[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Subject Index][Author Index]
Re: Spinosaurus's measurements as presented via Mr Mortimer's extrapolative wizardry, I find the mathematics interesting, but inconclusive without an articulated hypodigm for the hypodigm, because a humerus with Mr Stromer's 1915 and 1934 excavations was not discovered, and comparisons with Baryonyx and Suchomimus a yearning not substantiable without an articulated skull/skeleton However, I think it should be noted that ILM made their cinematic tyrannosaur of 2001 14.5 feet high x 37 feet long quite deliberately in contrast to their 19.7 feet high x 43.9 feet long spinosaur, and there is no evidence of a skull and articulated skeleton of Spinosaurus to substantiate the claim. Because the "Jurassic Park franchise" was quickly morally bankrupt following the 1993 film (enormous profits > no investment in paleontological research > no effort by Horrorwood to ensure that "Sue" remained in a Black Hills community)!
As far as being functionally quadruped, admittedly I should have worded the sentence a little differently: like Iguanodon, Spinosaurus could when necessary, bear weight upon its front arms, and, for short distances, walk forward, the quadrupedal pose as it ate enabled by the cantilevering strength of the animal's lower back (to quote from a Jack Bailey personal communication). Most of the lost hypodigm of Spinosaurus lacked centra, so trying to position the neural spines on a hypothetical vertebral column is fanciful, and Mr Stromer's efforts to guess their positioning in 1915 are just that, guesses, and I belive it is an unprovable assumption by Mr Mortimer the best-preserved vertebra illustrated in 1915 is a more caudal dorsal vertebra. It could be that Spinosaurus was a bulky, hump-backed, piscivorous, narrow-snouted theropod with some cranial dorsal vertebrae being markedly opisthocoelous. Since 1915/1934, &n!
p;no skulls and skeletons have been discovered with which to re-establish the taxon within a robust cladistic analysis, with detailed comparisons and measurements of homologous elements found in Baryonyx and Suchomimus. Drawings for me are not acceptable nor verifiable because the type is lost. The taxon remains a nomen dubium, and Jack Horner's estimations, while titilating for Kiddie Marketing toy departments and studio accountants who were in 2001 frantic for ticket revenues and who move their lips when reading, are, alas, perfunctory rhetoric.