Megaraptor is definately not a noasaur. Since its a South American sickle-clawed thing, I assumed it would be related to them too. But it's not. I think it was Chandler who gave me the reason, something about the shape of the claw muscle. Megaraptor isn't a dromaeosaurid either, you are correct in questioning their ability to cross over into the southern continents. Its apparently quite close to birds, like a gigantic Mononykus. Unenlagia, a smaller dino-bird, may represent a juvenile.

I wonder what was so great about the 'megalosaur' body plan for hunting sauropods?
from Brad, age 13, Woodville, ON, Canada; November 24, 2000

I've never heard it put in those words, Moyjo. Good example.
from Brad, age 13, Woodville, ON, Canada; November 24, 2000

Levine, you just quoted a site that classifies T. rex as "Carnosauria (the big meat eaters)" !!! I also think that most eight-year olds are more than three feet tall.
from Brad, age 13, Woodville, ON, Canada; November 24, 2000

Old Blood is cool I think its one of the best.
from Weiming, age ?, ?, ?, ?; November 24, 2000

People, please slow down. I know BBD is wrong and you guys have to straighten him out. But don't cause another Mr.Rogers repeat. BBD, you should alos have the huminity to admit you're wrong.
from Lilian T., age ?, ?, ?, ?; November 24, 2000

I hardly think is fair to use the pound for pound argument. Tyrannosaurus had alot more pound you know. The puny raptors had so little pounds, they were restricted to hunting small prey lest a kick or a fall from a herbivore injure them too badly to hunt....then they die.
from flamebird, age ?, ?, ?, ?; November 24, 2000

Yeah BBD, if your argument was correct, some people in the future would say that the hyenas could take on the lion because they could bite the lion and retreat. Do we see this happening? NO! Infact, lions end up killing hyenas that annoy them. I suspect its the same for T-Rex. T-Rex was by no means slow or dim witted, he was as smart as a raptor and extrmely agile for its size. I suspect T-Rex regulary killed the raptor that annoyed it or strayed too close to it, just like mordern day big predators do. Being small and fast is actually a disadvantage in the natural world.
from Paleoecologist, age ?, ?, ?, ?; November 24, 2000

Another person going for the deadilest pound for pund argument again? I am afraid I cannot agree with you. Being daedilest pound for pound hardly makes you the deadilest, lets show you how:

M-92F 9mm Berreta.
Weight: 1.2kilos
Muzzle Energy: 642jules

M-2 Browning Heavy Machine Gun
Weight: 13kilos
Muzzle Energy: 1780jules

Now, if you would notice, the Berreta is actually deadiler, pound for pound. But still, in the end, the M-2 still exceeds the Berreta in firepower. For BBD, since keeps using the pound for pound deadilest argument, why don't he try using the Berreta against a guy with a M-2 Browning? No? It's obvious is it not? In the Marine Corps, we don't go for the weapon which is deadilest, pound for pound. We go for the DEADILEST weapon. The T.Rex is the M-2, the raptor is the Berreta, who is better? That's obvious.
from Sgt Iilhalo, age ?, ?, ?, ?; November 24, 2000

Your right Leonard. I checked my facts and it did say that Carchardontosaurus had small arms. They also had large powerful jaws so they didn't wrestle there prey to the ground.
from firebird, age ?, ?, ?, ?; November 24, 2000

OK so I see your point about the Giga-T.Rex thing. I have a questin though. Was megaraptor a dromaeosaur or a Noasaur?(Did I spell that right?) Ive read he was a dromaeosaur by the way his hands are built, but how could they have crossed into south America? About the whole T.REx thing though, I dont buy he is the deadliest, I will always stick by the raptors as that. I have put the reasons why I believe so on my last posting. Tyrannosaurus is a bad mofo, but hes still slower than many other theropods and he needs to get in close to hurt you.I know you shouldnt pit dinosaurs against each other cuz all of them were built for their lifestyle, but sometimes its kinda fun to find who was the man among the dinosaurs. T.Rex couldnt survive in Giggys land and visa-versa. It was a land of big herbivores that called for that Megalosaur type build again. Giggy was too dumb and weak to survive in T.rex's land where it was colder and you had to be more muscled not only to survive but to stay warmer too. Those guys are built alot like Megalosaurs.
from ?, age ?, ?, ?, ?; November 24, 2000

A raptor being deadilest pound for pound....plueseese the raptors were overrated. Madye a pack of raptors can take down rexy when a bunch of neighbourhood cats can take down a lion...brad, can your cat do that?
from Moyjo, age ?, ?, ?, ?; November 24, 2000

BBD, no, we do not know that Giganotosaurus had bigger arms for the simple fact he didn't. Are you making up your own facts to smoke us as we go along? Not the honourable thing to do. Anyway, everybody, this is an extract from a articale about Giganotosaurus to really end this debate once and for all, notice this is an artice about how Giganotosaurus matches upo with Tyrannosaurus,it can be found at http://www.acnatsci.org/dinofest/teachers/dinohall/trex.html:

SKULL LENGTH: 6 feet, the size of two eight-year-olds!
LENGTH: 42 feet (13 meters)
HEIGHT: 12 feet at the hips (3.5 meters)
WEIGHT: Estimated at 8 tons (7,300 kilograms)
DIET: Meat
TEETH: flatter, dagger-like, serrated
ARMS: smaller, three fingers
BRAINCASE: smaller, narrower
AGE: Early Late Cretaceous, 100-90 million years ago
RANGE: South America, Nuquen Province of Argentina
CLASSIFICATION: Saurischia (lizard hipped dinosaurs), Theropoda (bi-pedal meat-eating dinosaur)

