Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]
Welcome to Carnivora. We hope you enjoy your visit.


You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free.


Join our community!


If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features:

Username:   Password:
Add Reply
Spinosaurus aegyptiacus v Tyrannosaurus rex
Topic Started: Jan 7 2012, 02:16 AM (459,278 Views)
Wolf Eagle
Member Avatar
M E G A P H Y S E T E R
[ *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Tyrannosaurus rex
Tyrannosaurus is a genus of coelurosaurian theropod dinosaur. The species Tyrannosaurus rex (rex meaning "king" in Latin), commonly abbreviated to T. rex, is a fixture in popular culture. It lived throughout what is now western North America, with a much wider range than other tyrannosaurids. Fossils are found in a variety of rock formations dating to the Maastrichtian age of the upper Cretaceous Period, 67 to 65.5 million years ago.[1] It was among the last non-avian dinosaurs to exist before the Cretaceous–Paleogene extinction event. Like other tyrannosaurids, Tyrannosaurus was a bipedal carnivore with a massive skull balanced by a long, heavy tail. Relative to the large and powerful hindlimbs, Tyrannosaurus forelimbs were small, though unusually powerful for their size, and bore two clawed digits. Although other theropods rivaled or exceeded Tyrannosaurus rex in size, it was the largest known tyrannosaurid and one of the largest known land predators. By far the largest carnivore in its environment, Tyrannosaurus rex may have been an apex predator, preying upon hadrosaurs and ceratopsians, although some experts have suggested it was primarily a scavenger. The debate over Tyrannosaurus as apex predator or scavenger is among the longest running in paleontology. Tyrannosaurus rex was one of the largest land carnivores of all time; the largest complete specimen, FMNH PR2081 ("Sue"), measured 12.8 metres (42 ft) long, and was 4.0 metres (13.1 ft) tall at the hips. Mass estimates have varied widely over the years, from more than 7.2 metric tons (7.9 short tons), to less than 4.5 metric tons (5.0 short tons), with most modern estimates ranging between 5.4 and 6.8 metric tons (6.0 and 7.5 short tons). Packard et al. (2009) tested dinosaur mass estimation procedures on elephants and concluded that dinosaur estimations are flawed and produce over-estimations; thus, the weight of Tyrannosaurus could be much less than usually estimated. Other estimations have concluded that the largest known Tyrannosaurus specimens had a weight exceeding 9 tonnes.

Posted Image

Spinosaurus aegyptiacus
Spinosaurus is a genus of theropod dinosaur which lived in what is now North Africa, from the lower Albian to lower Cenomanian stages of the Cretaceous period, about 112 to 97 million years ago. Spinosaurus may be the largest of all known carnivorous dinosaurs, even larger than Tyrannosaurus and Giganotosaurus. Estimates published in 2005 and 2007 suggest that it was 12.6 to 18 metres (41 to 59 ft) in length and 7 to 20.9 tonnes (7.7 to 23.0 short tons) in weight. The skull of Spinosaurus was long and narrow like that of a modern crocodilian. Spinosaurus is thought to have eaten fish; evidence suggests that it lived both on land and in water like a modern crocodilian. The distinctive spines of Spinosaurus, which were long extensions of the vertebrae, grew to at least 1.65 meters (5.4 ft) long and were likely to have had skin connecting them, forming a sail-like structure, although some authors have suggested that the spines were covered in fat and formed a hump. Multiple functions have been put forward for this structure, including thermoregulation and display. Dal Sasso et al. (2005) assumed that Spinosaurus and Suchomimus had the same body proportions in relation to their skull lengths, and thereby calculated that Spinosaurus was 16 to 18 meters (52 to 59 ft) in length and 7 to 9 tonnes (7.7 to 9.9 short tons) in weight. The Dal Sasso et al. estimates were criticized because the skull length estimate was uncertain, and (assuming that body mass increases as the cube of body length) scaling Suchomimus which was 11 meters (36 ft) long and 3.8 tonnes (4.2 short tons) in mass to the range of estimated lengths of Spinosaurus would produce an estimated body mass of 11.7 to 16.7 tonnes (12.9 to 18.4 short tons).

