History Community ~ All Empires Homepage


This is the Archive on WORLD Historia, the old original forum.

 You cannot post here - you can only read.

 

Here is the link to the new forum:

  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Calendar   Register Register  Login Login


Forum LockedThe Dinosaur vs. Thread!!!!!

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1 456
Author
Afghanan View Drop Down
Chieftain
Chieftain
Avatar
Durr e Durran

Joined: 12-Jun-2005
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1076
Post Options Post Options   Quote Afghanan Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Topic: The Dinosaur vs. Thread!!!!!
    Posted: 26-Nov-2008 at 02:33
Originally posted by Knights

Hello everyone! Excuse my lack of participation in a topic I am so fond of, but I have been on temporary leave for the past 2 months.

If you don't mind me going back to an earlier 'face-off' - Utahraptor vs. Majungasaurus.

This is an interesting one because both are evenly matched in terms of size. If I were to compare two dinosaurs as such, I'd prefer to do it solely on the grounds of anatomy, rather than assuming things relating to habits or physiology. So anatomy:

Both are comparable in terms of size, being about 7m long. However the Majungasaurus (despite bone cavities and fusion to reduce weight) was still a heavier therapod. I think it was brought up earlier that Utahraptor could reach 4 tonnes - ? From CT and bone analysis I believe they would be under a tonne. Either way, Majungasaurus has the weight advantage.

Nevertheless, various anatomical features of the raptor make it superiorly adapted for a therapod-on-therapod fight. The obvious is the clawed second toe which is now thought to be used to severe/puncture vital organs in the neck like the windpipe or jugular vein. What adds to the chance of the raptor getting a strike at Majunga's neck is its superior agility. The lighter weight, more aerodynamic structure and powerful legs (deduced from muscle-bone ratio) make for a swift killer.

If you look at the above renditions, the Utahraptor is clearly the superior runner. In a fight between 2 animals of similar size and of this ferocity, whoever strikes first is crucial. And for this reason, I would say the Utahraptor would more likely to prevail, but not put it past the Majungasaurus to kill the raptor too.

As we all know, there are so many dependent factors to take into account, so my analysis is based in a flat, grassy setting where both therapods are suspecting. Not that they would ever come across each other anyway; one living in Madagascar and the other in North America Smile

Regards,

- Knights -
 
Originally posted by Afghanan

Utah Raptor
 
 
 
 
 

Like other dromaeosaurids, Utahraptor had a huge curved claw on the second toe, one is preserved at 22 centimetres (8.7 in) in length and is thought to reach 24 centimetres (9.4 in) restored. Recent tests on reconstructions of the smaller Velociraptor suggest that claws of this type were used for stabbing or suffocating its prey, not slashing into their hide.[2] Up to 6.5 m (21 ft) long, 2 m (6.6 ft) tall, and 700 kg (1,500 lb) in weight, Utahraptor would have been a formidable predator.[1]

 
Source:  Wikipedia
 
----
 
 
 
VS
 
Majungasaurus (Majungatholus)
 
 
 
 
Majungasaurus was a medium-sized theropod that typically measured 6–7 meters (20–23 ft) in length, including its tail.[1] Fragmentary remains of larger individuals indicate that some adults reached lengths of more than 8 meters (26 ft).[2] Majungasaurus is perhaps most distinctive for its skull ornamentation, including the swollen and fused nasals and the frontal horn.
 
 
 
Was the sickle claw used for puncturing?    I thought this was one of the original theories that was rejected and that it was used primarily for grasping on to a larger creatures as its thin, razor sharp teeth shredded away at the prey.
 
I think the Utahraptor could definitely beat the Majungasaurs in a speed contest, but the Majungasaurus beats it in weight and also in raw power at the jaw.  It also had a horn on its head and it was shown to be heavily calcified, which means it was used to hit objects, possibly rivals, (this is ofcourse all theory).
 
I think the Utah raptor, as agile as it is, would not stand a chance against a Majungasaurus if they fought head on.  Majungasaurus were known to be very vicious, and even known to be cannibals and one Majungasaurus victim was shown with a broken neck after another Majungasaurus broke it and ate him.


