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 might still claim the title back


  • This topic is locked This topic is locked
124 replies to this topic

#16    Rodsrreal

Rodsrreal

    Alien Embryo

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 34 posts
  • Joined:03 May 2007

Posted 12 May 2007 - 01:58 PM

Quote

Well i  find it all very funny no one will ever know for sure who was "hardest" its like arguing over God being real or not, its all just opinion

Eh, not really. There ARE ways to tell, but until they clone a t-rex, all they have on dinos is an archeaopteryx by the name of C-11. (yes, they cloned one, duh! yes.gif )


#17    eden grange

eden grange

    Remote Viewer

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 515 posts
  • Joined:31 Mar 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Great Britain

  • ~Zauvijek~

Posted 12 May 2007 - 02:01 PM

Quote

Eh, not really. There ARE ways to tell, but until they clone a t-rex, all they have on dinos is an archeaopteryx by the name of C-11. (yes, they cloned one, duh! yes.gif )


What ways are those then?


#18    eyesaurSy

eyesaurSy

    Alien Embryo

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 18 posts
  • Joined:12 May 2007
  • Gender:Male

Posted 12 May 2007 - 04:35 PM

Quote

Well i  find it all very funny no one will ever know for sure who was "hardest" its like arguing over God being real or not, its all just opinion

See, this guy is the only one so far that I have found who I can agree with(aside from Andy, of course). We will never know what these creatures were like in life because we were not there. Cloning, no matter how accurate, would never be able to produce a 100% real dinosaur, because of how much the DNA would be distorted through fossilization, and because of the environment it would be in today. After all, we have less oxygen in our atmosphere, and plants have been evolving for 65 million years since dinosaurs died out. It would either die within a few hours of being born, or would live and be different enough that we couldn't use it for accurate research.
This is the greatest fault of Jurassic Park(and don't get me wrong, I love the movie and the book). The simple fact is is that we have no idea of knowing what they were ever like.
That is all.

(PS: Andy, you called in the cavalry, right? Well, here I am.)


#19    Rexy

Rexy

    Alien Embryo

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 8 posts
  • Joined:12 May 2007
  • Gender:Male

  • Raider of the Fridge

Posted 12 May 2007 - 04:59 PM


Question. Why would a predator have 7 in razor sharp teeth and a HUGE bite force if he was going to be a scavenger? Sure he might have eatten rotten meat when he could find it, but he probably hunted for fresh meat.

Edited by Rexy, 12 May 2007 - 05:00 PM.

Davy Jones: Do you fear death Mr. Turner?

Jack: Do you?

Jones: Your a cruel man Jack Sparrow!

Jack: Cruel is a matter of perspective.

Jones: Is it now? - stabs turner - - laughs evily -

Courage is being scared to death, but saddling up anyway. -John wayne

The man who smiles when things go wrong has thought of someone to blame it on

Professor Henry Jones: I didn't know you could fly a plane!
Indiana: Fly, yes! Land. . .no!

#20    Rodsrreal

Rodsrreal

    Alien Embryo

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 34 posts
  • Joined:03 May 2007

Posted 12 May 2007 - 05:40 PM

Why are vulchers the size of small children, and have sharp beaks, and claws, powerful wings, etc. and be scavengers? Because that is their role in nature, question it all you want, it is what it is.


#21    Rodsrreal

Rodsrreal

    Alien Embryo

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 34 posts
  • Joined:03 May 2007

Posted 12 May 2007 - 05:42 PM

Quote

See, this guy is the only one so far that I have found who I can agree with(aside from Andy, of course). We will never know what these creatures were like in life because we were not there. Cloning, no matter how accurate, would never be able to produce a 100% real dinosaur, because of how much the DNA would be distorted through fossilization, and because of the environment it would be in today. After all, we have less oxygen in our atmosphere, and plants have been evolving for 65 million years since dinosaurs died out. It would either die within a few hours of being born, or would live and be different enough that we couldn't use it for accurate research.
This is the greatest fault of Jurassic Park(and don't get me wrong, I love the movie and the book). The simple fact is is that we have no idea of knowing what they were ever like.
That is all.

(PS: Andy, you called in the cavalry, right? Well, here I am.)

True, so mabey C-11 isn't exactly like his cretaceous counterpart, but he IS the closest living thing there is...