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Discovered in Argentina in 1995 by paleontologist Dr. Rodolfo Coria, Giganotosaurus is currently recognized as the largest meat-eating dinosaur that ever lived, beating its North American cousin T. rex by a nose. Giganotosaurus is about as tall as the tallest T. rex specimen ever found, but the Southern American giant is at least two feet longer than the "tyrant lizard king

TYRANNOSAURUS REX
Tyrannosaurus rex
(tie-RAN-oh-SORE-us rex)
"Tyrant Lizard King"

SKULL LENGTH: 5 feet
LENGTH: 40 feet (about 12 meters)
HEIGHT: 12 feet at the hips (3.5 meters)
WEIGHT: Estimated at 6 tons (6,096 kilograms)
DIET: Meat
TEETH: larger, rounded, serrated
ARMS: larger, two fingers
BRAINCASE: larger, wider
AGE: Late Cretaceous, 68-65 million years ago
RANGE: North America (Colorado, Montana, New Mexico, Wyoming, South Dakota and Alberta, Saskatchewan)
CLASSIFICATION: Saurischian (lizard-hipped dinosaurs)
Theropoda (the meat-eating dinosaurs)
Carnosauria (the big meat eaters)

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
As of 1997, fewer than two dozen good specimens of T. rex have so far been found, all in western North America. Barnum Brown found the first one in 1905, and the second one in 1908 -- both in Montana and both incomplete. In 1905, Henry Fairfield Osborn described the dinosaur and gave it a name worthy of its terrifying size and appearance--"tyrant lizard king." T. rex skeletons are being found now at the rate of about one per year.

BBD, I hope this cleared any misconceptions.
from Levine, age 24, ?, ?, ?; November 24, 2000

Gee, I can't see how Giganotosaurus could shovle out muscle as described by BBD, it's teeth weren't long enough to make a bite so deep. Tyrannosaurus would have shovled out muscle in a bite. Alos the hands and shoulder bades were small in proportion to T-rex, meaning it did not have as much anchor. Could somebody confirm this once and for all. I don't like somebody spreading misinformation around.
from Leonard, age 12, ?, ?, ?; November 24, 2000

Most carnivores would have had a septic bite as they didn't brush their teeth, but Tyrannosaurus serrations were different from all other predators because it was specially designed to trap baterial, meaning it would be really really septic, septic enough to kill the prey in a few hours. Now, that's hunting-strength septic. The only animal that's immune to this was another Tyrannosaurus as they could bite each other and get away with it.

If you didn't know, Tyrannosaurus could also remove muscle in a bite. Infact, he could rip a hole threes feet by five feet if he was in a good mood, removing up to seventy kilos of flesh and whatever in in the way. Giganotosaurus could't do that. The argument is, Tyrannosaurus would probally kill off Giganotosaurs before the third bite, while Giganotosaurus tries franticly to bite the quick moving Tyrannosaurus Rex.

About that hand thing. I don't think Giganotosaurus had hands as strong as Tyrannosaurus. I don't see any special mention about bigger hands either. JC, could you confirm this?

I'm not defending Tyrannosaurus because he's my favourite. I do admit that Tyrannosaurus probally would lose if it attacked Ankylosaurus. I'm not so sure if the raptors were deadliest, and I certainly don't think they would have seriously or bravely attacked a Tyrannosaurus. I think the raptors were about as deadly as a Ceolurus of similar size

It hard to make generalizations about how is the deadilest. If you asked a small dinosaur like Hypsilodon who was the deadilest, it would have named the raptors, but if you asked a Antaotitan who it thought was the deadilest, it would have named Tyrannosaurus. These two animals were different predators that attacked different prey, so it's hard to decide deadilest or what. JC, could you confirm the hands issue?
from Lilain T., age ?, ?, ?, ?; November 24, 2000
I dont have the measurements of Giganotosaurus' hands. JC

Huh? Can't you see from the pictures? Read around! Even the guy how found Giganotosaurus would say so. Giganotosaurus had arms too small to use in an attack, like T.rex. Anyway, I figure T.rex was smart enough not to tango with Gigantosaurus. It would rush in, open a hole, and back off, using it's superior speed to keep away from Giggy, like it would have done to Triceratops. Sorry, but Giggy would have faced rapid extinction. In fact the reason it could not cross over into the continent of nort america was because of a shallow sea.
from Honkie Tong, age 16, ?, ?, ?; November 24, 2000

Honkie here,This is a picture of Giganotosaurus, could it be posted to the dinotalk instead? As you can see, it had Carnotaurus like forelimbs, unlike the grappling monsters suggested by somebody...

from ?, ?, ?, ?, ?; November 23, 2000

No! No! No! This is nonsense. All this is in contradiction to what I know about Carchardontosaurus. For starters, Carchardontosaurus had smaller hands, not the huge, grappeling claws you described. I also can't see how the dim-witted Carchardontosaurus could hunt down prey and wrestle it to the ground because it had weak jaws. It acted more like a sissors than a nutcracker, like T-rex. Not to mention he was dumber, slower and weaker than T-rex. Please check your info before you post anything or you will look like a total idiot like I did when I posted the wrong infomation on the Nanotyrannus debate. Do you concide T-rex was the deadilest predator now?
from Leonard, age 12, ?, ?, ?; November 23, 2000

Really? I thought the uncertinty principal limits what we know about the quamtum universe. I know your idea is to break that guy down and rebuild him to the original specs in a slower universe. Chaos theory shows this to be at best, inhernetly unstable. Try a tipper equation instead or you could skip the technicallies and go straight back with the flux capacitor!(And a cool Delorean)
from ?, age ?, ?, ?, ?; November 23, 2000

Ornitholestes and Ceolurus? I'm not sure man. They probally had the odds of two evenly matched neighbourhood dogs fighting each other. But lets get this straight: Tyrannosaurus would win if pitted against Carchardontosaurus and I have compelling reasons to believe so.

