|
Post by Super Communist on Nov 16, 2011 21:17:34 GMT -5
Or pure instinct, either way I don't see how a moose will be able to make use of its slightly higher mental capabilities.
One would expect an animal to run at full speed when its life is threatened.
Isn't a moose's charging range generally a few meters away from its target?
|
|
|
Post by Anomonyous on Dec 22, 2011 10:00:30 GMT -5
Moose do, however, possess some weapons advantages over Ceratosaurus. 1. Intelligence: Given how the moose is a mammal and that it lives roughly 150 million years after Ceratosaurus, it is bound to more intelligent. 2. Speed: Moose can run up to 35 mph. I am unsure of how fast Ceratosaurus could run, but since it was a bipedal animal and was neither a Dromeosaur nor a Struthioformes, it could probably not run as fast. 3 Weapons: Ceratosaurus was actually one of the more poorly armed Theropds. It mainly ate fish like a Spinosaurid, so not only would its teeth would not be as efficient for killing as another Theropod's teeth might be, but it also lacked long forearms or exceptionally sharp claws in contrast to Spinosaurids. Its horn was used for display rather than for use as a weapon. The moose, however, does have some good weapons. Its hooves are rather powerful and kill a human with one hit. Its 5 foot antlers may not serve as the best goring weapons, but they are excellent for defense and could even hook a charging opponent, allowing it manipulate it and through it to wherever the moose pleases. The antlers may be sharp enough to leave deep wounds and cuts, however. Size: Well...Ceratosaurus is obviously bigger. Ceratosaurus was about 7 meters long and weighed 800 kg on average. A moose is about 2 meters tall and weighs 600 kg on average. I've never heard of moose being particularly intelligent, and assuming it is more intelligent simply because it is a mammal seems somewhat half-way thought. Yes, the more intelligent animals usually are mammals, but this does not mean ALL mammals are more intelligent, and there's not much study being done on the intelligence of other mammals. Of course there are exceptions (such as the octopus, which is probably about as smart as a dog) but generally the intelligence of mammals is more well known. As for speed, dromaeosaurs are not especially fast, according to Thomas Holtz. Their JP image and their size probably gave them that reputation.
|
|
Reticulatus
Ichthyoid
http://fantasyfaceoff.proboards.com
Posts: 709
|
Post by Reticulatus on Dec 22, 2011 12:35:46 GMT -5
an agitated bull moose could win, they are very agressive and have great senses. If he has his antlers down there is no hope for a head on attack, and cervids are very hard to sneak up on.
|
|
|
Post by Tyrannosaurus on Feb 24, 2012 0:15:03 GMT -5
Ceratosaurus is so underrated.
|
|
Venomous Dragon
Archeon
The Varanid
The Ora, King of The Lizards.
Posts: 2,037
|
Post by Venomous Dragon on Feb 24, 2012 0:16:24 GMT -5
Dinos are so overrated
|
|
|
Post by Tyrannosaurus on Feb 24, 2012 0:23:16 GMT -5
Your statement is to generalized and really has no purpose other than to annoy me, mine is backed up by a long history back on Carnivora.
|
|
Venomous Dragon
Archeon
The Varanid
The Ora, King of The Lizards.
Posts: 2,037
|
Post by Venomous Dragon on Feb 24, 2012 0:38:20 GMT -5
Its purpose? it shows everyone my opinion of dinosaurs and were I stand on the topic and how was I to know you had back for the statement, given my personal history with you.
Deinonychus can tail whip harder than a komodo. Monitors have thin skin. Single celled organisms dont have metabolic rates.
Im sorry, im just feeling grumpy. I Shouldnt have been so rude.
|
|
|
Post by Tyrannosaurus on Feb 24, 2012 1:03:02 GMT -5
I never said Deinonychus could tail whip harder than a Komodo, I said monitors have thin skin in the context of the Megalania vs Utahraptor thread, and I edited that metabolism comment out of the post within minutes. I don't know or care about single-celled organisms anyway.
None of that really is as bad as your general bias against anything extinct especially Dinosaurs.
|
|
Venomous Dragon
Archeon
The Varanid
The Ora, King of The Lizards.
Posts: 2,037
|
Post by Venomous Dragon on Feb 24, 2012 1:06:42 GMT -5
I never said Deinonychus could tail whip harder than a Komodo, I said monitors have thin skin in the context of the Megalania vs Utahraptor thread, and I edited that metabolism out of the post within minutes. I don't know or care about single-celled organisms anyway. You did on carnivora. Not the point. Doesnt matter anyway, like I said im just kinda grumpy and this face really annoys me.
|
|
|
Post by Tyrannosaurus on Feb 24, 2012 1:06:51 GMT -5
Heck, the back for my statement is evident in the match. When has a moose ever faced any carnivore bigger than itself? If a grizzly can do it, a freaking Ceratosaurus can do it that I assure you.
|
|
Venomous Dragon
Archeon
The Varanid
The Ora, King of The Lizards.
Posts: 2,037
|
Post by Venomous Dragon on Feb 24, 2012 1:15:59 GMT -5
Ive never actually neen an acount of a grizzly taking an adult moose, let alone a bull.
|
|
|
Post by Tyrannosaurus on Feb 24, 2012 1:29:07 GMT -5
Well here's an adult cow. Found multiple videos of calves.
|
|
|
Post by Tyrannosaurus on Feb 26, 2012 18:06:26 GMT -5
Most moose, you must realize, are cows, 700-900 lbs. A bull moose is at parity with a small Ceratosaurus, but even that doesn't make it even. Ceratosaurus has huge jaws with long, sharp teeth. A bull moose has what? Dull antlers mainly for display(but only in mating season).
|
|
|
Post by DinosaurMichael on Feb 26, 2012 18:15:09 GMT -5
I give it to Ceratosaurus, but a Bull Moose is no joke. I won't underestimate it.
|
|
|
Post by jumbo1 on Jul 26, 2012 7:14:28 GMT -5
The Moose is more stable and those wide antlers would give ceratosaurus many puncture wounds. Moose actually attack more people than wolves or grizzlies. They're not to be messed with.
|
|