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 (459,211 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:
SpinoInWonderland
The madness has come back...
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Carcharodontosauridae
Jun 12 2013, 05:48 AM
Jinfengopteryx
Jun 12 2013, 05:31 AM
Carcharodontosauridae
Jun 12 2013, 04:48 AM
I did not invent anything. I had read that the nostrils of Spinosaurus were closer to the tip of the snout than believed. And also that the Spinosaurus MSNM V4047 was a old, and since it was in the process of shrinking from old age, had a shorter snout estimates of 1.75 meters, more like 1.5 meters.
Could you give us a link?
From Theropoda Blogspot:

"I never stated that Spinosaurus was proportioned as a tyrannosaurid. I wrote (in another post, not here) that all the extrapolations producing adult Spinosaurus as longer than 14-15 meters are poorly supported.
It's currently unknown whether skull size in Spinosaurids decreased with age: being them long-snouted animals, it could result the opposite, with adults with proportionally longer skulls than juveniles and subadults: look at long-beaked fish-eating birds ontogeny: chicks show relatively shorter skulls than adults.
In another post I showed that the fact that MSNM V4074 interalveolar space at the maxilla is 20% longer than the interalveolar space in the Spinosaurus aegyptiacus holotype maxillary fragment does not mean that the body of the former was 20% longer than the latter, since a 20% difference in maxillary dimension is present among Tyrannosaurus specimens with just a 5% difference in femur size (and femur is a better proxy for body size than maxilla).
Also, even assuming that Spinosaurus holotype dorsals are 150% those of Baryonyx holotype does not mean anything about their relative size differences as adults, since the ontogenetic stage of both specimens is unclear. And even when you just extrapolate Spinosaurus holotype size from Baryonyx holotype size (about 9 meters) in such a naive way, you have a 9 * 1.5 = 13.5 meters long animal.
The total skull length of Spinosaurus is unknown. MSNM V4074 is 1 meter long snout, and probably includes around 2/3 of the original skull length, not less (only oviraptorosaurs have snout about half the skull, all other nonavian theropods have longer snouts, and spinosaurids were probably among the longest-snouted theropods, thus the snout was most of the total skull length). Thus, the total skull was probably around 1.5 meters long, not 1.75.
The 17 (or more) meters long animal is a just a monster myth for kids."

In the comments:
http://theropoda.blogspot.it/2012/08/la-coda-destra-della-taglia-theropode.html#comment-form
Bias at it's best. Try putting a ~1-meter rostrum on a ~1.5-meter skull, it's rear portion would look too compressed. So by his logic, Dal Sasso is a kid?

That line proves that Cau is a biased Spinosaurus hater, think about it.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
theropod
Member Avatar
palaeontology, open source and survival enthusiast
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
No offense to him, but I think what Cau writes bases on even less evidence.

Let's start with his skull-lenght figure. Does it base on actual spinosaur material and reconstruction? No, it is a vague extrapolation from some generalised ratio. Which do you think it more likely, Dal Sasso or others reconstructions based on relatives, that turn out much longer, or Cau's extrapolation based on unrelated theropod's proportions?

I think he is far too extreme in his statements, like 15m+ being poorly supported compared to a lenght below that, or 17m being a myth. When making such claims, one should bring up more evidence than "the snout is usually 2/3 of the skull-lenght, so no reason to check whether that also fits with Spinosaurs..."

When he deduced his 12,5m Spinosaurus he was actually using body proportions of unrelated theropods on top of that. of course with a mere 1,5m skull, 14-15m is likely when basing on other spinosaurs. The point is however, that the skull of Spinosaurus very likely was longer than that.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
SpinoInWonderland
The madness has come back...
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
theropod
Jun 12 2013, 08:41 PM
No offense to him, but I think what Cau writes bases on even less evidence.

Let's start with his skull-lenght figure. Does it base on actual spinosaur material and reconstruction? No, it is a vague extrapolation from some generalised ratio. Which do you think it more likely, Dal Sasso or others reconstructions based on relatives, that turn out much longer, or Cau's extrapolation based on unrelated theropod's proportions?

I think he is far too extreme in his statements, like 15m+ being poorly supported compared to a lenght below that, or 17m being a myth. When making such claims, one should bring up more evidence than "the snout is usually 2/3 of the skull-lenght, so no reason to check whether that also fits with Spinosaurs..."

