Dinosaurs.

Starbuck

A thread for dinosaur nerds to discuss dinosaurs, news about them, theories about them, questions about them, theoretical fights between them, how they ruled the planet for so long, how they went extinct, or whatever.

To get the ball rolling, I ask: Some new evidence has suggested that tyrannosaurs hunted in packs, and that the brain was structured to have the capability of advanced (by dinosaur standards) social behavior. Not many people take Jack Horner's scavenger theory seriously now (myself included), but some paleontologists still dispute this claim (information from "Dino Gangs" on the Discovery Channel).

What do you think? Do you have any updated information on this topic? Do you have theories of your own?
 
ankylosaurus.jpg

ankylosaurus arrrrggghhh

Ankylosaurus-766345.jpg

raaawwwwrrrr im like a turtle but my tail is a club, trex can my DICK nine times in heeellllll

ANKYLOSAURUS_7.jpg

im an herbivore but literally there's no cooler dinosaur raaawwwwggghhhh

FleaAnkylosaurus.jpg

get the fuck out of my cretaceous period before i FUCK YOU UP

dinos2.jpg

if awesome blunt force trauma was an animal, i would be that animal

Ankylosaurus_dinosaur.png

i am ANKYLOSAURUS, KING OF THE DINOSAURS
 
On a more serious note, virtually all of the posters on this forum will not have valid opinions on dinosaurs beyond "who do you think is the coolest." Morm might have, but he is Gone, But Not Forgotten.
 
If there are any dinosaur people, hopefully they will find this thread. If they don't, it might still be worth it to see an ongoing debate over which one is coolest...but hopefully it won't come to that.
 
It seems that previous theories of Tyrannosaurus Rex being dimwitted loners were based in no small part on the fact that their skeletons were usually found alone, in contrast to the fossilized remains of more social dinosaurs such as the Triceratops. My personal knowledge of the Tyrannosaurus Rex has been found wanting in this respect, as I was still under the impression that minuscule forearms limited them to mostly scavenging. I was also surprised by the revelation that Tyrannosaurus Rex possessed relatively developed brains, and could co-ordinate attacks in a similar fashion to modern mammalian packs such as wolves and lions. I had hitherto thought that a dinosaur's brain power was inversely proportional to its body size, as the energy and nutrients required for brain development was diverted to body growth, and this fact is somewhat reinforced by the intelligent pack behaviour of the relatively diminutive raptors. I would venture to say that the concept of an intelligent Tyrannosaurus Rex goes against the grain of conventional knowledge, though I cannot be sure. What's also interesting is the fact that Tyrannosaurus Rex seemed, based upon these new discoveries, to rely upon their more agile young rather than the mature adults for the majority of the hunting, which I would imagine resulted in an unique pack dynamic. The revision of our concept of the infamous Tyrannosaurus Rex based on new fossilized findings goes to show that our views of these giant reptiles are never set in stone, and with each new fossil discovery comes new information, which allows us to open the door, get on the floor, everybody walk the dinosaur.
 
I was never convinced by the small forearms that T. rex was an obligate scavenger. All theropods have relatively short arms. Besides, T. rex has a few features that only an active predator would have reason for, such as binocular vision and the larger brain. Then there's the fact that a seven ton scavenger is absurdly inefficient.

Good point about the the intelligence of large dinosaurs, but CT scans have generated a brain about twice the size (proportionally) of most other predators, and larger still than those of herbivores. Also, it's worth noting that the largest land mammals are among the most intelligent today (elephants). It's also worth noting that tyrannosaurids were an advanced family of theropods with T. rex as their final product in the tail end of the Cretaceous, and most paleontologists agree that they were far more advanced than carcharodontosaurids, megalosaurids, spinosaurids, and still other families.

It is conjectured the juvenile T. rex could have sprinted in excess of 40 mph and chased prey to the waiting jaws of the adults. However, adults probably could have reached a sprint near 25 mph (keep in mind the coelurosaurian design).
 
