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 (459,173 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:
Canadianwildlife
Member Avatar
Apex Predator
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Hatzegopteryx
Jan 28 2014, 10:04 AM
Canadianwildlife, that is basic knowledge. I can't believe you just asked me a question that is just common knowledge. We all know small sardines won't feed a multi ton spinosaurid.
What? I asked if it has been proven that it fed on these rhino sized fish, common knowledge, but has it been proven? I'm not convinced. I never said they would feed on a spinosaurous, or anything linked to that. Where are you getting that from?
Edited by Canadianwildlife, Jan 28 2014, 10:07 AM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Ausar
Member Avatar
Xi-miqa-can! Xi-miqa-can! Xi-miqa-can!
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Canadianwildlife
Jan 28 2014, 09:54 AM
Dinopithecus
Jan 28 2014, 09:07 AM
I think there is a part of Planet Dinosaur that shows something from Onchopristis (giant sawfish) stuck in the mouth of a Spinosaurus. While documentaries aren't exactly something where you'd find hard evidence, IIRC, they had an actual picture of it.

Plus, rhino-sized fish, theropod at least as big as an elephant that eats fish? In one ecosystem?
A documentary showed it, but that is no proof at all. I agree that spinosaurous could have killed fish that large, but that doesn't mean it did.
Are you serious? Are we really going to try to explain it as that (I guess scavenging can be an implication from your post, not that you've directly said it).
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Hatzegopteryx
Unicellular Organism
[ * ]
Jesus god what did I just read... You know that also proves you're bias on that Ogopogo debate, right? You asked if something has been proven, but when you are in the Ogopogo debate, you don't seem to be that sceptical about it.

Back on topic, this is an animal that weighs like ten tonnes. Are you really telling me it didn't hunt rhino-sized fish that were present in its environment? It is common knowledge, this is a large animal, it needs large prey.

Once again I am surprised how biased you are being.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Canadianwildlife
Member Avatar
Apex Predator
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Dinopithecus
Jan 28 2014, 10:10 AM
Canadianwildlife
Jan 28 2014, 09:54 AM
Dinopithecus
Jan 28 2014, 09:07 AM
I think there is a part of Planet Dinosaur that shows something from Onchopristis (giant sawfish) stuck in the mouth of a Spinosaurus. While documentaries aren't exactly something where you'd find hard evidence, IIRC, they had an actual picture of it.

Plus, rhino-sized fish, theropod at least as big as an elephant that eats fish? In one ecosystem?
A documentary showed it, but that is no proof at all. I agree that spinosaurous could have killed fish that large, but that doesn't mean it did.
Are you serious? Are we really going to try to explain it as that (I guess scavenging can be an implication from your post, not that you've directly said it).
Well, this argument of mine isn't important, because what really matters is that it could kill fish that large, so I'm dropping that argument. :)
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Canadianwildlife
Member Avatar
Apex Predator
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Hatzegopteryx
Jan 28 2014, 10:13 AM
Jesus god what did I just read... You know that also proves you're bias on that Ogopogo debate, right? You asked if something has been proven, but when you are in the Ogopogo debate, you don't seem to be that sceptical about it.

Back on topic, this is an animal that weighs like ten tonnes. Are you really telling me it didn't hunt rhino-sized fish that were present in its environment? It is common knowledge, this is a large animal, it needs large prey.

Once again I am surprised how biased you are being.
Yes, I know that, but it isn't fair to state something as a fact that hasn't been proven, I choose to believe in ogopogo because of the reasons I already stated, but I don't state its existence as a fact. My argument here is irrelevent, because spino was more than capable of killing fish that large.
Edited by Canadianwildlife, Jan 28 2014, 10:17 AM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Canadianwildlife
Member Avatar
Apex Predator
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Hatzegopteryx
Jan 28 2014, 10:13 AM
Jesus god what did I just read... You know that also proves you're bias on that Ogopogo debate, right? You asked if something has been proven, but when you are in the Ogopogo debate, you don't seem to be that sceptical about it.<br /><br />Back on topic, this is an animal that weighs like ten tonnes. Are you really telling me it didn't hunt rhino-sized fish that were present in its environment? It is common knowledge, this is a large animal, it needs large prey.<br /><br />Once again I am surprised how biased you are being.<br />
I'm not biased by the way.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Hatzegopteryx
Unicellular Organism
[ * ]
Canadianwildlife
Jan 28 2014, 10:16 AM
Hatzegopteryx
Jan 28 2014, 10:13 AM
Jesus god what did I just read... You know that also proves you're bias on that Ogopogo debate, right? You asked if something has been proven, but when you are in the Ogopogo debate, you don't seem to be that sceptical about it.<br /><br />Back on topic, this is an animal that weighs like ten tonnes. Are you really telling me it didn't hunt rhino-sized fish that were present in its environment? It is common knowledge, this is a large animal, it needs large prey.<br /><br />Once again I am surprised how biased you are being.<br />
I'm not biased by the way.
How? You asked for proof here but there is no proof on Ogopogo's existence and you keep believing it blindly. That is pure bias.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Ausar
Member Avatar
Xi-miqa-can! Xi-miqa-can! Xi-miqa-can!
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Edit: Now I get what he was saying.
Edited by Ausar, Jan 28 2014, 10:19 AM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Canadianwildlife
Member Avatar
Apex Predator
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Hatzegopteryx
Jan 28 2014, 10:17 AM
Canadianwildlife
Jan 28 2014, 10:16 AM
Hatzegopteryx
Jan 28 2014, 10:13 AM
Jesus god what did I just read... You know that also proves you're bias on that Ogopogo debate, right? You asked if something has been proven, but when you are in the Ogopogo debate, you don't seem to be that sceptical about it.<br /><br />Back on topic, this is an animal that weighs like ten tonnes. Are you really telling me it didn't hunt rhino-sized fish that were present in its environment? It is common knowledge, this is a large animal, it needs large prey.<br /><br />Once again I am surprised how biased you are being.<br />
I'm not biased by the way.
How? You asked for proof here but there is no proof on Ogopogo's existence and you keep believing it blindly. That is pure bias.
Read my above post, the larger one, I edited it. Even I accept ogopogo may not be real, but I think it most likely does.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Canadianwildlife
Member Avatar
Apex Predator
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Dinopithecus
Jan 28 2014, 10:18 AM
Canadianwildlife
Jan 28 2014, 10:13 AM
Dinopithecus
Jan 28 2014, 10:10 AM
Canadianwildlife
Jan 28 2014, 09:54 AM
Dinopithecus
Jan 28 2014, 09:07 AM
I think there is a part of Planet Dinosaur that shows something from Onchopristis (giant sawfish) stuck in the mouth of a Spinosaurus. While documentaries aren't exactly something where you'd find hard evidence, IIRC, they had an actual picture of it.

