| 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 (459,098 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: | |
|---|---|
| Spartan | Nov 8 2015, 03:54 AM Post #4246 |
|
Kleptoparasite
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
What are you even trying to say with these Hadrosaurids? |
![]() |
|
| Thalassophoneus | Nov 8 2015, 04:05 AM Post #4247 |
![]()
Pelagic Killer
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Spartan
I don't know how to describe what I imagine.
Crocodiles hunt wildebeest and roll over to tear of their flesh! No, I don't think Spinosaurus could roll over ! I believe that it must have been more effective on land than this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x0qRr6DwVTU or this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6PnfeCg5I10Tell me. Isn't this a realistic depiction of four legged Spinosaurus? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HZ7zwW7CQuU
The fact that Tyrannsoaurus was the best theropod to hunt a ceratopsian doesn't mean that all the other theropods were completely useless. Neither does the fact that Spinosaurus was adapted for fish hunting mean that its jaws were as weak as those of a gharial (a very large gharial). The fact that some dinsoaurs become adapted for different habits doesn't necessarily mean that they completely lose the qualities of their ancestors. I believe Spinosaurus would be capable of killing a Triceratops. Although, just like Tyrannosaurus, it would have big chances of being killed, if the specimen was a large one. It would actually have significantly bigger chances of being killed, than Tyrannosaurus, for being notably less effective on land.
There seems to have been a confusion. I never said that Spinosaurus could damage Tyrannosauru's skull. It could do some scratches but not puncture it with its teeth. I'm talking about wounding the opponent's skin and muscle tissues. I never said anything about skull. Skull is very hard to crunch.
I should say this differently. Cause apparntly you do that thing that you turn my words against me when I have said something seemingly wrong. "It was a huge dinosaur, a theropod, with massive jaws and sharp teeth, that had small hindlegs but still could move quite well on land so it probably could hunt land animals also." |
![]() |
|
| Tyrant | Nov 8 2015, 04:09 AM Post #4248 |
![]()
Omnivore
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
1 last reply to giga and then I am done.
Saying it could hunt large animals because it is a dinosaur is a giant generalization. You realize modern birds including sparrows are considered dinosaurs?
Half of those sources are outdated and the others make more assumption than making any 100% factual statements. I got around to finally reading the spinosaurus diet page that you were jerking off to and the most relevant thing stated was that spinosaurus probably hunted terrestrial animals occasionally. Literally the same exact conclusion everyone and there mother has reached on this thread. Oh yeah, wanna know something funny? When we all still thought that Spinosaurus was a massive 15 ton beast, I favored it over tyrannosaurus without question.
No, if anyone is a "fanboy" it is you. Do you remember how our entire conflict started? Before we had even engaged in a discussion you insinuated I was a "fanboy" for stating that spinosaurus wasn't adapted to killing large animals because of its adaptation. That is literally "fanboy" behavior, trying to label someone something there not for opposing your view. I am not calling you a moron because of your opinion of this match I am calling you one because you keep making the same mistakes, make terrible analogies, paint unrealistic scenarios, your instance on using wikipedia as a source and because your posts often reek of hypocrisy.
That is what you wrote. You didn't write "I find a lot an exaggeration, Spinosaurus was still a large theropod," you just said dinosaur and I made that example to show how stupid that statement was. Of course it's not a perfect analogy it isn't meant to be. Gigas there is a reason everyone on every thread acts so hostilely towards you, if you don't want everyone sh itting on your life I suggest you improve your debating skills and stop with the wild "fanboy" accusations. Edited by Tyrant, Nov 8 2015, 04:13 AM.
|
![]() |
|
| Thalassophoneus | Nov 8 2015, 04:10 AM Post #4249 |
![]()
Pelagic Killer
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
If I remember well, Ausar told me that hunting an Edmontosaurus was far more impressive than hunting an Ouranosaurus, and stated that HE DOESN'T THINK Edmontosaurus weighted only 4 tons. I told him that with this logic I don't think a 18 m. Spinosaurus (Spinosaurus was up to 18 m. long, I hope we all agree) weighted only 7 tons. So he told me that the reaso why Edmontosaurus mustn't have weighted so little is that its relative, Shantungosaurus, was a few meters longer yet, given a weight of 4 tons for Edmontosaurus, weighted multiple times longer, which would be impossible. So I told him that maybe Edmontosaurus had a lighter structure than Shantungosaurus. And I posted these to see whether I'm right and I think I am. Edmontosaurus looks much smaller. |
![]() |
|
| Spartan | Nov 8 2015, 04:22 AM Post #4250 |
|
Kleptoparasite
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
It's a pain in the ass to debate with you since you never actually respond to what one says. Crocodiles hunt by ambush in rivers or large ponds. I can't imagine many animals being less competent at hunting and chasing animals on land than crocodiles.
