Whats wrong with dinosaur reconstruction?

[Bottomfeeder]

OP - consider my fin ray theory. If the animal could raise/fold back its sail like a fish, if maybe the spines in the structure were connected to a dorsal muscle, it could lower the sail when it needs to, or raise it when it needs to thermoregulate/whatever.

 

[MN_Rebel]

OP - consider my fin ray theory. If the animal could raise/fold back its sail like a fish, if maybe the spines in the structure were connected to a dorsal muscle, it could lower the sail when it needs to, or raise it when it needs to thermoregulate/whatever.

There is one problem with your theory: Spinosaurus' spines were stiff and are part of the spinal cord...in short words they cannot bend/raise/fold back its sail like sailfish.

 

[Bottomfeeder]

Ah, I didnt know that. I kinda just made it up. I didnt know they were rooted into the spine.

 

[00rollins]

Ummmm, you just finished saying Carcharodon has a weak bite force and now your comparing it to an axe again. Make up your mind. Carcharodon has a weak bite force even less than a lions you said. Now if a lion bit a Spino's sail covered in thick reptilian skin it wouldn't even penetrate it. So if Carcharodon has such a weak bite force he wouldn't be able to either. Ever see a fight between a croc and a lion? Now imagine if the croc outweighed the lion by 2 tons.lol! Seriously you seem to be countering your own points now.

Sorry this was an accident

Sent from my GT-P7510 using MonsterAquariaNetwork App

 

[koltsixx]

yes in a way. Its upper jaw teeth are extremly sharp. The jaw can open very wide to get the lower jaw out of the was. It hammered its head down into the meat and sliced through it. The neck was extremly powerful. It was very effective method.

the power came from its neck. It did not bite. It slamed its upper jaw into the meat like an axe and rushed down. Then waited that its prey bleed to death. You got it now?

Sorry fell asleep.lol! In order for an animal to open it's head at a 180 degree angle the animal would have to have a double hinged jaw and from everything I read and have seen Carcharodontosaurus didn't have one which means what you say shouldn't be possible. But lets say your right, how does that represent and advantage when Spino has a jaw like a croc. You keep not answering my question, which is how is that an advantage over Spino? I highlighted my question so you could hopefully see it and as you said earlier to me got it now?

Second question show me here how the Carcharodontosaurus jaw allows for what your saying which is that the lower jaw swung out of the way?Got it now....lol!
View attachment 776870

You also fail to do what I have which is provide citation for what your claiming, something I have done. Which means I've been proving that my theories are coming from actual scientists while you've proven nothing, except that these are your personal beliefs and don't even have reasons behind them. At every turn you have avoided my questions and answered what you feel like and provided no reasoning. How do you propose that people take you seriously when you offer no source material and no reasoning? You have also several times misspelled even the dino's names your describing incorrectly and not a typo as you keep doing it. Which leads me to believe you don't even know the name correctly how could you know much else about them correctly.

 

[Wiggles92]

Sorry fell asleep.lol! In order for an animal to open it's head at a 180 degree angle the animal would have to have a double hinged jaw and from everything I read and have seen Carcharodontosaurus didn't have one which means what you say shouldn't be possible. But lets say your right, how does that represent and advantage when Spino has a jaw like a croc. You keep not answering my question, which is how is that an advantage over Spino? I highlighted my question so you could hopefully see it and as you said earlier to me got it now?

Second question show me here how the Carcharodontosaurus jaw allows for what your saying which is that the lower jaw swung out of the way?Got it now....lol!
View attachment 776870

You also fail to do what I have which is provide citation for what your claiming, something I have done. Which means I've been proving that my theories are coming from actual scientists while you've proven nothing, except that these are your personal beliefs and don't even have reasons behind them. At every turn you have avoided my questions and answered what you feel like and provided no reasoning. How do you propose that people take you seriously when you offer no source material and no reasoning? You have also several times misspelled even the dino's names your describing incorrectly and not a typo as you keep doing it. Which leads me to believe you don't even know the name correctly how could you know much else about them correctly.

It only needs to be able to open it's jaw at a 90° angle or so for such a hunting method to be possible. Keep in mind that Smilodon could open its jaw at a 120° angle. However, I do not know if any studies have been done in regards to the angle at which Carcharodontosaurus could open its jaw.

 

[koltsixx]

It only needs to be able to open it's jaw at a 90° angle or so for such a hunting method to be possible. Keep in mind that Smilodon could open its jaw at a 120° angle. However, I do not know if any studies have been done in regards to the angle at which Carcharodontosaurus could open its jaw.

In either case a jaw structure would have to be different than normal to accommodate it opening to a larger degree. That's why I asked him to show me the structural difference in the jaw, so he could prove his point. I also asked him to site a source for his info. So far I'm the only one to actually reference actual papers on the matter that I'm speaking of. Being the fact that he's supposedly studying this field he hasn't shown any citation. One would think that when your learning about this stuff your books would be full of citations from scientists, because unless your actually the one studying the fossils and publishing the papers that's how you would learn. From the scientists who are studying the actual fossils and publishing the papers on their findings. Or am I wrong about that too? You can't pull something out of the air and say it's fact, which is what he's doing by just saying stuff without proof. I can do that too, but I choose not to. I choose to cite my sources and explain their reasons for their theory. That's my major point here. He says he's studying this field and that's been the only leg he's been standing on as he's provided not one shred of scientific fact or cited any source.

