Visual Comparisons Thread

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:

Pages:
1
…
107
108
109
…
113

Visual Comparisons Thread
Tweet Topic Started: Jan 7 2012, 01:17 AM (507,200 Views)
Grazier	Oct 30 2017, 01:01 PM Post #1606
Omnivore Posts: 1,483 Group: Members Member #4,332 Joined: Dec 16, 2016	Its interesting to see the dinosaur with the mammoth and elephant. Yes its way bigger but when you look at the shoulder heights the difference is not so absurd.



moldovan0731	Oct 31 2017, 03:18 AM Post #1607
Heterotrophic Organism Posts: 458 Group: Members Member #735 Joined: Oct 16, 2012	Grazier Oct 30 2017, 01:01 PM Its interesting to see the dinosaur with the mammoth and elephant. Yes its way bigger but when you look at the shoulder heights the difference is not so absurd. It's not a mammoth though.



Mammuthus	Oct 31 2017, 04:04 AM Post #1608
Proboscidean Enthusiast Posts: 3,063 Group: Members Member #4,143 Joined: Jul 22, 2016	moldovan0731 Oct 30 2017, 12:41 AM I guess most of you know who made these: I have no idea who made it lol, but I will say that is a great size comparison. Quote: Its interesting to see the dinosaur with the mammoth and elephant Palaeoloxodon namadicus was not apart of the genus Mammuthus, so no it wasn’t a mammoth. Edited by Mammuthus, Oct 31 2017, 04:09 AM.



Ausar	Oct 31 2017, 05:35 AM Post #1609
*Xi-miqa-can! Xi-miqa-can! Xi-miqa-can!* Posts: 8,781 Group: Members Member #771 Joined: Oct 31, 2012	That's a little strange. Patagotitan doesn't look like it's that much taller at the withers than Palaeoloxodon, but it weighs some 2.5 times as much (basing the Patagotitan mass estimate off of randomdinos' skeletal). Does it have something to do with leg length? Edited by Ausar, Oct 31 2017, 05:37 AM.



moldovan0731	Oct 31 2017, 05:57 AM Post #1610
Heterotrophic Organism Posts: 458 Group: Members Member #735 Joined: Oct 16, 2012	Mammuthus Oct 31 2017, 04:04 AM moldovan0731 Oct 30 2017, 12:41 AM I guess most of you know who made these: I have no idea who made it lol, but I will say that is a great size comparison. Quote: Its interesting to see the dinosaur with the mammoth and elephant Palaeoloxodon namadicus was not apart of the genus Mammuthus, so no it wasn’t a mammoth. It's made by Stephen O'Connor (or Steveoc86 if that's more familiar to you). Ausar Oct 31 2017, 05:35 AM That's a little strange. Patagotitan doesn't look like it's that much taller at the withers than Palaeoloxodon, but it weighs some 2.5 times as much (basing the Patagotitan mass estimate off of randomdinos' skeletal). Does it have something to do with leg length? It's not that strange actually. Female African bush elephants are 2.6 m tall at the shoulder and weigh 3 tonnes on average, males are 3.2 m tall at the shoulder and weigh 6 tonnes on average, the largest male was about 3.96 m tall at the shoulder and weighed about 10.4 tonnes, Palaeoloxodon namadicus was about 5.2 m tall at the shoulder and weighed about 22 tonnes (Larramendi (2016)). All this shows that an animal doesn't have to be that much taller to weigh much more. Edited by moldovan0731, Oct 31 2017, 06:04 AM.



Spartan	Oct 31 2017, 06:46 AM Post #1611
Kleptoparasite Posts: 1,948 Group: Members Member #2,550 Joined: Jun 4, 2014	Indeed, the dinosaur seems to be around 7m at the withers while the elephant is at 5m. Assuming isometric scaling that's already a weight difference of a factor of 2.7.



Ausar	Oct 31 2017, 07:15 AM Post #1612
*Xi-miqa-can! Xi-miqa-can! Xi-miqa-can!* Posts: 8,781 Group: Members Member #771 Joined: Oct 31, 2012	Quote: It's not that strange actually. Female African bush elephants are 2.6 m tall at the shoulder and weigh 3 tonnes on average, males are 3.2 m tall at the shoulder and weigh 6 tonnes on average, the largest male was about 3.96 m tall at the shoulder and weighed about 10.4 tonnes, Palaeoloxodon namadicus was about 5.2 m tall at the shoulder and weighed about 22 tonnes (Larramendi (2016)). All this shows that an animal doesn't have to be that much taller to weigh much more. That doesn't explain how that can be. It may just be that simple isometric scaling is all there is to it, as Spartan said. I forgot how much a seemingly "small" difference in height or length can influence mass. Edited by Ausar, Oct 31 2017, 07:16 AM.



