Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

All in the blood!

  1. May 16, 2003 #1
    last time i heard scientists were bitterly disputing whether dinosaurs are warm blooded or cold blooded.what's the latest verdict?by the way can anyone give me a sane reason why a predator like t-rex should have no use for
    forelimbs?
     
  2. jcsd
  3. May 16, 2003 #2
    I think the verdict is still out on that, but if I'm not mistaken the consensus is pointing towards warm blooded.

    Who says T-rex didn't have uses for it's forearms? Sure, they're small compared to the rest of its body, but they could still tear some **** up. I think I read each arm was capable of lifting around 800 lbs.
     
  4. May 16, 2003 #3
    i think they came to the conclusion that some were warmblooded and some were cold. also t-rex's arms were so short it would be hard to find a use for them. t-rex also was probably not a predator, it was seemingly (from fossil evidence) very slow, had great smelling capabilities, and could barely see, t-rex was probably a scavenger.
     
  5. May 16, 2003 #4

    LURCH

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor

    Just want to put in for the opposing point of view. I think that the evidence for T-Rex being a scavanger is nto at all convincing. For me, the evidence from dentition put the whole matter to rest; T-Rex, I am fairly convinced, was an ambush predator.

    Also, the best evidence we have for T-Rex in particular suggests that it was an endotherm. This evidence consists chiefly of the ratio of preditor-to-prey fossil evidence. The idea is that a preditor's population will grow 'till it holds as many individuals as can be supported by the available food supply. Food requirements for an endotherm are at least three times the amount needed by exotherms. The predator-to-prey ratio for T-Rex (and most Cretatious preditors that have been investigated) is indicative of a warm-blooded preditor.
     
  6. May 16, 2003 #5
    perhaps, but i still see no reason in which t-rexs sight was so poor, yet its olfactory was so advanced... look at a common ambush predator like an alligator, its eyesight is amazing and it's also quite fast (in water). now look at a scavenger like a vulcher, slow moving, bad eyesight, great sense of smell.
     
  7. May 18, 2003 #6
    i like divergence of opinion.keep it up.i still say trex had small forearms.i have got an impression that there was a steady trend to this decrease amongst tyranosaur family culminating with rex.what is the explanation.anyway what difference does it make if it were a scavenger(iff!)why should a scavenger not need forearms?
     
  8. May 18, 2003 #7

    Phobos

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    Obviously, there's still a big scientific debate on both sides. And on the middle (e.g., a predator that also scavenges).
     
  9. May 18, 2003 #8
    great point, i've recently looked in to some of this stuff and found that even though t-rex was slow, compared with other large plant eaters (triceratops for example) it was relatively the same speed. so indeed it would be able to catch its food, something a lot of scientist deemed impossible. also some believe it could "launch" itself with it's tail much like an alligator, quite interesting.

    a predator/scavenger would have been quite the ideal type of dinosaur back in those times huh? :wink:
     
Know someone interested in this topic? Share this thread via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook

Have something to add?



Similar Discussions: All in the blood!
  1. Blood Drinking (Replies: 12)

  2. Blood coagulation (Replies: 1)

  3. Blood Transfusions (Replies: 3)

  4. Blood transfusion (Replies: 4)

Loading...