|
|
Post by Runic on May 30, 2013 20:58:16 GMT 5
theropod I know I was making a point @frag Either or the sheer numbers alone would make a lone predator think twice. Especially if we employed aggressive bluffing.
|
|
|
|
Post by Grey on May 30, 2013 21:24:08 GMT 5
Beside mammalian pack hunters, I feel dromaeosaurids and the largest troodontids would have been very hazardous too. Yeah, that's a classic reminiscence from Jurassic Park but beyond the fiction, this is most likely true.
What about a pack of Allosaurus ? Large, deadly, quite fast, very big compared to a human but enoughly small to perhaps prey on it.
|
|
|
|
Post by Runic on May 30, 2013 21:39:07 GMT 5
I agree a pack of say deinonychus pose a serious threat to a group of humans but I don't know about troodontids. Their weaponry seems strictly limited to small fleet footed prey that couldn't fight back. I'm sure the average human be it sapien or Neanderthal could fight off most predation attempts from a troodontid. Allosaurus however is perfect. What I really want to know about is if the rausuchian crocodiles (I might have spelt that wrong) like postosuchus and kaproschus would have been dangerous? After all their armor and durability surely would save them from a few spear thrusts etc.
|
|
|
|
Post by theropod on May 30, 2013 21:46:09 GMT 5
What kind of Allosaurus? There are at least 2-3 species, probably more, and it is one of the most diverse dinosaurs in terms of size, without even equating it with Allosauridae which you could do at the moment.
The smallest adult Allosaurus fragilis are around 7m and 1t+, the largest are 10m(12m if including "Epanterias")+ and consequently 3-5t+. I have a hard time believing a pack of animals that large would go after humans. If allosaurids hunted in packs, then probably to go after big game, like sauropods or adult stegosaurs. Small animals like humans wouldn't have sufficient nutritional value to sustain groups of such large predators, but they would be a good snack for lone individuals (AARG...now I cannot get the imagination of a human being torn to pieces out of my head!!!!).
However as I wrote lone, small to average specimens would pose a great threat, they would be agile but still too large to fight effectively, have deadly but versatile weaponery (due to the light skull and flexible neck useful for catching smaller animals, eg. Dryosaurus, as well as effectively hunting big prey).
For a large specimen, a human wouldn't be much more interesting than for T. rex.
|
|
|
|
Post by theropod on May 30, 2013 21:51:20 GMT 5
I agree a pack of say deinonychus pose a serious threat to a group of humans but I don't know about troodontids. Their weaponry seems strictly limited to small fleet footed prey that couldn't fight back. I'm sure the average human be it sapien or Neanderthal could fight off most predation attempts from a troodontid. Allosaurus however is perfect. What I really want to know about is if the rausuchian crocodiles (I might have spelt that wrong) like postosuchus and kaproschus would have been dangerous? After all their armor and durability surely would save them from a few spear thrusts etc. is not a "rauisuchian", even tough exologically and morphologically similar. Yes, I could imagine fleet-footed terrestrial crocodilians or related animals to be really dangerous. Modern crocs kill a real lot of people compared to most other large animals. Fighting them would be difficult for they were probably really durable, and they could easily kill a human with a single bite. "rauisuchia" btw is paraphyletic, more correctly you should say "stem suchians", but phylogenies within this group are contradictory and very confusing. |
|
|
|
Post by Grey on May 30, 2013 21:55:50 GMT 5
Of course, I was thinking of the smallest species of allosaurs, or individuals the size of Big Al.
Another thing : there's not only the predation context, we can also suggest a territorial agressive behavior.
In the Lost World movie, one thing that I particularly appreciate is that the tyrannosaurs DO NOT kill and eat humans for nutritive purposes. The first time it is for defend their young, the second time is because of territoriality (extended because of the trail of the young's blood) and the last time, in San Diego, because the animal is drugged and presumably panicked and the last time once again protecting the baby (on the ship).
|
|
|
|
Post by theropod on May 30, 2013 21:58:47 GMT 5
Yes, that's one of the things I think they did really well In JP. T. rex would hardly have any interest in hunting humans for nutrition, and it wouldn't be dumb enough to attack a vehicle. However territoriality is very plausible.
Based on that, many herbivorous species could potentially pose a threat (Hippopotamus gorgops, Coelodonta, Ankylosaurus, Stegosaurus, Triceratops...)
|
|
|
|
Post by Grey on May 30, 2013 22:46:26 GMT 5
Large mosasaurs would be too possibly the most dangerous marine creatures for a diver or a swimmer.
Xiphactinus and Dunkleosteus would be fairly dangerous too, at a superior level than the great white for Dunkleosteus in my opinion, Xiphactinus being comparable.
|
|
|
|
Post by theropod on May 30, 2013 22:54:31 GMT 5
I suppose these would have been more agressive towards us than extant great whites, not known for attacking humans often.
|
|
|
|
Post by creature386 on May 30, 2013 22:59:07 GMT 5
Utahraptor, hands down. Faster than us,and big enough that we have no chance of defending ourselves. Coupled with the fact that we are a perfectly sized prey item. Danger factor is 10/10!!! I think Utahraptor really wouldn't be that much of a damger to us. Remember human are highly social creatures and no lone predator is gonna mess with a group of humans armed with spears. I see the relationship of a utahraptor to humans as the same as a leopard to baboons But a lone human at night or so would still be in a great danger, there are always some humans who have to leave the others. |
|
|
|
Post by Runic on May 30, 2013 23:13:31 GMT 5
I think Utahraptor really wouldn't be that much of a damger to us. Remember human are highly social creatures and no lone predator is gonna mess with a group of humans armed with spears. I see the relationship of a utahraptor to humans as the same as a leopard to baboons But a lone human at night or so would still be in a great danger, there are always some humans who have to leave the others. If utahraptor was anything like todays birds from the senses department. At night they would be blind as a bat just like humans. |
|
|
|
Post by Grey on May 30, 2013 23:15:19 GMT 5
Aren't dromaeosaurids supposed to have been nocturnial hunters ?
|
|
|
|
Post by Runic on May 30, 2013 23:35:03 GMT 5
Aren't dromaeosaurids supposed to have been nocturnial hunters ? No not from any of the material I've read on them. Being the closest relative to modern birds one can assume they relied heavily on sight while most other mammalian carnivores and possibly giant theropods relied on smell or hearing. |
|
|
|
Post by theropod on May 31, 2013 1:17:12 GMT 5
There are some exceptions (owls), but there is no basis for the assumption dromaeosaurs would have been nocturnal; that was one of the things JFC made up (together with the infectious T. rex-bite, the 14m Brygmophyseter, those pronated Allosaur-manus...).
Probably, like the majority of extant birds, they were active during the day.
I think a pack of Utahraptors would ahve been very dangerous to humans; they were exactly the right size that would make fighting several of them off very difficult, but still have made human prey attractive. a lone utahraptor wouldn't have an easy time with armed humans.
What about Gorgonopsians or other large, predatory stem-therapsids?
In water, I would suspect eurypterids maybe.
|
|
|
|
Post by Grey on May 31, 2013 1:29:46 GMT 5
My mistake, I was hinking about the troodontids.
Regarding those, I was thinking about the giant alaskan version rather than the southern individuals.
|
|
