| 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 (459,246 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: | |
|---|---|
| SpinoInWonderland | Feb 9 2013, 02:22 AM Post #2026 |
|
The madness has come back...
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
What to carnosaurs have to do in this match? This is a coelurosaur vs a megalosauroid... |
![]() |
|
| theropod | Feb 9 2013, 02:25 AM Post #2027 |
|
palaeontology, open source and survival enthusiast
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
In a letal area like the neck or the base of the skull, yes, but it first has the reach them, and before it gets overpowered. for the first line: the problem is, you ahve to realise compared to spinosaurus T. rex is far inferior in terms of power, it isn't that strong when comapred to spinosaurus.
I am not saying that, what I am saying is that it is not fair to use Spinosaurus at a lower size estimate and at the same time start fantasizing about T. rex specimens some claim where bigger than sue while that is in the best case speculation and in the worst case BS. I think when speculating about larger T. rexes, we should first think about larger spinosaurus. Both however would be pointless and therefore nobody here except for you does it. Both could potentially grow larger, the likelyness that Spinosaurus got much larger is significantly higher than that of T. rex getting much larger (for we have a nice sample size of the latter but not the former), so you are better off when you don't start this debate.
OK, I accept your opinion, however my point was simply that being a better fighter at parity that doesn't mean you can win against significantly larger opponents.
I intentionally totally exagerated to make my point clear to you, it looks like you didn't understand it...
I am chooseing the biggest confirmed Spinosaurus (only confirmed adult S. aegyptiacus) and the biggest confirmed T. rex (out of 31 specimens most of which where adult), and not using particularly low ones for the former. I still haven't seen supstantial evidence in favour of 13-14m T. rexes, sorry. Spinosaurs where not as gracile as many people think. Add that to a pretty massive crest on the back and you get an animal that doesn't just look very large, but that actually is very bulky and massively constructed as well. Even very agressive predators do not play the agressor in a fight with such an opponent, agressivity is not a factor when one has obvious ohysical superiority on its side. It rather plays a role in fights between equals.
I hope you realise I did not acknowledge it to be that large but just correct your size figure. Edited by theropod, Feb 9 2013, 02:27 AM.
|
![]() |
|
| SpinoInWonderland | Feb 9 2013, 02:28 AM Post #2028 |
|
The madness has come back...
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
It may be possible that the Spinosaurus would simply scare the Tyrannosaurus away with it's visual size, the spine being a big part of this, therefore winning without a single hit... |
![]() |
|
| theropod | Feb 9 2013, 02:29 AM Post #2029 |
|
palaeontology, open source and survival enthusiast
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
For some people: every theropod =/=t. rex=a carnosaur=weak slicing bite=inferior in every regard |
![]() |
|
| theropod | Feb 9 2013, 02:30 AM Post #2030 |
|
palaeontology, open source and survival enthusiast
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
In reality yes, but this is a fight scenario, there is no scaring away of opponents. it is not about the psychological advantage one has here, it is about the capabilities the two have when they have to fight |
![]() |
|
| SpinoInWonderland | Feb 9 2013, 02:35 AM Post #2031 |
|
The madness has come back...
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
I know right, and their argumentation consists entirely of bias statements, unreliable sources, false accusations, made-up 'facts', and insults... Many of them can't even back themselves up... For example: Some guy named "Red T-Rex" on YT accused me of Spinosaurus fanboyism, just because I stated that Spinosaurus would prevail against Tyrannosaurus, he can't even back his bs up, resorting to insults, I stated that my favorite dinosaurs are allosaurs and sauropods, but he keeps calling me a Spinosaurus fanboy. That guy is almost as bad as Palaeosaurus! |
![]() |
|
| SpinoInWonderland | Feb 9 2013, 02:36 AM Post #2032 |
|
The madness has come back...