#22    DigitalDreamer

DigitalDreamer

    Conspiracy Theorist

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 979 posts
  • Joined:14 Apr 2007
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Massachusetts

Posted 12 May 2007 - 06:25 PM

Thanks for backin me up Sy,By the way the t-rex wasnt wimp.On the african plains if you find the skelital remains of alion with tooth marks all over it dose that mean its a wimp?No it means it faught to the death,Lions fight almost all their lives and have the scars on their skulls to prove it.So what your basically saying is,The african lion is a wimp.I can see why a 400 pund cat that can kill just about anything is a wimp,I mean those razor sharp claws couldnt do anything right?By the way since when can a 2 foot tall animal take on a 15 foot giant?Oh ya thats right they have super powers that allow them to magically kill the t-rex right?

Posted Image

#23    angrycrustacean

angrycrustacean

    pǝʇsıʍʇ

  • Member
  • 3,024 posts
  • Joined:28 Jul 2005
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:ǝɹǝɥʇ ʞɔɐq

Posted 12 May 2007 - 07:05 PM

Quote

Eh, not really. There ARE ways to tell, but until they clone a t-rex, all they have on dinos is an archeaopteryx by the name of C-11. (yes, they cloned one, duh! yes.gif )


Oh dear lord.

Why must you speak of things you know nothing about? Do you like being smited?

I'm just going to let you go down in flames, since it's so amusing...but for the record, outside of Hollywood and your own fantasy, they have never cloned an archaeopteryx, nor any other prehistoric animal. mellow.gif

Posted Image
  


#24    draconic chronicler

draconic chronicler

    Majestic 12 Operative

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

Posted 12 May 2007 - 11:39 PM

Quote

Ok, mr. dinoman, did you know that spinosaurs have more in common with chickens than even iguanas or crocs?


Yes spino had more in common with chickens than iguanas, becasue both dinos and chickens are archosaurs.  But Crocs are archosaurs too, not lower reptiles, which your probably didn't know.  And most paleontologists will say they can learn more about dinosaurs from crocodiles than they do from birds.  In fact, it was becasue of like bone characteristics of theropods and crocodilians, that scientists can now determine the sex of these dinos with some degree of reliablility.

Virtually no animal is a pure scavenger.  T Rex no doubt hunted some prey just as vultures do, even if it was primarily a scavenger.  Even if T Rex was not an active hunter, it could have been a succesful "ambush predator".  Since todays huge crocs may have had similar lifestyles to large theropods, we see they are opportunistic feeders.  They hunt if they are hungry, and not adverse to scavenging dead animals as well.


#25    Ashigaru

Ashigaru

    Pretty Princess

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,437 posts
  • Joined:16 Oct 2003
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Kansas

Posted 13 May 2007 - 12:10 AM

How could something on land that big be an ambush predator?

Posted Image


#26    robbieb

robbieb

    Astral Projection

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 687 posts
  • Joined:12 Apr 2006

Posted 13 May 2007 - 12:46 AM

many things on land are ambush preadators. snakes are a prime example sit and wait for prey to get a little to close and boom strike without the prey erver knowing u were there


#27    Rodsrreal

Rodsrreal

    Alien Embryo

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 34 posts
  • Joined:03 May 2007

Posted 13 May 2007 - 01:20 AM

Quote

Thanks for backin me up Sy,By the way the t-rex wasnt wimp.On the african plains if you find the skelital remains of alion with tooth marks all over it dose that mean its a wimp?No it means it faught to the death,Lions fight almost all their lives and have the scars on their skulls to prove it.So what your basically saying is,The african lion is a wimp.I can see why a 400 pund cat that can kill just about anything is a wimp,I mean those razor sharp claws couldnt do anything right?By the way since when can a 2 foot tall animal take on a 15 foot giant?Oh ya thats right they have super powers that allow them to magically kill the t-rex right?

Ok, smartass, if you found a human's body along the side of the road riddled with bullets, does that mean he fought to his death? Probably not.


#28    Rodsrreal

Rodsrreal

    Alien Embryo

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 34 posts
  • Joined:03 May 2007

Posted 13 May 2007 - 01:23 AM

Quote

How could something on land that big be an ambush predator?

He's right, the most succesful 'ambush' predators were small and agile, and were intellegent too, take for example, velociraptor, whilst T-rex lacks all of those traits.