The only dinosaurs Tyrannosaurus could not beat was probally another Tyrannosaur, Tyrannosaurus Imperator(if it wasn't a T.rex) and ceratinly a healthy Ankylosaurus.
from Honkie Tong, age 16, ?, ?, ?; November 23, 2000

Hmm, you are right, but the mutiverse has multiple uncertainties too. I suggest you slow the speed of light down in a eistine-burum solution to create a temporal singulitary. If you can get the singularaty to be scaled up and some means to avoid hitting singularaty, you can actually go back in time if you have another singulatary. But this is highly speculative. You can try the neuron star solution too. But its up to you.
from ?, age ?, ?, ?, ?; November 23, 2000

I don't think its a good idea to generalise dinosaurs like this or even to pit them together as they were built for different things. It's my opinion that Tyrannosaurus would have taken down Carchardontosaurus in any case. All the agile and quick thinking Tyrannosaurus had to do was to get a single bite in at Carchardontosaurus and the game would be over. Carchardontosaurus on the other hand had to land a few more bites in at Tyrannosaurus to kill it. Not to mention Tyrannosaurus was built for survivality.

I suspect Tyrannosaurus would have gotten one bite in at Carchardontosaurus and stayed away using its superior speed, waiting for Carchardontosaurus to bleed to death from the gaping wound or die of infection. About the lighter more manurevalube head issue, I belivev that anaylsis to be flawed. Carchardontosaurus was about the same size as Tyrannosaurus rex but was built like Giganotosaurus, meaning it was actually weaker and slower...explains the small brain. In any case, Tyrannosaurus would have probally disabled Carchardontosaurus with one bite anyway. One must remember Tyrannosaurus hunted the dangerous Triceratops and the fast hardosaurs. It's best tatic of securing a kill would be to kill it as quickly as possible, giving rise to the powerful jaws and the powerfully neck.

Carchardontosaurus on the other hand was a sauropod hunter. Explaining the slow moving speed and the longer jaws. Carchardontosaurus didn't have to rely on one bite to kill as it was impossible to do with a large sauropod. Carchardontosaurus probally attacked a weak or feble sauropod until it was too weak to fight back, staying out of the letal tail radius.

But if you ask me, if you pit a one bite, one kill creature against a multiple bite killer is not really fair, Tyrannosaurus would blast right through Carchardontosaurus with a mixture of powerful jaws, agility and biological weapons. Mabye the reason that Giganotosaurus never got into north america was because it was stopped by the early Tyrannosauids. Pitting Carchardontosaurus against a Tyrannosaurus is akin to a infantry man(Carchardontosaurus ) with a AK-47 fighting a M1A2 Abrams(Tyrannosaurus).

Hey Brad, I just learnt of this case where a Allosaurus foolishly strayed into the rear arc of the Stegosaurus and got speared, dying three months later from a nasty infection. Is this true? Bakker told the story using a Allosaur hip bone and a few corny pictures.
from Honkie Tong, age 16, ?, ?, ?; November 23, 2000

Giganotosaurus' arms were bigger and just as powerful as a Tyrannosaurus' arms, not to mention bigger and longer. The hands were used to grapple or slightly hold when hell got close. If Tyrannosaurus had a septic bite, then that means most carnosaurs were septic biters since almost all of them had serrated teeth. I still dont think Tyrannosaurus is the most deadly predator, pound for pound. Im sticking with dromaeosaurus. He had long flexible hands, extremely fast reflexes, large killing claws on each paw, and large heavy head with very thick and serrated teeth. Then Tyrannosaur hunting behavior may have not been nipping, but not necesarrily crushing the neck either. Scars have been found on Triceratop hips and femurs or T.res teeth. T.Rex probably busted out on the prey in a group and snapped down on the back of the legs, thighs or sides, possibly while still chasing it into another section of the pack for a ambush. Notice I said POSSIBLY. Giganoto! saurus is known for his bigger longer hands than T.rex. I thought you guys knew this. I think if they both were pitted against each other, the damage would almost be close to equal, tyrannosaurs would lose alot of muscle and Giganoto would probably lose an arm or or gain a major fracture. They both would in the end have killed each other, but the T.rex might win first. You guys defend T.Rex so viciously just becuase hes a favorite. Paleontology isnt all about favorites, but about facts, period. You still have to remember Tyrannosaurs werent as fast as many carnosaurs, especially in reflexes, and some had more weaponry than T.rex like the raptors, if a T.rex got ahold of a large raptor,(a small raptor wouldnt have a chance) it would most def be hurt, but they move by reflexes too fast and they dont have to get so close to cut and severe. Their reflexes are superior to a tyrannosaurs as when it comes to turning around, jumping, swiveling and dodging, but you guys will probably just say Im wrong and ignore all other facts cuz you WANT tyrannosaurus to be the deadliest. It doesnt matter how powerful you are, if the opponet can keep away from your grasp and still keep hitting you, hes more dangerous, cuz you cant catch him. I love Tyrannosaurs myself and an awful lot, but I wanna stay true. Does anyone agree with me?
from BBD, age ?, ?, ?, ?; November 23, 2000

if ornitholestes and ceolurus fought, who do you think would win?
from russell p., age 11, seattle, wa, us; November 23, 2000

Yeah, I am thinking the same too, Honkie. Maybe raptors are like cheetahs. Killed small prey.

