[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Subject Index][Author Index]

Re: Airbagged(was Dive!Dive!Dive!)



Rob Meryson wrote:

> Now this is a good point.  The only thing I could say to counter this, is to 
> use
> tigers and wolves as examples.  These guys seem to be able to run in forests 
> with
> little difficulty.  Of course, being quadrepedal would give them far greater
> balance than Rex ever could've had, but it can show that a large animal can 
> get
> going pretty fast in a forest. 

     They are a lot smaller and built lower to the ground then T.rex.  If 
you look at yet smaller animals, I think you would find they are generally even 
faster and more manuverable in dense settings.  Try chasing a snake, 
you may find it surprisingly hard to catch.  

> Perhaps these features could represent the combined needs of being a running
> predator, as well as living in a bayou?

      Or being a running predator and a large predator.  Either way, I 
think you are compromising speed for another factor (a small 
animal that lives in a dense setting shortens its legs to get more 
manuverable, presumably because manuverability is more important in such 
a setting than flat out speed). 

LN Jeff
O-