SAME BASIC FACTS TO YOU OVER AND OVER....[/quote]

ok lets assume that the trex was fast enough to run down prey....he still doesnt have the eye sight or the agility to do anything to the animal.  Assuming trex is an ambush predator, he still doesnt have the quickness to attack


[quote]3 THINGS, T REX WAS FASTER THAN ALL OF ITS PREY ITEMS, SECOND, T-REX WOULD OF STAYED DOWNWIND. THIRD, THEY WOULD STAND CLOSE ENOUGH THAT THEY WOULDN'T ENCITE PANIC, AND THEN CHARGE (A CHARGE FOR A DINOSAUR, BECAUSE YOU SEEM TO COMPARE DINOSAURUS TO CHEETAHS)[/quote]

assuming that the prey were slower, again the trex still didnt have the agility to do anything, the downwind argument would work, sure its possible for a trex to charge, but why then do no predators of today use this tactic? its not a predator tactic


[quote]HMMMMM, I WONDER IF YOU HAVE EVER SEEN A HYENA, OR DO YOU EVEN KNOW WHAT HYENAS ARE? IF YOU DO, THEN YOU WOULD KNOW THAT HYENAS ATTACK PREY WHEN THEY FOLLOW HERDS...INTRESTING [/quote]

ive never personally seen a hyena, but the hyenas attacking prey in herds would be an oprotunistic predation....just what i was saying....the trex is mainly scavenger but will attack if the oprotunity arose.

[quote][quote][quote]ALSO, I HAVE NOTICED THAT WHENEVER WE PROVE YOU WRONG, YOU SAY WE SPECULATE AND THAT YOUR IDIOTIC NONSENSE IS FACT...JUST AN OBSERVATION [/quote]

you havent proved me wrong, though...still waiting actually[/quote]
^
IRONIC, ISN'T IT?[/quote]

still waiting.

[quote]
IT WAS FOR DINOSAURUS, AND IS STILL TRUE TODAY...I SAY THAT YOU GO AND DO SOME RESEARCH FOR AWHILE, THEN COME BACK AFTER A FEW DAYS, BECAUSE YOU ARE JUST MAKING A FOOL OF YOURSELF [/quote]

rolleyes.gif



[quote]I DID, AND IT'S EYESIGHT WAS PRETTY GOOD...NO, THANK YOU [/quote]


[quote]OK, LET ME MAKE AN ANALOGY HERE...A HYDRAULIC PUMP HAS THE POWER TO CRUSH STONE, THINK OF THAT AS A T-REX SKULL...NOW, ADD PIECES OF LEAD AS TEETH, AND TELL IT TO CRUSH STONE...JUST LIKE REAL T-REX TEETH WOULD, THE LEAD WOULD BEND AND BREAK...WHICH WOULD NOT BE VERY PLEASANT FOR A SCAVENGING T-REX...ONE REASON IT WAS A PREADATOR.[/quote]

hes not soley eating bones, but if a bone was to get in the way,then it would not prevent him from eating what he could, no animal would just eat bones all day


[quote]how did he camoflague himself?

DOWN WIND OF HIS PREY.[/quote]

thats not camoflague

[quote]
YES, A T-REX STANDING THERE WOULD BE MUCH OF A MENANCE BECAUSE THEY WOULD SEE LOUNGING PREDATORS EVERYDAY[/quote]

you honestly think that trex's prey items would not be alarmed of a trex just lounging around?

[quote]HAVE YOU EVER HEARD OF ELEPHANST CHARGING, I GUESS NOT BECAUSE OF YOUR NAIVE COMMENTS [/quote]

an elephant isnt a predator though, no predators of today charge at thier prey, no predators of today are even to the same proportions as trex to his "prey"

[quote]i ADVISE TAKING A READING CLASS, AND READ OUR POSTS, INSTEAD OF RANDOMLY DISMISSING THEM AND STATING NONSENSE MADE UP ON THE SPOT [/quote]

oh im not randonmy dismissing them, you have good points, the down wind arguement, and the hunting in packs, but thats all you got

[quote]O SORRY, I FORGOT ABOUT THE MASS KILLING SPREES CARCASSES WENT ON........ONLY IN SELF DEFENSE, YOU WOULD REALLY THINK A HADRSAUR WOULD GO OUT AND CHALLENGE A T-REX? I THINK YOU SHOULD AQUIRE A LITTLE SOMETHING CALLED KNOWLEDGE [/quote]

on the rare occasion that a trex did attack a living dinosaur, im sure they would fight back, as all animals of today do

[quote]AND ALL YOUR NONSENSE COULD BE FROM OPPORTUNISTIC SCAVENGING...I HOPE YOU REALISED THAT THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS OPPURTUNISTIC HUNTING, ONLY OPPURTUNISTIC SCAVENGING, BUT SADLY NOT YET [/quote]


what are you talkinga bout... no such thing as oprotunistic hunting?   jeez....


