[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Subject Index][Author Index]
RE: Wacking Tyrannosaurs & Top Ten Carnivores
> From: email@example.com [mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org]On Behalf Of
> no go
> Given the latests talk about Big Al injuries, it raises up a
> question from
> me. Is it possible that Tyrannosaurids could take more wacking in general
> then other theropod due to the idea that their bones (not the
> limbs though)
> tended to be more heavily built and massive (at least in the brusier
> Tyrannosaurids) plus the fact that Tyrannosaurid skeletons
> indicate a life
> surviving pretty nasty injuries, even for an active, fast moving
I) There is no evidence that tyrannosaurids were more heavily built and
massive than other theropods of the same size.
II) There is no evidence that tyrannosaurids show a greater number of
injuries per individual than do non-tyrannosaurid theropods of the same
size. There are many _Allosaurus_ skeletons, for example (Big Al, the USNM
paratype, etc.) that show significant healed damage.
> Subject: Ten Ton Carnivore
> Is my chain being yanked again?
Yank. _Therizinosaurus_ was a) almost certainly not ten tons and b) almost
certainly not a carnivore. Also, the skull on the image is _Allosaurus_: in
fact, it is the composite skull from Madsen's 1976 monograph.
Caveat surfor. (Okay, so I have no idea what "surfer" (as in web-surfer)
would be in Latin...).
Thomas R. Holtz, Jr.
Department of Geology Director, Earth, Life & Time Program
University of Maryland College Park Scholars
College Park, MD 20742
Phone: 301-405-4084 Email: email@example.com
Fax (Geol): 301-314-9661 Fax (CPS-ELT): 301-405-0796