Edited by Afghanan - 26-Nov-2008 at 02:35
The perceptive man is he who knows about himself, for in self-knowledge and insight lays knowledge of the holiest.
~ Khushal Khan Khattak
Back to Top
Knights View Drop Down
Webmaster
Webmaster
Avatar
AE Magazine Coordinator

Joined: 23-Oct-2006
Location: Australia
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 3294
Post Options Post Options   Quote Knights Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 26-Nov-2008 at 02:46
I thought the original theory (as shown in Jurassic Park) was that the Raptor's claw was used for slashing at the abdomen of prey, to disembowel. However of late, I was under the impression that the leaning was towards the claw's use as a 'dagger' of sorts, used to puncture rather than slash.

You'd be familiar with the 'Fighting Dinosaurs' fossil formation, which shows Protoceratops and Velociraptor locked in combat. The Raptor's sickle claw is embedded in the 'neck' (there's no tissue left of course) of the Protoceratops, and this is what is believed to have been the fatal blow. The puncture could also be used as a 'holdfast' for the Raptor. If this was the case, then once hooked onto the victim, Velociraptor would have put those razor sharp teeth you mentioned, to good use.

No doubt it could of doubled as a slashing tool, especially if its victim was smaller and on the ground. What are your thoughts?

Back to Top
Count Belisarius View Drop Down
Chieftain
Chieftain
Avatar
Magister Militum

Joined: 25-Jul-2008
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1114
Post Options Post Options   Quote Count Belisarius Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 26-Nov-2008 at 02:53
I love this topic any chance the mods could sticky it? 


Defenders of Ulthuan, Cult of Asuryan (57 Kills and counting)


Back to Top
Knights View Drop Down
Webmaster
Webmaster
Avatar
AE Magazine Coordinator

Joined: 23-Oct-2006
Location: Australia
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 3294
Post Options Post Options   Quote Knights Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 26-Nov-2008 at 02:55
I see no reason why not. We'll see if the recent enthusiasm continues Smile

Back to Top
Count Belisarius View Drop Down
Chieftain
Chieftain
Avatar
Magister Militum

Joined: 25-Jul-2008
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1114
Post Options Post Options   Quote Count Belisarius Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 26-Nov-2008 at 03:07
Big%20smileAll right!Smile
 
 
And now for a new fight what say a... a... hmmm let me think how about a pack of thirty gigantosaurs vs. a pack of sixty deinoychusBig%20smile
 
links:
 
 
 


Edited by Count Belisarius - 26-Nov-2008 at 03:19


Defenders of Ulthuan, Cult of Asuryan (57 Kills and counting)


Back to Top
Knights View Drop Down
Webmaster
Webmaster
Avatar
AE Magazine Coordinator

Joined: 23-Oct-2006
Location: Australia
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 3294
Post Options Post Options   Quote Knights Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 26-Nov-2008 at 11:24
Thirty Giganotosaurus would have no trouble in finishing off sixty Deinonychus. The ratio of two Raptors against one Giganotosaurus makes it an obvious conclusion.

Back to Top
Count Belisarius View Drop Down
Chieftain
Chieftain
Avatar
Magister Militum

Joined: 25-Jul-2008
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1114
Post Options Post Options   Quote Count Belisarius Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 05-Jan-2009 at 22:42
Newsflash the thread has been upgraded see page one for detailsBig smile
 
So how about Gigantosaur vs. Mammoth!Clap
 
(Mods sticky this topic or I will hate you the fury of a thousand suns and world eatersBig smile)


Edited by Count Belisarius - 05-Jan-2009 at 22:42
Back to Top
TheARRGH View Drop Down
Colonel
Colonel
Avatar
Over-Lord of the Marching Men

Joined: 29-Jun-2007
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 747
Post Options Post Options   Quote TheARRGH Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 06-Jan-2009 at 00:13
Probably giganotosaur.

however the Imperial Mammoth, which lived around california, reached similar sizes to a triceratops; maybe even a little larger. And while ceratopsians were quite possibly eaten by giganotosaurs, I would imagine that they were not the easiest prey to take down.