[quote]
DO YOU NOT KNOW ALMOST 90 PERCENT OF FACTS ABOUT T-REX PROVE THAT IT IS A HUNTER, OR DO YOU JUST LIKE BASKING IN BLISSFUL IGNORANCE?[/quote]

show me them then, man o man, im not one of those people who believe something and stick with it no matter what, if you can show me how trex is a predator than i will change my stance, its as easy as that, show me the proof and i will accept it, i have no problem in admiting being wrong, all im saying is based on what i know, and have seen/read/etc it shows that trex is a scavenger.

[quote]ALL THIS BLUFFING IS GONNA BACKFIRE ON YOU
OK, T-REX'S "STEAK-KNIFE" TEETH...[/quote]

to eat the remaining flesh of the carcass.

[quote]YES, WILD SPECULATION IS MUCH MORE LOGICAL THAN COLD, HARD FACTS....SARCASM AGAIN.[/quote]


[quote]QUITE FRANKLY, ITS THE OTHER WAY AROUND, EVER HEARD OF THE WORD PALEONTOLOGISTS? EVER HEARD OF HOW MANY FACTS THEY HAVE PROVEN TO YOUR SILLY NOTIONS THAT T-REX IS A PREDATOR. AGAIN , DO SOME RESEARCH FOR A FEW DAYS, THEN COME BACK ENLIGHTENED FELLOW FRIEND [/quote]

im not speaking on this subject with lack of knowledge like you seem to be thinking, i have the luxury of seeing both sides of the story, my mind has not been finitely made on the topic.


[quote]LET US USE ANOTHER ANALOGY! A DRAGOONFLY HAS A BRAIN THE SIZE OF A PINHEAD, YET IT HAS HIGHLY USEFUL EYES THAT MAKE IT A POWERFUL AND DANGEROUS PREDATOR....AND YOU SAID BEFORE...:ITS NOT THE BRAIN -TO BODY MASS RATIO, ITS THE OVERALL SIZE....[/quote]

ok, not sure if you have any background on neurology, but a brain alone is not responsible for eyesight, you have specific parts that are used for different things, in the case of the trex, he has a large smelling sectino and very small vision section, and as for the dragon fly, hes an insect wich is comparing apples to oranges

[quote]YES, I FORGOT T-REXES DO NOT HAVE BRAINS...[/quote]

rolleyes.gif they may have brains, but not an adequete visual cortex.


[quote]IT IS TRULY FUN TO POINT OUT YOUR IGNORANCE...I WOULD ADVISE YOU TO COMPARE T-REX TO ITS PREY ITEMS, AND SEE HOW MUCH FASTER AND ACCUTE T REX IS.[/quote]

all of the other animals are more proportionate with body mass, size, weight, even eye sight and smell, if anything they are on the same level, you need an edge to be a succesful predator

[quote] GO AND FIND ENLIGHTENMENT FRIEND, IT HAS BEEN MY PLEASURE TO HELP YOU STRAIGHTEN OUT    

GOOD LUCK! [/quote]

you havent showed me anything yet!  honestly i can see the anger in your posts, you should relax, its just a debate, but seriously if you got something proving to you that trex is a predator, show me

Edited by seeking, 26 October 2005 - 07:12 AM.

Posted Image
"Religion has no place in public schools the way facts have no place in organized religion."


#48    draconic chronicler

draconic chronicler

    Majestic 12 Operative

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

Posted 26 October 2005 - 11:26 AM

Seeking, it is not even a debate.  You simply cannot accept common sense.  You are so dead set in your beliefs, you are not open-minded to anything, exactly like a fundamentalist Christain who insists the world was created in 6 24 hour days and that all the worlds lifeforms coinhabited the earth together.  You cannot reason with them, nor can anyone reason with you.  BTW, do you pray to your one true God, Horner every night, or just attend the Church of Horner on Sundays?  Sorry to burst your bubble, but the "T-Rex as scavenger theory" was nothing more that yet another "Horner Publicity stunt" with not an ounce of scientific evidence.


