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

Re: New Rigby Giant




On Tue, 4 Nov 1997, Sean Connell wrote:

> > Brian (franczak@ntplx.net)
> Brian, and all, do you know how reliable this figure ( skull fully two
> meters) is? If it is this is truly one gigantic tyrannosaur.The largest
> skulls of any land animals (_Triceratops_ and _Torosaurus_) attain
> lengths of 7.5 feet if I remember right. In comparison, imagining a rex
> skull even close in overall length is awe inspiring.The ceratopids
> benefit from an elongate "frill' which in _Torosaurus_ accounts for much
> of the size.The rex, with it's deep blunt snout and proportions would
> certainly be a competitor in the "largest land animal skull" department
> if judged by sheer volume.Also....I'll second Brian's question on
> Rigby's reluctance at indentifying the genus/species as _Tyrannosaurus
> rex_.To my knowledge, there is a large diversity of size and shape in
> individual skeletal elements among rex. The result of changing gene
> pools within a species, that we are veiwing in a few individuals from
> different areas across a wide spectrum of that species' time on Earth?
> What bones is he seeing a difference so drastic that it would cast doubt
> on the species falling within rex? And what do the resident tyrannosaur
> specialists (Holtz?,Paul,etc.) say about the variation of skeletal
> features within _Tyrannosaurus rex_? How large a variation ( in your
> opinions), and in what skeletal features, should we see before we
> construct a new species within Tyrannosaurus or a new genus
> altogether?----Just thinking again, Sean C. :-D

I should probably allow someone else to bring up this point, but oh well.
I believe that the size is well within the range possible for a _T.rex_
based on an argument in PDW which stated that the individuals
then discovered _might_ not be fully grown individuals (GSP, if you no
longer support this idea, let us know--I don't mean to put words in your
mouth).  Therefore a _T.rex_ of 10 tonnes would not be unreasonable.  

jc