Comments (Page 1,142)

I believe Tyrannosaurus Rex was a great predator but would scavenge if the opportunity arose.

I believe it to be a Brachiosaur, the nostrils on its head would allow it to breath and it at the same time allowing the animal to eat enough food efficiently.

And a cheetah is bigger than a rabbit and faster,Crocs have conical teeth and kill prey larger than itself and tear it easily dispatching in a death roll,spinosaurus could do the same by thrashing his prey.

And also there is evidence of Tyrannosaur packing hunting but no direct evidence for Rex,I think they hunted as family groups

And if you read it I only wrote one disadvantage on trex and said it was slower

Ok in monsters Resurrected it clawed Sarchosuchus,and I don't believe that it could Charcharadontosaurus so easily,sorry if I'm angering you.and I get my info from multiple sources.

And I never said size would help it in a fight

Excuse me Lost World:Jurassic park, I know what you mean but I meant predators ,Spinosaurus had to occasionally fight Carcharodontosaurus and Sarchosuchus,and he did prey on animals like paralititan and ouranosaurus and preyed on the monster fish of the Cretaceous,Tyrannosaurus did have competition but not from major predators,but deadly herbivores and you spelled them great.

I'm sorry for undertaking T-Rex,it's just people do that to spinosaurus to,thank you Rexkiller and Rexfan 684:) for changing my view Tyrannosaurus rex:hunted in packs smaller than spinosaurus,both strong,trex has stronger bite force,spinosaurus was faster,hope that clears things up I just wanna know if people even appreciate a great animal like spinosaurus ?it seems everyone only likes Tyrannosaurus.... Thank you Rexkiller

This is, in my opinion, the most accurate depiction of Tyrannosaurus hunting behavior yet... [url=https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=dV2nG0NVzpo]When Dinosaurs Roamed America: T-rex Hunt[/url]

Not sure what you can tell me that I don't already know, but let's test your knowledge ;) Let's do a somewhat harder one, not T-rex or Spinosaurus. Say, Tarascosaurus.

Yeah, there weren't many good pics. One's that were decent were encrypted and would not work anyways.

Thanks Rex Fan it's hard to find a decent picture for a dinosaur of lower level popularity

It would be awesome if they use ice age animals , cretaceous land and sea predators en herbivores

I really hope that the new movie also includes prehistoric mammals like mammoth or smilodon or megistotherium , they ar also prehistoric , pretty awesome and dangerous too

Here DinoFights, here's a decent Abelisaurus pic ;) [img]http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_R3alTV6BaSE/TSEntw-lQlI/AAAAAAAAC_0/QC7FIiC6MHQ/s1600/tarascosaurus_by_atrox1.jpg[/img]

Amazing. Come on Cleo, if you can take a Carcharadontosaurus, you can take on a whatever the next thing is. Ps. Pitbull, nice.

Ok, but Daspletosaurus, Gorgosaurus, and Albertosaurus all lived BEFORE Tyrannosaurus. So, no, they were not around to kill things.

T. rex would hunt when there is nothing fresh to scavenge. That means a T. rex could hunt and never scavenge in his entire life, or it could scavenge its entire life. It would hunt more often then not, I'm talking 80-90 percent of the time as a hunter. I don't think that it would give up a good free meal though. And some thing else, you had Daspletosaurus Gorgosaurus and Albertosaurus ther to help kill things. And just because we haven't found many Dromeaosaurus fossils, doesn't. Need to go, I'll edit this part out later.

I think Spino is around the middle. 8 tons, 60 feet, 20 feet tall, hips by the way. I think it has a bite of around 4 tons. It is twice as long as a saltwater crocodile, who has a bite of 2 tons. There is also a direct correlation on how big a crocodile is compared to its bite force. And i really think that Spino could run at up to 30 mph, it has huge legs! It also had ginormous (that's a word) arms that had truly wicked claws at the end. That being said, T. rex was 9+ tons, 40-43 feet long, and around 16-17 feet tall. It had railroad spiked teeth that are just perfect for crushing bone. Pound for pound, T. rex is the heaviest. It had some really bad opponents like Triceratops and Ankylosaurus. Even Edmontosaurus could cause some serious trouble. It is pretty smart too, and has great eyesight. It does have puny arms however. It really want too fast either. All in all, I'd say that they have a 50-50 percent chance of beating eachother.

I agree with you completely t-rex90. Also, if anyone says it had tiny arms, so it was a scavenger, I'm sorry, but that does not mean anything. Hunters don't need long arms. Wolves are active hunters that don't use their front feet. The abelisaurs and carcharodontosaurs are all said to be hunters, and their arms are not very long either.

T-Rex HAD binocular vision, that means it could see in front as it could to the side, that's pretty sufficient for a hunter to me. T-Rex also had powerful teeth like rail road spikes used for crushing, most scavengers wouldn't have that much strong teeth compared to predators. Younger T-Rex's ran but the adult ones had to be ambush predators at least. And I agree that there would have had to be another large predator to take out all the heavy armored prey like triceratops and ankylosaurus. And by the way, hunters have very good sense of smell too used for catching prey, wolves, tigers, etc. And due to all the fossils with t-rex bite marks as many have said, all evidence points to T-Rex being mostly a hunter and besides, what predator wouldn't pass up an easy meal from time to time? I'm sure all the big carnivorous dinosaurs did it as well.

