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

#61    frogfish

frogfish

    ஆங்கிலத்த&

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

  • Flyfishing -- the Art of the Gods



Posted 02 November 2005 - 12:42 AM

they date rocks with radioactive elements, like stronium

-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!


#62    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 02 November 2005 - 02:26 AM

thank you froggy, i knew they used the strata, thanks for the reminder, forgot that part of the dating.

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

#63    frogfish

frogfish

    ஆங்கிலத்த&

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

  • Flyfishing -- the Art of the Gods



Posted 02 November 2005 - 02:33 AM

no problem! original.gif

-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!


#64    dj_gie

dj_gie

    Alien Embryo

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 29 posts
  • Joined:20 Dec 2003
  • Location:Hertfordshire

Posted 02 November 2005 - 09:01 PM

good point. He could have been hairy as well? How do scientists actually know he was a reptile as well??


#65    draconic chronicler

draconic chronicler

    Majestic 12 Operative

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

Posted 03 November 2005 - 12:00 AM

They know he was an archosaur, which technically is not are reptile.  Other Archosaurs include all the other true diosaurs, birds, crocodiles and pterosaurs.  Snakes, turtles and lizards are considered "reptiles".  Crocodiles are sometimes included in the reptile group too, but they are much more closely related to birds.


#66    frogfish

frogfish

    ஆங்கிலத்த&

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

  • Flyfishing -- the Art of the Gods



Posted 03 November 2005 - 12:49 AM

crocs are reptile, what are you talking about?

-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!


#67    Ashley-Star*Child

Ashley-Star*Child

    Alien Abducter

  • Member
  • 5,014 posts
  • Joined:25 Aug 2004
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:Somewhere on this planet ;)

Posted 03 November 2005 - 01:02 AM

Exactly. Crocodiles ARE reptiles. Who missed the biology class.


Posted Image


#68    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 03 November 2005 - 01:23 AM

who has been studing the beasts for their evolutionary tracks, and DC is right ask any dino expert or even croc expert.

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

#69    Ashley-Star*Child

Ashley-Star*Child

    Alien Abducter

  • Member
  • 5,014 posts
  • Joined:25 Aug 2004
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:Somewhere on this planet ;)

Posted 03 November 2005 - 02:17 AM

I'd hardly call DC a 'dino or croc expert'. Reptiles, they are.


Posted Image


#70    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 03 November 2005 - 02:59 AM

not who i was talking to, and DC has done their research, and i'd say google that info and see what you get, because my info comes out of journals and scientific magazines.

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

#71    DarkLordOfHELL

DarkLordOfHELL

    Alien Embryo

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

  • i serve only one master.

Posted 03 November 2005 - 04:08 AM

don't you mean talking about, i mean DC may not be an expert but certainly has more info than you or I.

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

#72    haunted_andrew

haunted_andrew

    Alien Embryo

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 72 posts
  • Joined:03 Sep 2005
  • Location:Michigan

  • Just because you haven't seen it... doesn't mean it doesn't exist...

Posted 03 November 2005 - 05:45 AM

Here's my 2 cents worth...

I believe that Tyrannosaurus was normally a hunter. Of course, any predator will scavenge if the opportunity arises, but to say that the T-rex was incapable of killing its own food is ignorant.  

Yes, the T-rex had miniscule arms. However, these arms were heavily, HEAVILY muscled. What's better for catching and holding prey? Longer, thinner, slimmer arms? Or shorter, stronger arms that hold your prey withing reach of your main weapon...

Your jaws. The jaws of a T-rex (as someone already mentioned) could put out an estimated 3000 psi of bite force. This strength would be BONE SHATTERING. Moreover, the teeth of a T-rex have roots over a foot long! Why would the T-rex need such deeply-rooted teeth if they didn't have to contend with a STRUGGLING prey animal. Also, look at the bite radius of a T-rex, With a good bite, a Tyrannosaur could rip a 3x5 FOOT chunk of flesh from a prey animal. Now, given the size of it's potential prey, this would probably be a CRIPPLING wound.  

Also, the T-rex was more than adequately equipped to hunt it's prey on a sensory level. The Tyrannosaurus had acute eyesight and binocular vision
two things VERY important to a predatory animal. Moreover, the Tyrannosaur's sense of smell is undisputedly one of the most powerful of ANY KNOWN CREATURE. Why? After a herd of hadrosaurs is attacked by a single, let alone a PACK of Tyrannnosaurs, are they going to linger in that area? And after the expediture of energy it took to BRING DOWN the prey, the T-rex, like a lion, would probably have to rest for a prolonged period of time. Meanwhile, the herd of prey animals has put several miles of distance between them and the kill. This amazing sense of smell would allow the Tyrannosaurs to EASILY track their prey.

