Pity the Poor T-Rex

Interesting.
The conclusion was a surprise to the researchers, who had thought one large collection of fossils found together was an indication of some sort of catastrophic event that killed them all at the same time.
Another blow for the poor old Creationist.
 
Interesting.

On a side note I've always liked the modern ideas that T-rex was a scavenger instead of a hunter.

Its a much more romantic vision of them in my opinion. Since a top scavenger would be adapted to fighting other healthy predators at their prime, instead of the weak or young/old herbivores that strayed from the herd. At least thats how I see it.


Supreme scavenger would put T-rex at the very top of the food chain.

Imagine this. A brontosuarus dies of old age from an injury like a broken ankle or hip. This attracts every huge carnivore in a 20 mile radius. All the carnivores fight over it. Predator verse predator. The toughest T-rex (adapted to killing other T-rex as well as all the other carnivores) wins king of the carcass.

In other words in a rich animal kingdom, you could have animals adapted to stalking the weaker or dieing herd animals but even more viscous animals adapted to killing the hunters and taking their kills.

Labeling an animal a scavenger doesnt reduce its nastiness. Look at all the footage of nature shows on predators in africa. There seems to be more action over the dead carcass of an antelope by hyena's and lions and other predators, then the killing of the antelope itself.
 
Last edited:
Paradox 99 said:
Interesting.

Another blow for the poor old Creationist.
?
How do you decude that?

not that i'm a creationist or anything, I just would like some insight into your reasoning behind that :)
 
dreamwalker said:
?
How do you decude that?

not that i'm a creationist or anything, I just would like some insight into your reasoning behind that :)
Oops, I should've been a little less criptic.
One of the Creationists' evidences for Noah's flood is that dinosaur remains show that they were wiped out suddenly in a cataclysmic event. When a new theory pops up like the one in this article it's just one more alternative to their own theories.
Before the theory of evolution became popular, there really wasn't any other answer to life other than there being a creator. Evolution doesn't disprove Creationism, it simply provides an alternative idea. Same with this article really.
 
I can sympathize with the T-Rex. "Sure, here I am, top predator, striking fear into the hearts of all, but what does it all mean? What's it all about? Chase, kill, eat, sleep, chase, kill, eat, sleep… is this really all there is?"

edit: That's me, I'm talking about. But I think T-Rex may have gone through the same kind of thing.
 
Paige Turner said:
I can sympathize with the T-Rex. "Sure, here I am, top predator, striking fear into the hearts of all, but what does it all mean? What's it all about? Chase, kill, eat, sleep, chase, kill, eat, sleep… is this really all there is?"

edit: That's me, I'm talking about. But I think T-Rex may have gone through the same kind of thing.

Paige, I can understand the eat, sleep, eat, sleep bit but what are you chasing all the time?

BTW In my view it's not about anything, it just is.
 
Paradox 99 said:
One of the Creationists' evidences for Noah's flood is that dinosaur remains show that they were wiped out suddenly in a cataclysmic event.
The only problem being that the dinosarus left us about 65 million years ago, give or take a few thousand, before Noah's flood is supposed to have happened. Yeah, I know, the YECs insist that the earth is no older than 6,000 to 10,000 years old, but as far as I'm concerned there is enough evidence against that theory to completely discount it in discussions of the topic.
 
serve them selves right, chasing after mates. silly things.


too late to pity them, they are all dead now, and i bet they wouldnt pity you. (if they were smart enough)
 

Similar threads


Back
Top