Anyway, what about my timeline spin-off story thingy? Should I go ahead or should I not? (Actually, uncertainty prinipal cannot interfere with quantum mechanics due to the nature of the multiverse, what ever that means ;) )
from DW, age 14, Singapore!, ?, ?; November 23, 2000

Yes, I found a picture of the fossils that show a good deal of the forelimbs. My goodness....they are small. Seems typical of all Argenetian super allosaurs.

And what's up with the Argenetians? Why on earth do they keep reciting the "Biggest Carnivore" sutra? I hope somebody highlights Tyrannosaurus Imperator too.
from Honkie Tong, age ?, ?, ?, ?; November 23, 2000

Do you people even know why "Sue" was called that? It is after the person who found the skeleton!! Seriousouly, they should give the skeleton a better name, its not just a lousy pile of bones, its a good skeleton. Anyway, out of tyrannosaurus, gigantosaurus, and carchardontosaurus, carchardontosaurus is the best by far!!! If he and t-rex fought to the death, he would definately win because he has a lighter more manurevalube head and is a lot more powerful. BUT ANYWAYS, THE ORNITHOPODS ARE THE BEST AND MOST SUCCESSFUL KIND OF DINOSAUR, THEY LIVED FROM THE VERY EARLY JURASSIC TO THE END OF THE CRETACOUS!!!!!! ALSO, ORNITHOPODS WERE MOST MANUERVABLE THAN MOST THEROPODS!! Anyways, I would agree the "attack large plant eaters" theory for the dromeosaurs is whacko. However, they could have lived in groups and taken down dinosaurs like puny protoceratopsians. Attacking sauropods? HA, HA, HA Good one!!!!!!!!!! Carchardontosaurus is the best carnivore, though, then baryonyx as close second, and third is Deltadromeus.
from russell p., age 11, seattle, wa, us; November 23, 2000

What the @#$ I'll generate a picture to post.
from ?, age ?, ?, ?, ?; November 23, 2000

Yeah man, Giganotosaurus forelimbs have been found. They're pretty freaky. Too small for it's size. You can check out any site about Giganotosaursu or even Zoon here. The shoulder blades were also freakishly small, meaning those arms were weak.
from Honkie Tong, age ?, ?, ?, ?; November 23, 2000

Hallmarks of Dinosaur History

1842, Dinomania starts when the term is coined. Dinosaurs thought to be closely related to birds and active.

1842-1890, Many dinosaurs identified wrongly as Megolosaurus.

1892, Sauropods discovered give people impression dinosaurs were slow, stupid lumbering beasts destined for extinction.

1905, An obsqure dinosaur, Tyrannosaurus Rex is discovered by Osborn. Unlnown to him at that time, it would soon be the most popular dinsoaur in the world.

1942, WW2 destroys many original fossils! Spinosaurus(all right!) lost.

1950, Dinos seen in flims as tail dragging morons.

1970, Another popular dinosaur genera, the raptors are found. Thought to be the deadilest animals ever to walk the earth, exceeding even Tyrannosaurus rex. Bakker also turns the paelo-world upside down with his theory of warm blooded dinosaur.

1980, lengthy debate, general agrement reached.

1990-98, Sucessful dinosaur shows, raptor popularity rises even more, now almost equal to Tyrannosaurus, looks capable of breaching the Tyrannosaur-barrier.

1998-2000, Closer invesgitation reveals great flaws in the raptor theory. Popularity plunges after findings, haven't recovered since. Tyrannopsaurus now the greatest and most popular dinosaur by a wide margin.
from Poling, age ?, ?, ?, ?; November 23, 2000

I've never seen the Giganotosaurus's arms, so I don't know hwat you are talking about. Is there a photo of the arms (or any Giganotosaurus fossil material) on the internet? I'd expect them to be fairly typical allosauroid, not carnotaurine.

Carnotaurus is freaky, what's up with those tiny backwards arms? Maybe Carnotaurus was an externally armless dinosaur, and the arm bones were adapted to be hidden in the flesh (like the tiny hind limbs of whales). That's a scary thought! A lot of things about Carnotaurus bug me. Like, if its so complete, why can't I find much information on it? How did it attack its prey? Why did Kenner never make JP and TLW Carnotaurus action figures availible in stores, when they looked so cool in the pictures? And did Carnotaurus have and descandants? Frustrating dino.
from Brad, age 13, Woodville, ON, Canada; November 23, 2000

Really, I thought Giganotosaurus was a pushover. Tyrannosaurus' powerful neck and jaws meant that it was a one bite disable dinosaur. Before you quote the Hardosaur tail, explain the Triceratops hip. One massive bite mark deeper than the others indicate the attack bite. That bite disabled the Triceratops. Lets see Giganotosaurus do that. T.rex didn't nip like a dog, it killed the prey with one quick bite to the spine. Giganotosaurus was a multiple bite killer. But it dosen't make sense. Crocs and snakes have a powerful bite like Tyrannosaurus because they could not grapple their prey and have to kill it quick. (though we suspect Tyrannosaurus actually grappled with its arms to manuver its prey into place.)

Giganotosaurus on the other hand had feeble arms that could not flex like Carnotaurus and a slender jaw lined with sharp teeth. It could not kill its prey with one bite at all. Nor could it grapple its prey due to its lack of arms. I suspect Giganotosaurus hunted sauropods and scavenged when it could. Sauropods can't run away after you bite them anyway. Which makes sense. Put Giganotosaurus into North America and it will face rapid extinction as it is unable to hunt the common Hardosaurs there, let alone compete with Tyrannosaurus. It'll go the way of Allosaurus.
from Paleoecologist, age ?, ?, ?, ?; November 23, 2000

Really? Giganotosaurus hunted like this? How did it wrestle down its prey with those weak jaws of it? I don't buy your Tyrannosaurus nipping story too. Tyrannosaurus had joints in its skull to act as shock absorbers to absorb the shock when it bit into its prey. Giganotosaurus didm't have those. It means that T.rex could bite way stronger than Giganotosaurus.