I'm actually truly surprised that I'm the only one citing stuff actual scientists who are studying the bones and digging them up and studying them and publishing papers and his opinion is given more weight than the actual paleontologist publishing their findings that I'm citing and quoting. I'm actually at a loss on that one.

 

[00rollins]

I cant believe how crazily this thread multiplied while I was working,
Darius many of the claims you post are worded in an almost certain fashion, from axe like attacking to agility and weather conditions. I am no expert in any way not even a novice although I do get the opportunity to make it to the museum of natural history ever couple of years, but I assume everything posted here in the thread is opinion based and nothing that the bones cant teach experts could be considered truth or fact. If I am wrong please correct me. Either way I like how koltsix used present day reptiles as comparison as it impliments an undisputable clause for comparison even if the comparison cannot lead to truth, fact, or agreement. I love a good debate but Im also thrown off by one that cannot be won or irrifutably disputed. It seems that there are an imense amount of what if`s being thrown around, climate, hunting characteristics, alternate species interaction and pecking order, and on and on. This will make the debate even harder, each unknown factor added to the debate of hump vs sail will exponentially increase the dissagreement percentage. The focus should be specific to sail and hump with the use of some common agreed factors as terms for cross referance. Thier is alot of dispute, what is the common ground, is it that this dino remained linked to water in some way, weather to hunt, scavenge, swim for fish or breed or whatever. Honestly I am increasinlgly unsure as this progresses. Seriously is there any common belief that all posters or better yet scientists agree on.

I may be going to the museum in nyc this weekend for some info

Considering I cant prove or disprove anything I figure a comparison to modern reptile bones may be interesting, this has been difficult as I cannot easily find the skeletons of most reptiles I would like to use in comparison.

vieled chameleon, I had one and I miss that bug eyed sucka, they have a hump, they can flatten thier bodies idf they fall out of a tree, to simulate a leaf like structure and lessen damage in the fall. The hump would be the outer ridge of the leaf like structure. Unrelated in any way to this dino exept it has an undisputable hump wich would couse for a reason to compare. Comparing bison hump to a reptile seems distant. Anyone aware of any larger humped modern reptile.




Sailfin dragon, while the sail is not on its back I like this for comparison of sail bone structure
I wish I could get the pic in better quality, think the bones are pretty wide in this sail compare to the rest of the body and its only a small sail on the tail.




My time is short but I will continue to search for some new bones


Met a girl that could open her mouth to that degree once, sorry ladies n gents I couldnt resist

Sent from my GT-P7510 using MonsterAquariaNetwork App

 

[Wiggles92]

In either case a jaw structure would have to be different than normal to accommodate it opening to a larger degree. That's why I asked him to show me the structural difference in the jaw, so he could prove his point. I also asked him to site a source for his info. So far I'm the only one to actually reference actual papers on the matter that I'm speaking of. Being the fact that he's supposedly studying this field he hasn't shown any citation. One would think that when your learning about this stuff your books would be full of citations from scientists, because unless your actually the one studying the fossils and publishing the papers that's how you would learn. From the scientists who are studying the actual fossils and publishing the papers on their findings. Or am I wrong about that too? You can't pull something out of the air and say it's fact, which is what he's doing by just saying stuff without proof. I can do that too, but I choose not to. I choose to cite my sources and explain their reasons for their theory. That's my major point here. He says he's studying this field and that's been the only leg he's been standing on as he's provided not one shred of scientific fact or cited any source.

I'm actually truly surprised that I'm the only one citing stuff actual scientists who are studying the bones and digging them up and studying them and publishing papers and his opinion is given more weight than the actual paleontologist publishing their findings that I'm citing and quoting. I'm actually at a loss on that one.

Valid points. I too would like to see exactly what that structural difference is along with any scientific papers that support the theory as I have yet to find any.

On a different note, I know that the modern African savannah comparison (cheetahs, lions, & hyenas) has come up when it comes to Spinosaurus, Carcharodontosaurus, and whatever smaller predators there were, but the issue that comparison is there's no evidence of Carcharodontosaurus or Spinosaurus hunting in packs however there certainly is enough evidence to indicate that they mainly preyed upon different food sources presumably to avoid a potentially fatal interaction with each other.

Personally, I would like to see what Paul Sereno, a paleontologist who specializes in African dinosaurs including Carcharodontosaurus, would say in regards to some of these theories considering that he appears to be on the leading edge of African dinosaur experts.

 

[Wiggles92]

Sailfin dragon, while the sail is not on its back I like this for comparison of sail bone structure
I wish I could get the pic in better quality, think the bones are pretty wide in this sail compare to the rest of the body and its only a small sail on the tail.

In the case of the sailfin dragon, only the male has such a large sail, and the female has a far smaller sail. There's also a remarkable difference in color as adult males tend to have a lot of bright cobalt blue on them while females are a bit more subdued in coloration.

Maybe there is a difference in sail size between the male Spinosaurus and the female Spinosaurus provided that the structure is indeed a sail?