Posted Image
Edited by Taipan, Apr 24 2015, 10:10 PM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Replies:
Superiron21
Autotrophic Organism
[ *  * ]
Maelstrom
Jan 24 2013, 04:38 AM
Superiron21
Jan 24 2013, 04:30 AM
I you don´t see the truth is your problem size is not the same as strenght (I´m not saying this, experts said)... spino was not stronger than t-rex even carcha was strongest than spino... but keep in your fantasy world the only advantage I see is size but only to intimidation no to fight...
Spino could have been twice as heavy as T.rex, if your bigger than you have to be stronger to support yourself.
Do you have prove that spino was heavier than T-rex? everything is speculation.... those fanboys and haters are saying that with his arms could deal with the head and power of the T-rex.... maybe jurassic park 3 fight scene was his best "recreation" of a fight lol totally impossible dream haters dream...
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Superiron21
Autotrophic Organism
[ *  * ]
Maelstrom
Jan 24 2013, 04:42 AM
Superiron21
Jan 24 2013, 04:38 AM
theropod
Jan 24 2013, 03:13 AM
I argue a bite force of ~2t to be likely because:

-I remember that was the result we got in the spinosaurus bite force thread based on a figure from Sakamoto
-I read this:
http://www.academia.edu/1812192/Structural_performance_of_tetanuran_theropod_skulls_with_emphasis_on_the_Megalosauridae_Spinosauridae_and_Carcharodontosauridae

It appears from a mere lateral view spinosaurus snout is weaker than Suchomimus`
I think it is likely this is balanced out by the broader rostrum, but It would be premature to say it was significantly stronger.
So the estimate directly based on baryonyx makes sense to me. People keep claiming that was a weak bite, but facts are, this is still an immense force, and if it got a good grip onto T. rex neck it wouldn´t be easy to shake off. The long teeth furthermore wouldn´t require a lot of strenght to puncture, and one has to keep in mind spinosaurus was probably able to feed on fishes whose scales could resist beign hit by an axe

Due to the massive mandible and the rostrum being more or less a solid piece of bone The skull could still possible resist quite a lot of force.

