Comments (Page 500)

Or it's more general for the entire genre. Ceratosaurus has weight estimates between 900-4,000 pounds. This one happens to be at 3,000 pounds.

They look tha same to me...

Don't want to break this to ya but, that's not C. Dentisulcatus Or is just a wrong weight estimate.

It could rear up a bit and bite the neck. It doesn't have arms like other predators so it won't be able to slash or grip at the ceratosaurs who is killing it.

Click this link for a good side by side comparison...

http://dinosaurs.findthebest.com/compare/61-63/Carnotaurus-vs-Ceratosaurus

TK, your puting up arguments for animals SMALLER. Carnotaurus is BIGGER. 

RexFan, they look the same to me.... Plus Carno has a decent weight advantage.

I said agility and strength help, speed doesn't. Not in a direct confrontation at least.

That Ceratosaurus looks pretty robust to me. That Carnotaurus has a less heavily built body.

They don't. Cheetah vs lion, deltadromeus vs spinoosaurus, ceratosaurs vs carnotaurs. Carnotaurs was built for speed not strength. Ceratosaurs was the opposite.

How would it not be stornger?? So what it's faster! It's heavier and just as robust!

really.... Speed, aglity and strenght don't help in a fight... I think this is a comedy club not a debate.

Probably not... Ceratosaurus horns a thin and delicate while Carnotaurus horns are robust sturdy. A good feature for combat.

I don't think Carnotaurus was stronger than Ceratosaurus. It was an animal built for speed. Fast animals like Carnotaurus, cheetahs, Deltadromeus, etc. aren't all that powerful. Speed is really only helpful if the Carnotaurus is chasing something, not fighting. Agility would be helpful, but I think both dinosaurs had a similar agility. Carnotaurus had long legs, but Ceratosaurus was a bit smaller. It probably evened out in that regard.

Speed doesn't help as much as you think it does in a fight . 

Its strength will be useless.

Carnotaurs horns wre for show most likely. Bigger Horton the better the male.

alot like ceratosaurus horns.......

Still not factoring in the horns, speed and strength... 

Also TK the Carno wouldnt just stand there waiting to get killed. It will probably shake around and try to move around and shift the ceratosaurus off

What about ceratosaurs huge teeth and powerful arms? That surly will take a toll on carnotaurs.

Studies show that Carnotaurus was capable of quick bites, but not strong ones. This is perfect for capturing small, fast prey, but not good for dealing with large animals. This would line up with it's speed, suggesting a fast theropod like Carnotaurus could run down quick prey, snap his jaws quickly, and grab it.

TK, if you know SO MUCH what ep were those horns used for if not fighting? Huh. Probably not mating unless the bulls rammed each other which would mean they were meant for combat.

also, you guys don't seem to to factor in the Carnotaurus size, strength, and speed. 

What about the muscle that layered its thick neck. That would help Carnotaurus rip and twist off flesh from the ceratosaurus  

Ya carnotaurs is adapted to hunting small prey due to its small skull and tiny teeth. The horns are not as combat oriented as you guys think the horns are fairly small. plus when ceratosaurs bites carnosaur's neck it won't be able to fend off the cerato cause of its lack of arms and appropriate jaws.

Thanks.

Glad you guys liked it.

nice. I wanted hyneira to win.

I was rooting for the sword ray too. Oh well rooting for elamosaurus next time

Pliosaurus did at the beginning.

A tooth twice as big as another is gonna leave a much bigger and deeper injury and Ceratosaurus had massive teeth.

BTW, just look at the skull of Carnotaurus...

I wouldn't call that a strong skull.

Damn! Was rooting for Xiphactinus... Will a fan favourite ever win :D? 

Nice job, anyways.

Ok, I'm going to set some stuff straight...

first off all, those horns weren't useless... Carnotaurus had a Storng skull, and those horns are robust as hell. 

And Lets not forget Carnotaurus was likely stornger. As it was heavier and just as if not more robust then Ceratosaurus and, was faster.

Ceratosaurus Definetly has a better bite and useful arms but, a stronger and faster animal with Bull like horns is probably going to come out on top the majority of the time.

also, there's a moisconception that almost evreybody on this forum believes... it is that a stornger bite force equals a deadlier bite. Which, honestly is not true. A overly powerful bite is only needed against ARMOURED prey... What really matters are the teeth, which there is ussualy no "better tooth design" unless the tooth doesn't have serrations.

I agree rex fan. They just would be useful in combat against an equally sized carnivore.

I do think it's horns weren't it's primary weapons. It MAY have used them, but I doubt it was on a regular basis, at least on large animals.

Ok, why do you all think carnotaurs could use his horns? I am sure it couldn't because its skull wasn't right for it. And it skull was fragile enough and quite weak... It would be able to take that amount of stess. It's skull produced a very weak bite and that was its only weapon. It's arms were utterly useles. It was fast and a bit larger, That's it. Ceratosaurs like me.hsppy said had huge teeth, powerful arms tipped with claws. And he wmy more agile. Ceratosaurs would win the majority.70-30 in favor of ceratosaurs.

65-35 in Cerato's favour. Sure, it was smaller. That's where the disadvantages stop though. It had some of the largest teeth proportianately, a nasty bite for  it's size, it was pretty agile, fast, and useable arms. Sure, Carno was tough and had those horns, but that'll only do so much for a short time. 

I think a good analogy would be a track star vs a wrestler. The track star is taller and faster, but the wrestler is far stronger. It's no contest in the end.

I'd give this one 70-30 in favor of Ceratosaurus.

55-45% Ceratosaurus.

Also, what about Ceratosaurus ingens? It's a pretty large species of Ceratosaurus...

Ceratosaurus. It had a more lethal bite and, something many haven't focused on is that it actually had usable arms/claws.

I'm going Carnotaurus 55-45 it was bigger, more robust, and speedy. Also while it teeth maybe small, it had very strong neck muscles.which could be used to hold on to the prey. And of course speed combined with the head butt with definitely crack bone

I loved telltales Jurassic Park, however for JW I would like to see a game like operation genesis or maybe like Mr Happy and Paden said a first person game like you can choose to be Chris Pratt or Bryce Dallas Howard something like that. Nice name by the way :)

So.. second line predator vs likely scavenger? Ceratosaurus takes this on for me(although I do like carnotaurus better). 57/43 in flavor of ceratosaurus.

Well, Scott Hartman put C. dentisulcatus at ~7.0 meters and 1,500 kg. That roughly translates to 22 feet and 3,300 lbs (1.65 tons)

The holotype - and olnly Carnotaurus was around 70 percent complete when they unearthedit, and seeing the cervical vertebrate were fully sutured, it appears to be a fully grown animal. The holotype measures 8.2 meters and weighs 2100 kg, which translates over to 25 feet and a weight of 4,629lbs(2.3 tons) so it does have a small weight advantage.

But, C. dentisulcatus is more robustly built and has a stronger jaw. Carnotaurus has those long, slender legs that would definetly give it an agility edge over Ceratosaurus, but it can't do a whole lot with those jaws. The teeth are tiny,and i don't think they'd be able to do much damage