When he deduced his 12,5m Spinosaurus he was actually using body proportions of unrelated theropods on top of that. of course with a mere 1,5m skull, 14-15m is likely when basing on other spinosaurs. The point is however, that the skull of Spinosaurus very likely was longer than that.
He is probably just trying to make Spinosaurus as small as possible.

Here's a huge blow to Cau's ultraconservative estimates:

The dorsal vertebrae of IPHG 1912 are almost twice as long as the corresponding ones in Baryonyx! This should finish all those <15-meter Spinosaurus estimates, for S. aegyptiacus at least.


theropod database
 
Baryonyx walkeri
Holotype- (BMNH R9951)
partial skull (915 mm) including premaxillae, anterior process of maxilla, posterior third of nasals, jugal lacking maxillary, postorbital and quadratojugal processes, lacrimal, prefrontal, postorbital, frontal, partial partietal, laterosphenoid, orbitosphenoid, occiput, quadrates, dentaries (one fragmentary), splenials (one fragmentary), partial surangular, partial angulars, coronoid, anterior vomers, many teeth, atlantal pleurocentrum, atlantal neuropophysis, axial intercentrum, axis (73 mm), axial rib, third cervical (81 mm), fifth cervical (74 mm), sixth cervical (95 mm), eighth cervical (120 mm), three cervical ribs (one complete), first dorsal (91 mm), second dorsal (108 mm), third dorsal (92 mm), partial fourth dorsal including centrum, prezygopophysis and diapophysis (90 mm), fifth dorsal (92 mm), sixth dorsal (88 mm), seventh dorsal neural arch, eighth dorsal centrum (93 mm), tenth cervical neural arch, eleventh dorsal (105 mm), thirteenth dorsal centrum (108 mm), fourteenth dorsal (110 mm), many dorsal ribs, several gasteralia, proximal caudal (134 mm), proximal caudal (144 mm), proximal caudal (140 mm), three fragmentary caudal centra, proximal caudal neural arch, two proximal caudal neural spines, five chevrons, scapulae (one lacking proximal end, both lacking distal end), coracoids, paired sternum lacking caudal half of one side, humeri (463 mm), radii (225 mm), ulna (283 mm), distal phalanx I-1, manual ungual I (240 mm), phalanx III-2 (132 mm), phalanx III-3 (91 mm), manual ungual III (142 mm), phalanx IV-1 (65 mm), ilium lacking preacetabular process (~820 mm), nearly complete pubis, ischium lacking distal end, partial femur lacking central portion (~890 mm), tibial fragment, proximal fibula, astragalar fragment, calcaneum, distal ends of two metatarsals, proximal pedal ungual, gastrolith

Spinosaurus aegyptiacus
Holotype- (IPHG 1912 VIII 19, destroyed)
(skull ~1.45 m) maxillary fragment, incomplete dentary (mandible ~1.34 m), splenial, angular, nineteen teeth (62, 126 mm), axial neural arch, middle cervical vertebra (185 mm), four dorsal vertebrae (195, 170, ~190, ~210 mm), three dorsal neural arches, anterior dorsal rib, two middle dorsal ribs, posterior dorsal rib, gastralium, six gastralia fragments, incomplete first sacral vertebra (155 mm), second sacral centrum, partial third sacral centrum, proximal caudal vertebra (90 mm)
Edited by SpinoInWonderland, Jun 12 2013, 09:28 PM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Spinodontosaurus
Member Avatar
Herbivore
[ *  *  *  * ]
Indeed. And if Cau were to insist on the 50% larger figure (the shortest S. aegyptiacus dorsal seems to be ~54.5% longer than the largest B. walkeri dorsal...) , it is worth noting that Scott Hartman's Baryonyx has an axial length in excess of 10 meters.
And that no complete spinosaurid skull is known, so stating this ratio as absolute fact is more than a little miss-leading, especially given how Suchomimus alone has reconstructions varying from 120cm right up to 170cm. Though for what it's worth, Hartman's baryonychine skeletals suggest the rostrum is 59-62% the total skull length, suggesting a total skull length of 160-170cm for a 1 meter rostrum; the Dal Sasso reconstruction is 160cm in terms of Pmx-Qj length
Edited by Spinodontosaurus, Jun 12 2013, 10:14 PM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Jinfengopteryx
Member Avatar
Aspiring paleontologist, science enthusiast and armchair speculative fiction/evolution writer
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
brolyeuphyfusion
Jun 12 2013, 02:16 PM
So by his logic, Dal Sasso is a kid?
Monitor X said that Cau did not want to insult Dal Sasso with that ( http://carnivoraforum.com/single/?p=8475507&t=9327489 ), they are actually good friends. This was not an attempt to attack Dal Sasso.
brolyeuphyfusion
Jun 12 2013, 02:16 PM
That line proves that Cau is a biased Spinosaurus hater, think about it.
1. Than write him a comment under his blog (you can do so in english and as an anonimo, many people do so) and explain him, why he's off.
2. You are allowed to call him to hate, but he doesn't think very good of the CF users either.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Big G
Herbivore
[ *  *  *  * ]
There is also a post where Cau states that Spinosaurus is over 15 meters long and weighing 5-10 tons:

http://translate.google.com/translate?u=http%3A//theropoda.blogspot.it/2008/08/ordini-di-grandezza-cenomaniana.html&hl=en&langpair=it|en&tbb=1&ie=UTF-8
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
SpinoInWonderland
The madness has come back...
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Jinfengopteryx
Jun 12 2013, 10:56 PM
brolyeuphyfusion
Jun 12 2013, 02:16 PM
So by his logic, Dal Sasso is a kid?
Monitor X said that Cau did not want to insult Dal Sasso with that ( http://carnivoraforum.com/single/?p=8475507&t=9327489 ), they are actually good friends. This was not an attempt to attack Dal Sasso.
His last line looks as if it is. ~17 meter Spinosaurus is NOT a kiddie monster myth, it is an actual possibility suggested by the proportions of relatives. Dal Sasso realized that correctly.

Jinfengopteryx
Jun 12 2013, 10:56 PM
brolyeuphyfusion
Jun 12 2013, 02:16 PM
That line proves that Cau is a biased Spinosaurus hater, think about it.
1. Than write him a comment under his blog (you can do so in english and as an anonimo, many people do so) and explain him, why he's off.
2. You are allowed to call him to hate, but he doesn't think very good of the CF users either.
I won't even bother, he believes that there is actually a length limit(13 meters) for theropods. The only thing I agree with him on is that Sciurumimus is a coelurosaur and that Amphicoelias is not a flagellicaudatan. The least I can do is tell others not to take his Spinosaurus estimates as proven facts.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Big G
Herbivore
[ *  *  *  * ]
Click me

I tried to rebuild IPHG and I came out 13.3 meters long and 7.4 tons of mass. A specimen of the 20% larger than it would be about 15.7 meters in length.
Edited by Big G, Jun 12 2013, 11:28 PM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
theropod
Member Avatar
palaeontology, open source and survival enthusiast
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
While I'm fine with this lenght, I would be cautious both about the skull lenght of the holotype, and the 20% that MNSM is supposedly larger. I doubt both to be honest:
https://lh4.googleusercontent.com/-2pQrrXWV1W0/UPLKH-2av2I/AAAAAAAABhY/eHzp8Zxdhb8/s512/Spinosaurus_skull_MSNM%2520V4047%2526holotype.jpg

Also, the "Suchomimus" holotype was never said to be a subadult.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Big G
Herbivore
[ *  *  *  * ]
theropod
Jun 12 2013, 11:43 PM
While I'm fine with this lenght, I would be cautious both about the skull lenght of the holotype, and the 20% that MNSM is supposedly larger. I doubt both to be honest:
https://lh4.googleusercontent.com/-2pQrrXWV1W0/UPLKH-2av2I/AAAAAAAABhY/eHzp8Zxdhb8/s512/Spinosaurus_skull_MSNM%2520V4047%2526holotype.jpg

Also, the "Suchomimus" holotype was never said to be a subadult.
But Suchomimus of 11 meters is a subadult. And 20% larger is the only valid statement in the field of paleontology, therefore, I feel that I put my trust.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Jinfengopteryx
Member Avatar
Aspiring paleontologist, science enthusiast and armchair speculative fiction/evolution writer
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
brolyeuphyfusion
Jun 12 2013, 11:04 PM
I won't even bother, he believes that there is actually a length limit(13 meters) for theropods.
Show me where he has said so (or better quote it)! After you guys have put the "he accused Dal Sasso of having used Tyrannosaurus for his estimates" thing into his mouth, I'm going to be more skeptical.
brolyeuphyfusion
Jun 12 2013, 11:04 PM
The only thing I agree with him on is that Sciurumimus is a coelurosaur
I hope I'm allowed to remind you that he only tends towards believing that (LINK).