#49    darkknight

darkknight

    Psychic Spy

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,335 posts
  • Joined:10 Oct 2005

Posted 26 October 2005 - 11:53 AM

Quote


you are not open-minded to anything, exactly like a fundamentalist Christain who insists the world was created in 6 24 hour days and that all the worlds lifeforms coinhabited the earth together.    BTW, do you pray to your one true God, Horner every night, or just attend the Church of Horner on Sundays?  

i dont like what just said! do not bring that topic into this debate.

Edited by darkknight, 26 October 2005 - 11:54 AM.


#50    frogfish

frogfish

    ஆங்கிலத்த&

  • Member
  • 11,142 posts
  • Joined:19 Sep 2005
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:The Swamp

  • Flyfishing -- the Art of the Gods



Posted 26 October 2005 - 09:28 PM

yes please keep christianity out of it...they have a reason....just like you and dragons...BUT I AGREE ON WHAT YOU SAID ABOUT HORNER

-Frogfish-
Posted Image
Researcher-Prostate Cancer Oncogene Research
University of Michigan Comprehensive Cancer Center

The National Center for Biotech Information
My Photo Gallery: Capturing India

Fishing is a Way of Life!


#51    frogfish

frogfish

    ஆங்கிலத்த&

  • Member
  • 11,142 posts
  • Joined:19 Sep 2005
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:The Swamp

  • Flyfishing -- the Art of the Gods



Posted 26 October 2005 - 09:47 PM

lets see....

link
link 2


-Frogfish-
Posted Image
Researcher-Prostate Cancer Oncogene Research
University of Michigan Comprehensive Cancer Center

The National Center for Biotech Information
My Photo Gallery: Capturing India

Fishing is a Way of Life!


#52    frogfish

frogfish

    ஆங்கிலத்த&

  • Member
  • 11,142 posts
  • Joined:19 Sep 2005
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:The Swamp

  • Flyfishing -- the Art of the Gods



Posted 26 October 2005 - 10:00 PM

Quote

that quote is comparing the trex's running speed against the "preys" running speed, trex needs the speed to strike as well as the coordination to strike to be an ambush predator.


if t-rex is faster than its prey, its more agile too...so it could kill them...use common sense...

Quote

nope, sorry, all wild animals are born with the natural instincts to detect potential dangers, feeder mice are domesticated


sorry, your wrong, feeder mice still have instincts....and it does happen in the wild, how else would snakes eat...even HORNER could see that!

Quote

theres no difference between a warning strike and a real strike? are you out of your mind? were are you getting your information from? your own imagination?


do you really think there a difference in speed....i would shut my mouth if I were you because you don't know nothing about herpetology

Quote

ok lets assume that the trex was fast enough to run down prey....he still doesnt have the eye sight or the agility to do anything to the animal. Assuming trex is an ambush predator, he still doesnt have the quickness to attack


lol, use common sense...if he is faster than his prey, he is more agile and "quick" so he could ambush them...

Quote

3 THINGS, T REX WAS FASTER THAN ALL OF ITS PREY ITEMS, SECOND, T-REX WOULD OF STAYED DOWNWIND. THIRD, THEY WOULD STAND CLOSE ENOUGH THAT THEY WOULDN'T ENCITE PANIC, AND THEN CHARGE (A CHARGE FOR A DINOSAUR, BECAUSE YOU SEEM TO COMPARE DINOSAURUS TO CHEETAHS)


