Nagisa wrote:QUOTE Horner has logical reasons for why he thinks the spino is a predator,
That's questionable. Spinosaurus' closest relatives (Baryonyx & Suchomimus) are known fish eaters; they stalk riverbeds looking for fish, crocodilians, and maybe juvenile or small dinosaurs as food sources. They likely didn't go after large prey, nor did they have the strength to. Their jaws were relatively weak and the teeth were cone shaped (easy for prey to wiggle free) and not very deeply set in the jaw. Sure, they had impressive forearms, but looking at modern-day predators, they all still use their jaws to some degree with the forearms merely serving as aids. And the Spino couldn't have been much faster than the Tyrannosaur because they were about the same size. Spino was a little leaner, but not too terribly much so.
Signs point to Spinosaurus being more a river-stalking piscivore than the ravenous killing machine the movie portrays. It very likely waded around on all fours feeling for fish with the tip of its snout a la the modern spoonbill (explains why the nostrils are set so high on the skull...so it doesn't drown while fishing).
QUOTE Their's evidence that the rex might have been a scavenger,[/quote]
Dubious and most paleontologists don't buy it. "Pure" scavengers don't exist, for one. All carnivores seek out the freshest possible kill with the least possible effort. Sometimes that means scavenging, sometimes hunting. Never strictly one over the other.
Also, that'd be a LOT of wasted equipment if Tyrannosaurus was a scavenger. The jaws, neck, and leg muscles were all incredibly powerful, and the jaws themselves could deliver a devastating, vice-like bite (whereas Spino's exceedingly thin jaws wouldn't exactly have great crushing power or grip). The teeth were strong, wide, serrated, and set very deeply in the skull, creating the ideal anchors for holding large, writhing prey while the beast snuffed its life out. The senses of smell and eyesight were very keen, which helps in BOTH predation and scavenging (Horner fails to realise that living animals have a strong scent, too).
There's also actual fossil evidence that Tyrannosaurus hunted at least part of the time. Edmontosaurus tailbones have been found broken by a Tyrannosaur's bite, but since healed (albeit crookedly). If Tyrannosaurus was a hypothetical "pure scavenger," why is he pursuing live prey?
QUOTE and scientist know for sure now that it couldn't run 35 miles an hour.[/quote]
Of course, but short bursts of twenty aren't out of the question. That's more than enough to run down its primary prey sources, anyway...large Hadrosaurs and Ceratopsians were bulkier and had leg structures much less indicative of speed, meaning a Tyrannosaurus could very well run one down even at low speed.
Remember that one Dinosaur Planet special, Alpha's Egg? Remember how slowly the Carcharodontosaurs moved? And yet they still outran a prey item? A Tyrannosaurus hunting an Edmontosaurus would likely look very, very similar.
QUOTE In JP3 Joe Johnston wanted to use a dinosaur that really stuck out as different and couldn't possibly be mistaken for any other dinosaur.[/quote]
Acrocanthosaurus atokensis could have been a superb candidate. Around Tyrannosaurus size with genuine killing ability. And with its high spine, long forearms, and more angular skull (a different colour scheme, perhaps?), it would have been quite distinctive.
QUOTE Man, you guys on this site love to kick dirt on Jack Horner's name.[/quote]
I have all the respect in the world for Horner and his contributions to the field of paleontology. However, I think his theories on Tyrannosaurus and Spinosaurus are completely off and blatantly ignore some rather solid research by other paleontologists. [/quote]
Did you know that you rule,Nagisa?You posted all the exact facts everyone needed to hear.I doubt Horner would be able to say anything about that. /tongue.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid=":P" border="0" alt="tongue.gif" />