No wuestion, T. rex has the more potent bite. But on the other hand it would have problems biting most parts of spinosaurus or reaching the head and neck, especially if it has to be wary of a pair of 1,8m jaws and huge claws that might have rivaled those of terizinosaurus. due to its sheer size Spinosaurus wouldn´t have problems killing T. rex, one has to imagine the force it must have had in the combined neck and arms and the sheer weight, it could possibly simply topple it over if it caught it.
what about reaching his throat? of course it could reach the neck maybe 1 or 2 head hits and then he could reach....
One or two hits would be extremely fatal, Spino's claws were longer than T.rex's skull was thick.
oh my god that was the most irrational thing I´ve ever heard.... his claws could never penetrate t-rex skulls you´re quite wrong! who told you broleyupfusion?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Maelstrom
Member Avatar
Autotrophic Organism
[ *  * ]
Superiron21
Jan 24 2013, 04:47 AM
Do you have prove that spino was heavier than T-rex? everything is speculation.... those fanboys and haters are saying that with his arms could deal with the head and power of the T-rex.... maybe jurassic park 3 fight scene was his best "recreation" of a fight lol totally impossible dream haters dream...
I'm not a fanboy nor a hater, I don't even think Spino could kill T.rex easily (6/10 maybe), Spino is most likely heavier than T.rex because mass cubes as length increases; saying that T.rex was heavier is more speculative. No one thinks Jurassic Park 3 is the best 'recreation'.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Superiron21
Autotrophic Organism
[ *  * ]
MightyMaus
Jan 24 2013, 04:44 AM
Superiron21
Jan 24 2013, 04:30 AM
brolyeuphyfusion
Jan 23 2013, 12:12 PM
Superiron21
Jan 23 2013, 09:53 AM
Jinfengopteryx
Jan 23 2013, 04:38 AM
brolyeuphyfusion
Jan 22 2013, 07:46 PM
Their comparative dentary sizes are irrelevant as it doesn't actually prove anything in this match...
Not in this match, but they have an estimate debate and Verdugo has critisized theropods reconstruction, because he claimed the dentary to be too long in theropods skull reconstruction. Skull size matters a lot in this fight, as it could help to determine the size of Spinosaurus, with scaling up from it's relatives (you know that a size advantage would be important for Spinosaurus). Skull size would be important aswell for bite force, tough in bite force Tyrannosaurus anyway wins with ease, but Spinosaurus would still need at least a bite force strong enough to kill Tyrannosaurus. Also, Tyrannosaurus being more bird like is very irrelevant, Verdugo just said the Tyrannosaurus thing for comparision, to show how big the dentary size he believes in would be.
I´m with you on that.... and by the way many scientists said that the bite force of spino was not designed for fighting (catching fish and preys really smaller comapring with it´s size) their hands are not so powerful they´re designed (even the claw to catch fishes and squeeze prey althought his claws could do damage ... yes but not mortal wonds to the robust body of t-rex.....
I´ve seen from a real expert a good explanation (push your 3rd finger with your first finge (spino bite) then push all the hand (T-rex bite)... If T-rex catch spino´s neck there won´t be coming back..... no matter it´s size
Would you just stop with the bias? You're not looking at Spinosaurus' advantages...what makes you think that this would be a biting contest!? Spinosaurus would overpower and kill the Tyrannosaurus with it's size and strength...
I you don´t see the truth is your problem size is not the same as strenght (I´m not saying this, experts said)... spino was not stronger than t-rex even carcha was strongest than spino... but keep in your fantasy world the only advantage I see is size but only to intimidation no to fight...
Think of it this way. Let's say Tyrannosaurus is a Jaguar, and Spinosaurus is a leopard, both weighing 250lbs. Of course the Jag is quite a bit stronger. Now imagine Tyranno is a 250lb Jag, and Spino is a 500lb leopard. Now, when factoring in the size advantage, you can easily see why spinosaurus would be far stronger in absolute terms than Tyrannosaurus.

For instance, Spinosaurus would be able to lift,carry,push,move, much heavier objects that Tyrannosaurus. Pushing moving is with body, not arms, although Spinosaurus has the advantage there too.
"For instance, Spinosaurus would be able to lift,carry,push,move, much heavier objects that Tyrannosaurus. Pushing moving is with body, not arms, although Spinosaurus has the advantage there too. " pal what did you smoke?... his body and his arms are designed to carry only fish and preys much much smaller compared to him... yes maybe spino was able to lift a brachiosaurus.... with your theorical facts....
Well imagine a pitbull (T-rex) and a Great Dane (Spino) pitbull can take down GD easilly....


@theropod The overestimates of spino 17m are proved theropod? with so less than 15% of the body? or this is true cause is not T-rex and the largest T-rex specimens need to be 100% researched
Edited by Superiron21, Jan 24 2013, 05:00 AM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Superiron21
Autotrophic Organism
[ *  * ]
Maelstrom
Jan 24 2013, 04:52 AM
Superiron21
Jan 24 2013, 04:47 AM
Do you have prove that spino was heavier than T-rex? everything is speculation.... those fanboys and haters are saying that with his arms could deal with the head and power of the T-rex.... maybe jurassic park 3 fight scene was his best "recreation" of a fight lol totally impossible dream haters dream...
I'm not a fanboy nor a hater, I don't even think Spino could kill T.rex easily (6/10 maybe), Spino is most likely heavier than T.rex because mass cubes as length increases; saying that T.rex was heavier is more speculative. No one thinks Jurassic Park 3 is the best 'recreation'.
I didn´t say so... I was talking about other guys that post in here.... jp3 thing was not for you.. sorry pal.... according to weight I´m not with you Spino mass was more speculative than T-rex cause specimens are less than 15% complete.... they speculated with it´s relatives... like suchominus or baryonix....
Edited by Superiron21, Jan 24 2013, 05:00 AM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Maelstrom
Member Avatar
Autotrophic Organism
[ *  * ]
Superiron21
Jan 24 2013, 04:57 AM
I didn´t say so... I was talking about other guys that post in here.... jp3 thing was not for you.. sorry pal.... according to weight I´m not with you Spino mass was more speculative than T-rex cause specimens are less than 15% complete.... they speculated with it´s relatives... like suchominus or baryonix....
No problem, but I don't see why you disagree with the speculated weights, linear scaling with relatives would give a more reliable estimate than just an opinion and just because it's speculative doesn't mean that it is wrong - it's all we can do at this point. I didn't say T.rex's weight's were more speculative than Spino's, I said that it is more speculative to assume it was heavier than Spino. In my opinion it is pretty obvious that Spino would be larger than T.rex; the holotypes vertebrate was 40% larger than the corresponding one in Sue and 193% larger than the one in Baryonyx. MSMN V4047 is about 20% larger than the holotype, so there is no doubt it was much larger than T.rex.