P.S. I hope you know that he doesn't deny feathered non-coelurosaurs:
Quote:
 
In conclusion, although I support the hypothesis that even megalosauroidi can have some kind of proto-feathers at the same time I do not consider Sciurumimus evidence in favor of this, and I think most parsimonious interpret this new theropode coelurosauro much as a baseline.
Source
Edited by Jinfengopteryx, Jun 13 2013, 12:41 AM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
theropod
Member Avatar
palaeontology, open source and survival enthusiast
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Carcharodontosauridae
Jun 13 2013, 12:07 AM
theropod
Jun 12 2013, 11:43 PM
While I'm fine with this lenght, I would be cautious both about the skull lenght of the holotype, and the 20% that MNSM is supposedly larger. I doubt both to be honest:
https://lh4.googleusercontent.com/-2pQrrXWV1W0/UPLKH-2av2I/AAAAAAAABhY/eHzp8Zxdhb8/s512/Spinosaurus_skull_MSNM%2520V4047%2526holotype.jpg

Also, the "Suchomimus" holotype was never said to be a subadult.
But Suchomimus of 11 meters is a subadult. And 20% larger is the only valid statement in the field of paleontology, therefore, I feel that I put my trust.

There is no evidence for that, it's that easy. i tough so too, because it is miscited in many places, but the authors didn't write so. Baryonyx' holotype is the subadult.

20% larger is basically a guess, not based on a tentative reconstruction if I remember right. It is definitely not supported by any evidence in the form of a comparative restoration of the skull's proportions, at least not with the holotype's dentary at 75cm in lenght, which is the most likely based on Stromer's figures.
The strange thing about the holotype are the enourmous vertebrae, which based on Baryonyx are already indicative of a larger size than the majority of estimates for MNSM V4047. Maybe the skull size was really proportionally smaller in the holotype, which explains the relatively short dentary?


Jinfengopteryx
Jun 13 2013, 12:34 AM
brolyeuphyfusion
Jun 12 2013, 11:04 PM
I won't even bother, he believes that there is actually a length limit(13 meters) for theropods.
Show me where he has said so (or better quote it)! After you guys have put the "he accused Dal Sasso of having used Tyrannosaurus for his estimates" thing into his mouth, I'm going to be more skeptical.
brolyeuphyfusion
Jun 12 2013, 11:04 PM
The only thing I agree with him on is that Sciurumimus is a coelurosaur
I hope I'm allowed to remind you that he only tends towards believing that (LINK).

P.S. I hope you know that he doesn't deny feathered non-coelurosaurs:
Quote:
 
In conclusion, although I support the hypothesis that even megalosauroidi can have some kind of proto-feathers at the same time I do not consider Sciurumimus evidence in favor of this, and I think most parsimonious interpret this new theropode coelurosauro much as a baseline.
Source

When was Cau accused of accusing Dal Sasso of using tyrannosaurs? Dal Sasso obviously didn't, it was rather Cau who used such unrelated taxa as a basis for proportions, to deduce his 12,5m figure.

Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Big G
Herbivore
[ *  *  *  * ]
theropod
Jun 13 2013, 02:33 AM
Carcharodontosauridae
Jun 13 2013, 12:07 AM
theropod
Jun 12 2013, 11:43 PM
While I'm fine with this lenght, I would be cautious both about the skull lenght of the holotype, and the 20% that MNSM is supposedly larger. I doubt both to be honest:
https://lh4.googleusercontent.com/-2pQrrXWV1W0/UPLKH-2av2I/AAAAAAAABhY/eHzp8Zxdhb8/s512/Spinosaurus_skull_MSNM%2520V4047%2526holotype.jpg

Also, the "Suchomimus" holotype was never said to be a subadult.
But Suchomimus of 11 meters is a subadult. And 20% larger is the only valid statement in the field of paleontology, therefore, I feel that I put my trust.

There is no evidence for that, it's that easy. i tough so too, because it is miscited in many places, but the authors didn't write so. Baryonyx' holotype is the subadult.