Also the teeth of Giganotosaurus don't fit your theory. It had small teeth to rip and tear flesh, while T.rex was a cookie cutter. Meaning, Giganotosaurus could only tear it's prey while T.rex could remove a 70kilo slab of meat. Not to mention the eyes and brain. By compairsion, Giganotosaurus is effectively dumb and blind alongside T.rex. Not to mention T.rex was actually more powerful than Giganotosaurus as it was more heavily muscled.

I suspect Giganotosaurus was actually a evolutionary latecomer. The allosaurs were never the match of the Tyrannosauids in any case. But T.rex had the best weapon: biological warfare. Some scientists wondered why on earth T.rex needed those serrations on it's teeth when it could snap shut its jaws at 12000 pounds. Recently, they discovered that T.rex had a special feature about these serrations. Unlike other dinosaurs, Tyrannosaurus' serrations didn't really help in cutting the flesh, but it helped to trap bits of rotting meat to make its bite extremely septic. Meaning even a bite from a Tyrannosaur would mean in a few hours, either the prey is very lucky or very dead from infection. Komodo dragons hunt in this way too. T.rex and monitor lizards are about the only reptiles known to do this.

So here we have it. Having the best eyesight exceeding even the raptors, the best sense of smell and super sharp stero hearing with a large brain to boot, Tyrannosaurus would be the ultimate expression of the land based carnivore. We now know that the Tyrannosauids might have even rivaled the raptors in intelligence. Tyrannosaurus was the deadilest land predator ever.

Don't take offence about what I said. I don't want another Mr.Rogers incident here. Everybody has a wacked idea of dinosaurs once in a while.

And one more thing: Giganotosaurus' arms were smaller and weaker than T.rex. T.rex had very powerful arms.
from Lilian T., age ?, ?, ?, ?; November 23, 2000

No! No! No! This is nonsense. All this is in contradiction to what I know about Giganotosaurus. For starters, Giganotosaurus had smaller hands, not the huge, grappeling claws you described. I also can't see how the dim-witted Giganotosaurus could hunt down prey and wrestle it to the ground because it had weak jaws. It acted more like a sissors than a nutcracker, like T-rex. Not to mention he was dumber, slower and weaker than T-rex. Please check your info before you post anything or you will look like a total idiot like I did when I posted the wrong infomation on the Nanotyrannus debate. Do you concide T-rex was the deadilest predator now?
from Leonard, age 12, ?, ?, ?; November 23, 2000

One thing JC, why did you put the picture I sent as by HT?
from Billy Macdraw, age ?, ?, ?, ?; November 23, 2000
Which one was it? The last few I've gotten had no name on them at all, but were from "no go," so I assumed it was HT. If you put your name on the note, I'll put the right name on the picture. Aren't you the same person anyway? JC

Hi.When I sayed to put the dino fiction in the order of how many coments they get I ment good ones, not bad.Also,(Brad, are you reading this?)if someone didn't send in their name or get a good coment, keep it in the oginize those ones how all the storys are now.
from Reuben, age 7, Nedham, MA, USA; November 23, 2000
I'm going to have to re-organize the page soon anyway because it's getting too big (and bigger all the time). I'll give everyone their own page, with links to that from the main page. JC

Your evaluation of Tyrannosaurus hunting is flawed. I suspect there are better ways for Tyrannosaurus to hunt its prey. Tyrannosaurus didn't nip and chase its prey like a hyena bacause it couldn't keep up a burst of speed for distance. Tyrannosaurus probally removed a seventy kilogram slab of meat for dangerous herbivores like Triceratops and backed off for it to bleed out or simply bit down hard on a helpless herbivore to disable it in short order.

Gigantosaurus wasn't a strong biter. The shape of the jaws are all wrong. Gigantosaurus didn't pack to oral firepower of Tyrannosaurus. Estimates of Gigantosaur bite force ranges from 1500-3000 newtons. Tyrannosaurus bit at a confirmed 3000-12000 newtons. I can't see why Gigantosaurus could cause more damage. If any, the hard hitting, quick thinking Tyrannosaurus would have made short work of Gigantosaurus had we cloned and pitted them together.

I find the clipped tail open to question. Why pack all that firepower just to nip at the tail? Tyrannosaurus probally finished the prey with one bite to the torso or neck. The reason we got the tail wound was that the herbivore was escaping, so a tail wound would be more likely as it was running away. We have a good reason to believe that Tyrannosaurus was the deadilest predator, and facts to back it up too.
from Honkie Tong, age 16, ?, ?, ?; November 23, 2000

Err, I thought Gigantonosaurus had smaller hands that T.rex? It's hands resemble more of Carnotaurus, with the inability to flex. Gigantonosaurus also had a weak bite, meaning that it was intended to rip flesh, not T.rexes' bone crushing bite. I expect T.rex to nip at a escaping Hardosaur but in no way that indicates true behaviour. T.rex killed its prey by inflicting massive damage in one bite.