moldovan0731	Oct 31 2017, 09:20 AM Post #1613
Heterotrophic Organism Posts: 458 Group: Members Member #735 Joined: Oct 16, 2012	Spartan Oct 31 2017, 06:46 AM Indeed, the dinosaur seems to be around 7m at the withers while the elephant is at 5m. Assuming isometric scaling that's already a weight difference of a factor of 2.7. It seems to have a shoulder height smaller than 7 m actually, more like 6.5-6.7 m. Spartan Oct 31 2017, 06:46 AM Indeed, the dinosaur seems to be around 7m at the withers while the elephant is at 5m. Assuming isometric scaling that's already a weight difference of a factor of 2.7. Also, the shoulder height of Palaeoloxodon namadicus is 5.2 m, not 5 m. Ausar Oct 31 2017, 07:15 AM Quote: It's not that strange actually. Female African bush elephants are 2.6 m tall at the shoulder and weigh 3 tonnes on average, males are 3.2 m tall at the shoulder and weigh 6 tonnes on average, the largest male was about 3.96 m tall at the shoulder and weighed about 10.4 tonnes, Palaeoloxodon namadicus was about 5.2 m tall at the shoulder and weighed about 22 tonnes (Larramendi (2016)). All this shows that an animal doesn't have to be that much taller to weigh much more. That doesn't explain how that can be. It may just be that simple isometric scaling is all there is to it, as Spartan said. I forgot how much a seemingly "small" difference in height or length can influence mass. I basically said the same thing, just not with the phrase of isometrical scaling. Edited by moldovan0731, Nov 1 2017, 12:46 AM.



Ntwadumela	Nov 4 2017, 12:01 AM Post #1614
Herbivore Posts: 629 Group: Members Member #163 Joined: Feb 2, 2012	4 feline species recorded on the same trail of the “Land of the Leopard” at once! An Amur leopard, a Siberian tiger, a lynx and an Amur leopard cat have got caught in the lens of trail cameras fixed in the same area of the “Land of the Leopard”. For the first time in the period of photomonitoring all these four species inhabiting the most famous feline territory of the country were noticed on the same trail. Read more: http://leopard-land.ru/news/5741



Wombatman	Nov 4 2017, 07:38 AM Post #1615
Herbivore Posts: 547 Group: Members Member #1,183 Joined: Mar 27, 2013	Ausar Oct 31 2017, 07:15 AM Quote: It's not that strange actually. Female African bush elephants are 2.6 m tall at the shoulder and weigh 3 tonnes on average, males are 3.2 m tall at the shoulder and weigh 6 tonnes on average, the largest male was about 3.96 m tall at the shoulder and weighed about 10.4 tonnes, Palaeoloxodon namadicus was about 5.2 m tall at the shoulder and weighed about 22 tonnes (Larramendi (2016)). All this shows that an animal doesn't have to be that much taller to weigh much more. That doesn't explain how that can be. It may just be that simple isometric scaling is all there is to it, as Spartan said. I forgot how much a seemingly "small" difference in height or length can influence mass. The dinosaur ribcage is also way wider and taller, and has a massive neck and tail, and the muscles to hold them up. It is also compensated with relatively hollow bones.



Warsaw2014	Nov 7 2017, 03:19 AM Post #1616
Herbivore Posts: 963 Group: Members Member #2,919 Joined: Nov 5, 2014



Ausar	Nov 7 2017, 03:38 AM Post #1617
*Xi-miqa-can! Xi-miqa-can! Xi-miqa-can!* Posts: 8,781 Group: Members Member #771 Joined: Oct 31, 2012	Quote: I basically said the same thing, just not with the phrase of isometrical scaling. You just gave stats on the animals' sizes, so that wasn't very clear to me. However, this is anything but important, so I'll drop this now. Below are the skulls of a capybara and a spotted hyena. I was a bit surprised at how much the former can weigh (they can be roughly man-sized). And here are the skulls of a leopard seal and a horse. Both come from this blog post. There are some more visual comparisons in the above link, but I found these two the most compelling. Edited by Ausar, Nov 7 2017, 03:39 AM.



Warsaw2014	Nov 7 2017, 03:47 AM Post #1618
Herbivore Posts: 963 Group: Members Member #2,919 Joined: Nov 5, 2014	Edited by Warsaw2014, Nov 7 2017, 03:47 AM.



Ferreomus	Nov 7 2017, 04:51 AM Post #1619
Herbivore Posts: 822 Group: Members Member #4,371 Joined: Feb 2, 2017	Skull between Pleistocene American Carnivores; Attached to this post: 0W8A8573_572.jpg (555.69 KB)



Taipan	Nov 7 2017, 04:22 PM Post #1620
Administrator Posts: 18,011 Group: Admins Member #1 Joined: Feb 25, 2011	Ferreomus Nov 7 2017, 04:51 AM Skull between Pleistocene American Carnivores; P. atrox looks much larger than S. fatalis!



2 users reading this topic (2 Guests and 0 Anonymous)


Go to Next Page
« Previous Topic · Video & Image Gallery · Next Topic »

Pages:
1
…
107
108
109
…
113