Spinosaurus literally hasn't a single trait to deal with something like Triceratops. Triceratops has absolutely every advantage in this fight.
You still don't get that it's Tyrannosaurus' head it has to fight. It simply can't avoid it. That is why T. rex' bite force is so important here: It could easily fatally damage Spinosaurus rather fragile skull while it would be almost impossible for Spinosaurus to pull off the reverse. I explained this numerous times to you, but you only keep coming up with some weird kung-fu moves by Spinosaurus or say that these giant theropods fight like sumo ringers and hug each other (wtf?). |
![]() |
|
| Thalassophoneus | Nov 8 2015, 04:38 AM Post #4251 |
![]()
Pelagic Killer
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
That's what I said. It probably hunted terrestrial animals occasionally (but generally prefered not to tire itself and eat fish which were easier). Probably. Occasionally. Which means that it could.
If I was a fanboy I would kill your mother and then use her blood to write a letter to you, insulting you and saying that Spinsoaurus was biped and very fast and such stuff, that I used to believe but I don't anymore. I called you a fanboy cause of several statements you made, like Grimace: Why do people even think it eating fish means anything? Have you guys even ever tried to cut into an armored fish before? It'd probably be harder to rip apart some of the big fish species back then then it would a dinosaur. Tyrant: Killing a crocodile-sized fish really doesn't compare to another theropod's ability to kill five ton + animals. It's like comparing an oystercatcher's ability to eat hard shelled snails and clams to a hawk's ability of killing rats. Awesome and very smart guy (a.k.a. me ): Clear from where? (From where is it clear that Tyrannosaurus was a much better hunter than Spinosaurus?Tyrant: Based on the fact that spinosaurus was specialized in eating smaller fish and tyrannosaurus preyed on animals its own size and maybe even those larger than it. So you didn't accept that Spinosaurus might have been hunting land animals. The first time I called you a fanboy was somewhere there (page 277). The second time was when I said that Spinosaurus might could push Tyrannosaurus and flip it over and you said that "this f ucking moron thinks Spinsoaurus knows judo". It is called fighting! Anyone can do it! EVEN JELLYFISH CAN DO IT!!! OK. Maybe not jellyfish. You also told me to everyone the favor and deactivate my account. The fact that you started insulting me for not excluding the possibility of Spinosaurus winning is a sign of fanboyism. Then you said Tyrannosaurus would definitely bring down Spinsoaurus in a contest of strength, which I also doubt cause each one of these animals had different strong parts on each body. And you keep saying that Wikiepdis isn't valid while it has plenty of sources, both out of date and up to date! This is what is good with Wikipedia! It shows you what have different people of different years said!
You just took something that I shouldn't over-generalize and you turned it against me. It is VERY annoying when you say something that you didn't mean exactly this way and someone turns it against you.
Everyone on every thread acts hostilely towards me cause I'm an alt-bag*, thus there must be lots of people that won't agree with me. And I repeat that I'm not a fanboy, cause I only defend the possibility of Spinsoaurus winning. I do not say that it would certainly win. And I do not find this a mismatch, in favor of Tyrannsoaurus, and say things like "Spinsoaurus was CRAWLING" or "Spinsoaurus was definitely not 18 m., even though many sources suggest so and even though it remains quite unknown" or "10/10 that T.rex stompz this stupid ducky ;-P" (I'm looking at you, MantisShrimp!). *Alt-bag is a term used by the Greek internet personality Mikeius. It is a combination of the words "alternative" and "douchebags" and refers to people that do not like anything popular, original and, let's say, "traditional" and only like alternatives that are way less popular, so that they can play it progressive and opposed to this capitalist and stuck up society. Spartan
I posted videos. And I posted one before which I ask you if you think it was a realistic depiction of how quadruped Spinsoaurus might have been running.
