Re: late night thoughts: misunderstand what?

[Dann Pigdon <dannj@alphalink.com.au>]

don ohmes wrote:

> Dann Pigdon wrote:
>
> > I suspect a well-aimed bite by a tyrannosaur could possibly have
> > incapacitated an adult sauropod.
>
> ....... "...suspect ... possibly..."? I know you are trained to use cautious 
> language, but c'mon, Dann. What do I have to do, cite Erickson et al, on bite 
> strength?

As well as studies on sauropod neck strength...

For a guaranteed-fatal single bite the rex would have to bite *really* close to 
the head. I'm guessing sauropods would rather keep their heads away from large 
predators if at all possible, so they'd be doing everything in their power to 
avoid such an encounter. And their 'power' would have been considerable.

>
> ........... Now we are back in "aw c'mon!" territory. Tail swing is an 
> iconic, but negligible factor in realistic predation scenarios. Remember the 
> trees? End of story, unless we are entertaining the idea that when tail meets 
> tree, tail wins. Which is ludicrous. -- DO.

What trees? What evidence is there that sauropods lived *amongst* trees? I 
think it's more likely they spent more time in open terrain at forest borders 
(for those that actually fed on trees) than cruising amongst them. Sauropods 
with low-slung heads (like diplodocids) needn't  have gone anywhere near trees 
at all. Those long necks and tails would have made navigating amongst trees a 
nightmare.

--
___________________________________________________________________

Dann Pigdon
GIS / Archaeologist         http://www.geocities.com/dannsdinosaurs
Melbourne, Australia        http://heretichides.soffiles.com
___________________________________________________________________