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 (459,182 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:
TheMechaBaryonyx789
Member Avatar
Herbivore
[ *  *  *  * ]
Canadianwildlife
Jan 25 2014, 08:41 AM
Jinfengopteryx
Jan 25 2014, 07:01 AM
Canadianwildlife
Jan 25 2014, 06:43 AM
By the way, my thinking that you did not like was Fact, which you cannot change. It wasn't bad thinking, it was fact.
Of course it is a fact, but I found it redundant because paleontology simply consists for the greatest part of speculation. Why not work with what we have?
Yeah I know, but because of that fact, spinosaurous fans have no right to boast that it would beat a t-rex because of the fact I stated. I'm glad they are trying to find out more of what they have, but the best they can do id duduct. Maybe a whole skeleton will be found soon.
We can accurately reconstruct missing parts of Spinosaurus using parts from its relatives.
Scott Hartman's skeletal diagram is the most accurate reconstruction of Spinosaurus we have. Why not use it?
Most sources depict Spinosaurus as being larger (and thus overall stronger) than Tyrannosaurus.
And by your logic Scott Hartman is automatically a Spinosaurus fan because he reconstructed Spinosaurus...
Edited by TheMechaBaryonyx789, Jan 25 2014, 08:49 AM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Canadianwildlife
Member Avatar
Apex Predator
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
TheMechaBaryonyx789
Jan 25 2014, 08:46 AM
Canadianwildlife
Jan 25 2014, 08:41 AM
Jinfengopteryx
Jan 25 2014, 07:01 AM
Canadianwildlife
Jan 25 2014, 06:43 AM
By the way, my thinking that you did not like was Fact, which you cannot change. It wasn't bad thinking, it was fact.
Of course it is a fact, but I found it redundant because paleontology simply consists for the greatest part of speculation. Why not work with what we have?
Yeah I know, but because of that fact, spinosaurous fans have no right to boast that it would beat a t-rex because of the fact I stated. I'm glad they are trying to find out more of what they have, but the best they can do id duduct. Maybe a whole skeleton will be found soon.
We can accurately reconstruct missing parts of Spinosaurus using parts from its relatives.
Scott Hartman's skeletal diagram is the most accurate reconstruction of Spinosaurus we have. Why not use it?
Most sources depict Spinosaurus as being larger (and thus overall stronger) than Tyrannosaurus.
And by your logic Scott Hartman is automatically a Spinosaurus fan because he reconstructed Spinosaurus...
And what do its relatives look like, and you can't automatically say spino was stronger, not in the jaws. Post some pictures of what the spinosaurous's relatives look like. No, I call a spino fan one who favors it over a t-rex.
Edited by Canadianwildlife, Jan 25 2014, 08:51 AM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
TheMechaBaryonyx789
Member Avatar
Herbivore
[ *  *  *  * ]
Canadianwildlife
Jan 25 2014, 08:50 AM
TheMechaBaryonyx789
Jan 25 2014, 08:46 AM
Canadianwildlife
Jan 25 2014, 08:41 AM
Jinfengopteryx
Jan 25 2014, 07:01 AM
Canadianwildlife
Jan 25 2014, 06:43 AM
By the way, my thinking that you did not like was Fact, which you cannot change. It wasn't bad thinking, it was fact.
Of course it is a fact, but I found it redundant because paleontology simply consists for the greatest part of speculation. Why not work with what we have?
Yeah I know, but because of that fact, spinosaurous fans have no right to boast that it would beat a t-rex because of the fact I stated. I'm glad they are trying to find out more of what they have, but the best they can do id duduct. Maybe a whole skeleton will be found soon.
We can accurately reconstruct missing parts of Spinosaurus using parts from its relatives.
Scott Hartman's skeletal diagram is the most accurate reconstruction of Spinosaurus we have. Why not use it?
Most sources depict Spinosaurus as being larger (and thus overall stronger) than Tyrannosaurus.
And by your logic Scott Hartman is automatically a Spinosaurus fan because he reconstructed Spinosaurus...
