|
Post by Tyrannax on Sept 25, 2008 0:02:36 GMT
Really? That's a good point, but it came to me and I throw I might through my theory out there. ;D
I don't really study dinosaurs as much as I do Tyrannosaurus, so I'm not surprised that i'm not up to date with Triceratops lol
|
|
|
Post by kustom65 on Sept 25, 2008 0:04:23 GMT
I dunno, that nasal horn looks pretty nasty! Who'd wanna mate with that guy?
As for big cat hunting techniques, they rely on a combination of stealth, surprise, speed and raw power. Also, lion(esse)s often use the pack-hunt method, where the hapless prey will suddenly find itself encircled. I recently saw a doco where a fully-grown giraffe was taken down by a lion pack, including males.
T. rex .. pack hunter? It's been proposed by Curry et al. In fact, he had the rather neat theory that the younger, more agile T.rexes would herd prey towards a couple of hidden adults who would then administer the killing blows.
I see the obligate scavengers of the Cretaceous most likely being the gigantic pterosaurs of the day, filling the niche now occupied by vultures.
NOT T. rex....!
|
|
|
Post by stoneage on Sept 25, 2008 0:06:25 GMT
;D Ceratopsians front legs weren't mean"t for running, they were made for moving side to side. In other words keeping their heads between them and the predator. I suspect they did this in groups when possible. Yes their head dress was also probably used for sexual display.
|
|
|
Post by Tyrannax on Sept 25, 2008 0:11:39 GMT
;D Ceratopsians front legs weren't mean"t for running, they were made for moving side to side. In other words keeping their heads between them and the predator. I suspect they did this in groups when possible. Yes their head dress was also probably used for sexual display. That horn does look deadly....if it had to be...
|
|
|
Post by kustom65 on Sept 25, 2008 0:19:26 GMT
;D Ceratopsians front legs weren't mean"t for running, they were made for moving side to side. In other words keeping their heads between them and the predator. I suspect they did this in groups when possible. Yes their head dress was also probably used for sexual display. As with every other horned animal, the horns evolved for defense and attack and secondarily came to be objects of sexual display. Likewise for muscles; females are attracted to masculine features... (I'm off to the gym. )
|
|
|
Post by Tyrannax on Sept 25, 2008 0:22:53 GMT
;D Ceratopsians front legs weren't mean"t for running, they were made for moving side to side. In other words keeping their heads between them and the predator. I suspect they did this in groups when possible. Yes their head dress was also probably used for sexual display. As with every other horned animal, the horns evolved for defense and attack and secondarily came to be objects of sexual display. Likewise for muscles; females are attracted to masculine features... (I'm off to the gym. ) Also a good theory. But which is true? Howabout you guys argue about Triceratops and let T-Rex rest for a little bit ;D
|
|
|
Post by baryonyx on Sept 25, 2008 0:42:19 GMT
No no no no no. A hadrosaur had hoof-ish toes, ergo the individual toes had far more surface area to them; likewise a Triceratops foot. And have you ever seen a non-lynx cat go through snow? It doesn't very well, because the lack of surface area causes the force of the body's mass to focus too narrowly against the substrate. Likewise, I would imagine, with a rex toe. Each one is long, narrow, and supporting several tons. While the foot could slog through some mud, of course, it would not be that efficient for moving over a river/pond bed. And weight is entirely the issue--the higher the mass, the higher the downward force due to gravity (the actual measure of weight); the narrower the surfaces against a substrate, the more likely they are to push through due to those forces. Ergo, a T rex would sink in more viscous materials than an Allosaurus because the higher mass would increase the downward force, causing greater likelihood of sinking. And based on Morrison Fm. predator traps, we know that it didn't take much for an allosaur to become mired. Triceratops had a very circular foot (very small toes/wouldn't have helped him much) and its weight would have been pushed straight down. But considering he walked on 4 legs, his weight was evened out. Exactly, Tyrannosaurus WOULD have his weight spread out, but he'd still be much too heavy to make it useful. Especially since he's bipedal. I understand weight is the entire issue, that's what I'm saying. Try this- go out onto thick snow. If you sink in, use swim flippers and walk on your toes. The flippers even your weight out, just as Tyrannosaurs toes did for him .He, however, weighed 7 tons, way too much for him to get far even if he did have his weight splayed out..... Point is, just like a bird his weight wasn't entirely pressed down onto a foot - is was pressed down onto a foot AND 6 large toes. Are you proposing that a triceratops would get farther than a Tyrannosaurus if it walked into thick mud? Let me remind you that Triceratops weighed, in some cases, 11 tons, and did NOT have the advantage Tyrannosaurus did. I agree with Tyrannax here, i've read several time sin dinosaur books that his toes spread his weight around.
