[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Subject Index][Author Index]
Re: How Did Hadrosaurs Survive?
On Sunday, October 27, 2002, at 08:00 AM, Tim Donovan wrote:
[I wrote] Short legs does not = slow.
It is logical, and lambeosaurs were also relatively bulky.
Just because something is logical it does not mean that it is true
(many logical statements are false), they must be tested. If longer
legs = faster speed, then we should be able to observe a strong
correlation in nature. I have put together a list of speed estimates of
some large mammals, and I see no such correlation:
Indian Rhinoceros: 56 km/h
Giraffe: 52 km/h
Grizzly Bear: 56 km/h
American Bison: 56 km/h
Warthog: 58 km/h
Camel: 32 km/h
Hippopotamus: 32 km/h
Lion: 58 km/h
Cheetah: 110 km/h
These are not very precise, and open to question, but they do not
support the conclusion that longer legs makes for higher speed. In
particular I draw your attention to the following:
1) Grizzly Bears and Rhinos are faster than Giraffes, and Warthogs are
faster than all of them.
2) Camels and Hippos are roughly equal in speed, despite enormous
difference in leg length.
3) Warthogs may be faster than American Bison - despite a similar build
and much smaller size.
4) The animal with the second shortest legs (the cheetah) is the
The differences above are FAR greater than the difference between
lambeosaurines and hadrosaurines - the data does not support the
conclusion that hadrosaurines were faster.
John Conway, Palaeoartist
"Do I contradict myself? Very well, then I contradict myself, I am
large, I contain multitudes." - Walt Whitman
Systematic ramblings: http://homepage.mac.com/john_conway/