Quote:
 
oh my god that was the most irrational thing I´ve ever heard.... his claws could never penetrate t-rex skulls you´re quite wrong! who told you broleyupfusion?


Firstly, extremely fatal does not equate to penetrating the skull. Secondly, if Spino used it's claws like depicted in Planet Dinosaur it would be very capable of penetrating T.rex's skull - just because it is a TV show does not mean it is inaccurate, they obviously did research. Broly did not tell me anything...
Edited by Maelstrom, Jan 24 2013, 05:19 AM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Superiron21
Autotrophic Organism
[ *  * ]
Maelstrom
Jan 24 2013, 05:14 AM
Superiron21
Jan 24 2013, 04:57 AM
I didn´t say so... I was talking about other guys that post in here.... jp3 thing was not for you.. sorry pal.... according to weight I´m not with you Spino mass was more speculative than T-rex cause specimens are less than 15% complete.... they speculated with it´s relatives... like suchominus or baryonix....
No problem, but I don't see why you disagree with the speculated weights, linear scaling with relatives would give a more reliable estimate than just an opinion and just because it's speculative doesn't mean that it is wrong - it's all we can do at this point. I didn't say T.rex's weight's were more speculative than Spino's, I said that it is more speculative to assume it was heavier than Spino. In my opinion it is pretty obvious that Spino would be larger than T.rex; the holotypes vertebrate was 40% larger than the corresponding one in Sue and 193% larger than the one in Baryonyx. MSMN V4047 is about 20% larger than the holotype, so there is no doubt it was much larger than T.rex.

Quote:
 
oh my god that was the most irrational thing I´ve ever heard.... his claws could never penetrate t-rex skulls you´re quite wrong! who told you broleyupfusion?


Firstly, extremely fatal does not equate to penetrating the skull. Secondly, if Spino used it's claws like depicted in Planet Dinosaur it would be very capable of penetrating T.rex's skull - just because it is a TV show does not mean it is inaccurate, they obviously did research. Broly did not tell me anything...
I agree with you on that but for me Spino was not designed to fight big theropods like (t-rex carcha and giga) that was proved according to its bite and it claw (to catch squeeze preys).... I respect your point....
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Maelstrom
Member Avatar
Autotrophic Organism
[ *  * ]
Superiron21
Jan 24 2013, 05:25 AM
I agree with you on that but for me Spino was not designed to fight big theropods like (t-rex carcha and giga) that was proved according to its bite and it claw (to catch squeeze preys).... I respect your point....
Ok then I respect your opinion, but Spino's bite hasn't really been tested properly - just assumptions based on skull structure. It is very possible that it had a strong bite because it would need to to pull 2 ton fish out of the water and linear scaling would put it at: (17/8)^3*387kg = 1747 kg bite force atleast. Nowhere near as strong as T.rex's but very capable of killing and probably similar to Carcha and Giga's bite force; it's teeth weren't as damaging as there's, but IMO it could still overcome them with just it's size and claws. You can keep your opinion though.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Superiron21
Autotrophic Organism
[ *  * ]
Maelstrom
Jan 24 2013, 05:42 AM
Superiron21
Jan 24 2013, 05:25 AM
I agree with you on that but for me Spino was not designed to fight big theropods like (t-rex carcha and giga) that was proved according to its bite and it claw (to catch squeeze preys).... I respect your point....
Ok then I respect your opinion, but Spino's bite hasn't really been tested properly - just assumptions based on skull structure. It is very possible that it had a strong bite because it would need to to pull 2 ton fish out of the water and linear scaling would put it at: (17/8)^3*387kg = 1747 kg bite force atleast. Nowhere near as strong as T.rex's but very capable of killing and probably similar to Carcha and Giga's bite force; it's teeth weren't as damaging as there's, but IMO it could still overcome them with just it's size and claws. You can keep your opinion though.
You have a point but is till not enough to penetrate the T-rex neck according what I´ve been reading... and something another point that could put the balance in favor of the winner is the aggressiveness, and according to it´s diet (2tons fish, prey relatively small than it´s big size) not the same aggressiveness that T-rex could have killing preys with awesome defense and according to the 2 tons fish maybe the arms should help him to catch and to hurt the fish and also finish him bite it imo ... but could kill another big predators Don´t worry my friend that will be answered soon....
Edited by Superiron21, Jan 24 2013, 05:57 AM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
theropod
Member Avatar
palaeontology, open source and survival enthusiast
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
^I have to disagree on the last part, going by the msot recent studies an allosaurus spoecimen with a skull ~80cm long was put at a bite force of 800kg. It is possible that this is overestimated regarding the other, lower estimates for similar sized specimens, but using it would yield ~3t for the Carcharodontosaurus neotype (max skull lenght=1,56m, and remember, the skull is rather more laterally expanded than in Allosaurus). Giganotosaurus wouldn´t be too different, at least for the holotype, not sure about the other specimen.