#29    Cormorant

Cormorant

    Alien Embryo

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 13 posts
  • Joined:13 May 2007

Posted 13 May 2007 - 03:30 AM

((Andy, Im here for ya))

Ok lets just lay this down straight forward:

QUOTE(DigitalDreamer @ May 12 2007, 03:55 PM)
Thanks for backin me up Sy,By the way the t-rex wasnt wimp.On the african plains if you find the skelital remains of alion with tooth marks all over it dose that mean its a wimp?No it means it faught to the death,Lions fight almost all their lives and have the scars on their skulls to prove it.So what your basically saying is,The african lion is a wimp.I can see why a 400 pund cat that can kill just about anything is a wimp,I mean those razor sharp claws couldnt do anything right?By the way since when can a 2 foot tall animal take on a 15 foot giant?Oh ya thats right they have super powers that allow them to magically kill the t-rex right?

Ok, smartass, if you found a human's body along the side of the road riddled with bullets, does that mean he fought to his death? Probably not.


A trex has short arms that are awkward just as a hyena has unusualy long front legs that are useless for killing. but they both make up for it in having some of the strongest jaw strengths in the animal kingdom.

To the "smartass" who said the thing about a person lying on the side of the road with bullet holes in them dosent mean he fought to the death:: MAKE A BETTER ARGUMENT!!! a human is the most unevolved animal in the animal kingdom. The only thing we have for us is our brain power. But because of our brain power we have screwed up ourselves in thinking were better than other animals. Check: WERE NOT! We cheet in life. We dont use anything we have naturally to get what we want. Half of the people of the world dont even get off their rears to act like an ""animal" for use of the word". But thats away from the point.
QUOTE(Ashigaru @ May 12 2007, 09:40 PM)
How could something on land that big be an ambush predator?

He's right, the most succesful 'ambush' predators were small and agile, and were intellegent too, take for example, velociraptor, whilst T-rex lacks all of those traits.


How can something the size of a great white be an ambush predator? How can something the size of a grizzly be an ambush predator? Becasue they can. You dont need to be small to be efficient. You have to be efficient to be efficient. Sure velociraptor was probably smarter, but it did not compete with the Trex for a niche in the food web did it now?


QUOTE(Rodsreel) Why are vulchers the size of small children, and have sharp beaks, and claws, powerful wings, etc. and be scavengers? Because that is their role in nature, question it all you want, it is what it is.

Because thats what theya re let to be. the amount of food will suffice their size. Why arent ravens the size of an Argentavis? Becasue we dont have many large animals anymore for them to eat.


QUOTE(Rodsrreal @ May 12 2007, 08:51 AM)
Ok, mr. dinoman, did you know that spinosaurs have more in common with chickens than even iguanas or crocs?


Yes spino had more in common with chickens than iguanas, becasue both dinos and chickens are archosaurs. But Crocs are archosaurs too, not lower reptiles, which your probably didn't know. And most paleontologists will say they can learn more about dinosaurs from crocodiles than they do from birds. In fact, it was becasue of like bone characteristics of theropods and crocodilians, that scientists can now determine the sex of these dinos with some degree of reliablility.

Virtually no animal is a pure scavenger. T Rex no doubt hunted some prey just as vultures do, even if it was primarily a scavenger. Even if T Rex was not an active hunter, it could have been a succesful "ambush predator". Since todays huge crocs may have had similar lifestyles to large theropods, we see they are opportunistic feeders. They hunt if they are hungry, and not adverse to scavenging dead animals as well.


QUOTE(DigitalDreamer @ Apr 28 2007, 09:51 AM)
Frog that dosnt matter t-rex would kill them both,Im sick of people looking down at the most ferocious dinosaur that ever lived.Show some respect tot he dinosaur that could kill anything.

you have no idea what you are talking about. T Rex with almost useless fore arms? You've got to be kidding. See my last post on spino vs T Rex. The latest Spino is almost one third bigger than the largest T Rex.


Your one to talk about someone not knowing anything. The forearms are useless, so what it makes due with jaws. If is forearms were any bigger its tail wouldnt be much of a worth of a tail would it now? And so what if the spino was bigger?
The ebola virus can kill a human::the bird flu can kill a crane::a brown recluse can kill a dog. Its the same freaking concept.


QUOTE(DigitalDreamer @ May 11 2007, 06:10 PM)
Do you know anything about dinosaurs?Uh first off just because something has a longer jaw dosnt mean anything,And for the last frackin time its arms were positioned under its body so they would be USE-LESS in a fight.Long claws also dont mean anything if you cant use the arms that control the claws,How is spinosaurus not as bulky as t-rex?It had a 5 or 6 foot spine sticking out of its back,That limits its movements and t-rex had more than a strong bite.The t-rex faught very often and this is known due to the tooth marks of other tyrannosaurs in almost evry skull of evry t-rex ever found.Spino never faught,It probrally relied on intimidation because it couldnt fight.And im not sorry to say that t-rex would kill the spino.By the way heres a quote form draconic " For your information, a spino approximately one third longer than every other theropod would in all liklihood also be the heaviest." now whos bulkier spino or t-rex?If your a third longer than every other theropod would in all liklihood also be the heaviest,Weight equals bulk wich equals speed reduction wich equals an animal that would rely on intimadation to scare off a potential foe.