T-rex had binocular vision with good depth perception. That's almost certainly a fact. Like I said, let's ignore anatomy and look at nature and how it's balanced. That's what I want to see more people look into when it comes to the debate.

I posted this before buddy... But anyway: I think that with all the evidence we have gathered, the Tyrannosaurus Rex isn't built to hunt. The femur is longer then the tibia, the sense of smell was way too good for a typical hunter and the eyesight was not the least sufficient for a hunter. It couldn't run fast and couldn't see well with a bite force to crush bone. Hmmm... I think that Tyrannosaurus Rex was primarily a scavenger.

Yes, I forgot to mention the healed bite marks. What I don't get is why people think all T-rex did was scavenge. When it comes to the balance of nature, it had to hunt. No other predator was around at the time that was big enough and common enough to keep the herbivores in check. That burden fell to T-rex, and it was happy to do it ;)

Opportunistic hunter. Hunted 65-75% of the time because it had the tools of an armor crushing predator (binocular sight, size, powerful bite) but also had the tools of a scavenger. (Slow, one of the best senses of smell, teeth for crunching bone, tiny arms) I can see where Jack Horner got the scavenger theory from but it's invalid now that healed dinosaurs with Tyrannosaurus bites in them have been found.

BTW, I meant raptors and NanoT were too small and uncommon enough. Sorry for the confusion ;)

Good points. I believe that Rex was hunter more often than not.

I agree. It is perhaps the least accurate depiction of Spinosaurus yet. It's jaws were way too robust for one thing. Planet Dinosaur had a better depiction in my opinion.

Seen it before. It wasn't very informative, and I really doubt much of what it did in the video is possible.

I mean, just look at this! [url=https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=W--8HyuauDQ]Spinosaurus in Monsters Resurrected[/url] (This does not even show him taking out a Carcharodontosaurus with a single claw swipe)

What about Bruhathkayosaurus? Assuming the leg bone was indeed a bone and not a tree the dinosaur would be beyond 200 tons. Amphicoelias ranges anywhere from 100 tons based off of the lowest diplodocus estimates to 375 tons based off of Diplodocus hollorum's upper estimates.

Yes. It was showing Spinosaurus as being far bigger than Carcharodontosaurus. I love how they had Spino pick up Rugops, which is at least half Spino's size, in it's jaws and shake it around. That's probably impossible for any animal to do. That's the only time I've ever seen a dinosaur with jaws about 6-7 ft long, in my opinion, pick up a 30 ft long, 1-2 ton dinosaur and shake it around.

I think if Spino fell at all, it would be injured. Didn't that show also have Charcaradontosaurus WAY smaller than Spino?

Indeed. It's not just Spino's jaw strength, but the shape of his teeth. Conical teeth are great for grasping, especially slippery prey like fish, but don't tear flesh very well. Spinosaurus would have a hard time using it's jaws to dispatch prey bigger than Ouranosaurus. Spinobro64, you also listed only 1 disadvantage for Spinosaurus. You gave quite a few for Tyrannosaurus. Based on what you said, I can tell you're getting your info from Monsters Resurrected. Keep in mind that's the show that depicted Spinosaurus killing Carcharodontosaurus with a single claw swipe, picking up a 30 ft Rugops and shaking it around in it's jaws, and killing a Sarcosuchus with a bite to the neck. Almost, if not all of this, is far fetched and unlikely, if not impossible.

Good comparison Rex Fan. The more I re-read this, the more comments I have on this. "Spinosaurus also took on big dangerous prey much bigger than itself,T-Rex preyed on smaller prey and had almost no competition." By smaller prey, you are referring to Triceratops and Ankylosaurus, and Edmontosaurus. Lets focus on the first two right know. Triceratops (three horned face) was a large ceratopsian, and anything that it hit head on, would be killed, or severely wounded by the impact. Ankylosaurus had armour that even T-Rex couldn't bite through. It also had a tail club that could break bone, and potentially kill, a predator. Edmontosaurus wasn't completely defenceless though. It could probably do some damage with its tail. Now put Spino in that environment. How long will it last before getting killed by something or starving to death?

Let's say, just for a minute, that Spino was bigger than Rex(I still don't believe that to be honest), then how on earth would it be faster? The highest estimates put it at 20 tons! How can a 20 ton animal move faster than a 7-10 ton animal? Trust me, a rabbit can outrun me any day and I'm way bigger.

I think Kalmayisaurus for the next fight.

What did you mean, "Able to beat most dinosaurs in a race, ESPECIALLY T-Rex"? There were dinosaurs that were slower than T-Rex. Once again, you're right Rex Fan.

I agree. We need more good remains of both Amphicoelias and Ultrasauros to determine which is bigger.