It doesn´t seem as if carcharodontosaur bite forces where quite as weak as some think, tough I used to think spinos bite was stronger too. It might be save to say they are closer to each other than either is to T. rex, and together in a rough range.

Check this to see the skulls in question compared: http://carnivoraforum.com/blog/entry/3823033/45167/

Posted ImagePosted ImagePosted Image

I think it is obvious that while more elongated than th others, whimpy is certainly the wrong term to refer to spinosaurus skull. It still has robust bits, the dentary obviously is, after all that´s also the part bearing a lot of weight in predation on large fish, and the rostrum is more or less a solid piece of bone. It is imo likely that it had a bite force ~2t +-half a ton. Keeping in mind the size of the fish it preyed on, the jaw apparatus must have been quite capable of withstanding forces at least, meaning it would be a useful grabbling tool in a fight.
Edited by theropod, Jan 24 2013, 07:18 AM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Grey
Kleptoparasite
[ *  *  *  *  *  * ]
If Theropod models are accurate, Tyrannosaurus skull is far more massive despite being shorter and likely much heavier than Spinosaurus. In fact I wonder if the skull of the later is not far fin, an adult man wouldn't fit at all in that mouth.

That being said, comparing the skulls is an important factor in that fight but not a decisive as WE DON'T KNOW THE REAL SIZE AND PROPORTIONS OF SPINOSAURUS.