And what do its relatives look like, and you can't automatically say spino was stronger, not in the jaws. Post some pictures of what the spinosaurous's relatives look like. No, I call a spino fan one who favors it over a t-rex.
I said that Spinosaurus' body would be overall stronger than Tyrannosaurus' body due to its weight advantage, not its jaws... Tyrannosaurus had stronger jaws than Spinosaurus, never once have I disputed that.
There is no need to post pictures of Spinosaurus' relatives, what particular relevance does that have? The only way we can reconstruct missing parts of Spinosaurus is by using parts of its relatives.
And now by your logic anybody that favours an animal over an animal in a fight is always a fan of that particular animal...
Edited by TheMechaBaryonyx789, Jan 25 2014, 09:04 AM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Canadianwildlife
Member Avatar
Apex Predator
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
TheMechaBaryonyx789
Jan 25 2014, 08:56 AM
Canadianwildlife
Jan 25 2014, 08:50 AM
TheMechaBaryonyx789
Jan 25 2014, 08:46 AM
Canadianwildlife
Jan 25 2014, 08:41 AM
Jinfengopteryx
Jan 25 2014, 07:01 AM
Canadianwildlife
Jan 25 2014, 06:43 AM
By the way, my thinking that you did not like was Fact, which you cannot change. It wasn't bad thinking, it was fact.
Of course it is a fact, but I found it redundant because paleontology simply consists for the greatest part of speculation. Why not work with what we have?
Yeah I know, but because of that fact, spinosaurous fans have no right to boast that it would beat a t-rex because of the fact I stated. I'm glad they are trying to find out more of what they have, but the best they can do id duduct. Maybe a whole skeleton will be found soon.
We can accurately reconstruct missing parts of Spinosaurus using parts from its relatives.
Scott Hartman's skeletal diagram is the most accurate reconstruction of Spinosaurus we have. Why not use it?
Most sources depict Spinosaurus as being larger (and thus overall stronger) than Tyrannosaurus.
And by your logic Scott Hartman is automatically a Spinosaurus fan because he reconstructed Spinosaurus...
And what do its relatives look like, and you can't automatically say spino was stronger, not in the jaws. Post some pictures of what the spinosaurous's relatives look like. No, I call a spino fan one who favors it over a t-rex.
I said that Spinosaurus' body would be overall stronger than Tyrannosaurus' body due to its weight advantage, not its jaws... Tyrannosaurus had stronger jaws than Spinosaurus, never once have I disputed that.
There is no need to post pictures of Spinosaurus' relatives, what particular relevance does that have? The only way we can reconstruct missing parts of Spinosaurus is by using parts of its relatives.
And now by your logic anybody that favours an animal over an animal is a fan of that particular animal...
Yes, well they still can't prove the weight of the animal. Spinosaurous may have had a long head, but it may have had a small body relative to the head. Even if spino was bigger, I still favor the t-rex.
Edited by Canadianwildlife, Jan 25 2014, 09:05 AM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Spinodontosaurus
Member Avatar
Herbivore
[ *  *  *  * ]
Canadianwildlife
Jan 25 2014, 06:47 AM
It's guesswork, that's clearly a fact! They still cannot prove its size, and they are still guessing it.
Then you don't understand how science works if you view a rigorous skeletal reconstruction by a palaeontologist as mere 'guesswork'. Nobody here is saying we can 'prove' the exact size of Spinosaurus, however, simply dismissing any size estimate as 'guesswork' because you don't like it stupid.

