Tyrannosaurus vs. Giganotosaurus

Kintaro · Post by **Kintaro** » 2003-02-06 12:58pm

Which one would win in a one on one fight?

Keep in mind that a Tyrannosaurus has a bite force of a least 2,900 pounds of force (that was the amout from just a feeding mark), which is greater than any known animal.

Post by **Kuja** » 2003-02-06 01:01pm

Rexy.

Stravo · Post by **Stravo** » 2003-02-06 01:03pm

Gigantasauraus winning against a T Rex in Jurassic Park III was a contrived piece of shit that made me hate that movie from that scene onward. T-Rex is king - Hail to the King baby!!!

Kintaro · Post by **Kintaro** » 2003-02-06 01:07pm

Stravo wrote:Gigantasauraus winning against a T Rex in Jurassic Park III was a contrived piece of shit that made me hate that movie from that scene onward. T-Rex is king - Hail to the King baby!!!

That was a Spinosaurus, which is even worse!

Stravo · Post by **Stravo** » 2003-02-06 01:09pm

I stand corrected and now EVEN MORE DISGUSTED with that movie!!

RedImperator · Post by **RedImperator** » 2003-02-06 01:22pm

This is probably a pretty evenly matched fight, unless there's some critical bit of information about Gigantasauraus that I'm missing (he's so recently discovered none of my references mention him). It would probably come down to the skill, experience, and luck of the individual animals. I think T-Rex might have better short-burst speed, just judging by the build of the legs and lower torso, which might give him the advantage, though it's possible Gigantasauraus might have had fractionally more raw power (not really enough to make a difference, though).

On a side note, the Academy of Natural Sciences in Philadelphia has mounted a cast of a Gigantasauraus directly over the front desk, so while you're paying for your ticket, there's a set of 6 inch teeth practically at eye level. Very nifty.

Admiral Valdemar · Post by **Admiral Valdemar** » 2003-02-06 01:23pm

Stravo wrote:I stand corrected and now EVEN MORE DISGUSTED with that movie!!

Indeed. T-Rex baby! Not some overgrown alligator.

RedImperator · Post by **RedImperator** » 2003-02-06 01:28pm

Stravo wrote:Gigantasauraus winning against a T Rex in Jurassic Park III was a contrived piece of shit that made me hate that movie from that scene onward. T-Rex is king - Hail to the King baby!!!

That was Jack Horner's doing. He's got a bug up his ass about Rex being a scavenger and nothing else, and he was the technical advisor on that movie. Spinosaurus wouldn't stand a chance against a healthy adult Tyrannosaurus.

Stravo · Post by **Stravo** » 2003-02-06 01:33pm

RedImperator wrote:
Stravo wrote:Gigantasauraus winning against a T Rex in Jurassic Park III was a contrived piece of shit that made me hate that movie from that scene onward. T-Rex is king - Hail to the King baby!!!
That was Jack Horner's doing. He's got a bug up his ass about Rex being a scavenger and nothing else, and he was the technical advisor on that movie. Spinosaurus wouldn't stand a chance against a healthy adult Tyrannosaurus.

What's funny about that is wasn't a character based on him in Jurassic Park II that got eaten by one of the T-Rex's in the waterfall scene?

Kintaro · Post by **Kintaro** » 2003-02-06 01:35pm

And Dr. Horner (the equivalent to Darkstar in the T. rex: predator or scavenger debate) says that the Spinosaurus is the ultimate predator

Kintaro · Post by **Kintaro** » 2003-02-06 01:37pm

Stravo wrote:What's funny about that is wasn't a character based on him in Jurassic Park II that got eaten by one of the T-Rex's in the waterfall scene?

I think that was Bob Bakker, one of his rivals

RedImperator · Post by **RedImperator** » 2003-02-06 01:41pm

Stravo wrote:
RedImperator wrote:
Stravo wrote:Gigantasauraus winning against a T Rex in Jurassic Park III was a contrived piece of shit that made me hate that movie from that scene onward. T-Rex is king - Hail to the King baby!!!
That was Jack Horner's doing. He's got a bug up his ass about Rex being a scavenger and nothing else, and he was the technical advisor on that movie. Spinosaurus wouldn't stand a chance against a healthy adult Tyrannosaurus.
What's funny about that is wasn't a character based on him in Jurassic Park II that got eaten by one of the T-Rex's in the waterfall scene?

No, that character was based on Bob Bakker (who I beleve was the technical advisor on JP II). Bakker and Horner are the two men most responsible for resurrecting dinosaurs' image in the latter half of the 20th century. Horner discovered the big Maiasaur nesting grounds in Montana that proved at least some species cared for their young, and Bakker worked with John Ostrom at Yale to basically trash all the theories that said dinosaurs were nothing but lumbering, overgrown lizards. Allen Grant's character was based on Horner in the original JP novel and movie.