You evidentally don't.

Believe it or not, real, famous, PHd carrying paleontologists were advisors in Jurassic Park, and they recognized Spino as both the largest, AND most formidable dino, and this was even before the new, possibly 60 foot super spino was found. Do you really think you know more about this than real paleontologists?
I really doubt it.

((Screw the professionals! I dont have a phd in paleontology but as a qualified herpitologist and icthyologist I think I have merit in saying that the spinosaurs's jaw would be easier to crack in how it was thin AND elongated. wheras the crocodile which proffesionals constantly sompare it with has an elongated AND widened jaw making the force of it spread out more and lowering its chance of breaking when the spinos jaw would snap easier.))


You are misquoting me. Yes a 60 foot spino is probably heavier than a forty foot Rex, but this is because it is a full third bigger. But it is still a more gracile built and therefor much faster animal, just as if there were a 60 foot velociraptor. The sail is not a hindrance, if anything, it helped this dino warm up and cool off quicker than ANY other large carnosaur, another great advantage.

((check your wording since you apparently know nothing as Spinosaurus was not a carnosaur [although it was a carnIVORE]. And the sail will keep the spine in the torsoe straight so turning would actually be a problem. the sail did let it warm and cool quicker but your forgetting that its still not instantaneous. ))[/b]

We also know Spino hunted other large prey, not just fish. Their teeth have been found imbedded in other dinosaur bones. And if you knew anything about reptiles, you would know that young crocodiles eat mostly fish, but large crocs mostly go for big mammalian prey when it is available, often outsizing them like water buffalo. It was probably the same thing with Spino.

[b]((and if you also knew about reptiles youd know that young corcodiles also eat small mammals and bugs. And that adults still continue to eat fish.))


And here is another important thing that has been ignored in this discussion. Unlike the Rex, which was the only big Carnosaur of its time and place, Spinos seemed to live side by side, for millions of years with another awesome predator, possibly also larger than T Rex, the Charcodonosaurus. This suggestd Spino could hold its own against more conventional theropods of large size, and unlike Rex, may have sometimes actually fought with other species of carnosaur.

((and how many documented fight scars have there been between charchar and spino?))

And although I do not agree, there are PHd carrying, famous paleotologists who know far more about dinos than you, that have made a reasonable argument that T Rex is nothing but a scavenger, whereas Spinos snatched pterodactlys out of the sky if we are to believe the fossil evidence, and catching fish requires a predators skill, unlike simply sniffing out and scarfing down rotten meet. No wonder it didn't need a predator's forearms, it may very well have been just an "overgrown garbage disposal on hind legs".


((And you my very good friendly "expert" should remember that a so called expert said that hyenas were lowly scavengers until within the last five years a video showed hyenas taking down buffalo and killing off lions. So know now that the experts also apologized for this and have changed their mind. You see in this world I have come to know fact and theory change as much as the church does on decisions.))


I hope everyone here realizes that T-rex's title came from it being one of the first large therapods discovered, and lager than any other found in the early 1900's. Then spinosaurus was found, and it was larger, then chardontonsaurus, then giganotosaurus. See? T-rex is a glorified cretaecious(forgot how to spell it) Buzzard. Of course it had teeth marks in it! It was constantly hunted by Smaller, more agile raptors! Just because it had marks on it doesn't mean it won the fight or was tougher than any other dino. Infact, that may mean it was a weakling!

I truly hope for your sake you dont think that? A velociraptor killing a Rex. Whats next?  a kite taking down a harpy eagle? or maybe a jackal taking down an elephant? or to keep it in check a compsognathus taking down a hadrosaur?

Edited by Cormorant, 13 May 2007 - 03:33 AM.


#30    eyesaurSy

eyesaurSy

    Alien Embryo

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 18 posts
  • Joined:12 May 2007
  • Gender:Male

Posted 13 May 2007 - 05:02 AM

See, when I said "cavalry," I meant cavalry. Fresh from one of the best Jurassic Park boards on the web! Together we've got enough knowledge of paleontology to impress Jack Horner, maybe even the great Mr. Bakker himself. So I hope you boys are prepared for a nice, long debate!





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users