CompsognathusMember0 XPJan-20-2014 2:58 PMI know some of you are desperate to be right, but you guys simply cannot accept the facts that spinosaurus was not a weak animal and was in fact actually probably quite strong in terms of snout, and was certainly more solid in this regard than carcharodontosaurus. You guys do not see the facts and only think that spinosaurus' snout was not very strong because "it wass sow mutch smaler in hight and widthe then carcarodontasaurus!" This is wrong! I cannot stress that enough.
By comparing the snouts of carcharodontosaurus and spinosaurus, there is so much that you guys are overlooking. All of the characteristics in spinosaurus point to a high capacity to grip, especially more-so than in carcharodontosaurus. These important characteristics include:
More heavily-constructed rostrum in spinosaurus (it was more compact and was characterized by particularly higher density
Rostrum that, along with its more impressive density and build, was simply better adapted for multidirectional resistance. This flows into the point about a much lessened risk of injury in such gripping; spinosaurus' snout was simple so much better designed for gripping without stress fracturing occurring
Balanced dimensions (this flows into my previous point)
Conical teeth (designed for piercing and gripping, not killing)
Simply compare the two animals' snouts, because I am sick of all this "yoo hav no proofs" crap: http://images3.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20101003190116/archosauria/images/e/e2/Skulls2.png
Tyrannosaurus RexMember6270 XPJan-20-2014 3:05 PMWe don't think Spinosaurus is weak. We just thing that Carchar is stronger due to dietary diferences. "It wass sow mutch......" are you F***** 6? We may be young (I'm 14), but we don't talk like that. Get it through YOUR thick skull that we won't change our opinions just because of dentition that and lateral pressure this.
Jack of all trades. Master of none
CompsognathusMember0 XPJan-20-2014 3:05 PMWas a new thread necessary? noone, not once said spinosaurus was weak in the thread. nor did i. once again, you have not provided your sources for your dubious information. you keep rambling on about how strong Spinos jaws are, and that's fine. doesn't make sense, but it's your opinion buddy. Next time, you might wanna lead with ' this is my opinion' instead of saying it's 100% fact :)
Nature doesn't deceive us; it is we who deceive ourselves.
CompsognathusMember0 XPJan-20-2014 3:12 PMQuote: We don't think Spinosaurus is weak. We just thing that Carchar is stronger due to dietary differences.
THAT is an opinion... But what I am doing is using inference and observation instead of just saying "I think so, thus I am right". The stresses present in predation would naturally be much higher in spinosaurus; an animal that is well adapted for gripping large fish would naturally be experiences a particularly higher amount of pressure than an animal that kills much quicker and is not designed for gripping and would instead most likely be injured by such an event.
Quote: "It wass sow mutch......" are you F***** 6? We may be young (I'm 14), but we don't talk like that.
That wasn't supposed to be serious, bro...
Quote: Get it through YOUR thick skull that we won't change our opinions just because of dentition that and lateral pressure this.
Fine, believe what you want. But that doesn't make me wrong... Unless you guys can give me solid evidence to support your claims
Quote: once again, you have not provided your sources for your dubious information. you keep rambling on about how strong Spinos jaws are, and that's find. doesn't make sense, but it's your opinion buddy. Next time, you might wanna lead with ' this is my opinion' instead of saying it's 100% fact :)
And so how does claiming that spinosaurus had more robust jaws than carcharodontosaurus that were so much better designed for multidirectional gripping resistance fall into the opinion category? Spinosaurus had a denser rostrum overall than carcharodontosaurus and related genera (along with plenty of other defining traits), deal with it.
Seriously, you guys always claim that this is opinionated when you yet fail to tell me why
CompsognathusMember0 XPJan-20-2014 3:14 PMbecause you haven't given us any strong sources that say other wise..
Nature doesn't deceive us; it is we who deceive ourselves.
Haha I'm 14 aswell MrHappy9097...don't we have so much in common...lol. I agree we dont talk like we're a bit high or something,I don't think spinosaurus is weak but that might be someone's opinion and that is their own and they are free to voice it so.....
CompsognathusMember0 XPJan-20-2014 3:18 PMThere are no sources to prove that... I am using observation of defining characteristics. I have debated about this before on a few different forums:
http://theworldofanimals.proboards.com/thread/527/sarcosuchus-imperator-carcharodontosaurus-saharicus?page=7
http://www.topix.com/forum/science/dinosaurs/T7M8U4AAT440HGAJD/p49
CompsognathusMember0 XPJan-20-2014 3:20 PMthen it is YOUR THEORY, stepped it up rfom opinion for ya ;) it's not a scientifically established fact, but it's what you believe bud. kudos to you, i respectfully disagree
Nature doesn't deceive us; it is we who deceive ourselves.
CompsognathusMember0 XPJan-20-2014 3:22 PMThat is still not an opinion... I would like firm evidence that even remotely supports the notion that carcharodontosaurus had a stronger resistance to gripping stress than spinosaurusCompsognathusMember0 XPJan-20-2014 3:25 PMno one ever stated that, but you may find this entertaining?
http://rspb.royalsocietypublishing.org/content/277/1698/3327.full
Nature doesn't deceive us; it is we who deceive ourselves.
CompsognathusMember0 XPJan-20-2014 3:26 PMObservation and opinion go hand in hand. Someone could look at this very discussion and say who they think is right because of what they observed. They don't know who's right for any real certainty, but they have an opinion. Observation and opinion are closely linked.
No one is right and no one is wrong. End of story.