So, probably: Advantage giganotosaur, but possible mammoth victory, especially if the giganotosaur could not attack from ambush.
Who is the great dragon whom the spirit will no longer call lord and god? "Thou shalt" is the name of the great dragon. But the spirit of the lion says, "I will." - Nietzsche

Back to Top
Knights View Drop Down
Webmaster
Webmaster
Avatar
AE Magazine Coordinator

Joined: 23-Oct-2006
Location: Australia
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 3294
Post Options Post Options   Quote Knights Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 06-Jan-2009 at 00:17
I agree with Arrgh - the Giganotosaurus would be the winner. 

Back to Top
Carcharodon View Drop Down
Baron
Baron


Joined: 04-May-2007
Location: Sweden
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 479
Post Options Post Options   Quote Carcharodon Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 15-May-2009 at 15:49
Originally posted by Count Belisarius

Keep in mind we aren't dealing with a great white, and the tylosaur has to surface to breathe, and if the tylosaur starts to bleed the shark will go in to a frenzy.
 
A killer whale also has to surface to breed, still it can take out a great white shark:
 
Back to Top
TheARRGH View Drop Down
Colonel
Colonel
Avatar
Over-Lord of the Marching Men

Joined: 29-Jun-2007
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 747
Post Options Post Options   Quote TheARRGH Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 15-May-2009 at 15:55
Originally posted by Carcharodon

 
A killer whale also has to surface to breed, still it can take out a great white shark:
 



True, but it's also bigger and heavier than a great white, on average. If they were truly equivalent in size, it might be a little more difficult...and a tylosaur and megalodon were, fully grown, pretty close size-wise.
Who is the great dragon whom the spirit will no longer call lord and god? "Thou shalt" is the name of the great dragon. But the spirit of the lion says, "I will." - Nietzsche

Back to Top
Carcharodon View Drop Down
Baron
Baron


Joined: 04-May-2007
Location: Sweden
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 479
Post Options Post Options   Quote Carcharodon Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 15-May-2009 at 15:55
One can also add that the most ferocious sea reptile probably was not the mosasaur Tylosaurus but one of the pliosaurs (like Pliosaurus or Liopleurodon).
Back to Top
Carcharodon View Drop Down
Baron
Baron


Joined: 04-May-2007
Location: Sweden
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 479
Post Options Post Options   Quote Carcharodon Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 15-May-2009 at 15:58
Originally posted by TheARRGH


True, but it's also bigger and heavier than a great white, on average. If they were truly equivalent in size, it might be a little more difficult...and a tylosaur and megalodon were, fully grown, pretty close size-wise.
 
Probably the Tylosaur was more intelligent than the Megalodon (but of course not so intelligent as a killer whale) and it´s manouverability was probably also greater.
Back to Top
TheARRGH View Drop Down
Colonel
Colonel
Avatar
Over-Lord of the Marching Men

Joined: 29-Jun-2007
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 747
Post Options Post Options   Quote TheARRGH Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 15-May-2009 at 22:15
Originally posted by Carcharodon

 
Probably the Tylosaur was more intelligent than the Megalodon (but of course not so intelligent as a killer whale) and it´s manouverability was probably also greater.


Considering all the information we have about them is in the form of massive rocky bones, those are some pretty large assumptions to make. Sharks are a hell of a lot smarter than they appear, believe me. And we don't really know that much about their behavior or social structure. Certainly a lot less about their massive whale-eating ancestors. Tongue

Also, I'd like to make a point: I've met people of similar mass to myself who I'm probably smarter than - at least in terms of measurable stuff like grades, vocabulary, etc. - who could beat the hell out of me in a fight. Intelligence is useful in a fight when you have the time and/or self-control to use it; most of the time it can even be a bad idea to think too much. Most fighting systems are meant to develop your instincts, not hone your intellect. For good reason; instincts are about all you have in a real fight.

In addition, maneuverability is a little overrated. In the crush of combat, generally your good options as far as movement are pretty restricted. Not to say that it's useless, just that a fight tends to go well for those who are heavier, stronger, and more resilient.

Who is the great dragon whom the spirit will no longer call lord and god? "Thou shalt" is the name of the great dragon. But the spirit of the lion says, "I will." - Nietzsche

Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1 456

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down



This page was generated in 0.047 seconds.