| 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: |
| Spinosaurus aegyptiacus v Tyrannosaurus rex | |
|---|---|
| Tweet Topic Started: Jan 7 2012, 02:16 AM (459,262 Views) | |
| Wolf Eagle | Jan 7 2012, 02:16 AM Post #1 |
![]()
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. ![]() 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).
Edited by Taipan, Apr 24 2015, 10:10 PM.
|
![]() |
|
| Replies: | |
|---|---|
| Fist of the North Shrimp | Jan 29 2013, 01:04 AM Post #1786 |
|
vá á orminum
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Only if your your arguments were logical and you were a rational person. Which is not the case on most occasions. |
![]() |
|
| Grey | Jan 29 2013, 01:06 AM Post #1787 |
|
Kleptoparasite
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
You're right Jinfen for the translation. |
![]() |
|
| MysteryMeat | Jan 29 2013, 02:57 AM Post #1788 |
|
Herbivore
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
I see. It's weird because the green parts look more like fossils--random coloring, rock like textures. The white parts look so smooth it's like sculpted. Look at some of the tallest dorsal spines. |
![]() |
|
| Jinfengopteryx | Jan 29 2013, 03:31 AM Post #1789 |
![]()
Aspiring paleontologist, science enthusiast and armchair speculative fiction/evolution writer
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
By the way, don't we actually know Spinosaurus' teeth? |
![]() |
|
| theropod | Jan 29 2013, 04:47 AM Post #1790 |
|
palaeontology, open source and survival enthusiast
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
The roots and some small parts sticking out are embedded in the rostrum, Stromer recovered several teeth and I think there is a good amount of isolated teeth just like with Carcharodontosaurus. We definitely know the tooth count in the recovered parts and their approximate shape |
![]() |
|
| Grey | Jan 29 2013, 08:44 AM Post #1791 |
|
Kleptoparasite
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Sure, scientists are not omniscient and are often the first to assume this, as knowledge is always progressing. But between scientifical thoughts and some guys on a forum where they try to make facts of 15-20 tons theropods, sauropods of 250-300 tons and more with a fiercer behavior than any predator, 40 m ichthyosaurs, scientifical works will always prevail and most of the time will be only updated by others scientific works. You guys should really stop thinking you are all f**king self-made experts. Some here clearly forget that all the basis of their excitation about very poorly known species, seen through drawings, models, graphics, is based on the evidences collected by field researchers themselves, sometimes in harsh and dangerous places. There's a terrible lack of modesty among posters of this forum, particularly in this section. Fortunately, a few rational and cautious posters are highly valuable and displays a true maturity in their reasoning and suggestions. The truth is that a large part of the posts making thread long like this one have their place only in the fictional section, and some deserve no place at all. Edited by Grey, Jan 29 2013, 08:51 AM.
|
![]() |
|
| SpinoInWonderland | Jan 29 2013, 11:55 AM Post #1792 |
|
The madness has come back...
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
We're not proclaiming ourselves self made experts, just showing that the "authority>>>logic" thing is wrong... The 250+ tonne sauropods and the 40-meter ichthyosaurs were achieved by isometric scaling... The 15-20 tonne theropods were from Therrien and Henderson with their super-heavy Spinosaurus... |
![]() |
|
| Grey | Jan 29 2013, 12:13 PM Post #1793 |
|
Kleptoparasite
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Isometric scaling calculations highly debatable, even when experienced with scanners and modern methods, all of this based on very highly fragmentary remains, some lost since decades or more than one century ago. That's a huge difference. Authority is not superior to logic but extraordinary claims need extraordinary evidences. There's no 250 tons sauropod, there's in fact not confirmed 100 tons sauropods. There's no freaking 40 m ichthyosaurs neither, that's discussed in a megalodon related subject these times. Carnivora believers of such things are more like a sect. Go back at the actual research made currently, you'd be disappointed. |