I can't figure how Gigantonosaurus wrestled it's prey. It's skull was a foot bigger but weight the same as it had less bone than T.rex. To make a stronger jaw, you don't make it long and slender, you make it compact. It's an engineering trick. If Gigantonosaurus really wrestled its prey, it would have broken its jaw really well.
from ?, age ?, ?, ?, ?; November 23, 2000

Everybody loves T.Rex. I love him too, but hes not my fav. One of em is dromaeosaurus, with a big heavy head and powerful jaws like a tyrannosaur and a raptor body, he was deadly, even though he wasnt the biggest, he was still deadly, very. Tyrannosaurus may have had the most powerful bite, but he wasnt the deadliest BIG meat eater. I bet it was a giganotosaur type animal cuz they have big fast heads with a shearing bite that can disable muscle and long big hands to hold you while they inflict more damage. Tyrannosaurus was deadly too, I aint dissin the Rex, but it was a runner who nipped and bit the prey while running it and pulling it down and eating it while it was still alive. Now Im sure a bunch of you wanna say no, but there is a hadrosaur skeleton, with the area of the end of tail having bone nipped or bit off, showing while tyrannosaurs ran the prey the bit and nipped it and probably pulled it down or nipped and bit out the thighs disabling the prey animal. Giganotosaurus was more of a wrestler, with it's heavy weight it would have amobushed prey and bit out hunks of important muscle like calves, thighs or shoulder muscles, and if things were more difficult,it would use those hands to hold prey while it sheared and slashed very very quickly like a croc or owl.
from BBD, age ?, ?, ?, ?; November 22, 2000

dinos are so cool. Did you know they lived 1,8500 years ago? Thats along time!
from ag, age 11, nanaimo, bc, canada; November 22, 2000

Guys, any ideas for new pictures? What do you think of my new pictures?
from Honkie Tong, age 16, ?, ?, ?; November 22, 2000

I figure Tarbosaurus would probally sever Elasmosaurus' neck with one bite. But what the hell, it was a cool chapter. Too bad Tabosaurus died.
from ?, age ?, ?, ?, ?; November 22, 2000

The next Old Blood is out. It's a "talking chapter." I also posted my own pictures to boot.
from Billy Macdraw, age 18, ?, ?, ?; November 22, 2000

I guess you are right. But we suspect T.rex had the bird-paws of running birds. I don't think he fell very often. I chase my chincken around for a good part of an hour and they don't seem to fall, despite going flat out. My chickens are amazingly fast, even faster than my neighbour's dogs when they got chased by it, escaping with only minus a few tail feathers. I have yet to see my chinckens fall, not to mention they lack arms and a balancing tail.

I think T.rex probally didn't fall at any speed. Like my chickens! (Yes, the ones I posted a picture of.)
from Honkie Tong, age 16, ?, ?, ?; November 22, 2000

I am not for it. But you could post the sensible comments on. Remember the T.rex could not eat so much incident?
from Lilian T., age ?, ?, ?, ?; November 22, 2000

No, Reuben. First of all, some people don't give their age. And then they're the negative comment issue. On the subject of Dino Fiction, one of my poems is now on the fiction page. Has anyone read it yet?
from Brad, age 13, Woodville, ON, Canada; November 22, 2000

Good point Brad. The Elasmosaurus's neck doesn't look very strong.
from firebird, age ?, ?, ?, ?; November 22, 2000

I have a new plan for the format of the Dinosaur Fiction section. You can organize the stories by how many comments they get. That would probably mean that Old Blood would have the most comments so it would be at the top and ?'s story has the least so it would be at the bottom. If two people get the same amount of comments for their story, the older person's story goes first. For those stories that donlt have any commments, you could also put those in age order. If you have any comments about the stoies then count those. I like to remind all Dino-Show-Us fans that Dino-Show-Us 2 will be coming out very soon.
from Reuben B., age 7, Nedham, MA, USA; November 22, 2000
What does everyone else think about this? This opens up a huge can of worms; I dread reading the comments from those who thrive on contention (and they are out there)! What if the comments are neutral or aren't entirely positive - would they count against the total? As an alternative to my keeping track of the numbers of comments (I'd be about as accurate as the people who count the votes in Florida), we could put up an automated voting section on that page if that what everyone wants. JC

How often do we fall when running? Depends on the individual and the conditions.
If you were running on a running track outside with shoes on, you probably wouldn't fall.
If I was running inside, or a smooth floor, with only my socks on my feet, and there were tables and doorways in my way, I'd probably fall more often.
Running is just a lot more fun indoors, I'm probably more used to the air in here or something. I hate running outside.
Of course, this doesn't have anything to do with Tyrannosauurs.
from Brad, age 13, Woodville, ON, Canada; November 22, 2000

Elasmosaurus vs. Tyrannosaurus?

Firebird's RAPTOR is not alone, the novel DINOVERSE by Scott Ciecin also features a fight between a Tyrannosauurs and an Elasmosaurus--the Elasmosaurus whips its neck around the rex and hauls it under the water. Which basically means that two people wrote about a similar event.

I have my doubts about this too. Basically because I've always heard that the elasmosaur's neck being for darting out and catching food in the mouth, not for squeezing stuff to death like a snake does. The elasmosaur's neck does not look incredibly muscular either, so I don't think elasmosaurs picked up heavy things like tyrannosaurs and held them high in the air. But the elasmosaur did have a large body, weighing perhaps a few tons. Could an elasmosaur at least drag a dinosaur under and try to drown it or something?
Maybe. For Elasmosaurus and Tyrannosaurus to fight, the T. rex would have to be really close to the water, and if he was standing on slippery rock it wouldn't take much from the Elasmosaur to make him slip and crash in. But of course, nobody has proven that a situation like that ever happened even once in the history of those genera. And if Elasmosaurus did kill T. rex, I can't picture him eating it quickly. Elasmosaurus seems to have a relativley small mouth. Kronosaurus, on the other hand, would probably eat T. rex in about ten bites.

Has anyone ever read DINOVERSE? Seeing how its one of about five dinosaur novels in the world*, I would hope somebody else has it. Basically the minds of some kids get transported into the bodies of dinosaurs, which is kind of cool.