|
|
|
Post by stoneage on Sept 25, 2008 1:02:04 GMT
No no no no no. A hadrosaur had hoof-ish toes, ergo the individual toes had far more surface area to them; likewise a Triceratops foot. And have you ever seen a non-lynx cat go through snow? It doesn't very well, because the lack of surface area causes the force of the body's mass to focus too narrowly against the substrate. Likewise, I would imagine, with a rex toe. Each one is long, narrow, and supporting several tons. While the foot could slog through some mud, of course, it would not be that efficient for moving over a river/pond bed. And weight is entirely the issue--the higher the mass, the higher the downward force due to gravity (the actual measure of weight); the narrower the surfaces against a substrate, the more likely they are to push through due to those forces. Ergo, a T rex would sink in more viscous materials than an Allosaurus because the higher mass would increase the downward force, causing greater likelihood of sinking. And based on Morrison Fm. predator traps, we know that it didn't take much for an allosaur to become mired. Triceratops had a very circular foot (very small toes/wouldn't have helped him much) and its weight would have been pushed straight down. But considering he walked on 4 legs, his weight was evened out. Exactly, Tyrannosaurus WOULD have his weight spread out, but he'd still be much too heavy to make it useful. Especially since he's bipedal. I understand weight is the entire issue, that's what I'm saying. Try this- go out onto thick snow. If you sink in, use swim flippers and walk on your toes. The flippers even your weight out, just as Tyrannosaurs toes did for him .He, however, weighed 7 tons, way too much for him to get far even if he did have his weight splayed out..... Point is, just like a bird his weight wasn't entirely pressed down onto a foot - is was pressed down onto a foot AND 6 large toes. Are you proposing that a triceratops would get farther than a Tyrannosaurus if it walked into thick mud? Let me remind you that Triceratops weighed, in some cases, 11 tons, and did NOT have the advantage Tyrannosaurus did. And another thing, T-Rex never walked on Snow!
|
|
|
Post by kustom65 on Sept 25, 2008 1:11:23 GMT
Would Rex have confronted Triceratops from the front? Animals always take the path of least resistance and do their best to minimize any risk of injury. That's why I say Rex had to have been an ambush monster. Once again, to illustrate my "point": Of course Rex also hunted hadrosaurs and whatever else it could get. Most of the smaller dinos would have been faster than him, so again, ambush would have been his only recourse.
|
|
|
Post by stoneage on Sept 25, 2008 1:20:50 GMT
I believe that T-Rex only hunted large pray. It was too big to go after small agile pray. Also I think it hunted in packs, as has been suggested. It would be much easier to seperate prey from the herd. And in the case of armoured dinosaurs in particular to attack their vulnerable parts. Teamwork makes the task less dangerous.
|
|
|
Post by Tyrannax on Sept 25, 2008 1:31:54 GMT
I believe that T-Rex only hunted large pray. It was too big to go after small agile pray. Also I think it hunted in packs, as has been suggested. It would be much easier to seperate prey from the herd. And in the case of armoured dinosaurs in particular to attack their vulnerable parts. Teamwork makes the task less dangerous. The idea of Tyrannosaurus being a pack hunter is definitely plausible. If it were slow, this would come in handy as a member of its pack or family could wait in ambush for another member to lead the prey towards the waiting Tyrannosaurus. Actually the theory of pack hunting makes much more sense than solitary hunting. What about the theory of caring parents? This theory also leads us to believe that Rex was a pack hunter. Allosaurus may have also hunted in packs- bringing down diplodocus or outwitting a stegosaurus. And stoneage, I know he didn't walk on snow. In, fact, this adaptation of theropods wasn't really used often- only when walking across a muddy riverbank that may have had a density comparable to SNOW!
|
|
|
Post by sbell on Sept 25, 2008 2:17:04 GMT
Triceratops had a very circular foot (very small toes/wouldn't have helped him much) and its weight would have been pushed straight down. But considering he walked on 4 legs, his weight was evened out. Exactly, Tyrannosaurus WOULD have his weight spread out, but he'd still be much too heavy to make it useful. Especially since he's bipedal. I understand weight is the entire issue, that's what I'm saying. Try this- go out onto thick snow. If you sink in, use swim flippers and walk on your toes. The flippers even your weight out, just as Tyrannosaurs toes did for him .He, however, weighed 7 tons, way too much for him to get far even if he did have his weight splayed out..... Point is, just like a bird his weight wasn't entirely pressed down onto a foot - is was pressed down onto a foot AND 6 large toes. Are you proposing that a triceratops would get farther than a Tyrannosaurus if it walked into thick mud? Let me remind you that Triceratops weighed, in some cases, 11 tons, and did NOT have the advantage Tyrannosaurus did. I agree with Tyrannax here, i've read several time sin dinosaur books that his toes spread his weight around. What I'm trying to argue is that, while yes the toes are designed to spread, and thus distribute the weight more evenly, they are simply not thick or large enough to properly distribute the weight in a very soft sediment like mud or silts. Or snow (which was only given as a sediment that requires a lot of surface area to support a small amount of mass, just like muds and clays). Therefore, this is one more line of negative evidence for T rex being a predator that lurked within a pond and then attacked toward the shore. That's all.