20% larger is basically a guess, not based on a tentative reconstruction if I remember right. It is definitely not supported by any evidence in the form of a comparative restoration of the skull's proportions, at least not with the holotype's dentary at 75cm in lenght, which is the most likely based on Stromer's figures.
The strange thing about the holotype are the enourmous vertebrae, which based on Baryonyx are already indicative of a larger size than the majority of estimates for MNSM V4047. Maybe the skull size was really proportionally smaller in the holotype, which explains the relatively short dentary?


Jinfengopteryx
Jun 13 2013, 12:34 AM
brolyeuphyfusion
Jun 12 2013, 11:04 PM
I won't even bother, he believes that there is actually a length limit(13 meters) for theropods.
Show me where he has said so (or better quote it)! After you guys have put the "he accused Dal Sasso of having used Tyrannosaurus for his estimates" thing into his mouth, I'm going to be more skeptical.
brolyeuphyfusion
Jun 12 2013, 11:04 PM
The only thing I agree with him on is that Sciurumimus is a coelurosaur
I hope I'm allowed to remind you that he only tends towards believing that (LINK).

P.S. I hope you know that he doesn't deny feathered non-coelurosaurs:
Quote:
 
In conclusion, although I support the hypothesis that even megalosauroidi can have some kind of proto-feathers at the same time I do not consider Sciurumimus evidence in favor of this, and I think most parsimonious interpret this new theropode coelurosauro much as a baseline.
Source

When was Cau accused of accusing Dal Sasso of using tyrannosaurs? Dal Sasso obviously didn't, it was rather Cau who used such unrelated taxa as a basis for proportions, to deduce his 12,5m figure.

Your citation:

"That's BS, it's just a hypothetical adult size as the holotype, 11m long, was subadult. No scientist I know of has ever given an adult size for it, I merely know it was suggested to be approximately on par with some other giant theropods. "

From this:

http://carnivoraforum.com/topic/9867648/1/
Edited by Big G, Jun 13 2013, 02:54 AM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Jinfengopteryx
Member Avatar
Aspiring paleontologist, science enthusiast and armchair speculative fiction/evolution writer
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
theropod
Jun 13 2013, 02:33 AM
When was Cau accused of accusing Dal Sasso of using tyrannosaurs?
I fear you have misunderstood me:
Jinfengopteryx
Jun 13 2013, 12:34 AM
brolyeuphyfusion
Jun 12 2013, 11:04 PM
I won't even bother, he believes that there is actually a length limit(13 meters) for theropods.
Show me where he has said so (or better quote it)! After you guys have put the "he accused Dal Sasso of having used Tyrannosaurus for his estimates" thing into his mouth, I'm going to be more skeptical.
brolyeuphyfusion
Jun 12 2013, 11:04 PM
The only thing I agree with him on is that Sciurumimus is a coelurosaur
I hope I'm allowed to remind you that he only tends towards believing that (LINK).

P.S. I hope you know that he doesn't deny feathered non-coelurosaurs:
Quote:
 
In conclusion, although I support the hypothesis that even megalosauroidi can have some kind of proto-feathers at the same time I do not consider Sciurumimus evidence in favor of this, and I think most parsimonious interpret this new theropode coelurosauro much as a baseline.
Source
By that I was referring to this:
brolyeuphyfusion
Dec 31 2012, 08:11 PM
Cau said that the 17-meter estimates are based on proportioning it like a tyrannosaurid, so I can't take him seriously when it comes to Spinosaurus :P
Source: http://carnivoraforum.com/topic/9353350/8/
I have seen no evidence yet for that claim. If he has once done so, I would like to see such a quote.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
theropod
Member Avatar
palaeontology, open source and survival enthusiast
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
I fear now I understand even less. Whom did broly accuse Cau did accuse to have stated Dal Sasso based anything on T. rex?

From the quote you show I seem to have understood you correctly even tough what you wrote would suggest there was another person whom Cau alledgedly accused of having said that. lol

Anyway, the whole thing is beyond ridiculous, no sane person would seriously believe an estimate for Spinosaurus that bases on T. rex can be conclusive.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
2 users reading this topic (2 Guests and 0 Anonymous)
DealsFor.me - The best sales, coupons, and discounts for you
Go to Next Page
« Previous Topic · Dinosauria Interspecific Conflict · Next Topic »
Add Reply

Find this theme on Forum2Forum.net & ZNR exclusively.