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Even then, the psychological impact would reduce Tyrannosaurus' fighting capability here... |
![]() |
|
| Jinfengopteryx | Feb 9 2013, 02:39 AM Post #2033 |
![]()
Aspiring paleontologist, science enthusiast and armchair speculative fiction/evolution writer
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
But brolyeuphyfusion, Tyrannosaurus also faced Hadrosaurs standing a lot taller than it, so it should be able to manage this psychologically. |
![]() |
|
| SanR | Feb 9 2013, 04:01 AM Post #2034 |
![]()
Unicellular Organism
![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Spinosaurus's sail would have made it look much larger and it was probably larger than the Hadrosaurs Tyrannosaurus faced, I think that psychological advantages are quite useful. For example bluff charges would have been effective at keeping T.rex out of 'harm's-way' and T.rex would be more risky with attacking; especially considering that it didn't live with any other large carnivores and Spinosaurus co-existed with several. You can see this behaviour in many modern animals: leopards are capable of injuring lions; but don't attack, cougars are capable of injuring bears; but are very risky with even getting close, etc. Edited by SanR, Feb 9 2013, 04:01 AM.
|
![]() |
|
| theropod | Feb 9 2013, 04:37 AM Post #2035 |
|
palaeontology, open source and survival enthusiast
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
It might have faced huge hadrosaurs (tough Magnapaulia was initially exagerated and we don't currently have evidence for any spinosaurus-sized forms), but that doesn't mean it usually attacked them alone. A predator usually minimises the risks of injury, for an animal living in family groups fighting such an animal on its own would be very illogical, and I think a lone t. rex would probably have a psychological disadvantage. That's why I think agressiveness is not helpful, animals are not agressive towards larger opponents that they don't know, and if they are that can be their downfall. it is only advantageous to be agressive if you know your opponent. |
![]() |
|
| Godzillasaurus | Feb 9 2013, 04:49 AM Post #2036 |
|
Reptile King
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
But tyrannosaurus was more heavily built and had a much more robust skull with a much more powerful bite force. But that is somewhat of a pointless argument due to the spino's sheer size. Edited by Godzillasaurus, Feb 9 2013, 04:50 AM.
|
![]() |
|
| theropod | Feb 9 2013, 05:04 AM Post #2037 |
|
palaeontology, open source and survival enthusiast
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
^I'm aware of that, after all I made these:![]() ![]() I don't think anyone here denies that in the bite department T. rex is superior, but spinosaurus jaws are not useless, they are optimised for gripping large, tough and slippery fish. If it got a hold of T. rex, those teeth would make it hard to escape. I think we all have seen the video of the alligator gar withstanding several hits with an axe, also some might have watched the episode of PD-files where it is concluded that the teeth of spinosaurus where very effective at puncturing. No question, T. rex bite is more powerful and much better suited to kill large animals. However that of spinosaurus is still a powerful weapon it could have used in several ways to overpower and kill it's opponent, and to some degree it can make up for its deficiency by being larger, hence more durable. T. rex needed twice better bite (in absolute terms) to make up for its lack of size alone. Edited by theropod, Feb 9 2013, 05:04 AM.
|
![]() |
|
| Jinfengopteryx | Feb 9 2013, 05:08 AM Post #2038 |
![]()
Aspiring paleontologist, science enthusiast and armchair speculative fiction/evolution writer
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
But we should take a scenrio where both are forced to fight a life to death battle, under normal conditions, I think neither of them would attack the other face to face. |
![]() |
|
| dinosaur | Feb 9 2013, 06:45 AM Post #2039 |
|
Heterotrophic Organism
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
See dude, this is exactly what i was talking about. They don't know what's cool! They have no idea that Tyrannosaurus is the man! |
![]() |
|
| Jinfengopteryx | Feb 9 2013, 06:58 AM Post #2040 |
![]()
Aspiring paleontologist, science enthusiast and armchair speculative fiction/evolution writer
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
That discussion doesn't have anything to do with coolness! |
![]() |
|
| 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