Spinosaurus was quite slower than Tyrannosaurus but it also had jaws that could penetrate the skin of a ceratopsian and it additionally had claws. So if it was managing to avoid the ceratopsian's horns, it could possibly kill it. Let's not forget that Spinosaurus had a very long tail. Seriously! What about its tail?
Spinosaurus avoiding the head of Spinsoaurus would be like me avoiding you, while you are attacking me with a large scissor (those huge ones that are used for the garden). And even less, cause the neck (that is moving Tyrannsoauru's head) is less flexible than the arms (that you would use to move the scissor). I guess I have to describe it to you in words. Spinosaurus and Tyrannosaurus see each other and start making circles around each other. Spinosaurus charges at Tyrannsoaurus 1: It attempts to bite Tyrannsoaurus on the neck but Tyrannosaurus manages to bite its snout and stop it and then bites its own neck and kills it. 2: Spinsoaurus rises on its hindlegs to be a little taller and folds its arms around Tyrannsoauru's neck (while its own neck is next to Tyrannsoauru's shoulder). It starts scratching. It falls on Tyrannsoaurus with all of its weight, causing it to lose its balance. It bites Tyrannsoaurus on the neck and tears of chunks of flesh. This was an example. Edited by Thalassophoneus, Nov 8 2015, 04:51 AM.
|
![]() |
|
| Spartan | Nov 8 2015, 04:59 AM Post #4252 |
|
Kleptoparasite
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Lol I'm out. So Spinosaurus was a kung-fu fighter, then they both were sumo ringers trying to hug each other and now these 7000kg dinosaurs are like two humans fighting each other with garden shears. I'm not going to reply to you anymore til you manage to make a coherent argument that's not just your wishful thinking. Edited by Spartan, Nov 8 2015, 05:04 AM.
|
![]() |
|
| Ausar | Nov 8 2015, 05:01 AM Post #4253 |
|
Xi-miqa-can! Xi-miqa-can! Xi-miqa-can!
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
And I repeat that the tyrannosaur's much more powerful bite will help contribute to it having a much more damaging bite than the spinosaur. And a much more damaging bite is an advantage. No intelligent person would deny the previous statement. Also, neither's first strategy is going to be to try and tear flesh with their jaws. Both have comparatively blunt, thick teeth designed more for piercing and more or less relied on the strength of their jaw muscles coupled with their teeth to kill their respective prey. Finally, since Spinosaurus had teeth ill-suited for causing soft tissue damage, a bite force that was comparatively low, and a longirostrine snout that was not well-suited for dealing with high stresses and overall fighting similar-sized opponents, the idea that Spinosaurus' bite is really going to be all that effective against Tyrannosaurus is questionable at best. Hurr durr! Captain Obvious strikes! I don't know if you're aware, but I didn't say that because I thought the claws would be physically incapable of grabbing onto Tyrannosaurus. I said that because theropods (at least most of them) likely did not use their claws as their primary killing weapons and thus Spinosaurus would not have deliberately tried to kill something by sticking its claws into a vital region. What if I told you that wasn't the primary reason? It's 'cause most theropods (including these two) primarily used their jaws to kill/fight. Considering how that of Tyrannosaurus is far better suited for fighting an animal the same weight as itself, guess who's more likely to seriously injure and kill their opponent here. Allow me to try to find it. Edit: ah, here it is (hyperlink). Well, that's because it was. Edmontosaurus was significantly larger than Ouranosaurus. I believe the former should be about as heavy as a giant theropod like Tyrannosaurus or Spinosaurus. Considering this, what's more impressive: a giant theropod killing an Edmontosaurus about as heavy as itself or a giant theropod killing an Ouranosaurus significantly smaller than itself? Because Edmontosaurus seems too heavily built to be only ~4t at ~12m. And I pointed out that the reason this holds no ground was because Spinosaurus did not reach 18m. No, it's because "Edmontosaurus seems too heavily built to be only ~4t at ~12m.". What reason is there to suggest such was the case? The two animals are related and should, by phylogenetic inference, have similar body builds. Edited by Ausar, Nov 8 2015, 05:21 AM.
