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

RE: T. rex was a 'slow-turning plodder'...

Huh?  RTFP!!  We don't use elephant data at all to reconstruct tyrannosaur
bodies, locomotion, or anything. To me, the two are entirely separate cases.
We built anatomically-realistic (but still not perfect) 3D computer models
that took into account the lighter bodies of theropods. And in the paper we
looked at different masses etc and their effects on turning. Precise mass
value doesn't matter for our running estimates (explained in my papers), but
center of mass does. Don't rely on the media to give you an accurate
portrayal of what the science actually involves; read the science.

--John R. Hutchinson 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Brandon Pilcher [mailto:trex_kid@hotmail.com] 
> Sent: 09 June 2007 09:25
> To: dinosaur@usc.edu
> Subject: RE: T. rex was a 'slow-turning plodder'...
> Why does Hutchinson think a 3-4 ton rex is implausible? The 
> article did not 
> do a very good job at explaining the problem with that idea (science 
> reporting for the lay masses at its finest again). As I 
> understand, the 
> standard 7-8 ton estimate for Rex used in both Hutchinson's 
> studies and most 
> dinosaur books is based on measurements using elephants. The 
> idea that it 
> was lighter comes from accounting for honeycomb structures in 
> the bones and 
> air sacs, present in T. rex but not in elephants. Now, I 
> think 3 tons is 
> pushing it, but I can see a 5-ton rex. If this case for a 
> lighter rex can be 
> vindicated, I'd like to see how that would affect speed and 
> turning velocity 
> estimates.
> _________________________________________________________________
> Call friends with PC-to-PC calling - FREE 
> http://get.live.com/messenger/overview