[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Subject Index][Author Index]
Re: Bipedal apatosaurs and stegosaurs?
Nick Longrich wrote:
> Yes, the use of mind-altering substances can get you in a lot of
> trouble ;)
> It's difficult to imagine this, but then, it's also difficult to
> imagine 30 tonne animals rearing up to feed, or 30 tonne animals period.
> It raises an interesting question- whether they could at all-
> I suppose there's no reason why not but it seems like an impractical way
> to go for long distances.
I'm doubting this too. If the forelimbs were physically long enough to reach
the ground, why would you not use them? Especially when they were obviously
walking feet almost identicle to the ones in Diplocus, Barosaurus etc (in
> But then, hell, 20-30 tonne bipeds- duckbills- seem to be
> possible. But it also seems to me that their forelimbs are much more
> slender than in stegosaurs and diplodocids.
I seriously doubt that any ankylopolexan (post camptosaur ornithopod) was
bipedal for any extended period of time. This is confirmed with trackway
evidence and structural evidence (again, if your forelimbs could reach the
ground why wouldn't you use them for walking, especially when the hand is a
derived psuedo-hoof and not the grasping hand of earlier ornithopods).
Therizinosauroids are a different case altogether though since in their
evolution, their hands got longer more slender claws rather than shorter ones
one would expect if they used their forelimbs in walking.
"Asteroids do not concern me Admiral."