|
|
Post by triceratops on Sept 17, 2009 5:54:57 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by Griffin on Sept 17, 2009 16:06:50 GMT
Despite the fact that I don't think rex and chasmo coexisted, its still a really nice job on your part. Good work.
|
|
|
|
Post by triceratops on Sept 18, 2009 1:05:24 GMT
Despite the fact that I don't think rex and chasmo coexisted, its still a really nice job on your part. Good work. You're right!Next time I will pay attention to this situation.thank you! |
|
|
|
Post by Ajax on Sept 18, 2009 2:14:52 GMT
I think at some stage we may find Chasmo lived a couple of million years past its suspected time life when we dig up more evidence. When its such a close time difference so many millions of years ago, no one can be sure, that's the fun part about prehistoric times, new findings, discoveries & evidence are discovered everyday.
|
|
|
|
Post by Griffin on Sept 18, 2009 2:35:02 GMT
This it true I was just pointing out that as it stands, Chasmosaurus lived during the Campanian at the latest 74mya and would have more likely been fending off Albertosaurus and Daspletosaurus, both predecesors of Rex who lived at the earliest 67mya. They may in the future find a Maastrichtian chasmo who knows.
|
|
|
|
Post by Ajax on Sept 18, 2009 3:59:21 GMT
This it true I was just pointing out that as it stands, Chasmosaurus lived during the Campanian at the latest 74mya and would have more likely been fending off Albertosaurus and Daspletosaurus, both predecesors of Rex who lived at the earliest 67mya. They may in the future find a Maastrichtian chasmo who knows. I have the Chasmo at 76-70mya, but i never know the best source for this kind of info. Anyone know of a accurate site with a dinosaur A-Z for quick reference of these kinds of things, It will come in handy for when i start serious diorama making. |
|
|
|
Post by Griffin on Sept 18, 2009 5:05:33 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by Ajax on Sept 18, 2009 5:31:18 GMT
See this is the stuff that confuses me, this site has a link to Wikipedia for more information and looking at the Chasmosaurus as an example Wikipedia has time frame from 70-76mya where as the site you just gave me has 74-76. Thats a big difference of 4 million years.  Who do i believe? |
|
|
|
Post by Megaraptor on Sept 18, 2009 8:34:59 GMT
I use wiki and add/ take a couple of million years where they are needed(e.g if, say, a new tyrannosaur was discovered in a 1-million year space I would add say 3 million years).
|
|
|
|
Post by sid on Sept 18, 2009 8:44:51 GMT
Awesome diorama... The Chasmo has a really fierce expression  Regarding the temporal gap in which a dinosaur lived, well... Remember that, if a certain species is not found anymore in a certain stratum, it doesn't mean the species got surely extinct... Maybe he migrated who knows where, or maybe he survived for some million of years after his supposed "passing away" but we've yet to find the fossils to prove it  |
|
|
|
Post by Horridus on Sept 18, 2009 18:01:21 GMT
or maybe he survived for some million of years after his supposed "passing away" but we've yet to find the fossils to prove it Maybe that's why it's alright to have a nodosaur fending off Tyrannosaurus. (Now someone will humiliate me by naming a late-surviving nodosaur that did indeed co-exist with T. rex...go on then...) |
|
|
|
Post by sid on Sept 18, 2009 20:27:08 GMT
or maybe he survived for some million of years after his supposed "passing away" but we've yet to find the fossils to prove it Maybe that's why it's alright to have a nodosaur fending off Tyrannosaurus. (Now someone will humiliate me by naming a late-surviving nodosaur that did indeed co-exist with T. rex...go on then...) Edmontonia Longiceps (Campanian - Maastrichtian) ;D ;D ;D |
|
|
|
Post by Horridus on Sept 20, 2009 18:02:54 GMT
Edmontonia Longiceps (Campanian - Maastrichtian) ;D ;D ;D I thought Edmontonia was ever so slightly older than T. rex - ie. it was a contemporary of Daspletosaurus? Can't find a good source on it though. The NHM agrees with me, Wikipedia agrees with you... Certainly this guy seems to agree with me: prehistoricsillustrated.com/pg_bobm_02.html |
|
|
|
Post by sid on Sept 21, 2009 17:05:35 GMT
Edmontonia Longiceps (Campanian - Maastrichtian) ;D ;D ;D I thought Edmontonia was ever so slightly older than T. rex - ie. it was a contemporary of Daspletosaurus? Can't find a good source on it though. The NHM agrees with me, Wikipedia agrees with you... Certainly this guy seems to agree with me: prehistoricsillustrated.com/pg_bobm_02.htmlCool sculpture  And yeah... The age in which Ed ( ;D) lived varies from site to site; oh well, i don't see nothing wrong to think that some of these living tanks could have survived some thousands of thousands of years more just to meet T.Rex ;D |
|
|
|
Post by Megaraptor on Sept 21, 2009 21:36:12 GMT
Also, there is Panoplosaurus from Campanian-Maastrichian Montana and Alberta-where
t-rex is most famous.
|
|
|
|
Post by Horridus on Sept 22, 2009 18:19:00 GMT
Also, there is Panoplosaurus from Campanian-Maastrichian Montana and Alberta-where t-rex is most famous. Again, Panoplosaurus seems to be a bit earlier. Or is it? Aaarrghh! |
|
|
|
Post by bucketfoot on Oct 29, 2009 23:39:05 GMT
OUTSTANDING!! As for me, having completed the gigantic Darga Trike/TRex dio recently, I have another in mind on a smaller scale - IF I can get my hands on a McVey TRex that is ...
...I am working on it so stay tuned....
|
|