Regarding the bite force issue, it seems to me that Sakamoto, on askabiologist, said that Spinosaurus would have definitely a weaker bite force than Tyrannosaurus and carcharodontosaurids...
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
theropod
Member Avatar
palaeontology, open source and survival enthusiast
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
regarding my reconstruction, only the known parts are of course certain, and how they scale is a different question. carcha is fairly complete, sue is complete but crushed and the top view might not be totally accurate but gives a good impression of its width. spino is a real problem as we don't even know how exactly the dentary matches the rostrum and the other fragments. the whole posterior cranium is speculative and based on relatives, so it might have been completely different. however neither irritator nor suchomimus seem to have had a wider cranium. Its possible that having a wider snout, the posterior part of spinosaurus was too more expanded, you could use your imagination there. The rest is based on Suchomimus and irritator and while not factual as good as any other guess.
Certainly it was in any case by far narrower than t.rex's skull.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Godzillasaurus
Reptile King
[ *  *  *  *  *  * ]
MightyMaus
Jan 24 2013, 04:44 AM
Superiron21
Jan 24 2013, 04:30 AM
brolyeuphyfusion
Jan 23 2013, 12:12 PM
Superiron21
Jan 23 2013, 09:53 AM
Jinfengopteryx
Jan 23 2013, 04:38 AM
brolyeuphyfusion
Jan 22 2013, 07:46 PM
Their comparative dentary sizes are irrelevant as it doesn't actually prove anything in this match...
Not in this match, but they have an estimate debate and Verdugo has critisized theropods reconstruction, because he claimed the dentary to be too long in theropods skull reconstruction. Skull size matters a lot in this fight, as it could help to determine the size of Spinosaurus, with scaling up from it's relatives (you know that a size advantage would be important for Spinosaurus). Skull size would be important aswell for bite force, tough in bite force Tyrannosaurus anyway wins with ease, but Spinosaurus would still need at least a bite force strong enough to kill Tyrannosaurus. Also, Tyrannosaurus being more bird like is very irrelevant, Verdugo just said the Tyrannosaurus thing for comparision, to show how big the dentary size he believes in would be.
I´m with you on that.... and by the way many scientists said that the bite force of spino was not designed for fighting (catching fish and preys really smaller comapring with it´s size) their hands are not so powerful they´re designed (even the claw to catch fishes and squeeze prey althought his claws could do damage ... yes but not mortal wonds to the robust body of t-rex.....
I´ve seen from a real expert a good explanation (push your 3rd finger with your first finge (spino bite) then push all the hand (T-rex bite)... If T-rex catch spino´s neck there won´t be coming back..... no matter it´s size
Would you just stop with the bias? You're not looking at Spinosaurus' advantages...what makes you think that this would be a biting contest!? Spinosaurus would overpower and kill the Tyrannosaurus with it's size and strength...
I you don´t see the truth is your problem size is not the same as strenght (I´m not saying this, experts said)... spino was not stronger than t-rex even carcha was strongest than spino... but keep in your fantasy world the only advantage I see is size but only to intimidation no to fight...
Think of it this way. Let's say Tyrannosaurus is a Jaguar, and Spinosaurus is a leopard, both weighing 250lbs. Of course the Jag is quite a bit stronger. Now imagine Tyranno is a 250lb Jag, and Spino is a 500lb leopard. Now, when factoring in the size advantage, you can easily see why spinosaurus would be far stronger in absolute terms than Tyrannosaurus.

For instance, Spinosaurus would be able to lift,carry,push,move, much heavier objects that Tyrannosaurus. Pushing moving is with body, not arms, although Spinosaurus has the advantage there too.
Spinosaurus may have been stronger than tyrannosaurus when much larger and heavier, but tyrannosaurus is more powerful pound for pound. I do see what you are saying.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Godzillasaurus
Reptile King
[ *  *  *  *  *  * ]
theropod
Jan 24 2013, 07:13 AM
^I have to disagree on the last part, going by the msot recent studies an allosaurus spoecimen with a skull ~80cm long was put at a bite force of 800kg. It is possible that this is overestimated regarding the other, lower estimates for similar sized specimens, but using it would yield ~3t for the Carcharodontosaurus neotype (max skull lenght=1,56m, and remember, the skull is rather more laterally expanded than in Allosaurus). Giganotosaurus wouldn´t be too different, at least for the holotype, not sure about the other specimen.

It doesn´t seem as if carcharodontosaur bite forces where quite as weak as some think, tough I used to think spinos bite was stronger too. It might be save to say they are closer to each other than either is to T. rex, and together in a rough range.

Check this to see the skulls in question compared: http://carnivoraforum.com/blog/entry/3823033/45167/

