|
Post by Tyrannosaurus on Jun 30, 2012 20:06:51 GMT -5
Most of the arguments for T. rex being solely a scavenger also apply to wolves; slower than most of the prey(deer/Hadrosaurs) can't use arms strong sense of smell Yet wolves hunt every terrestrial mammalian herbivore species in north america. Thomas R. Holtz was able to debunk Jack Horner's argument in the form of a children's book; www.amazon.com/T-Rex-Scavenger-Jurassic-Institute/dp/0375812970And even Jack Horner once admitted that pure scavenging was a stretch, though I can't for the life of me find that article. T. rex speed estimates vary widely. I don't much trust such studies, I think it's impossible to determine those things exactly just from the skeleton. The point is, T. rex was clearly faster than an elephant. Elephants don't even bend their legs when running, T. rex's legs resemble those of an ostrich.
|
|
|
Post by Tyrannosaurus on Jul 1, 2012 16:58:37 GMT -5
PS- I promise this time to respond to the rest of everyone's points. Sorry for the delay. Then quit ignoring my size comparison.
|
|
|
Post by Anomonyous on Jul 4, 2012 18:47:30 GMT -5
Ok I've re-read the entire thread and all the links Commie and Anom posted I don't doubt that t-rex could hunt low-end, weak animals. A strong healthy animal ready to fight? Hard to say. PS- I promise this time to respond to the rest of everyone's points. Sorry for the delay. The weight thing for dinosaurs appears to be shifting back and forth. However, Tyrannosaurus does have long legs more suited to an animal which chases down prey, large hips, and a tail which allows for extra muscle attachment. This seemingly would compensate for the muscle mass lost due to the dinosaur's weight. Seeing that we have a nice healthy (in its time) fully grown scarred Edmontosaurus skeleton for use as proof of Tyrannosaurus' hunting prowess, and a Triceratops wearing some serious battle scars which I hear it may not have survived, I think it's time to put this old myth to rest. Most of the arguments for T. rex being solely a scavenger also apply to wolves; slower than most of the prey(deer/Hadrosaurs) can't use arms strong sense of smell First one doesn't actually work all that well for Tyrannosaurus. You've stated Tyrannosaurus should be able to run much faster than an elephant, which can reach speeds of 25 mph when charging. BTW, I know about that thing saying elephants can only run at 12 mph. Sounds ludicrous. I'm sure an elephant is going to run top speed for you just because you are an almighty god and demanded it, and that somehow I, a weak little @$$, can outrun the largest land animal on Earth...yeah, not happening. Anyway, I doubt hadrosaurs and Triceratops would be able to top speeds of perhaps 18 mph.
|
|
|
Post by Tyrannosaurus on Jul 4, 2012 21:55:03 GMT -5
I'd say Hadrosaurs, at least the smaller species, were faster than T. rex, but that proves nothing. And Triceratops and Torosaurus are actually more common than Hadrosaurs in T. rex's environment(though Hadrosaurs are more diverse).
|
|
|
Post by mobster on Nov 27, 2012 16:00:18 GMT -5
www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/08/05/AR2005080500317.html He died in Angola in a thicket near Macusso on Nov. 13, 1955. Sixteen bullets from a .416 Rigby killed him. His tusks were seven feet long, his height, at the withers, was 13 feet 2 inches. Twenty-three bearers were unable to lift his bloody hide, which weighed more than two tons. He's no longer the biggest ever shot. Now he's just the biggest ever mounted, which isn't the same. A bigger one, six inches taller, was bagged in Angola in 1974 by E.M. Nielsen Jr., a car dealer from Columbus, Neb.
|
|
|
Post by mobster on Dec 8, 2012 3:33:15 GMT -5
I now think it would be really close. 5.7/10 in favor of the elephant.
If the t-rex gets an early advantage and bites off the elephant's tusks and trunk, he'll win. Otherwise, the elephant will charge and knock down the less stable t-rex.
Elephant: Intelligence Tusks Stability Maneuverability
T-rex: Killing bite Experience in killing large game (though not as huge of an advantage for reasons I stated in another thread) Height (I thought they were the same height but Anom says Rex was taller so I'm unsure)- whether height is an advantage or not is up for debate
PS Anom thanks for changing my mind on T-rex. I used to be a T-rex hater and thought it was a lousy scavenger when I first came to this forum but I guess not.
|
|
|
Post by Anomonyous on Dec 8, 2012 16:00:35 GMT -5
Against an elephant? Certainly height is going to be an advantage. Anything shorter will get crushed/stabbed more easily. An elephant is basically a triceratops with less protection, greater height, and possibly greater speed. There aren't many studies on how fast Triceratops can move.
|
|
|
Post by mobster on Dec 9, 2012 0:32:49 GMT -5
Is there another size comparison chart other than the one we have on page 1 which shows a female elephant?
And height being an advantage, well t-rex is pretty unstable and if its taller than the elephant its even more prone to being knocked down.
As stated before, I do agree with you a t-rex has the ability to kill the elephant. But I'd rather not underestimate the elephant's tusks, stability, and intelligence factor.
About triceratops, I watched the T-rex vs triceratops episode of The truth about Killer dinosaurs on BBC. It stated T-rex ran faster in a straight line but triceratops was more agile.
|
|
|
Post by Super Communist on Dec 9, 2012 0:42:37 GMT -5
^Can't find any good ones at the moment but I'll check tomorrow. According to the newest size estimate on Sue tyrannosaurus could have had a hefty size advantage on an elephant. www.livescience.com/16524-rex-dinosaur-weighed.htmlAnd lets not forgot sue is just a large specimen and is almost certainly not among the largest.
|
|
|
Post by mobster on Dec 9, 2012 3:39:43 GMT -5
Also, the largest elephant weighed 24,000 LB according to here: www.sandiegozoo.org/animalbytes/t-elephant.html The largest elephant on record was an adult male African elephant. It weighed about 24,000 pounds (10,886 kilograms) and was 13 feet (3.96 meters) tall at the shoulder!Elephants can get up to 10 tons. www.elephanttag.org/general/general_social.html African elephants can grow to be about 13 feet tall and weigh over 10 tons (or 20,000 lbs)! Asian elephants, although smaller, can still grow to be 12 feet tall and reach weights of 7 tons (14,000 lbs).So T-rex doesn't have much of a size advantage.
|
|
|
Post by Anomonyous on Dec 9, 2012 11:23:54 GMT -5
Why would weight matter for the Tyrannosaurus? The elephant, perhaps, I could see it adding momentum to the charge, although the tusks should suffice anyway.
|
|
|
Post by Super Communist on Dec 9, 2012 13:05:49 GMT -5
Yes, but that elephant is most likely a freak specimen, sue is almost certainly nothing more that a large specimen of tyrannosaurus.
It would greatly decrease the chance of tyrannosaurus being bowled over, assuming an elephant would be brave enough to charge the first tyrannosaurus it ever saw.
|
|
|
Post by Anomonyous on Dec 9, 2012 13:15:20 GMT -5
When you have 2 huge holes dug in your organs, I'm not sure it would matter if you were bowled over.
|
|
|
Post by mobster on Dec 9, 2012 16:22:32 GMT -5
I know next to nothing about extinct animals so I'm not going to comment on T-rex's weight. But yes, Sue would probably beat the average african bull elephant.
|
|
|
Post by PMAC on Mar 25, 2013 22:43:46 GMT -5
I think its a 50/50 thing. I mean i can see an Elaphant stabbing a T-Rex with its tusks but i can see a T-Rex tearing through an Elaphants flesh with its bite. It just depends on the elaphants size and tusks.
|
|