Page 2 of 2

Re: True Color Dinosaur Revealed (Nat Geo)

Posted: Wed Feb 10, 2010 5:22 pm
by muy_thaiguy
Juan_Bottom wrote:
muy_thaiguy wrote:Actually, on the T-rex thing, a recent program I watched talked about how the T-rex would have actually been fairly smart (amongst dinos anyway) amd had eye's that had a fairly large field of vision allowing them to hunt prey, as well as coordinate with family members as it is believed they may have hunted in family units. Though I did not here that T-rex's had feathers at a young age, but did know that nearly all of the raptors did

It's all rubbish I say. The kind folks who discovered T-Rex are the ones who decided that she was the Tyrant Lizard King. It would make sense given that you would expect that paleontologists would have been the experts on the subject of Dinosaurs. But the science didn't really exist in their day. T-Rex was made out to be this huge hulking and slow monster that dragged it's tail on the ground. Times have changed as we learned more.
The argument over apex predator or scavenger has been going a while, and will continue on to the future.
It's not a wide field of vision that T-Rex is known for, it's known for it's amazing and uncommon binocular vision. T-Rex had the ability to judge how far away something was. They also had just amazing smell.
But the argument for scavenger I think is stronger than the argument for predator. T-Rex had a vulture's brain for crying out loud. Add a body structure that we see over time (6 million years) evolving to walk long distances instead of running... it's really fascinating stuff though. The whole debate is.

About juveniles, yeah that's awesome too. They looked different enough from adults that for a very long time they were classified as a separate species from T-Rex.

And about Dino's becoming birds.
I remember reading somewhere about tissue that was recovered from a T-Rex bone. Included was some red blood cells which were very similar to Ostrich's red blood cells. T-Rex specifically has been called genetically a cross between a chicken and a newt.
It's all just so hardcore I love this.

Walk? I have read and seen on several programs that they could get upto 30mph or so. Granted, I have seen programs where they feature T-rex as a slow moving scavenger. My question is, why the hell does a scavenger need to be so big? Look at the skull, you don't need a great sense of smell to locate a rotting corpse, but you do if you are looking for a creature that is living and on the move. Same goes for the vision. Sure some scavengers have good vision, but look at hawks, falcons, and eagles. They hunt with extrodinary vision. And considering that these birds are the descendents of the dinos, especially the meat eating ones, I would really have to pull for T-rex being a predator.

And who needs arms when you have a head that big, teeth that long, and wide enough to tear a man sized whole out of a Brontosaurus/Apatasaurus.

Re: True Color Dinosaur Revealed (Nat Geo)

Posted: Wed Feb 10, 2010 6:01 pm
by Neoteny
Everything was bigger back then. Global warming.

Re: True Color Dinosaur Revealed (Nat Geo)

Posted: Wed Feb 10, 2010 6:35 pm
by Juan_Bottom
muy_thaiguy wrote:Walk? I have read and seen on several programs that they could get up to 30mph or so.

T-Rex topped out at (probably) 45 miles, but only for very short periods of time. They just didn't have the muscles for it. Furthermore if they tripped and go hurt, they were F-ed. A broken leg and they would almost surely die. A beast that big without arms to break it's fall cannot run safely.

muy_thaiguy wrote:My question is, why the hell does a scavenger need to be so big?

That is a horrible question given that we are talking about dinosaurs.

muy_thaiguy wrote:Look at the skull, you don't need a great sense of smell to locate a rotting corpse, but you do if you are looking for a creature that is living and on the move. Same goes for the vision.

You need both because you will travel great distances looking for carrion. Vultures (I would dare to say all carrion eaters except bacteria) have not only great sight, but great smell as well. It's not a secret.

muy_thaiguy wrote:They hunt with extrodinary vision. And considering that these birds are the descendents of the dinos, especially the meat eating ones, I would really have to pull for T-rex being a predator.

Genetically as I already mentioned T-Rex is more closely related to chickens. It also may have had blood similar to Ostriches. If you believe that a T-Rex could have evolved into an Eagle then why is unlikely they may have evolved into Ostriches, Chickens, or Vultures?

muy_thaiguy wrote:
And who needs arms when you have a head that big, teeth that long, and wide enough to tear a man sized whole out of a Brontosaurus/Apatasaurus.

T-Rex likely wouldn't have eaten really large Dinosaurs even as a predator.
No one is really sure what a T-Rex would have used it's flimsy arms for. They did have strongly developed muscles, capable of lifting like 400 pounds if I remember right. But for a beast that big that isn't a lot. They also had very limited mobility too. Your arms move 360 degrees and theirs moved about 45 degrees. One theory put forward is that they were used to grip mates during copulations. Or maybe to grab prey? I can't think of any land predators today that grab prey with their face only. It's dangerous and you don't want to lose an eye. But the T-Rex only had two claws. Anyway
the point is that it's arms weren't vestigial, but they wouldn't have broken the fall if a T-Rex tripped while running. It's possible that Juveniles may have hunted while adults did not.

Re: True Color Dinosaur Revealed (Nat Geo)

Posted: Wed Feb 10, 2010 6:37 pm
by jonesthecurl
MeDeFe wrote:[
[bigimg]http://img707.imageshack.us/img707/8365/uccellopaolo13951475stg.jpg[/bigimg]

Notice the wings and the lack of forelegs? Highly typical of dragons in European art.




That would make it a wyvern I think you'll find, not a dragon. Usually dragons are depicted with more in the leg department.

Re: True Color Dinosaur Revealed (Nat Geo)

Posted: Wed Feb 10, 2010 6:45 pm
by john9blue
MeDeFe wrote:[bigimg]http://img707.imageshack.us/img707/8365/uccellopaolo13951475stg.jpg[/bigimg]


Is that person on the left male or female? I'm guessing female, but... :sick:

Re: True Color Dinosaur Revealed (Nat Geo)

Posted: Wed Feb 10, 2010 7:05 pm
by natty dread
john9blue wrote:Is that person on the left male or female? I'm guessing female, but... :sick:


Looks like a human-ostrich hybrid to me.

Re: True Color Dinosaur Revealed (Nat Geo)

Posted: Wed Feb 10, 2010 7:54 pm
by jonesthecurl
here's the whole picture btw


Image

Re: True Color Dinosaur Revealed (Nat Geo)

Posted: Wed Feb 10, 2010 9:09 pm
by Juan_Bottom
Why would he kill her pet? WTF? Here she is taking (what I imagine was actually an iguana) her pet out for a walk and this F-ing knight charges in from no where and stabs it to death. It's like Monty Pyton's holy grail when they kill the famous historian.
Then this bastard knight goes back and talks about how he totally saved this maiden from a wyvern. TAnd how she totally wanted it but he couldn't get his armor off or some junk. So he gets the picture painted and forgot to take out the part of the story where the monster (iguana) was on a leash.

Re: True Color Dinosaur Revealed (Nat Geo)

Posted: Thu Feb 11, 2010 8:32 am
by MeDeFe
jonesthecurl wrote:That would make it a wyvern I think you'll find, not a dragon. Usually dragons are depicted with more in the leg department.

I think Paolo Uccello knows better what a 15th century dragon looks like than you do.


john9blue wrote:Is that person on the left male or female? I'm guessing female, but... :sick:

You need to read up on your own mythology I think.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saint_George_and_the_Dragon

Re: True Color Dinosaur Revealed (Nat Geo)

Posted: Thu Feb 11, 2010 1:57 pm
by zimmah
2dimes wrote:Every know society has dragon tales.



and every unknown society is allready eaten by them