[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Subject Index][Author Index]
Re: Dinosaur weights; overestimated?
Just a thought, would it be possible to estimate weights from tracks? If
the original consistency of the soil can be estimated, wouldn't it be
possible to figure the ground pressure needed to produce track depth; then
figure the weight necessary to produce that pressure?
From: Matthew Troutman <email@example.com>
To: firstname.lastname@example.org <email@example.com>
Date: Thursday, August 21, 1997 1:37 AM
Subject: Dinosaur weights; overestimated?
You know one thing that REALLY peeves me in the field of dinosaur
research is the overestimation of a dinosaur's weight. The formula used
to estimate weights in animals basically works for dead weight animals
mammals for example.) Dinosaurs were probably like birds in that they
had extensive air-sacs through their bodies; mammals lack that feature
and are mostly liquid, muscle, and bone. So a mammal and a bird that are
the same size and have the same measurements will differ in weight since
birds are mostly air. The same is true for all dinosaurs. They all have
hollow bones and air-sacs like birds so they were light like birds. This
information is never given or really considered in weight estimations.
This is why the weight of Tyrannosaurus has been overestimated
frequently. It should weigh about 3-5 tons and possibly less. Sauropod
weights have been overestimated since the presense of big air filled
necks is never taken into consideration.
I wish feedback: do any of you concur?
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com