QUOTE

Quote

3 THINGS, T REX WAS FASTER THAN ALL OF ITS PREY ITEMS, SECOND, T-REX WOULD OF STAYED DOWNWIND. THIRD, THEY WOULD STAND CLOSE ENOUGH THAT THEY WOULDN'T ENCITE PANIC, AND THEN CHARGE (A CHARGE FOR A DINOSAUR, BECAUSE YOU SEEM TO COMPARE DINOSAURUS TO CHEETAHS)


assuming that the prey were slower, again the trex still didnt have the agility to do anything, the downwind argument would work, sure its possible for a trex to charge, but why then do no predators of today use this tactic? its not a predator tactic


then how does a cheetah hunt? They are the same principles

QUOTE
QUOTE
HMMMMM, I WONDER IF YOU HAVE EVER SEEN A HYENA, OR DO YOU EVEN KNOW WHAT HYENAS ARE? IF YOU DO, THEN YOU WOULD KNOW THAT HYENAS ATTACK PREY WHEN THEY FOLLOW HERDS...INTRESTING


ive never personally seen a hyena, but the hyenas attacking prey in herds would be an oprotunistic predation....just what i was saying....the trex is mainly scavenger but will attack if the oprotunity arose.

so oppurtunistic hunting is when an animal mainly hunts, not scavenges? Ok, then original.gif trex is an "oppurtunistic hunter". YES, hyenas do hunt more than they scavenge....

QUOTE
still waiting.

even more ironic....i will just let you be ignorant, no one believes you anyways grin2.gif


I'll stop here, because it is usless arguing with a thick-skulled person like you original.gif...Kind of like trying to convince a catholic that abortion is good...
Sorry, but i wqasn't angry, I just used CAPS because it was easier to disinguish what i typed.

-Frogfish-
Posted Image
Researcher-Prostate Cancer Oncogene Research
University of Michigan Comprehensive Cancer Center

The National Center for Biotech Information
My Photo Gallery: Capturing India

Fishing is a Way of Life!


#53    green_dude777

green_dude777

    Psychic Spy

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,052 posts
  • Joined:24 May 2004
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Ohio

  • When you look back in life, you don't regret what you did, you regret what you never attempted.

Posted 27 October 2005 - 07:15 PM

Sorry Seeking, but I'm in agreement with DC, Frogfish, and the rest.  I'm guessing you're from a midwestern state?  Assuming you would "see" a T-Rex in an open field?  Have you ever travelled to a thick jungle?  Have you not seen trees and brush taller than a T-Rex?  I'm only from Ohio, so I know about open areas.  But I've also been through thick forests, not woods.  I personally could see how something so big could hide off of a game trail, wait for some type of pack animals passing through, ambush and come up with dinner.  

     The eyesight note:  how good of eyes do you need to be able to see a dinosaur from 10-50 feet away?  I know blind people who would know when a dinosaur is that close.

     The speed note:  last time I checked, not too many dinos were that fast.  We're not talking about cheetahs, or even gazelle.  So maybe a Rex couldn't catch another faster PREDATOR (remember, predators are the faster ones) but ambushes a waterhole and has a chance to catch a variety of different dino delicacies.

The scavenger theory is interesting, I might have bought more from Horner if he would've endorsed this While or Before the movies were selling or sold. (Hint, Hint)

No pun intended, Peace



#54    seeking

seeking

    Poltergeist

  • Member
  • 2,678 posts
  • Joined:28 Jul 2003
  • Location:Connecticut

  • Unthinking faith would be a good question to ask the creator of the human mind.

Posted 28 October 2005 - 05:59 PM

allright people, seriously, you are all making assumptions of me and i think its funny

i dont believe in god, or any of the like, im from CT, and i do have an open mind, you can ask anyone here on this board that has seen my posts

i will reply back to the posts more thouroughly after i get out of work, ta ta for now

Posted Image
"Religion has no place in public schools the way facts have no place in organized religion."


#55    draconic chronicler

draconic chronicler

    Majestic 12 Operative

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

Posted 28 October 2005 - 11:10 PM

I think even the poor eyesight stuff is very dubious as well and not based on any reality.  The closest living relatives to dinos are birds and crocodilians.  Birds have the best vision in the world and crocs have excellent vision as well, undoubtedly better than humans, both day and night.  T-Rex also has a top predator's binocular vison, something Horner didn't want to mention.  T-Rex had incredible olfactory powers, and this would be important in finding game trails and ambushing prey.  The notion that T Rex would die if it stumbled is nearly as asinine as Horner's scavenger theory.  Maybe he came up with that one too.  If we took "computer models" as gospel, than it would be impossible for bumblebees to fly.  Computer models also said T-REx was fast, then, that he was slow, and that he could not get up if he fell.  It is all BS, a researcher can make a computer model to exactly what he wants it to.  The way to learn about extinct animals is to study the behaviour of similar living living animals in similar ecological niches.  Horner didn't do this, which is why the theory is so flawed.  The onlyu thing it had going for it from the very begiining is the gullible human tendency to accept any instance of "revisonism" no matter how contrived.