*(Raptor Red, Jurassic Park, [Crichton's] The Lost World, and Dinosaur Summer are the other four that come to mind. Doyle's Lost World has little to do with our modern concept of dinosaurs, and I've never gotten around to reading it).
from Brad, age 13, Woodville, ON, Canada; November 22, 2000

No offence, but I can't figure how that sea creature could lift a six ton Tyrannosaurus.
from Lilian T., age ?, ?, ?, ?; November 22, 2000

Note: I have just sent the newest RAPTOR. Tell me what you think about it.
from firebird, age ?, ?, ?, ?; November 22, 2000

I believe the main problem lies in how did the dromeosauridae kill their prey. As noted, the dromeosauridae lack the incredible damage potential of the Tyrannosauids per unit. This could be made up for by having them hunt in groups, but another problem arises.

The dromeosauridae all have the wrong leg-bone proportions we might expect to see in the lifestyle we envision them by. The dromeosauridae were built for sudden bursts of speed over a short distance. Even so, the dromeosauridae were not the swiftest predator around. They seem to be built to be nimble, not fast.

Which brings us too our next question. How exactly did they hunt big prey? As we can see, the dromeosauridae were all lightly built, meaning a fall or a kick from a struggling predator could spell doom or serious injury. We cannot determine how exactly dromeosauridae hunted, but we can be sure they were not hunters of big prey. I am quite amused that some people suggest they could attack sauropods.
from Levine, age 24, ?, ?, ?; November 22, 2000

Ahhhhhh don't do it! The uncertainty principal will mean that you cannot be sufficently reconstructed in phase space. Anyway, I can't see how the raptors could hunt in the plains. The raptors weren't particulary swift. They could probally put in a sprint but for very short distances, like the cheetah. And like the cheetaH, they hunted small prey.

Tyrannosaurus lived in the forests, while its close relative Tarbosaurus lived in the gobi desert. Both don't seem to have trouble hunting in the two very different climates.

But if you are suggesting a long distance run after prey, the raptors fill the role poorly. In fact, Tyrannosauids were more efficent runners. If you look at the raptors carefully, I suspect we may find they were ill suited for hunting big prey. They were on the adverage about lion-sized, and we don't see lions taking down healthy elephants. Utahraptors were probally the top predators for sometime, but the early Tyrannosauids obviously did the job better. One has to remember they were in decline while the Tyrannosaurs rose in number. Some interatcion between the two must be causing this.
from Honkie Tong, age 16, ?, ?, ?; November 22, 2000

Hahahahhaha! Nice one Honkie! That's the best way to kill a myth. Hahahahaha!
from DW, age 14, Singapore!, ?, ?; November 22, 2000

All predators kill the weak, unwary and injured. Maybe raptors were like hyenas, sometimes primarily scavengers, sometimes primarily predators. This can be observed in modern Africa. (When I say raptors, I am refering to the family dromeosauridae.)

Were Tyrannosaurs the top predators in the Early Cretaceous? I thought that it was the Acrocanthosaurs and Utahraptors. I think the ecology was mostly fern savannas in North America (I'm not sure) so it makes sense that an ambush predator suited for open plains hunting would evolve. Maybe raptors were like that. Or maybe they were scavengers. Heck! Let's build a quantum computer and go back in time! I'm sick of guessing! (As you can see, I've been reading Micheal Crichton's latest book, Timeline.)

Seriously, I think we have to stop guessing. There is too little informatiion to go on. It's fun but...

What you said about cat's claws are right, Honkie. But I think what Brad said is also true.

You know, I'm thinking of writing another version of timeline like what Billy did with old blood. What does everyone else think? Should it be done?
from DW, age ?, ?, ?, ?; November 22, 2000

Another thing, did you see my new pictures? Anyway, I was thinking about this. How often do we fall when we are running anyway? I believe Tyrannosauids, being better balanced, falling would be a very rare but spectular sight. That probally ment they could exceed their supposed 30kph speed. Of course, Tyrannosaurus probally lumbered around at slow speeds of 17kmh most of the time.
from Honkie Tong, age 16, ?, ?, ?; November 21, 2000

There has been no evidence of raptors bringing down larger prey, save for Deinonychus. But as seen, attacking large prey was a risky affair. Two Deinonychus bought it just by attacking a Tenontosaurus! At this rate, the Deinonychus would be extinct before long. I suspect Deinonychus might have only hunted large prey when it was weak and unable to defend itself. I used to hear stories about Velociraptors attacking sauropods, but I hardly consider them to be true.

Tyrannosaurus hunted the big cat way, by ambush. It lived in a forest, which made hiding easier in the savanah. Tyrannosaurus was the top predator of its time, a role which the lion now plays. We suspect that the raptors played a lower scavenging role or were small game hunters. Raptors were lightly built, so falling from the back of a herbivore would have been injurous. So far, raptor skeletons have been found to be relatively free from injuries one expects to find from attackig large herbivores like broken limbs or ribs.

The issue of how the raptors brought down large prey have also been brought to question. Slashing with their claws would have not caused a lot of damabe as complaired to a large carnosaur bite. Not to mention they had to jump onto the herbivore to get a good bite at the neck. I am pretty sure the herbivore will not just stand there, but run while all this is happening. How the raptors managed a killing bite on a 3 ton running herbivore is open to question.

The problem is compouded in bigged raptors like Utahraptor and Megaraptor. I found the Walking with Dinosaurs Utahraptor attack scene rather absurd. How did a one ton Utaraptor actually jump? A one ton animal falling two meters from the back of a herbivore would be badly injured. I suspect the raptors actually hunted smaller prey, instead of the popular swarming idea suggested. There are just too many holes in that theory. It appears it was so obvious, that people took it in without question.

