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

Re: cause of Gigantism in sauropods

The notion that the measurement of average prey/predator size ratio in today's world delineates as a matter of scientific principle a null hypothesis about the behavioral interaction between giant sauropods and giant theropods is just that -- a notion, otherwise known as an opinion.

The laws of physics directly constrain certain activities (e.g., locomotion, bite force), and data from extant animals can indeed form a null, but this principle does not extend to behavior.

Alligators are tactically capable of eating people, but statistically rarely do -- taking that data to form a null hypothesis about the behavior of the similarly capable Nile Crocodile, or even individual alligators, is unlikely to prove useful.

The data, both extant and fossil, tell us that -- 1) giant theropod jaws could encompass the necks of even very large sauropods, 2) bite force was such that one full-on bite to any portion of the neck and head was likely to be mortal, 3) the mobility of the giant theropods on hard, flat ground was (barring anomalous and unexpected giant sauropod locomotive capability) overwhelmingly superior, and 4) the likely relative nutritional requirements of the respective morphologies meant that time was very much on the theropod's side in any protracted engagement.

Ignoring tactical capacity on grounds of conjectured behavioral limitations when evaluating the possible evolutionary paths by which this coeval morphological couplet came into full flower is neither useful nor "scientific".