|
![]() |
|
| Thalassophoneus | Nov 8 2015, 05:23 AM Post #4254 |
![]()
Pelagic Killer
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
No, Spartan. You don't need to be an Extreme Dinosaur to avoid your opponent dinosaur's head and just fold your arms around its neck, from below. I could make you a drawing, but I guess I'm not going to reach that point just because you are in the mood not understand what I'm saying. As you can see, guys, I have accepted Ibrahim's paper and that Spinosaurus had quite weak jaws for its size. And that it was less effective on land than Tyrannosaurus. What else do you want? Let me guess. "We want you to accept that Tyrannosaurus definitely wins and Spinosaurus could do nothing to another dinosaur." No. Cause Spinsoaurus had its quite strong jaws, and quite strong arms, and long tail and those are at least enough. I just saw some things on World of Animals. Some people disqussing about somone making ridiculous statements. I saw my name in the thread and I was about to burst like a closed keetle. But then I realised that this guy isn't serious at all. He REALLY favors Spinsoaurus. His name is AFGThugonomics.
I doubt those sources are really accurate. At least not anymore.
" For all we know, it might have behaved like that. " Yes, because Spinosaurus probably did kill 13-14 meter long carcharodontosaurids with one hit, and slaughtered ~12 meter long pholidosaurid crocodyliforms for sport, right?
Apparently, Planet Dinosaur and Monsters Resurrected are more reliable sources than Ibrahim and Sereno! (Said someone ironically) Seriously now, guys. Do you think I'm like THIS guy? I mean yes, I believe Spinosaurus had enough bite force to kill another dinosaur and I believe it was 18 m. long at maximum (cause that's what Del Sasso say and Ibrahim seemingly didn't deny, while others measure its length at 15 m. which is pretty close) and I also have stated that Ibrahim's paper doesn't exclude the possibility of Spinosaurus having been semi-aquatic. But come on! Seriously! Do you guys really compare me to... THIS? |
![]() |
|
| DarkGricer | Nov 8 2015, 05:38 AM Post #4255 |
|
Omnivore
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
You did not just use ARK's Spinosaurus as a source... ARK's Spinosaurus is inaccurate. Even if Spinosaurus does turn out to be a quadruped, there's pretty much no way it would've walked on its palms like ARK's Spinosaurus does. And even if it did, theropod arms are terrible for weight bearing, running like that would likely result in it breaking its own arms. It's a dinosaur, not a giant dog. Chances are, Spinosaurus was quite slow on land. |
![]() |
|
| The supersaurus | Nov 8 2015, 05:45 AM Post #4256 |
|
Heterotrophic Organism
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
such big debating, very big,very big indeed^ |
![]() |
|
| Thalassophoneus | Nov 8 2015, 05:46 AM Post #4257 |
![]()
Pelagic Killer
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
I didn't see it running on its palms cause it was in the water. Spinosaurus must have been knuckle-walking. And his Spinosaurus was bulkier than Ibrahim's. This video is what I could find to show you what I imagine. And I doubt that THESE arms could break.
|
![]() |
|
| FishFossil | Nov 8 2015, 05:47 AM Post #4258 |
|
Herbivore
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
I'm done Dunk. It's like talking to a brick wall. A brick wall who doesn't really give an answer to the questions he's asked, and instead replies with an unrelated aspect of the topic that just leads to an overly confusing view of what you actually believe. The things you say and the things you state you believe do not match up. I have no idea what you ACTUALLY feel, and we've all been debating you for at least 10 pages now. Have a good day Dunk. |
![]() |
|
| Thalassophoneus | Nov 8 2015, 05:48 AM Post #4259 |
![]()
Pelagic Killer
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
I'm notable for causing big debates!
|
![]() |
|
| The supersaurus | Nov 8 2015, 05:49 AM Post #4260 |
|
Heterotrophic Organism
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
10 pages! What........ ten pages
|
![]() |
|
| 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)





! I believe that it must have been more effective on land than this: 
): Clear from where? (From where is it clear that Tyrannosaurus was a much better hunter than Spinosaurus?

2:23 AM Jul 14