Big raptors probally hunted the Tyrannosaur way, mabye they used their hands to grapple while biting, but swarming is out of the question. Smaller raptors probally did hunt big prey if it was seriously injured. We don't see a pride of lions bothering a elephant until its old and weak. I suspect the same in raptors. Tyrannosaurus was a big game hunter of big game prey. But that's just my findings from the evidence.
from Honkie Tong, age 16, ?, ?, ?; November 21, 2000

You're right BBD, they were running heads. I wonder who was the deadilest of them all? Does bulk and weight matter? I read somewhere that Tyrannosaurus had jaws powerful to penetrate the armour of a Tank. But it was a media reaprt...pewhy. But at 12000 pounds per square inch, T.rex would have done an disporportionate amount of damage for its size.
from Frankie F., age ?, Singapore, ?, ?; November 21, 2000

I think we are too caught up in size. As we had proved with Gigantonosaurus, size really dosen't matter as Tyrannosaurus had the most powerful bite ever. Those new contenders are really no challange for the surprisingly agile Tyrannosaurus Rex. All Tyrannosaurus had to do was either to bite them to death or to bite off a huge chunk and to wait for another opening. Those big carnivores were sauropod hunters, hardly a match for the Triceratops hunting, quick thinking Tyrannosaurus Rex.(Of course I know they never met.)
from Leonard, age 12, ?, ?, ?; November 21, 2000

All T.rex fans please vote, today we must get as many votes as possible!
from ?, age ?, ?, ?, ?; November 21, 2000

Mr.Bakker cannot be trusted. He's good but stubborn, meaning that he still contuines to promote wrong ideas!
from ?, age ?, ?, ?, ?; November 21, 2000

Highlt unlikely russel. Hardosaur tails were hardly built for wacking. But stress fractures found on their tails supported this theory at one time ...until we noticed that they stepped on each others tail. Besides, a hardosaur tail would hardly deter a Albertosaurus. I think the hardosaurs still used plan b the most often...run!
from Honkie Tong, age 16, ?, ?, ?; November 21, 2000

The raptors had keritin on their claws, but there was a bon core inside. Break that and the claw is deformed.
from Leonard, age 12, ?, ?, ?; November 21, 2000

Hardly, a lot of Tyrannosaur fans will be very dissed to see their votes go to another creature. Remember, the Tyrannosaur fans are a huge force here, lets leave them alone! They are a force to be reckoned with.
from Honkie Tong, age 16, ?, ?, ?; November 21, 2000

hadrosaurs could have whacked big predators like albertosaurus over with their tails. do you think this could be true?
from russell p, age 11, seattle, ?, usa; November 21, 2000

I like t-rex. It rocks on ice!!!
from Ashley R., age 9, Midland, Texas, U>S>A>; November 21, 2000

Brad: That's perfectly "legal." You can, however, only use the abbreviation of G. (genus) species if the full genus is understood. For example, you can't just come out and say (in a scientific paper anyways) L. amicagraphica. You'd have to say the paper was about Leaellynasaura. A better example would be about Ceratosaurus. You couldn't start describing C. magnicornis, C. nasicornis, and C. ingens without first mentioning that you are talking about Ceratosaurus. So there wouldn't be any confusion in the case you were talking about if it was Tyrannosaurus or Torvosaurus rex.
from Chandler, age ?, ?, ?, ?; November 21, 2000

JC, why did you start the making of dino-show-us with the words show-us studios?I started it by saying "Hi!Welcome to dino-show-us studios."I also would like you to consider Liaf L.'s "story" in the voting section and put my storys clasified under Dino-show-us!, Dino Warz under Dino Warz, and Old Blood under Old Blood the way the other storys are.
from Reuben B., age 7, Nedham, MA, USA; November 21, 2000
I posted exactly what I got. I'll add that, but if there's more missing, why don't you re-send it. Also, Leif submitted both a dinosaur vote and a story (submitted to the ficiton section) which I assume he wanted posted there. JC

Never seen the show, but Bakker was probably holding a rib of _Edmarka rex_, which he described as a "torvosaurine" megalosaur in 1992. Edmarka was definately a big theropod, claiming thats it was bigger than Giganotosaurus isn't too far fetched.

Imagine the chaos that would be caused by making Edmarka a junior synonym of Torvosaurus, but retaining the species as Torvosaurus rex... major recount needed in the voting booth, which T. rex are you voting for?

Is it legal to name new dinosaurs T. rex if the T. stands for something else???? That would be fun.
from Brad, age 13, Woodville, ON, Canada; November 21, 2000

I will agree Tyrannosaurs had the niche of big cats in America and Eurasia at their time, but bodywise, they were most similar to the pachycroucuta, or giant hyenas of the pleistocene. Look at them, big heavy heads, crushing teeth and they are runners. Even the biggest fossil hyena to date is speculated as runnin in groups comprised mostly of up to 3 to 5 members. Raptors, I speculate, had the niches of smaller type cats, or most likely, saber-tooth cats. Raptors were built for taking on prey much larger than themselves, like a sabertooth did. In the early cretaceous period, they held a much bigger and higher role except in africa and austaila. I really like the Megalosaurs myself. On a documentary concerining giganotosaurus, carcharodontosaurus and Tyrannosaurus, Dr.Bakker said the rib of a megalosaur showed the guts to be 6 feet deep, and if you added all the meat and etc. it was bigger than giganotosaurus. They really seemed to be "runnin heads".!
from BBD, age ?, ?, ?, ?; November 21, 2000

Raptors still had keratin on their claws too.
from Brad, age 13, Woodville, ON, Canada; November 21, 2000