Check out the theropod skeletal section of Scott Hartman's skeletaldrawing.com for reconstructions of Baryonyx, Suchomimus and Spinosaurus (among others of course)
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Vobby
Member Avatar
Omnivore
[ *  *  *  *  * ]
Canadianwildlife, study a little more. First, Spinosaurus exists and is a perfectly valid taxon. Second, we almost perfectly know how its torso, neck and skull looked like. The disagreement about the lenght of the holotype isn't important here, since any difference would only regard the tail. There are several reconstructions, there are studying describing its bones, there are studies inferring its size, studies regarding its bite force and resistance to bending of its skull... not to talk about the tons of posts made by artists and paleontologists on the net about it. Really, we have more than enough to discuss it and compare what we know for sure about it with what we know for sure about Tyrannosaurus. Why the hell do you feel the need to remember us that we don't have its legs and arms? If you think that Scott Hartman's recostruction is wrong, then please go and read Stromer, then explain why. I agree in saying that many things people seems to consider sure are more speculation than facts, but spamming 5 pages of this thread to protest against the lack of fossils is completely worthless.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
TheMechaBaryonyx789
Member Avatar
Herbivore
[ *  *  *  * ]
Canadianwildlife
Jan 25 2014, 09:03 AM
TheMechaBaryonyx789
Jan 25 2014, 08:56 AM
Canadianwildlife
Jan 25 2014, 08:50 AM
TheMechaBaryonyx789
Jan 25 2014, 08:46 AM
Canadianwildlife
Jan 25 2014, 08:41 AM
Jinfengopteryx
Jan 25 2014, 07:01 AM
Canadianwildlife
Jan 25 2014, 06:43 AM
By the way, my thinking that you did not like was Fact, which you cannot change. It wasn't bad thinking, it was fact.
Of course it is a fact, but I found it redundant because paleontology simply consists for the greatest part of speculation. Why not work with what we have?
Yeah I know, but because of that fact, spinosaurous fans have no right to boast that it would beat a t-rex because of the fact I stated. I'm glad they are trying to find out more of what they have, but the best they can do id duduct. Maybe a whole skeleton will be found soon.
We can accurately reconstruct missing parts of Spinosaurus using parts from its relatives.
Scott Hartman's skeletal diagram is the most accurate reconstruction of Spinosaurus we have. Why not use it?
Most sources depict Spinosaurus as being larger (and thus overall stronger) than Tyrannosaurus.
And by your logic Scott Hartman is automatically a Spinosaurus fan because he reconstructed Spinosaurus...
And what do its relatives look like, and you can't automatically say spino was stronger, not in the jaws. Post some pictures of what the spinosaurous's relatives look like. No, I call a spino fan one who favors it over a t-rex.
I said that Spinosaurus' body would be overall stronger than Tyrannosaurus' body due to its weight advantage, not its jaws... Tyrannosaurus had stronger jaws than Spinosaurus, never once have I disputed that.
There is no need to post pictures of Spinosaurus' relatives, what particular relevance does that have? The only way we can reconstruct missing parts of Spinosaurus is by using parts of its relatives.
And now by your logic anybody that favours an animal over an animal is a fan of that particular animal...
Yes, well they still can't prove the weight of the animal. Spinosaurous may have had a long head, but it may have had a small body relative to the head. Even if spino was bigger, I still favor the t-rex.
I know we can't 100% prove the weight of a prehistoric animal, but we can create accurate estimates.
I have heard ranged estimates for Spinosaurus' weight, and most put Spinosaurus as being more massive than Tyrannosaurus.
Spinosaurus didn't have a very large head in relation to its body size according to Scott Hartman's skeletal diagram.
Spinosaurus was also more powerful than Tyrannosaurus (due to its weight advantage), so I would favour Spinosaurus in this fight.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Canadianwildlife
Member Avatar
Apex Predator
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Vobby
Jan 25 2014, 09:07 AM
Canadianwildlife, study a little more. First, Spinosaurus exists and is a perfectly valid taxon. Second, we almost perfectly know how its torso, neck and skull looked like. The disagreement about the lenght of the holotype isn't important here, since any difference would only regard the tail. There are several reconstructions, there are studying describing its bones, there are studies inferring its size, studies regarding its bite force and resistance to bending of its skull... not to talk about the tons of posts made by artists and paleontologists on the net about it. Really, we have more than enough to discuss it and compare what we know for sure about it with what we know for sure about Tyrannosaurus. Why the hell do you feel the need to remember us that we don't have its legs and arms? If you think that Scott Hartman's recostruction is wrong, then please go and read Stromer, then explain why. I agree in saying that many things people seems to consider sure are more speculation than facts, but spamming 5 pages of this thread to protest against the lack of fossils is completely worthless.