CompsognathusMember0 XPJan-20-2014 3:30 PMexactly...this is random, but i thought it would lighten the mood :)
Nature doesn't deceive us; it is we who deceive ourselves.
CompsognathusMember0 XPJan-20-2014 3:43 PMWow, that's uh, interesting ;)
Tyrannosaurus RexMember6270 XPJan-20-2014 4:57 PMNice PFG.
One last thing, "lets put an end to this," and your opening line is "I know you guys are desparate to be right....." Im going to put end to this by pissing people off (you got my nerves at least).
Jack of all trades. Master of none
CompsognathusMember0 XPJan-20-2014 5:00 PMGodzillasaurus, you're fighting a losing battle. You aren't gonna convince anyone by badmouthing them! Try to disprove that!
Tyrannosaurus RexMember6270 XPJan-20-2014 5:08 PMHe's lucky I had to work on my Jeep after I commented, if I had seen that before I left.......
Jack of all trades. Master of none
CompsognathusMember0 XPJan-20-2014 5:18 PMdid i miss somethin? XD
Nature doesn't deceive us; it is we who deceive ourselves.
Tyrannosaurus RexMember6270 XPJan-20-2014 5:24 PMDon't think so. First post on this topic, "Try to disprove this." If I had seen that before I left, I would have lost it on him.
Jack of all trades. Master of none
CompsognathusMember0 XPJan-20-2014 5:26 PMoh yeah, that ticked me off. don't know what it was about what he was saying, but it pissed me off.
I gave him ' the evidence' he wanted so bad and then he never said anything back..
Nature doesn't deceive us; it is we who deceive ourselves.
Tyrannosaurus RexMember6270 XPJan-20-2014 5:31 PMQuote: "It is not wise to say something is your opinion."
Quote: I know you are all desparate to be right."
And so on, the list of things he's said to piss me off is huge.
Nonetheless, he's fighting an uphill battle against the Hitlerwall (it was real thing, in Italy 1944, it stopped .308 bullets fired from point blank) with a slingshot and marbles.
Jack of all trades. Master of none
CompsognathusMember0 XPJan-20-2014 5:35 PMhe was sayin stuff like that in RexFans 'The Spinosaurs' therad...partly why that went on for so long. and i agree, my ideas aren't about to be changed.
Nature doesn't deceive us; it is we who deceive ourselves.
CompsognathusMember5 XPJan-20-2014 5:36 PMI dont think i would call that "proof ", i look at them as educated guesses, and lets not forget these are animals that went extinct 65 million years ago, but what we do know is that they are much different from any animals today, so i wouldnt be surprised by the outcome of this ;)
Tyrannosaurus RexMember6270 XPJan-20-2014 5:38 PMI know PFG.
Never thought I'd say this (no offence), but thank you for speaking rationally in a topic discussing Spino's strength.
Jack of all trades. Master of none
CompsognathusMember0 XPJan-20-2014 5:38 PMQuote: I gave him ' the evidence' he wanted so bad and then he never said anything back..
That said nothing about spinosaurus of any relevance.
I say again, you have no real reason to believe that carcharodontosaurus had a more robust snout than spinosaurus; that is just wrong. If you want to think that, then fine. But I am going to tell you that this is not an opinion one bit. Simple, spinosaurus possessed a narrower and shallower rostrum by comparison that was an adaptation for reduced drag in water. It, however, is a comparably more robustly-constructed structure by comparison (it was a particularly denser and more compact piece, to say the least) that was far better adapted for gripping resistance much evident in its lack of similar pockets within its skull and lessened risk of injury occurring. NONE OF THIS IS OPINION! If I were to claim carcharodontosaurus to have a more robust snout just because it was bigger, that is an opinion.
Tyrannosaurus RexMember6270 XPJan-20-2014 5:43 PMThese things went extinct 65 million years ago (100 million for the two that are being discussed), so don't say that this isn't opinion, because it isn't fact. You have your opinions, and I'm slowly losing my respect, but that's fine that you hav your opinions. Saying something is fact about Spinosaurus (all dinosaurs, for that matter), is saying everything we know about sharks (creatures that have been observed and documented), is an opinion.
Jack of all trades. Master of none
CompsognathusMember0 XPJan-20-2014 5:43 PMoh god -_- it talked about Carcharodontosaurs' skull anatomy and function, like you wanted. Carcharodontosaurus did have a more robust skull! that is FACT! heck, tyrannosaurus rex has a more robust skull. Are you gonna say its not?
Nature doesn't deceive us; it is we who deceive ourselves.
CompsognathusMember0 XPJan-20-2014 5:45 PMI thought we came to a peace on this?
What happened to that peace?
I thought we agreed, No contreveral threads about spinosaurus or rex, Unless its news about them in the film, Or a new discovery....
*Keeping the peace in check*
Life cannot be contained, it breaks walls, crashes through barriers sometimes painfully, but uh... Life uh, finds a way
Tyrannosaurus RexMember6270 XPJan-20-2014 5:45 PMLet's not bring Rex into this PFG, but probably, he probably will.
Jack of all trades. Master of none
CompsognathusMember5 XPJan-20-2014 5:45 PMNiether am i letting go of my opinion of spinosaurus being the strongest of any land carnivores, this guy did stress good points, but didnt have to get off at the pace he did.
CompsognathusMember0 XPJan-20-2014 5:46 PMAlso it appears anything bad mouthing a spinosaur isn't going to have ' any relevance'
Nature doesn't deceive us; it is we who deceive ourselves.