Edited by draconic chronicler, 28 October 2005 - 11:14 PM.


#56    Doctor_Strangelove

Doctor_Strangelove

    Nazi Scientist

  • Member
  • 2,616 posts
  • Joined:28 Jan 2005
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Halifax, Nova Scotia

  • Mein Führer! I can walk!

Posted 01 November 2005 - 01:51 AM

I think it was either both or just a scavenger. Or a possibility of both my answers. And no i'm not crazy. Well I am, but oh-well.

It may have originally been a predator or predator/scavenger, but as time went on, they just started to steal other carnivores meals.

But i'm still sticking with both, maybe it picked it's battles. Which would be easier, killing a large triceratops or scaring away velicitraptors?

"Isn't it weird when users quote themselves in their own signatures?"-Doctor_Strangelove

#57    frogfish

frogfish

    ஆங்கிலத்த&

  • Member
  • 11,142 posts
  • Joined:19 Sep 2005
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:The Swamp

  • Flyfishing -- the Art of the Gods



Posted 01 November 2005 - 02:10 AM

Soory, but Velociraptors lived in Mongolia, not N. America...It was more a hunter than a scavenger, clearly!

-Frogfish-
Posted Image
Researcher-Prostate Cancer Oncogene Research
University of Michigan Comprehensive Cancer Center

The National Center for Biotech Information
My Photo Gallery: Capturing India

Fishing is a Way of Life!


#58    DemonWatcher

DemonWatcher

    Extraterrestrial Entity

  • Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 413 posts
  • Joined:08 Sep 2005
  • Gender:Male

  • I am a Watcher who must endure, in order to see I must abide by the laws of time.

Posted 01 November 2005 - 02:59 AM

you don't need jaws that kill in a single well placed strike to be a scavenger, all you need there is a strong set of TEETH, not jaw muscle but teeth.  And such a big head is well suited fr killing most prey in a single or even in two strikes(if need be).
The only way for Tyranosuarus Rex to be a scavenger is if it was injured and could not hunt on its own.

I am a Watcher by birth, and so it should not surprise any when my observations are truthful.

History is where you confuse the long since deceased
And irritate the h**l out of the living.~ Golden Hawk

#59    fallingalien

fallingalien

    Psychic Spy

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,178 posts
  • Joined:08 Apr 2005

  • UFOs are underneath the Solar Tide

Posted 01 November 2005 - 03:21 AM

Quote


This was said on another thread, but the T-Rex as scavenger is nonsense designed to give a certain exhibitionist paleontologist some publicity.
The main argument for this is that T Rex's arms were nearly useless and he wasn't very fast.  Now consider the T-Rex as a "land crocodile".  Crocodiles do not need front claws to be a highly succesful predator.  Huge jaws are quite enough.  Also consider crocs wait in ambush for animals to come to the water.  T-Rex could wait along "game trails" for dinos to pass by.

There is no such thing as a pure scavening reptile today, and there probably wasn't 65 millions years ago.  

Falling alien, I am not sure what you mean, but the fossil evidence quite conclusively proves humans did not coexist with dinosaurs.  If they had, there would be no people today.

I think there is a lot of cultural and spiritual evidence for the creatures we know as "dragons" coexisiting with mankind, but most of these legends suggest that dragons are "controlled" by a higher authority, and therefore be prevented from wiping out mankind as giant theropod dinosaurs would have.


leaf eaters wouldn't eat humans and meat eaters didn't live everywhere. plus lions and tigers and all them don't attack humans much.

this isn't jurassic park and I don't believe in the way they do carbon dating, complete WASTE.

Getting banner

#60    DarkLordOfHELL

DarkLordOfHELL

    Alien Embryo

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 76 posts
  • Joined:10 Oct 2005

  • i serve only one master.

Posted 01 November 2005 - 04:45 AM

carbon dating is good up to a point yes, but they generally don't carbon date fossils, they look at the strata the bones are sitting in, in order to try and get a more accurate dating for the creatures likely period of burial.

I look at the world and see it needs to be conquered...




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users