EDIT: Fun fact: Technically, Bob Bakker is credited with describing the type specimen for Homo sapiens. It seems Linneaus overlooked finding and describing a type specimen for humans when he created his classification system. Edward Drinker Cope, the co-founder of modern American palentology (and, incedently, the Academy of Natural Sciences in Philadelphia), requested in his will that he be made the type specimen and donated his skeleton to science, but because he some sort of bone damage from disease, they refused to do so. His body was kept in storage at the University of Pennsylvania. Nobody ever got around to doing it, and finally in I think 1992, Bob Bakker, who idolized Cope, actually got his hands on Cope's skull thanks to a pair of National Geographic journalists who were doing a story on palentologists and finally wrote a description and submitted it to whoever's in charge of these things. So technically, the type specimen for humanity is Edward Drinker Cope, described in the early 1990s by Bob Bakker, and humanity's native habitat is.....Philadelphia (so suck it, New York! You might have your "championships" and "functional economy" and might not be "a moribund post-industrial wasteland", but WE'RE the home of the species. Nyah).

Admiral Valdemar · Post by **Admiral Valdemar** » 2003-02-06 01:44pm

Kintaro wrote:And Dr. Horner (the equivalent to Darkstar in the T. rex: predator or scavenger debate) says that the Spinosaurus is the ultimate predator

So much bullshit, I guess the name T-Rex doesn't mean anything to him.

Death from the Sea · Post by **Death from the Sea** » 2003-02-06 01:50pm

Gigantasauraus... wasn't one of Godzilla's enemy monsters named something like that?

Kintaro · Post by **Kintaro** » 2003-02-06 01:52pm

No, Giganotosaurus was discovered '94 or '95. I don't remember Godzilla's enemies having a name like that after the discovery date.

Death from the Sea · Post by **Death from the Sea** » 2003-02-06 01:55pm

If the T-Rex is supposed to be a scavenger then why is it believed that they have bad eyesight and can for the most part only detect movement? or was that a BS brainbug from JP ?

RedImperator · Post by **RedImperator** » 2003-02-06 01:56pm

Kintaro wrote:And Dr. Horner (the equivalent to Darkstar in the T. rex: predator or scavenger debate) says that the Spinosaurus is the ultimate predator

Hey, let's not go comparing the man to Darkstar now. Horner has privately admitted he's partially doing this just to jerk people's chains and keep them thinking. His work with ornithopods and their social structure was revolutionary--he's the reason why almost nobody thinks dinosaurs were like turtles who abandon their young as soon as the eggs are laid.

Kintaro · Post by **Kintaro** » 2003-02-06 01:57pm

Also, check out the bone scares on T. rex to find out what kinds of injuries this animal can take and survive, like broken necks

RedImperator · Post by **RedImperator** » 2003-02-06 01:58pm

Death from the Sea wrote:If the T-Rex is supposed to be a scavenger then why is it believed that they have bad eyesight and can for the most part only detect movement? or was that a BS brainbug from JP ?

JP brainbug. I'm not sure if that was just a plot device or some theory that was in vogue at the time. I don't know of anyone who thinks T-Rex could only detect movement.

Kintaro · Post by **Kintaro** » 2003-02-06 01:58pm

Death from the Sea wrote:If the T-Rex is supposed to be a scavenger then why is it believed that they have bad eyesight and can for the most part only detect movement? or was that a BS brainbug from JP ?

That was bs from the movie and first book. In the second book, it even says it was bs.

RedImperator · Post by **RedImperator** » 2003-02-06 01:59pm

Kintaro wrote:Also, check out the bone scares on T. rex to find out what kinds of injuries this animal can take and survive, like broken necks

Interestingly enough, most of the wounds we've found on Rexes were from...other Rexes. Clearly, they weren't opposed to fighting each other. At least one Rex skeleton is believed to have wounds acquired while mating (a broken tail)!

Kintaro · Post by **Kintaro** » 2003-02-06 02:01pm

Yep, I think that was Sue's broken tail.

Kintaro · Post by **Kintaro** » 2003-02-06 02:10pm

Would those of you who are voting for Giganotosaurus please explain why?

Death from the Sea · Post by **Death from the Sea** » 2003-02-06 02:13pm

Thanks RedI and Kintaro. now I know, and .... well you know the rest...

I do think that T-Rex would wipe the floor with the Gigantisauraus. Much like the T-Rex did at the end of JP with the velociraptors.

Kintaro · Post by **Kintaro** » 2003-02-06 02:16pm

You're welcome.