Cretaceous carnage #3

Nice!!!

rooting for charcardontosaurs.

Why is the Carcharadontosaurus section pretty much the exact same as the Wikipedia one (Wikipedia is a unreliable sorce ussualy) anyways

its a mismatch in favour of Carcharadontosaurus. Carcharadontosaurus was IMO weighed 6.5-8 tons while epanteris IMO was 3-5 tons. 

Carhcaradontosaurus wins easily, it has a stornger bulid, probably smarter, stornger, around the same speed. IMO carchar wins 70% of the time.

Intelligence  dosnt play a role in a fight

Yes. It does. Intelligence helps with tactics.

ALL

Animals fight with instinct 

Hey S-P. You've already burnt quite a few bridges here. Do you really think you should burn more?

What does that mean.

I use the wikipedia exerpts for this, so there's more room on debating sizes, haha i know it's rather unreliable but it does help in the debate aspect ;)

True ;).

I think hpp is mad at me.

Well, if you use Wikipedia you can just scroll down and click on the sources for it. And in a way, there is no such thing as reliable data about dinosaurs, after all, 20 years ago they were considered dumb, stupid, giant, and monstrous reptiles. Now they theorize they were giant birds that were smarter than we credited them for, some even cooperated with each other to hunt.

Awesome I know.

Oh, goodness me, forgot to comment on who I would think would win. I think I would go with Epanterias... Like I said, one day I plan to expand upon my dinosaur knowledge so I can participate in these debates.

Yeah. Im not mad, or anything. Was just a bit confused :) hey any of you up for a LOOOOONGGG DEBATE?

Bring buddy!!

I will win though.

S-P, he was joking... If you even try to start a fight, I will asemble the JW members...

JW MEMBERS, ASSEMBLE!!!

I'm aware of it raptor, and i have several dinosaur PDF files, so i know which sources are reliable and which aren't :P i find using thewikipedia exerpt though, it leaves more room for us to debate the sizes of the animals and what not

Wikipedia page for C. Iguidensis had it's length at 15 meters at one point..smh..

Please no not again!!! 

Yeah, but I see what you mean. I remember once reading a funny pie chart...

Can't find it. Well, just thought I'd say my due.

I was jokeing to guys

The fossil evidence shows epanterias is  a decently sized animal(yangchuanosaurus sized or larger) Allow me to demonstrate...

Basing off of A. Fragilis, A fully complete epanterias skull would measure ~129cm(4.2 feet)

 Greg Paul estimated 845 mm (33.3 in) for a skull belonging to an individual he estimates at 7.9 m (26 ft) long. From there, it is a simple matter of upscaling.

First, the 1:8 ratio

4.24 x 8 yields ~ 33.6 feet, which is near the maximum size thought possible for A. Fragilis.Scaling up from an A. Fragilis with a 33.3 in skull, we get an Epanterias measuring 40.12 feet in length.Using "big al" to scale for weight, the holotype for Epanterias would weigh 4/5 tons.

Still, What Epanterias is up against is a 7 ton, 43 foot long more evolved version of itself.Carcharodontosaurus would probably win this comfortably, something like 70/30.

Lots of numbers

Carnosaur.. You gave a size simeler to mine and we had the same odds. So didn't underestimate anything... 

i know, lol i had gone into that thinking the allosaur would be larger then the math showed it to be...was probably thinking of saurophaganax...i'll edit that first part out :P

Epet is more agile and has hatchet bite.

Carchara is more robust and has shearing flesh bite.

Allosaurus fragilis is the only species that i know of that has had the hatchet bite atributed to it. Why? why not A. Europaeus? A. Tendaguruensis? A.  Jimmadensi? or even the related taxa, like Yangchuanosaurus?

Granted, Allosaurus Amplexus would be more agile, but it is at a severe(4,000+ pounds) disadvantage. Carchy also has a more formidable set of jaws, with a longer reach to them( 1.5 meter skull vs 1.2 meter skull.) 

Carcharodontosaurus FTW! :D

I think a allosaurid would have a hatchet bite twice their weight 

am I  right??