On the subject of its arms, I read somewhere that some scientists believe that smaller forearms could of been to compensate for its large head. Because its massive weight, if its forearms were bigger it may have had trouble controlling its front weight. Also because some theropods arms were so vestigial they lost the nails on the ends of their finger tips, I believe trex may have used its arms.

I had read that trex large brains but I thought it was more for its senses and I wasn't really sure about pack hunting. Although, with new evidence I think pack hunting might of been possible and if a trex saw another trex trying to bring down an animal, I'm sure it would of joined in like some predatory birds and komodo dragons do today.
 
Jack Horner has suggested that Torosaurus should be under the same genus as Triceratops. He has cited growth rings in the horns and the shape of the horns as they correspond to the animal's estimated age. He has also suggested that Dracorex and Stygimoloch be classified under Pachycephalosaurus.

There are various theories about the use of tyrannosaurs' arms. Examining the musculature, it's theorized that those arms could have curled 900 pounds, which isn't exactly a lot by dinosaur standards, but still might be useful for whatever the head could't do...which isn't much. I've heard the arms might have been used to help the animal stand from a prone position, and I've heard that they might have useful for grasping a mate or even sexual tickling...but that sounds a little far fetched.
 
Hmmm...

If I was at the beginning of time, and I could make anything I wanted just by saying it, I cant help but think that a planetful of dinosaur fights to watch would not be a wasted opportunity.

Dinosaur coolness as evidence of creationism is actually pretty compelling.
 
T-rex vs triceratops is the obvious main event. I suppose there isnt much reason for two herbivores of different species to fight, which reduces some of the more famous options I guess.
 
Greymon didn't breathe any fire, that video sucked

How the fuck did that stupid T-Rex trip and kill itself?
 
JFC I: Tyrannosaurus vs. Triceratops.
Triceratops is often considered one of the best armed herbivores known. However, the strength of the frill has been disputed, and Jack Horner has suggested that the horns on the head would be horrible for defense because if Triceratops did successfuly gouge Tyrannosaurus through the chest, then that multi-ton monster probably falls on the head of Triceratops, probably killing it anyway. I think it's more reasonable that Triceratops would arm for the legs, maiming the Tyrannosaurus as opposed to the kamikaze tactic. The maximum bite force for T. rex is estimated to have been 2 to 20 tons. Some are much, much higher (dinopedia lists of potential of 900,000 tons, lol), but 2 to 20 seems more realistic. That plus fat nine-inch teeth suggests something made to crush and shatter bones, like those of Triceratops or the apparently famous Ankylosaurus.
 
You know in a Power Rangers game, the Triceratops could kill everything just by charging and spinning it's head around. That would make it pretty hard for T-Rex to get close enough to take a bite.
 
I am not convinced. If Tyrannosaurus gets maimed in the process of attacking Triceratops then that is basically a kamikaze attack as well, which it wont do. If Tyrannosaurus wanted to kill a Triceratops, it would likely have to find one separated from its herd and attack it with a team.

I figure the most likely outcome of a head on fair fight (IE not full strength Trex vs crippled Tops), is Tyrannosaurus attacks, cant find a way past the horns, and either gets injured and gives up or gives up before getting injured. If they have to fight to the finish, then TRex may be the favourite, but it would only be because a lot of Tops's wins might be turned into draws by TRex crushing it.

Bone crushing teeth are one thing, but you have to grab a hold of them first, and I cant imagine the Tops is going to be standing still.
 
To clarify, I was suggesting Triceratops maiming Tyrannosaurus in the fight, not a maimed Trike going in against T. rex.

One dramatization of the fight features T. rex biting and snapping off a horn before it moves to the side and tries to deliver a killing bite to the neck. I could see it getting a hold on the horn pretty quickly; despite its bulk, it was one of the more birdlike dinosaurs, and may well have been relatively light on its feet. Still, in all that thrashing, it's likely that one of those horns finds home if T. rex doesn't control Triceratops enough. This match probably played out many times with different results; either animal can end the fight quickly with one good blow, but the odds are in favor of Triceratops imo.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top