Post by ted on Mar 26, 2011 10:23:48 GMT
;D I never said there is no post cranial anatomy in pliosaurs but there is very little with regard to Liopleurodon. Size is generally determined by skull length. Dino Frey said: "Well there is a bite mark with a diameter of 60 mm in the horizontal branch of a 350 mm pteroid. The tooth penetrated from dorsally meaning that the crown alone must have had a length of about 400 mm. Then comes a root which is normally about two thirds the length of a pliosaur tooth and then you just must find the bones to accommodate the ting and do a bit of calculation. So much for the possible five metres." So is this a pterosaur? The pteroid is a rod-like bone found only in pterosaurs, the flying reptile of the Mesozoic. The so called bite mark has a diameter of only 2.3622 inches
Dino also says " I will put up a post soon with detailed data about what we know and for the moment we know only a little because about 75% of the 14 tons are still unprepared, and that what is out of the matrix is in Linares and not here. So I cannot even provide the lateset immages of the thing. I would like to be cautious with any taxonomy for the moment. Each block yields more huge bones." This was 2 1/2 years ago and there is nothing new. There are no images, and he hadn't even seen most of the pieces.
Notice that the most complete pliosaur ever which has a skull estimated at 3 meters is not much more then 8 meters long.
www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1714208/posts
Darren Naish pretty well sums things up when he said" As we all know, pliosaurs had super-powers and were capable of biting chunks out of granite and so on.
Dino Frey means the pterygoid, this bone is also mentionned here, page 4 to 7:
www.dfg.de/download/pdf/dfg_magazin/wissenschaft_oeffentlichkeit/forschung_magazin/german_research_3_05_en_.pdf
"One bite to the head hit the upper side of the left pterygoid and broke through deep into the bones. To have left a such wound, the tooth must have penetrated the entire depth of the skull To do this the crown of the tooth must have been at least 40 centimetres long".
As you see the 6 cm wide corresponds just to the tip of the tooth, as the it must have penetrated the entire skull to reach the pterygoid !
Images about the Monster of Aramberri ?
2.bp.blogspot.com/_skl7S3fkL2M/Simipu70hKI/AAAAAAAAFSg/iYytpCLd_i8/s1600-h/post_dinos+205.jpg
Search on the Mexican news, the fossil is display there.
The mail I received from Dr Stinnesbeck dates back 3 weeks ago :
"By now, our excavations at Aramberri are completed and about 60 to 70% of the fossil were recovered. "
Read more: dinotoyforum.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=dinos&action=post&thread=3993"e=102480&page=3#ixzz1HhPpi7s0
We should have some news soon...
As for the Svalbard specimens, we have also to await.
Note that Jorn Hurum seems to be reputed to somewhat exagerrate.
3 m skull for 8 m body ? It would mean that the skull would be at least halg of the entire lenght. Not credible.
Other sources indicate 10 m body.
And finally Predator X at 15 m would also have a 3 m skull.
This is not coherent.
Also kronosaurs have the biggest skull in proportion to their lenght but these proportions you cite for Svalard are proply unreasonnable !
Also Darren Naish is right about the godzillaisation.
But not that pliosaurs are described by Richard Forrest :
"Pliosaurs likely had the most powerful bite force of any predator, living or extinct. It can't think of any animal that would even come close," Forrest said.
"Inside their enormous skulls they had huge areas of muscle available for biting force. One of these animals would have been big and strong enough to pick up a small car and bite it in half."