|
|
|
Post by stoneage on Sept 25, 2008 2:20:39 GMT
;D Tyrannax did you write an article on the internet about T-Rex suggesting it used its tail to attack other dinosaurs? It just sounds like you the way the person talks. ;D
|
|
|
Post by sid on Sept 25, 2008 5:16:29 GMT
For me Tyrannosaurus Rex lived like the modern tiger (or something along these lines)...A small family,with the cubs living with the mother until they become adults,while the male hunts alone and,occasionaly,with his mate. Just my two cents,i don't see him as a pack hunter or as a very social animal
|
|
|
Post by Tyrannax on Sept 25, 2008 5:34:23 GMT
I agree with Tyrannax here, i've read several time sin dinosaur books that his toes spread his weight around. What I'm trying to argue is that, while yes the toes are designed to spread, and thus distribute the weight more evenly, they are simply not thick or large enough to properly distribute the weight in a very soft sediment like mud or silts. Or snow (which was only given as a sediment that requires a lot of surface area to support a small amount of mass, just like muds and clays). Therefore, this is one more line of negative evidence for T rex being a predator that lurked within a pond and then attacked toward the shore. That's all. Thats what I meant too. We just didn't understand each other And no, I didn't write an article on T-Rex suggesting he used his tail as a weapon.....what do you mean it sounded like me? lol ;D Sid, you're theory is also what I believe- Tyrannosaurus's "pack" was actually it's family .... I don't believe T-Rex stumbled along, looking for a pack such as Deinonychus did. I believe from the time a Rex was born, he hunted with his parents and siblings. I also believe Tyrannosaurs could live alone successfully. I do not believe a large pack was needed. I mean, he was the largest predator of his time, he didn't have any need for a massive pack. Its uneccessary. I understand Allosaurus may have hunted in packs because their were much larger herbivores (Apatosaurus, Camarasaurus, Diplodocus, Brachiosaurus), but during Tyrannosaur's time and general area...there weren't many large herbivores that required much help...
|
|
|
Post by sbell on Sept 25, 2008 15:56:08 GMT
For me Tyrannosaurus Rex lived like the modern tiger (or something along these lines)...A small family,with the cubs living with the mother until they become adults,while the male hunts alone and,occasionaly,with his mate. Just my two cents,i don't see him as a pack hunter or as a very social animal The evidence for social hunting in rexes is marginal at best. Albertosaurus has been found in multi-age associations. There may be other earlier ones, but until a track way or mass kill shows up of rex itself, it is conjecture (just like downy rex chicks--it can be hypothesized, but there is no direct support either way right now).
|
|
|
Post by [][][]cordylus[][][] on Sept 26, 2008 0:39:45 GMT
;D Ceratopsians front legs weren't mean"t for running, they were made for moving side to side. In other words keeping their heads between them and the predator. I suspect they did this in groups when possible. Yes their head dress was also probably used for sexual display. I never said they would be running.
|
|
|
Post by [][][]cordylus[][][] on Sept 26, 2008 0:41:22 GMT
;D Ceratopsians front legs weren't mean"t for running, they were made for moving side to side. In other words keeping their heads between them and the predator. I suspect they did this in groups when possible. Yes their head dress was also probably used for sexual display. As with every other horned animal, the horns evolved for defense and attack and secondarily came to be objects of sexual display. Likewise for muscles; females are attracted to masculine features... (I'm off to the gym. ) The theory I heard about was different species of ceratopsians would know the difference between species, and thus not mate with other species. I wonder if I could have fit one more "species" in there... ;D
|
|
|
Post by [][][]cordylus[][][] on Sept 26, 2008 0:44:06 GMT
And another thing, Trex never walked in snow! Can you show me the research that said that?
|
|
|
Post by Tyrannax on Sept 26, 2008 1:20:56 GMT
And another thing, Trex never walked in snow! Can you show me the research that said that? lol ;D Whoa Ct, you're karma is bad right now
|
|