Ok, fine, you have proved me, but I'm still backing the rex in this fight.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Canadianwildlife
Member Avatar
Apex Predator
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
The t-rex has the better weaponry, its jaws, has the bacteria which can be lethal, spino was stronger in the body, but the two animals won't be using their bodies, they will be using their jaws. Spino also has that fragile sail, and all the rex has to do is bite it, which can cause major damage. Not only that, it has been suggested that the if it fell on its sail, the animal would pretty much break its back. The spino has the weight and size advantage, but can it use it?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
TheMechaBaryonyx789
Member Avatar
Herbivore
[ *  *  *  * ]
Canadianwildlife
Jan 25 2014, 09:15 AM
The t-rex has the better weaponry, its jaws, has the bacteria which can be lethal, spino was stronger in the body, but the two animals won't be using their bodies, they will be using their jaws. Spino also has that fragile sail, and all the rex has to do is bite it, which can cause major damage. Not only that, it has been suggested that the if it fell on its sail, the animal would pretty much break its back. The spino has the weight and size advantage, but can it use it?
1. Tyrannosaurus did not have an infectious bite, that is pure speculation made by JFC.
2. Spinosaurus had a muscle ridge, not a sail.
3. Spinosaurus can use its strength to overpower Tyrannosaurus by knocking Tyrannosaurus to the ground and breaking Tyrannosaurus' ribcage with the impact.
4. Tyrannosaurus did have a stronger bite force, but it will be less effective against a larger theropod such as Spinosaurus due to Tyrannosaurus' smaller bite gape.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Canadianwildlife
Member Avatar
Apex Predator
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
TheMechaBaryonyx789
Jan 25 2014, 09:21 AM
Canadianwildlife
Jan 25 2014, 09:15 AM
The t-rex has the better weaponry, its jaws, has the bacteria which can be lethal, spino was stronger in the body, but the two animals won't be using their bodies, they will be using their jaws. Spino also has that fragile sail, and all the rex has to do is bite it, which can cause major damage. Not only that, it has been suggested that the if it fell on its sail, the animal would pretty much break its back. The spino has the weight and size advantage, but can it use it?
1. Tyrannosaurus did not have an infectious bite, that is pure speculation made by JFC.
2. Spinosaurus had a muscle ridge, not a sail.
3. Spinosaurus can use its strength to overpower Tyrannosaurus by knocking Tyrannosaurus to the ground and breaking Tyrannosaurus' ribcage with the impact.
4. Tyrannosaurus did have a stronger bite force, but it will be less effective against a larger theropod such as Spinosaurus due to Tyrannosaurus' smaller bite gape.
Smaller bite gape, the t-rex can still easily bite the spino, and it will be far more lethal than the other way around. Yes, but if it fell on that hump or whatever it is, it could still easily break. it will be harder for the t-rex to get in a bite, but when the spino tries, that is when the rex can bite, it could bite its jaws or side step. I don't think a spinosaurous will kill a rex by simply just knocking it down, rememember, the t-rex was smarter, and it wouldn't be stupid to just stand there, it would side step. The rex, considering its shorter, would be more nimble, and would be able to dodge better than the spino. The spinos arms would also probably fracture if it tried to grip upward, its arms were lower down on its body. If the spino fails to knock the rex down, and they begin to fight with their jaws, that is where the t-rex takes over.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
TheMechaBaryonyx789
Member Avatar
Herbivore
[ *  *  *  * ]
Canadianwildlife
Jan 25 2014, 09:30 AM
TheMechaBaryonyx789
Jan 25 2014, 09:21 AM
Canadianwildlife
Jan 25 2014, 09:15 AM
The t-rex has the better weaponry, its jaws, has the bacteria which can be lethal, spino was stronger in the body, but the two animals won't be using their bodies, they will be using their jaws. Spino also has that fragile sail, and all the rex has to do is bite it, which can cause major damage. Not only that, it has been suggested that the if it fell on its sail, the animal would pretty much break its back. The spino has the weight and size advantage, but can it use it?
