|
|
Post by Grey on Jun 30, 2013 22:48:14 GMT 5
|
|
|
|
Post by theropod on Jun 30, 2013 23:04:34 GMT 5
Oh, that one. When did I post it?
I cannot find any consistent argument for Spinosaurus' torso being slimmer, not even the holotype. He might have meant bulk, where it can be concluded from relatives.
btw his comparison of the vertebrae uses the neural arch to gauge the depth. That's just as biased as using the spinous process, the latter is obviously hypertrophied in Spinosaurus and vice versa. Best would be to use the centrum, which is similar in depth. We unfortunately don't know about the width.
And, another thing: the 20% bigger for MNSN V4047 are a guess, nothing factual. Cross-scaling between the two is difficult. The holotype of Spinosaurus appears to be about Sue-sized, tough likely longer.
@creature398: "Die zahnärztliche Holotypus von Spinosaurus ist kürzer als die der Tyrannosaurus" I just had to post this!
|
|
|
|
Post by creature386 on Jun 30, 2013 23:30:57 GMT 5
Is this quote from Stromer?
|
|
|
|
Post by theropod on Jul 1, 2013 1:08:16 GMT 5
No, google translator used on Cau's blog. You think Stromer would write something like that? lol
English for that would be "The dentist holotype of Spinosaurus is shorter than that of the Tyrannosaurus"
|
|
|
|
Post by creature386 on Jul 1, 2013 14:14:53 GMT 5
I thought the quote was from Stromer, because it was in German. Anyway, I now see that this was just because of google translator. Anyway, Cau believed MSMN to be 14,4 m long, assuming it was 20% larger than the holotype, the holotype would be 12 m long in Cau's opinion. He believes Sue to be 12,5 m long, so this is a bit unsurprising.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 1, 2013 14:53:26 GMT 5
Cau believed MSMN to be 14,4 m long Cau's Spinosaurus is actually ~15 meters long when measured in axial length. ________________ A hint of Scott Hartman's Spinosaurus mass estimate has been revealed. It dwarfs FMNH PR2081. I posted the statement in the giant theropods overview thread. |
|
|
|
Post by creature386 on Jul 1, 2013 15:22:47 GMT 5
Cau believed MSMN to be 14,4 m long Cau's Spinosaurus is actually ~15 meters long when measured in axial length. So the holotype would be 12,5 m long, what is as long as what he claims Tyrannosaurus to be. |
|
gigadino96
Junior Member
Vi ravviso, o luoghi ameni
Posts: 226 
|
Post by gigadino96 on Jul 1, 2013 17:12:02 GMT 5
Spinosaurus win at 60-65 %. SMG din-1 is about 8 tons, while MSNM V4047 is likely more than 10 tons.
|
|
|
|
Post by theropod on Jul 29, 2013 2:46:57 GMT 5
I know someone on deviantart who might join soon. We discussed a bit about theropod size (also a lot about Carcharodontosaurus, and he/she seems very educated on these matters). That person stated to have performed a GDI analysis of Hartman's Spinosaurus, reconstructing chest width and the dorsal structure based on Acrocanthosaurus (Bates et al., 2009) and checked it with suchomimus, yielding a reasonable result. He/she got more than 15t for Spinosaurus. see the comments here: theropod1.deviantart.com/art/Finally-the-largest-of-them-all-372748026 |
|
|
|
Post by Runic on Jul 29, 2013 3:32:36 GMT 5
Isn't Charchar now even smaller than T.Rex or was that Giganotosaurus?
|
|
|
|
Post by theropod on Jul 29, 2013 3:39:43 GMT 5
What you likely mean was about Giganotosaurus, but it being smaller is premature, and would base on several doubtful or erraneous assumptions.
|
|
|
|
Post by Runic on Jul 29, 2013 3:49:21 GMT 5
What you likely mean was about Giganotosaurus, but it being smaller is premature, and would base on several doubtful or erraneous assumptions. Lol this is one of the reasons why I don't see how you all can constantly debate the size of these animals (no offence intended) truth be told I'm fairly knowledgeable on the skeletals etc but I just never found a reason to use that smarts as it seems one persons estimates (For example like Cau's) is always in conflict with another one's (Example Hartmans). How do you guys do that 24/7 lol |
|
|
|
Post by theropod on Jul 29, 2013 3:53:43 GMT 5
I guess if someone has a strong interest in something (like I'm obsessed with giant theropods and their size)...
We have some overlapping fields of interest (functional morphology, dinosaurs in general) but focus on different animal groups and size classes, and you don't care that much about size. everyone is fascinated by different stuff. You couldn't get absorbed into a debate about the size of T. rex and Carcharodontosaurus, just like I couldn't get absorbed into one about a fight between Canis lupus and Crocuta crocuta.
|
|
|
|
Post by Runic on Jul 29, 2013 3:59:31 GMT 5
I guess if someone has a strong interest in something (like I'm obsessed with giant theropods and their size)... We have some overlapping fields of interest (functional morphology, dinosaurs in general) but focus on different animal groups and size classes, and you don't care that much about size. everyone is fascinated by different stuff. You couldn't get absorbed into a debate about the size of T. rex and Carcharodontosaurus, just like I couldn't get absorbed into one about a fight between Canis lupus and Crocuta crocuta. I guess I can understand that logic. I seem to be the only one here interested in smaller dinosaurs and birds/droms :/. I guess I'm not interested in 40ft lizards relying on really nothing but size to beat eachother. But to each his own. |
|
|
|
Post by theropod on Jul 29, 2013 5:21:53 GMT 5
I guess if someone has a strong interest in something (like I'm obsessed with giant theropods and their size)... We have some overlapping fields of interest (functional morphology, dinosaurs in general) but focus on different animal groups and size classes, and you don't care that much about size. everyone is fascinated by different stuff. You couldn't get absorbed into a debate about the size of T. rex and Carcharodontosaurus, just like I couldn't get absorbed into one about a fight between Canis lupus and Crocuta crocuta. I guess I can understand that logic. I seem to be the only one here interested in smaller dinosaurs and birds/droms :/. I guess I'm not interested in 40ft lizards relying on really nothing but size to beat eachother. But to each his own. That's not true (surprise, surprise!  ), but good one BI! As you undoubtedly know these animals had just as sophisticated predatory morphology and anatomy as the animls your primary interests lie in. I'm also interested in birds and dromeosaurs, but you are right, I should do a bit more research and contributions on them (this might come when I find the time to read the chapters in The Dinosauria dealing with them). My strong obsession with large animals (shared by many fellow members) is because of the very special ecological and functional aspect you see in apex predators or megaherbivores, and yes, also because it it is spectacular. Also the larger theropods especially are much more different from extant ones regarding their physique and ecology than the smaller ones, so they are more "exotic". And they are special in that they and giant sauropods are kind of another level added to an ecosystem of animals otherwise comparable to extant ones regarding their size and ecology. That being said I highly doubt a fight between them would be some sort of static face-bite-trying-to-wrestle-down-opponent thingy. Most are absolutely not built for this kind of fight. Some Allosaurs are likely even somewhat similar to dromaeosaurs, built to claw onto an opponent and start defleshing it. And this matchup is arguably the most spectacular animal clash of any known terrestrial fauna. |
|
), but good one BI! As you undoubtedly know these animals had just as sophisticated predatory morphology and anatomy as the animls your primary interests lie in.