Posted ImagePosted ImagePosted Image

I think it is obvious that while more elongated than th others, whimpy is certainly the wrong term to refer to spinosaurus skull. It still has robust bits, the dentary obviously is, after all that´s also the part bearing a lot of weight in predation on large fish, and the rostrum is more or less a solid piece of bone. It is imo likely that it had a bite force ~2t +-half a ton. Keeping in mind the size of the fish it preyed on, the jaw apparatus must have been quite capable of withstanding forces at least, meaning it would be a useful grabbling tool in a fight.
Save for the sharp, conical teeth that make up its weaponry.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
MightyMaus
Member Avatar
Autotrophic Organism
[ *  * ]
Superiron21
Jan 24 2013, 04:56 AM
MightyMaus
Jan 24 2013, 04:44 AM
Superiron21
Jan 24 2013, 04:30 AM
brolyeuphyfusion
Jan 23 2013, 12:12 PM
Superiron21
Jan 23 2013, 09:53 AM
Jinfengopteryx
Jan 23 2013, 04:38 AM
brolyeuphyfusion
Jan 22 2013, 07:46 PM
Their comparative dentary sizes are irrelevant as it doesn't actually prove anything in this match...
Not in this match, but they have an estimate debate and Verdugo has critisized theropods reconstruction, because he claimed the dentary to be too long in theropods skull reconstruction. Skull size matters a lot in this fight, as it could help to determine the size of Spinosaurus, with scaling up from it's relatives (you know that a size advantage would be important for Spinosaurus). Skull size would be important aswell for bite force, tough in bite force Tyrannosaurus anyway wins with ease, but Spinosaurus would still need at least a bite force strong enough to kill Tyrannosaurus. Also, Tyrannosaurus being more bird like is very irrelevant, Verdugo just said the Tyrannosaurus thing for comparision, to show how big the dentary size he believes in would be.
I´m with you on that.... and by the way many scientists said that the bite force of spino was not designed for fighting (catching fish and preys really smaller comapring with it´s size) their hands are not so powerful they´re designed (even the claw to catch fishes and squeeze prey althought his claws could do damage ... yes but not mortal wonds to the robust body of t-rex.....
I´ve seen from a real expert a good explanation (push your 3rd finger with your first finge (spino bite) then push all the hand (T-rex bite)... If T-rex catch spino´s neck there won´t be coming back..... no matter it´s size
Would you just stop with the bias? You're not looking at Spinosaurus' advantages...what makes you think that this would be a biting contest!? Spinosaurus would overpower and kill the Tyrannosaurus with it's size and strength...
I you don´t see the truth is your problem size is not the same as strenght (I´m not saying this, experts said)... spino was not stronger than t-rex even carcha was strongest than spino... but keep in your fantasy world the only advantage I see is size but only to intimidation no to fight...
Think of it this way. Let's say Tyrannosaurus is a Jaguar, and Spinosaurus is a leopard, both weighing 250lbs. Of course the Jag is quite a bit stronger. Now imagine Tyranno is a 250lb Jag, and Spino is a 500lb leopard. Now, when factoring in the size advantage, you can easily see why spinosaurus would be far stronger in absolute terms than Tyrannosaurus.

For instance, Spinosaurus would be able to lift,carry,push,move, much heavier objects that Tyrannosaurus. Pushing moving is with body, not arms, although Spinosaurus has the advantage there too.
"For instance, Spinosaurus would be able to lift,carry,push,move, much heavier objects that Tyrannosaurus. Pushing moving is with body, not arms, although Spinosaurus has the advantage there too. " pal what did you smoke?... his body and his arms are designed to carry only fish and preys much much smaller compared to him... yes maybe spino was able to lift a brachiosaurus.... with your theorical facts....
Well imagine a pitbull (T-rex) and a Great Dane (Spino) pitbull can take down GD easilly....


@theropod The overestimates of spino 17m are proved theropod? with so less than 15% of the body? or this is true cause is not T-rex and the largest T-rex specimens need to be 100% researched
Where did I state a theoretical fact? Spinosaurus at its upper size range was much stronger than Tyrannosaurus. That fact is unavoidable. Spinosaurus's arms are verrry strong, lifting two tons(you said this) means Spinosaurus could pick up a small car in each hand.... It has the power in its body to easily control and push a teensy little 6 ton rex around.

As for your Pitt bull-Great dane comparison, I would definitely back a 200lb GD over a 100lb Pitt Bull.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
2 users reading this topic (2 Guests and 0 Anonymous)
Go to Next Page
« Previous Topic · Dinosauria Interspecific Conflict · Next Topic »
Add Reply

Find this theme on Forum2Forum.net & ZNR exclusively.