| 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: |
| I'm skeptical about the weight of amphicoelias | |
|---|---|
| Tweet Topic Started: Jul 31 2012, 09:02 AM (13,575 Views) | |
| Godzillasaurus | Jul 31 2012, 09:02 AM Post #1 |
|
Reptile King
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Though amphicoelias was very large, the fact that it was a diplodocid is making me skeptical about its weight. Diplodocids were very slender and lightly built for sauropod standards, being longer, though lighter than brachiosaurs and titanosaurs. Most of the candidates for the "world's largest dinosaur" are dinosaurs like Argentinosaurus, puertasaurus, and bruhathkaysaurus, all of which were titanosaurs. Amphicoelias is another candidate. However, it was a diplodocid. When you look at size comparisons with other sauropods, it looks like a human with a bunch of mice surrounding it. IT LOOKS FRICKIN HUGE! Another large diplodocid, supersaurus, weighed in at only 35-40 tons. Amphicoelias was estimated to have weighed a whopping 122 tons! That is assuming the proportions were correct. Something isn't right here. It doesn't make sense that the diplodocids, which were slender and lightly-built for sauropod standards, would have the world's heaviest dinosaur (other than bruhathkaysaurus) on their side. Amphicoelias makes titanosaurs look like wimps. That is, if it wasn't much smaller, and/or if it even existed. |
![]() |
|
| Replies: | |
|---|---|
| theropod | Aug 1 2012, 01:19 AM Post #31 |
|
palaeontology, open source and survival enthusiast
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
@broleywhatever: Stop with that fanboy accusatios right NOW! You shouldn´t even start. He hasn´t understood the math completely, you have to explain it to him in order to convince him, and that isn´t giving you the right to accuse anybody of being a fanboy. And note that I myself like the Jurassic, probably better than the Cretaceous due to being forgotten so often, and due to late cretaceous North America being so overused. I do not think it exceeded the weight of Puertasaurus or Bruhathkayosaurus, if the latter really existed. I don´t think that it would be proportionally heavier than diplodocus either, because in order to be able to support itself it had to save weight as good as possible. |
![]() |
|
| Godzillasaurus | Aug 1 2012, 01:19 AM Post #32 |
|
Reptile King
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
150 tons was way to heavy for a sauropod. |
![]() |
|
| theropod | Aug 1 2012, 01:20 AM Post #33 |
|
palaeontology, open source and survival enthusiast
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
wow, you guys are posting so frequently that once I have finished my post, there are 3 more I have to read! |
![]() |
|
| Jinfengopteryx | Aug 1 2012, 01:20 AM Post #34 |
![]()
Aspiring paleontologist, science enthusiast and armchair speculative fiction/evolution writer
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
We have only drawings, all fossils are gone. |
![]() |
|
| theropod | Aug 1 2012, 01:21 AM Post #35 |
|
palaeontology, open source and survival enthusiast
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
I don´t think so. Read my reasons for that on the appropriate tread. |
![]() |
|
| Jinfengopteryx | Aug 1 2012, 01:21 AM Post #36 |
![]()
Aspiring paleontologist, science enthusiast and armchair speculative fiction/evolution writer
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Why it's too heavy, they have quite strong legs(look at those of Brontomerus for example, they could support a heigh weight). Edited by Jinfengopteryx, Aug 1 2012, 01:22 AM.
|
![]() |
|
| Godzillasaurus | Aug 1 2012, 01:22 AM Post #37 |
|
Reptile King
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
But then again, that is the same thing for bruhathkaysaurus. It seems as though the supposed biggest dinosaurs are the ones that we would never know for sure existed. |
![]() |
|
| Godzillasaurus | Aug 1 2012, 01:23 AM Post #38 |
|
Reptile King
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Some say that sauropods maybe only grew to about 120-130 tons at most. |
![]() |
|
| Jinfengopteryx | Aug 1 2012, 01:24 AM Post #39 |
![]()
Aspiring paleontologist, science enthusiast and armchair speculative fiction/evolution writer
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
But the fossils can be at least claimed to be an animal, while Bruhathkaysaurus probably only was a tree. I don't think that the images are a fake:http://scienceblogs.com/tetrapodzoology/2010/01/07/biggest-sauropod-ever-part-ii/ |
![]() |
|
| Jinfengopteryx | Aug 1 2012, 01:25 AM Post #40 |
![]()
Aspiring paleontologist, science enthusiast and armchair speculative fiction/evolution writer
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Sounds quite outdated. Also I have the impression that many people don't take the evidence for strong Sauropod legs in Brontomerus in account. |
![]() |
|
| Godzillasaurus | Aug 1 2012, 01:25 AM Post #41 |
|
Reptile King
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
I still think that bruhathkaysaurus fossils look like actual fossils. However, they are still very little evidence. And shouldn't we be getting back on topic? |
![]() |
|
| theropod | Aug 1 2012, 01:25 AM Post #42 |
|
palaeontology, open source and survival enthusiast
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
"some say", and it´s a "universal truth" isn´t the same. to me, everything point´s out tho that being highly probable, possibly even evidenced. |
![]() |
|
| Godzillasaurus | Aug 1 2012, 01:28 AM Post #43 |
|
Reptile King
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Do you guys think that, knowing the new size estimates, animals like puertasaurus and argentinosaurus grew heavier than amphicoelias? http://paleoking.blogspot.com/2010/03/forgotten-giants-1-puertasaurus.html |
![]() |
|
| theropod | Aug 1 2012, 01:28 AM Post #44 |
|
palaeontology, open source and survival enthusiast
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
I especially have the impression of a sauropod possibly larger than a blue whale being not pleasant to some people. |
![]() |
|
| Jinfengopteryx | Aug 1 2012, 01:28 AM Post #45 |
![]()
Aspiring paleontologist, science enthusiast and armchair speculative fiction/evolution writer
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Bruhathkaysaurus is only very poorly described, so errors like that easily can be made, in fact, many scientists even seem to ignore it. |
![]() |
|
| 2 users reading this topic (2 Guests and 0 Anonymous) | |
| Go to Next Page | |
| « Previous Topic · Debate & discussion of dinosaur related topics. · Next Topic » |
| Theme: Dinosauria light | Track Topic · E-mail Topic |
9:36 AM Jul 11
|
Powered by ZetaBoards Premium · Privacy Policy


)


![]](http://z4.ifrm.com/static/1/pip_r.png)




9:36 AM Jul 11