![]() |
|
| SpinoInWonderland | Jan 29 2013, 12:24 PM Post #1794 |
|
The madness has come back...
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
You can't just say that, based on the fact that only a tiny portion of all the prehistoric fauna has ever been discovered... Don't worry though, I don't state 200-300 tonne sauropods or 40-meter ichthyosaurs as solid facts, only as possibilities... Edited by SpinoInWonderland, Jan 29 2013, 12:24 PM.
|
![]() |
|
| Grey | Jan 29 2013, 12:34 PM Post #1795 |
|
Kleptoparasite
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Justly, this is because : -we don't have found everything yet -even long time discovered species are updated in their attributed sizes As for the possibility, never say never. But do you at least realize the humongous biological, biomechanical, trophic, ecological constraints such animals would represent ? You just see big, big and bigger, without thinking the against. I was discussing about pliosaurs with Espen Knutsen and Buchy when I supported the existence of 25 m animals. When talking about 1 m long fangs for the Aramberri specimen (loosely based on teeth marks), the word of Knutsen was "totally ireasonnable" and Buchy "funny". It's time to show a bit more maturity. Edited by Grey, Jan 29 2013, 12:35 PM.
|
![]() |
|
| SpinoInWonderland | Jan 29 2013, 12:42 PM Post #1796 |
|
The madness has come back...
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Yes I realize those, that's why I never believed in 500-tonne sauropods, and I rejected claims of 15+ meter Tyrannosaurus... |
![]() |
|
| Grey | Jan 29 2013, 12:58 PM Post #1797 |
|
Kleptoparasite
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
You don't have to approach 500 tons for question the reasonability of such weights. At best, this is kid stuff. I don't believe in 15 m rex and any theropod based on a very tiny skeletal piece of fragment. For recall of the SVPOW article related to Amphicoelias : Folks — please remember, the punchline is not “Amphicoelias fragillimus only weighed 78.5 tonnes rather than 122.4 tonnes”. The punchline is “when you extrapolate the mass of an extinct animal of uncertain affinities from a 132-year-old figure of a partial bone which has not been seen in more than a century, you need to recognise that the error-bars are massive and anything resembling certainty is way misplaced.” No wonder I just laugh when a guy tries to convince me that a 250 tons sauropod existed based on a poorly preserved footprint. Edited by Grey, Jan 29 2013, 01:08 PM.
|
![]() |
|
| mega t.rex the magnificent | Jan 30 2013, 12:14 AM Post #1798 |
|
Autotrophic Organism
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
![]() Something tells me that: Giganotosaurus is the largest in terms of weight Spinosaurus is the largest in terms of length Tyrannosaurus is the largest in terms of height |
![]() |
|
| SpinoInWonderland | Jan 30 2013, 12:26 AM Post #1799 |
|
The madness has come back...
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Actually, that reconstruction of Spinosaurus is at 9 tonnes, and that's the most conservative. That Spinosaurus has a proportionally shorter body than other spinosaurids, which the more recent and proven look of Spinosaurus seems to disagree with: ![]() That skeletal is IPHG 1912, the destroyed holotype. It's a subadult...and yet it's as large as Giganotosaurus or Carcharodontosaurus(based on the scale bar)... http://skeletaldrawing.blogspot.com/2012/01/revisiting-fisher-king.html MSNM V4047 would have been much larger... One of the vertebrae which was once assumed to be in the torso, was actually a caudal(tail) vertebra... Edited by SpinoInWonderland, Jan 30 2013, 12:26 AM.
|
![]() |
|
| Kurtz | Jan 30 2013, 01:14 AM Post #1800 |
|
Kleptoparasite
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
So Grey how large was the spino? |
![]() |
|
| 2 users reading this topic (2 Guests and 0 Anonymous) | |
| Go to Next Page | |
| « Previous Topic · Dinosauria Interspecific Conflict · Next Topic » |
| Theme: Dinosauria light | Track Topic · E-mail Topic |
2:23 AM Jul 14
|
Powered by ZetaBoards Premium · Privacy Policy


)



![]](http://z4.ifrm.com/static/1/pip_r.png)









2:23 AM Jul 14