1. Tyrannosaurus did not have an infectious bite, that is pure speculation made by JFC.
2. Spinosaurus had a muscle ridge, not a sail.
3. Spinosaurus can use its strength to overpower Tyrannosaurus by knocking Tyrannosaurus to the ground and breaking Tyrannosaurus' ribcage with the impact.
4. Tyrannosaurus did have a stronger bite force, but it will be less effective against a larger theropod such as Spinosaurus due to Tyrannosaurus' smaller bite gape.
Smaller bite gape, the t-rex can still easily bite the spino, and it will be far more lethal than the other way around. Yes, but if it fell on that hump or whatever it is, it could still easily break. it will be harder for the t-rex to get in a bite, but when the spino tries, that is when the rex can bite, it could bite its jaws or side step. I don't think a spinosaurous will kill a rex by simply just knocking it down, rememember, the t-rex was smarter, and it wouldn't be stupid to just stand there, it would side step. The rex, considering its shorter, would be more nimble, and would be able to dodge better than the spino. The spinos arms would also probably fracture if it tried to grip upward, its arms were lower down on its body. If the spino fails to knock the rex down, and they begin to fight with their jaws, that is where the t-rex takes over.
It is very unlikely that Spinosaurus would fall on its muscle ridge... Also don't call it a hump use the correct terminology. Spinosaurus and Tyrannosaurus would most likely ram into each other, and Tyrannosaurus would be knocked to the ground due to it being the lighter one. Neither Spinosaurus or Tyrannosaurus were agile due to both of them being over elephant sized. Neither of them could dodge easily at all. Why would Spinosaurus be stupid enough to fracture its arms in such a way...
Tyrannosaurus only really has more powerful jaws on its side, because being more advanced and faster are not advantages in this case.
Spinosaurus would win the majority of the time imo.
Edited by TheMechaBaryonyx789, Jan 25 2014, 09:39 AM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Vobby
Member Avatar
Omnivore
[ *  *  *  *  * ]
Canadianwildlife
Jan 25 2014, 09:10 AM
Vobby
Jan 25 2014, 09:07 AM
Canadianwildlife, study a little more. First, Spinosaurus exists and is a perfectly valid taxon. Second, we almost perfectly know how its torso, neck and skull looked like. The disagreement about the lenght of the holotype isn't important here, since any difference would only regard the tail. There are several reconstructions, there are studying describing its bones, there are studies inferring its size, studies regarding its bite force and resistance to bending of its skull... not to talk about the tons of posts made by artists and paleontologists on the net about it. Really, we have more than enough to discuss it and compare what we know for sure about it with what we know for sure about Tyrannosaurus. Why the hell do you feel the need to remember us that we don't have its legs and arms? If you think that Scott Hartman's recostruction is wrong, then please go and read Stromer, then explain why. I agree in saying that many things people seems to consider sure are more speculation than facts, but spamming 5 pages of this thread to protest against the lack of fossils is completely worthless.
Ok, fine, you have proved me, but I'm still backing the rex in this fight.
You didn't even noticed that I strongly back Tyrannosaurus too, due to the fact that I'm convinced (not just me here..) to have evidence for it being much bigger, with bigger meaning heavier.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
TheMechaBaryonyx789
Member Avatar
Herbivore
[ *  *  *  * ]
Vobby
Jan 25 2014, 09:38 AM
Canadianwildlife
Jan 25 2014, 09:10 AM
Vobby
Jan 25 2014, 09:07 AM
Canadianwildlife, study a little more. First, Spinosaurus exists and is a perfectly valid taxon. Second, we almost perfectly know how its torso, neck and skull looked like. The disagreement about the lenght of the holotype isn't important here, since any difference would only regard the tail. There are several reconstructions, there are studying describing its bones, there are studies inferring its size, studies regarding its bite force and resistance to bending of its skull... not to talk about the tons of posts made by artists and paleontologists on the net about it. Really, we have more than enough to discuss it and compare what we know for sure about it with what we know for sure about Tyrannosaurus. Why the hell do you feel the need to remember us that we don't have its legs and arms? If you think that Scott Hartman's recostruction is wrong, then please go and read Stromer, then explain why. I agree in saying that many things people seems to consider sure are more speculation than facts, but spamming 5 pages of this thread to protest against the lack of fossils is completely worthless.
