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


     This seems an interesting thread so I thought I'd contribute my two 
     cents worth. 
     Granted that the reasoning below by Mr. Mallon is logical I would have 
     to say that theropods would operate on instinct rather than reason. 
     Surely the predatory instinct would drive the theropods to pursue 
     their prey into any terrain (short of commiting suicide that is). If a 
     theropod is capable of navigating a body of water (isn't there 
     evidence of possible theropod fording of rivers - i.e. partial 
     fossilised footprints?), it must be capable of driving a panicked prey 
     animal before it and out of the water, especially if it was engaged in 
     group hunting? I would also tend to think that the last place a 
     sauropod would instinctively run to for safety would be water - 
     wouldn't there always be a danger of becoming slowed by muddy terrain 
     on the softer foreshores of a body of water? Surely a sauropod would 
     seek safety with its herd first.
     On another tack, if we accept that Mr. Mallons arguments are valid 
     then is it not also possible that the theropods would follow anyway 
     driven by the same predatory instinct? Are there not examples of other 
     predators following prey animals to their own detriment (I'm thinking 
     now of smilodon becoming trapped at La Brea after attacking mired 
     Is this reasoning flawed? I'd really like to hear some feedback if 
     possible. Thank you.
     Miguel A. Garcia
     Jordan Mallon wrote:
     If the victim didn't sink first, the allosaurs would have had
     > three choices
     > 1) eat and swim at the same time.
     > 2) go back ashore and wait for the carcass to wash up.
     > 3) somehow climb atop the dead body and eat the dead dino, then have 
     > swim back on a full belly.