[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Subject Index][Author Index]
Re: T.rex predation
> From: Dictator-for-life Calvin <MWEDEL@gslan.offsys.ou.edu>
> Something's been on my mind. Why is the question always, "How do you
> know that tyrannosaurs were hunters instead of scavengers?" I'd take
> one look at a tyrannosaur skeleton and ask, "What makes you think
> that they were scavengers instead of hunters?" Is it the size? Cuz
> if that's the case
REALLY GORY SNIP
The weight of a turkey vulture? Funny you should ask. THREE POUNDS.
I can't escape the feeling that John R. Horner, whose accomplishments and
reputation precede him (as well they should), put forth the "primarily"
scavenging _Tyrannosaurus rex_ hypothesis as a ploy to incite us to
rigorously question the assumptions we take for granted when we speculate
about the behavior of extinct species. Perhaps we need something like this
or a paper on respiratory turbinals every now and then to help us put
together ALL the relevant data we can assemble, even if the preponderance
of evidence leads us right back to the view we held in the first place.
Horner's leading question is: "Where's the evidence?" I may be one who
inadvertantly dragged this round of the scavenging T.rex discussion back on
to the list (with an mere offhand remark, I might add), but I do not think
John Horner that a scientist of Horner's character and humility would
object in the least to the probing dialogue which has ensued here.
Rant over. Resume wild speculation.
Ralph Miller III <firstname.lastname@example.org>