Finally, concerning a Tyrannosaur's speed capabilities, here's the trick to being a predator, you only need to be SLIGHTLY faster than your prey. We've had all this discussion about the speed a T-rex was capable of... has anyone stopped to think about the speed limit of it's PREY?  

I believe that the T-rex would wait in ambush for it's prey, and then barrel towards it at a sprint, (possible far quicker that we've estimated) latch on with it's grappling hook arms, and then veritably bludgeon and lacerate it's prey to death with it's powerful neck and jaws. Hell, if it was able to latch on to it's prey's neck, one quick snap would break it's neck instantly.

OR, it might have barreled at it's prey and tackled them with sheer body-mass... A 5 ton T-rex moving even 20 mph would probably topple a prey animal easily, then it's only a matter of dealing a killing blow while it's immobilized.
This technique would be very effective if Tyrannosaurs hunted in small packs, smaller, quicker individuals could tackle prey as the larger, more powerful creatures moved in for the kill.

Moreover, we've discovered evidence of a Tyrannosaurus attacking a live prey animal. A skeleton of a Hadrosaur, I believe an Edmontosaurus, was discovered to have wounds on it's hind and tail sections remarkably similar to bite wounds inflicted by large, serrated seven-inch long Tyrannosaur teeth.. However, the bones showed evidence of regrowth AFTER the wound, so the animal was alive enough to HEAL after the attack.

I have no doubt that if a T-rex could steal dead prey from another predator, it would... ALL PREDATORS will take a pre-killed prey over something they have to expend energy hunting... But to assume that there was enough carrion to sustain groups of 7-10 ton theropods is absolutely PREPOSTEROUS.

So of COURSE the T-rex could be an advantageous scavenger, but it's unreasonable to say that it wasn't capable of bringing down it's own food.

believe.

#73    draconic chronicler

draconic chronicler

    Majestic 12 Operative

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

Posted 03 November 2005 - 01:57 PM

Aah hah! now we really see how ignorant both Frogfish and Ashley are on the subject of dinosaurs.   You both know about as much on this subject as you do about the Bible -- ZILCH!

DW is right, as I am, but like he says, don't take it from me, take it from the latest sceintific books and journals.  Frogfish, even your Dino God Horner will tell you the same thing.  It is one of the few, intelligent, scientific things he has ever said.

Crocodilians birds and dinosaurs are all closely related archosaurs, which technically should be classed seperately from the "lower" reptiles, which anatomically are completely different animals, even though a croc has the superficial outside resemblence to a lizard.  These archosaurs, crocs included, have a very different physiology compared to the "reptiles".  

And as for being a croc expert, there are probably few people in the world who have had such a direct contact with them, (like living in a small studio
apartment with a "loose" nile crocodile for over 10 years, and studying crocodiles in their natural habitat in Sri Lanka, including big "Salties").  As I type this, there is a 6 foot alligator lying under my chair.

Edited by draconic chronicler, 04 November 2005 - 12:10 AM.


#74    Atlantis Rises

Atlantis Rises

    The Ancient

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,521 posts
  • Joined:25 Dec 2003
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:My Mind's Eye

Posted 03 November 2005 - 03:33 PM

I believe that Tyrannosaurus was normally a hunter. Of course, any predator will scavenge if the opportunity arises, but to say that the T-rex was incapable of killing its own food is ignorant.  

Yes, the T-rex had miniscule arms. However, these arms were heavily, HEAVILY muscled. What's better for catching and holding prey? Longer, thinner, slimmer arms? Or shorter, stronger arms that hold your prey withing reach of your main weapon...

Interesting, because history states the opposite. T-Rex had very short arms and they were not muscular. T-Rex's legs were its powerhouse along with it's massive jaws.

Your jaws. The jaws of a T-rex (as someone already mentioned) could put out an estimated 3000 psi of bite force. This strength would be BONE SHATTERING. Moreover, the teeth of a T-rex have roots over a foot long! Why would the T-rex need such deeply-rooted teeth if they didn't have to contend with a STRUGGLING prey animal. Also, look at the bite radius of a T-rex, With a good bite, a Tyrannosaur could rip a 3x5 FOOT chunk of flesh from a prey animal. Now, given the size of it's potential prey, this would probably be a CRIPPLING wound.