Plus, rhino-sized fish, theropod at least as big as an elephant that eats fish? In one ecosystem?
A documentary showed it, but that is no proof at all. I agree that spinosaurous could have killed fish that large, but that doesn't mean it did.
Are you serious? Are we really going to try to explain it as that (I guess scavenging can be an implication from your post, not that you've directly said it).
Well, this argument of mine isn't important, because what really matters is that it could kill fish that large, so I'm dropping that argument. :)
What...

I hardly even understand what you're saying here.
I'm dropping it because spinosaurous could have easily killed a fish that size or bigger, so it doesn't matter if it did or didn't. I actually accept that it probably did feed on fish that large or larger.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Hatzegopteryx
Unicellular Organism
[ * ]
Canadianwildlife
Jan 28 2014, 10:19 AM
Hatzegopteryx
Jan 28 2014, 10:17 AM
Canadianwildlife
Jan 28 2014, 10:16 AM
Hatzegopteryx
Jan 28 2014, 10:13 AM
Jesus god what did I just read... You know that also proves you're bias on that Ogopogo debate, right? You asked if something has been proven, but when you are in the Ogopogo debate, you don't seem to be that sceptical about it.<br /><br />Back on topic, this is an animal that weighs like ten tonnes. Are you really telling me it didn't hunt rhino-sized fish that were present in its environment? It is common knowledge, this is a large animal, it needs large prey.<br /><br />Once again I am surprised how biased you are being.<br />
I'm not biased by the way.
How? You asked for proof here but there is no proof on Ogopogo's existence and you keep believing it blindly. That is pure bias.
Read my above post, the larger one, I edited it. Even I accept ogopogo may not be real, but I think it most likely does.
You were still being biased, that doesn't change my point since I was talking about the original post which you edited making it a statement about you in the past
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Canadianwildlife
Member Avatar
Apex Predator
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Hatzegopteryx
Jan 28 2014, 10:21 AM
Canadianwildlife
Jan 28 2014, 10:19 AM
Hatzegopteryx
Jan 28 2014, 10:17 AM
Canadianwildlife
Jan 28 2014, 10:16 AM
Hatzegopteryx
Jan 28 2014, 10:13 AM
Jesus god what did I just read... You know that also proves you're bias on that Ogopogo debate, right? You asked if something has been proven, but when you are in the Ogopogo debate, you don't seem to be that sceptical about it.<br /><br />Back on topic, this is an animal that weighs like ten tonnes. Are you really telling me it didn't hunt rhino-sized fish that were present in its environment? It is common knowledge, this is a large animal, it needs large prey.<br /><br />Once again I am surprised how biased you are being.<br />
I'm not biased by the way.
How? You asked for proof here but there is no proof on Ogopogo's existence and you keep believing it blindly. That is pure bias.
Read my above post, the larger one, I edited it. Even I accept ogopogo may not be real, but I think it most likely does.
You were still being biased, that doesn't change my point since I was talking about the original post which you edited making it a statement about you in the past
And so were you. You don't think that ogopogo exists because the evidence isn't good enough, and that it hasn't been proven, but you believe that spinosaurous it did eat fish that large despite that it hasn't been proven either.So I could say that that belief is pointless because it is something that hasn't been proven, but I do believe that it did indeed prey on fish that large or larger though, I changed my mind.
Edited by Canadianwildlife, Jan 28 2014, 10:26 AM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Hatzegopteryx
Unicellular Organism
[ * ]
No I am not being biased, I actually heard of evidence of large sawfish remains on Spinosaurus. It was about a year ago, I'll try to find it again.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Hatzegopteryx
Unicellular Organism
[ * ]
Also stop contradicting yourself. In your reply to Dinopithecus, you said:

"Well, this argument of mine isn't important, because what really matters is that it could kill fish that large, so I'm dropping that argument"

You admitted it could kill fish that large. Stop the contradiction.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Canadianwildlife
Member Avatar
Apex Predator
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Hatzegopteryx
Jan 28 2014, 10:26 AM
No I am not being biased, I actually heard of evidence of large sawfish remains on Spinosaurus. It was about a year ago, I'll try to find it again.
I'm talking about rhino-sized fish, not those saw fish. And yes.you are being biased as well.
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.