|
|
Post by sid on Dec 17, 2008 23:34:18 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by crazycrowman on Dec 17, 2008 23:44:54 GMT
:oWow! I have to say, it is a bizzare looking thing. "And,sorry to say it,but i simply REFUSE to believe that such a big Dromeosaurid was clad in feathers" Well, remember, to the "anti feather hold outs" Fedducia and Martin, its probably not even going to be called a dinosaur, rather a highly diversified bird  |
|
|
|
Post by sid on Dec 18, 2008 0:01:04 GMT
:oWow! I have to say, it is a bizzare looking thing. "And,sorry to say it,but i simply REFUSE to believe that such a big Dromeosaurid was clad in feathers" Well, remember, to the "anti feather hold outs" Fedducia and Martin, its probably not even going to be called a dinosaur, rather a highly diversified bird Bah,Feduccia and Martin theory is really idiotic,to say the least  Anyway,that was an interesting critter,no doubt,and it's curios the fact that,just like Abelisaurids and Giganotosaurus,he had very short arms...Maybe South America air made dinosaur arms shrink? ;D |
|
|
|
Post by ningishzida on Dec 18, 2008 2:24:08 GMT
I recall a paper that completely dismissed feathers on 'raptors', suggesting that the fringy outline on many of these fossils were not feathers, but simply a kind of staining.
The conical teeth and long snout suggests this raptor may have evolved into a fisher, like the spinosaurids --- not that this would be the only thing they ate.
|
|
|
|
Post by tetonbabydoll on Dec 18, 2008 2:40:11 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by crazycrowman on Dec 18, 2008 2:40:12 GMT
I recall a paper that completely dismissed feathers on 'raptors', suggesting that the fringy outline on many of these fossils were not feathers, but simply a kind of staining. Please post it then. I am sure its either old, or by Feddica or Martin, who have now crossed over saying that all of the maniraptora are all birds, not dinosaurs at all. There really is no one refuting the feathers anymore within the scientific community because there is no reason to refute the feathers on the specimens who are clearly feathered. That said...yeah, what is with the tiny arms !!! "*****please***** do not start the feather versus collegen stain debate **again**" I just saw that you posted that right after I posted this....  |
|
|
|
Post by tetonbabydoll on Dec 18, 2008 2:41:57 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by itstwentybelow on Dec 18, 2008 3:36:20 GMT
Wow now that is an exciting find. I wonder who would win in a fight, Utahraptor or Austroraptor...? I wonder what sorts of environmental pressures these South American raptors were under to get those teeny arms. I'm gonna go ahead and say that Utahraptor probably would have whooped up on this thing because it had longer arms, but I'm still anxious to see who makes the first Austroraptor figure!
|
|
|
|
Post by kuni on Dec 18, 2008 5:10:38 GMT
Sounds like a rad raptor radiation down in South America. Awesome stuff.
|
|
|
|
Post by Tyrannax on Dec 18, 2008 5:22:35 GMT
Utahraptor still out competes it as far as size. Very cool find!
|
|
|
|
Post by itstwentybelow on Dec 18, 2008 7:24:04 GMT
Ummm actually Utahraptor was pretty much the exact same size. About 6.5 m. long (or a little over 20 feet).
|
|
|
|
Post by wheezy on Dec 18, 2008 8:33:36 GMT
the last few lines made me laugh. You know about the buck-billed titanosaurs what a typo.
|
|
|
|
Post by Tyrannax on Dec 18, 2008 21:43:54 GMT
They stated this raptor was between 16 and 20 feet. Utahraptor grew 25 feet in some cases. So very much close in size, but according to the information, Utahraptor was slightly bigger.
|
|
|
|
Post by itstwentybelow on Dec 19, 2008 2:02:37 GMT
I'd like to know where you got that info because I've never read anywhere about a Utahraptor specimen that large. Everything I've read states that Utahraptor had a MAX length of 21 feet. 25 feet. is almost 20% larger, which is a pretty significant difference. Maybe you need to read up on dinosaurs other than T.rex?
|
|
brad
Junior Member
Posts: 83 
|
Post by brad on Dec 19, 2008 6:32:59 GMT
Even if they were the same length, Utahraptor looks more robust and massive. I haven't read the Austroraptor paper yet, though.
|
|
|
|
Post by ningishzida on Dec 20, 2008 13:39:09 GMT
As to winning a fight, if there are two 'raptors' of identical size, I would give the advantage to the one with the more robust arms, though there may be other variables as well.
|
|
|
|
Post by Tyrannax on Dec 20, 2008 21:23:27 GMT
I'd like to know where you got that info because I've never read anywhere about a Utahraptor specimen that large. Everything I've read states that Utahraptor had a MAX length of 21 feet. 25 feet. is almost 20% larger, which is a pretty significant difference. Maybe you need to read up on dinosaurs other than T.rex? All my sources (books) which are fairly new, say it grew around 24 feet in length. Your saying there was never a specimen over 21 feet long?  Tisk tisk. |
|
|
|
Post by [][][]cordylus[][][] on Dec 20, 2008 21:30:46 GMT
I'd like to know where you got that info because I've never read anywhere about a Utahraptor specimen that large. Everything I've read states that Utahraptor had a MAX length of 21 feet. 25 feet. is almost 20% larger, which is a pretty significant difference. Maybe you need to read up on dinosaurs other than T.rex? All my sources (books) which are fairly new, say it grew around 24 feet in length. Your saying there was never a specimen over 21 feet long? Tisk tisk. Nope. Utahraptor was about the size of the animals in Jurassic park. Megaraptor (which is now maybe a spinosaur) was said to be 25 feet. What books are those? And remember, don't trust everything you read |
|
|
|
Post by Tyrannax on Dec 20, 2008 21:34:21 GMT
All my sources (books) which are fairly new, say it grew around 24 feet in length. Your saying there was never a specimen over 21 feet long? Tisk tisk. Nope. Utahraptor was about the size of the animals in Jurassic park. Megaraptor (which is now maybe a spinosaur) was said to be 25 feet. What books are those? And remember, don't trust everything you read True, but their tails were much longer and inflexible. The books stated they could grow to 24 feet in length. That's about right. Humans grow up to 6 feet, but some grow bigger. 21 feet isn't written in stone for these guys. We've only found a small handful of specimens. ;D |
|
|
|
Post by [][][]cordylus[][][] on Dec 20, 2008 21:50:49 GMT
Nope. Utahraptor was about the size of the animals in Jurassic park. Megaraptor (which is now maybe a spinosaur) was said to be 25 feet. What books are those? And remember, don't trust everything you read True, but their tails were much longer and inflexible. The books stated they could grow to 24 feet in length. That's about right. Humans grow up to 6 feet, but some grow bigger. 21 feet isn't written in stone for these guys. We've only found a small handful of specimens. ;D What does the stiffness of the raptors' tails have to do with whether utahraptor or this new one is biggest? |
|
We just managed to almost get through a whole week without that coming up. *sigh*
Tisk tisk.![[][][]cordylus[][][] Avatar](http://files.sharenator.com/Troll_Face_U_MAD_RE_wrestling_1-s407x405-126802.jpg)
