Shoot a firework rocket ~ Winners!Make a forum zoo! |
| Welcome to The Round Table. We hope you enjoy your visit. You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free. Join our community! If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features: |
| What annoys you about paleontology?; Rant on about moronic theories, complaints, or just animals that annoy you. | |
|---|---|
| Topic Started: Sep 28 2013, 05:04 PM (256,455 Views) | |
| Sheather | Nov 6 2013, 05:16 PM Post #676 |
![]()
Thank you for the set, Azrael!
![]()
|
It's still my favorite series today, I think. |
![]() |
|
| Jules | Nov 6 2013, 05:17 PM Post #677 |
![]()
Mihi est imperare orbi universo
![]()
|
You can't group all large Theropods together Tyrannosaurids belonged to Coelurosaurs and as such are more related to Ornithomimosaurs, Compsognathids and stuff than to other large Theropods such as Allosaurids. Abelisaurids are late-surviving Ceratosaurs. |
![]() |
|
| hananas59 | Nov 6 2013, 05:18 PM Post #678 |
![]()
Evolving creatures from earth.
![]()
|
Well I like planet dinosaur as series. But I liked that movie about the tarbosaurus too even if some things weren't accurate |
![]() |
|
|
|
Nov 6 2013, 05:25 PM Post #679 |
![]()
|
I've been convinced that tyrannosaurs probably had feathers, but I doubt other large theropods had many feathers. |
![]() |
|
| Jules | Nov 6 2013, 05:27 PM Post #680 |
![]()
Mihi est imperare orbi universo
![]()
|
Yeah, I'm doubtful on that too We don't know about Sciurimimus for the moment. However, since this recent discovery about dinosaur scales being modified feathers, I rather think the ancestors of Dinosaurs were feathered and these feathers then turned to quills and Dinosaurian scales But for the moment, it's up to the artist. And I personally prefer great fluffyballs.
|
![]() |
|
|
|
Nov 6 2013, 05:29 PM Post #681 |
![]()
|
Just for the lulz!
|
![]() |
|
| Furka | Nov 6 2013, 06:10 PM Post #682 |
![]() ![]()
|
i should have used that as a reference for my old style drawing of Spino ! ![]() poor guy, such an amazing animal whose image is being ruined by JP fanboys ... |
![]() |
|
|
|
Nov 6 2013, 08:50 PM Post #683 |
![]() ![]()
|
If you take the text in that picture out of context, It's actually passable, but the illustration is so intriguingly outdated it's hilarious. Ah yes, Spinosaurus, A creature butchered by some of the most annoying people on Earth. Now, I will say this: I enjoyed the antics of the JPIII Spino, because of how ludicrously overboard Jack went on making Spino look like some sort of ultimate badass of prehistoric destruction, but the real Spino is a lot more interesting. |
![]() |
|
| DinoBear | Nov 8 2013, 10:02 PM Post #684 |
![]()
|
The 4 ton estimate for Edmontosaurus annoys me. How can a hadrosaur the same length as T. rex weigh nearly 3 tons less, yet it's bulkier and wider than the theropod?
Edited by DinoBear, Nov 8 2013, 10:03 PM.
|
![]() |
|
| CyborgIguana | Nov 9 2013, 01:05 AM Post #685 |
![]() ![]()
|
The simple answer is theropod bias, my friend.
|
![]() |
|
| Similis | Nov 9 2013, 02:12 AM Post #686 |
![]() ![]()
|
First of all, they have a different body build, second, T.rex's skull alone weighs a lot. Not all hadrosaurs are estimated to be lightweights aswell, for example for Saurolophus angustirostris from Asia I've seen estimates going as high as 7 tons. Also... T.rex was much more bulky than Edmontosaurus. Among dinosaurs it was what we would consider a bodybuilder. Strong bones and lots of muscles won't give you less weight. Also, making T.rex purposely havier than Edmontosaurus isn't a bias towards the theropods. Because it makes the good old rexy less and less capable of keeping up the pace with its prey. |
![]() |
|
| DinoBear | Nov 9 2013, 10:14 AM Post #687 |
![]()
|
While T. rex was indeed a very bulky theropod, hadrosaurs were no slouches, either: ![]() Granted, the T. rex is an "average" sized individual, and the Edmontosaurus is on the large end for its kind, but you get the idea. |
![]() |
|
| Similis | Nov 9 2013, 10:41 AM Post #688 |
![]() ![]()
|
And this proves... what exactly? 4 ton estimates are given to the animals with maximum size estimate 12 m, while the top weight estimates for T.rex were done for animals like Sue. From what I recall top weight estimates for the 13 or so meters long Edmontosaurus were balancing around 5-6 tons. And again - rex's skull alone weighs much more than Edmontosaurus' one, add the muscle mass behind those jaws into the account, plus powerful neck to support it. When you look at Edmontosaurus and its skeleton, you can see that it, in fact, was more lightly built.
Edited by Similis, Nov 9 2013, 10:43 AM.
|
![]() |
|
| DinoBear | Nov 9 2013, 11:54 AM Post #689 |
![]()
|
Most of the ones I find for Edmontosaurus of that size are just 4 tons, and I'm fine with 6 tons for an animal of that size (though I'd prefer something closer to 7 tons). |
![]() |
|
| CyborgIguana | Nov 9 2013, 04:21 PM Post #690 |
![]() ![]()
|
The fact that I can't Google pterosaurs without coming across David Peters skeletals!
Edited by CyborgIguana, Nov 9 2013, 04:21 PM.
|
![]() |
|
| 4 users reading this topic (4 Guests and 0 Anonymous) | |
| Go to Next Page | |
| « Previous Topic · Extinct Animals & Evolution · Next Topic » |

FAQ
Search
Members
Rules
Staff PM Box
Downloads
Pointies
Groups







Tyrannosaurids belonged to Coelurosaurs and as such are more related to Ornithomimosaurs, Compsognathids and stuff than to other large Theropods such as Allosaurids. 