Crippling, but not fatal. A Tricotops (sp) could probably fight off a T-Rex successfully and recover.

Also, the T-rex was more than adequately equipped to hunt it's prey on a sensory level. The Tyrannosaurus had acute eyesight and binocular vision
two things VERY important to a predatory animal. Moreover, the Tyrannosaur's sense of smell is undisputedly one of the most powerful of ANY KNOWN CREATURE. Why? After a herd of hadrosaurs is attacked by a single, let alone a PACK of Tyrannnosaurs, are they going to linger in that area? And after the expediture of energy it took to BRING DOWN the prey, the T-rex, like a lion, would probably have to rest for a prolonged period of time. Meanwhile, the herd of prey animals has put several miles of distance between them and the kill. This amazing sense of smell would allow the Tyrannosaurs to EASILY track their prey.

I'm confused. I thought T-Rex had poor visutal acuty? It's sense of smell was powerful, but it's binocular vision was quite poor for an animal of its size, and I'm not just saying this because of the movie Jurassic Park. It's a proven fact that T-Rex was a hunter, but it was practically as blind as a bat visually.

Finally, concerning a Tyrannosaur's speed capabilities, here's the trick to being a predator, you only need to be SLIGHTLY faster than your prey. We've had all this discussion about the speed a T-rex was capable of... has anyone stopped to think about the speed limit of it's PREY?

Again, incorrect. Speed it one thing, but intelligence is very important to overcome your prey and T-Rex wasn't the brightest blub. It had strategic capabilities, but most animals were smarter.  A T-Rex could really only overpower another animal if they roamed in packs. Remember, numbers equal power. Alone, it stood a very slim chance against an equal adversary.

I believe that the T-rex would wait in ambush for it's prey, and then barrel towards it at a sprint, (possible far quicker that we've estimated) latch on with it's grappling hook arms, and then veritably bludgeon and lacerate it's prey to death with it's powerful neck and jaws. Hell, if it was able to latch on to it's prey's neck, one quick snap would break it's neck instantly.

OR, it might have barreled at it's prey and tackled them with sheer body-mass... A 5 ton T-rex moving even 20 mph would probably topple a prey animal easily, then it's only a matter of dealing a killing blow while it's immobilized.
This technique would be very effective if Tyrannosaurs hunted in small packs, smaller, quicker individuals could tackle prey as the larger, more powerful creatures moved in for the kill.

You're thinking of the Velociraptor, who hunt in packs, hide in foilage, and then attack their prey. A T-Rex could barrel over its prey, but moreover it would wait for its prey to fight back. You see, T-Rex was a hunter and it liked to fight. The fight was a part of the hunt. And victory proved its superiority over others.


Moreover, we've discovered evidence of a Tyrannosaurus attacking a live prey animal. A skeleton of a Hadrosaur, I believe an Edmontosaurus, was discovered to have wounds on it's hind and tail sections remarkably similar to bite wounds inflicted by large, serrated seven-inch long Tyrannosaur teeth.. However, the bones showed evidence of regrowth AFTER the wound, so the animal was alive enough to HEAL after the attack.

I have no doubt that if a T-rex could steal dead prey from another predator, it would... ALL PREDATORS will take a pre-killed prey over something they have to expend energy hunting... But to assume that there was enough carrion to sustain groups of 7-10 ton theropods is absolutely PREPOSTEROUS.

So of COURSE the T-rex could be an advantageous scavenger, but it's unreasonable to say that it wasn't capable of bringing down it's own food.



Yes, it could bring down its own food, but so could others bring down a T-Rex.

Edited by Atlantis Rises, 03 November 2005 - 03:35 PM.

History is like Time - it always repeats itself.


#75    FrothyDog

FrothyDog

    Ectoplasmic Residue

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 126 posts
  • Joined:08 Oct 2005
  • Location:Texas

  • I'm fully ambimaldextrous... i'm very clumsy with either hand.

Posted 03 November 2005 - 04:50 PM

it is quite possible for one bite to kill.  look at the komodo dragon.  the mouth is laced with deadly bacteria, so even if you get away, there's still a huge chance of death.

i think the rex did a lot of hunting, and of course scavenged when it could.

the powerful legs and jaws are the real killers, though, the arms were considerably less important.  you don't NEED strong arms to be a killer.  wolves use speed and bite, and the rex likely had the same strategy.

yes, i know wolves are pack critters.  but if a lone rex could run up and get a quick bite off, what's to say that wouldn't be more than enough to take the beastie down?





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users