[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Subject Index][Author Index]
From: Martin Baeker <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: Thu Oct 30, 2003 11:11:58 PM Australia/Canberra
This I don't understand: Wasn't your argument that they were instable,
But surely they were more bottom-heavy - the upper half of the animal
was mostly neck. The CoG as determined by the parts above the
would be quite well balanced, AFAIK?
that their CoG was quite high? If the lower part of the body is
the CoG *must* move upwards, obviously, and make them more unstable.
If OTOH they were so bottom-heavy, then I don't see the danger of
over in any case.
I shouldn't have said bottom-heavy, they're middle-heavy. The way their
legs are depicted in popular art, it seems they would have been
unsupportable. I propose they had far more heavily-muscled legs than
the gazelle-like limbs they're generally depicted with.