Ok, fine, you have proved me, but I'm still backing the rex in this fight.
You didn't even noticed that I strongly back Tyrannosaurus too, due to the fact that I'm convinced (not just me here..) to have evidence for it being much bigger, with bigger meaning heavier.
You are using Cau's studies as a reference. I am using Hartman's studies as a reference. Our sides of the argument will be different.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Canadianwildlife
Member Avatar
Apex Predator
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
TheMechaBaryonyx789
Jan 25 2014, 09:37 AM
Canadianwildlife
Jan 25 2014, 09:30 AM
TheMechaBaryonyx789
Jan 25 2014, 09:21 AM
Canadianwildlife
Jan 25 2014, 09:15 AM
The t-rex has the better weaponry, its jaws, has the bacteria which can be lethal, spino was stronger in the body, but the two animals won't be using their bodies, they will be using their jaws. Spino also has that fragile sail, and all the rex has to do is bite it, which can cause major damage. Not only that, it has been suggested that the if it fell on its sail, the animal would pretty much break its back. The spino has the weight and size advantage, but can it use it?
1. Tyrannosaurus did not have an infectious bite, that is pure speculation made by JFC.
2. Spinosaurus had a muscle ridge, not a sail.
3. Spinosaurus can use its strength to overpower Tyrannosaurus by knocking Tyrannosaurus to the ground and breaking Tyrannosaurus' ribcage with the impact.
4. Tyrannosaurus did have a stronger bite force, but it will be less effective against a larger theropod such as Spinosaurus due to Tyrannosaurus' smaller bite gape.
Smaller bite gape, the t-rex can still easily bite the spino, and it will be far more lethal than the other way around. Yes, but if it fell on that hump or whatever it is, it could still easily break. it will be harder for the t-rex to get in a bite, but when the spino tries, that is when the rex can bite, it could bite its jaws or side step. I don't think a spinosaurous will kill a rex by simply just knocking it down, rememember, the t-rex was smarter, and it wouldn't be stupid to just stand there, it would side step. The rex, considering its shorter, would be more nimble, and would be able to dodge better than the spino. The spinos arms would also probably fracture if it tried to grip upward, its arms were lower down on its body. If the spino fails to knock the rex down, and they begin to fight with their jaws, that is where the t-rex takes over.
It is very unlikely that Spinosaurus would fall on its muscle ridge... Also don't call it a hump use the correct terminology. Spinosaurus and Tyrannosaurus would most likely ram into each other, and Tyrannosaurus would be knocked to the ground due to it being the lighter one. Neither Spinosaurus or Tyrannosaurus were agile due to both of them being over elephant sized. Neither of them could dodge easily at all. Why would Spinosaurus be stupid enough to fracture its arms in such a way...
Tyrannosaurus only really has more powerful jaws on its side, because being more advanced and faster are not advantages in this case.
Spinosaurus would win the majority of the time imo.
I doubt they are both stupid enough to just ram each other like big horn sheep, that would be stupid, they will fight with their jaws. So they just charge each other and knock each other over? The jaw fighting theory is more reasonable. Spinosaurous pretty much couldn't use its arms anyway, as they are too low, and at risk for being bitten. Yes, the t-rex 's main advantage is its jaws, but that is what they will fight with, the only other way they could fight is by ramming each other, which isn't an effective way to fight. How is the spinosaurous going to knock the t-rex over when it has to get past the t-rexes jaws?
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.