Comments: 62
acepredator In reply to Carlosdino [2015-11-06 01:25:06 +0000 UTC]
Definitely not a quadruped, but not a biped either.
Both North African spinosaurids had short legs.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
acepredator In reply to grisador [2015-11-07 18:05:39 +0000 UTC]
The latter.
Every single spinosaurid remain found in Africa fit with the proportions of the 2014 specimen (whatever that is...it's not a chimera; the legs only look bit shorter on the model than the actual fossil due to perspective).
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
grisador In reply to acepredator [2015-11-07 23:35:56 +0000 UTC]
Look; after the sigilmassasaurus thing its clear there's no ''clear'' spinosaurus hindlimbs known; yet.
And I honestly supiseo you didn't know the pelican model already; IF the animal was short legged.
2.bp.blogspot.com/-5G9wUvmoo4c…
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
acepredator In reply to grisador [2015-11-07 23:44:39 +0000 UTC]
I have seen the pelican model, but I just don't think it really matters. This animal spent most of its time in water; what it could do on land is irrelevant as it didn't do much on land.
There are partial hindlimbs, however.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
grisador In reply to acepredator [2015-11-10 16:33:55 +0000 UTC]
I think the 'Spino whale' theory is utterly wrong; especially right now. As you know where're several new things happening on 2014 spinosaurus inaxcuracy catasthrope; just saying this animal almost never go to land and throwing it is wrong; as we see there're also a few things pointing the animal might be a terrible swimmer too
Oh that ? Okay than...
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
acepredator In reply to grisador [2015-11-10 20:15:24 +0000 UTC]
A Spinosaurus on land would be pretty much unable to do much. It can't use its forelimbs to move, it can't walk on two legs (even the pelican posture is a risky maneuver) and it's going to be ridiculously slow.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
grisador In reply to acepredator [2015-11-10 21:17:15 +0000 UTC]
Uhhh... That smaller hindlimbs is in a VERY dubious state right now...
Even if it did shorter legs; look today's short legged birds like penguins and pelicans; they walk quite fast
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
acepredator [2015-11-05 13:28:43 +0000 UTC]
A Spinosaurus would not float in water. It was adapted to sink like a rock.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Carlosdino In reply to acepredator [2015-11-05 14:06:24 +0000 UTC]
Well, these are old sketches I made more than three years ago! And it was an exercise of wild speculation.
Indeed, I don't know anything about the flotability abilities of spinosaurs.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
acepredator In reply to Carlosdino [2015-11-05 16:48:24 +0000 UTC]
New study (came out weeks ago)
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
acepredator In reply to Carlosdino [2015-11-05 20:03:10 +0000 UTC]
No, whatever the hell the 2014 specimen is (but probably applies to spinosaurids in general)
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
ZaubererbruderASP [2014-01-13 08:26:24 +0000 UTC]
The Whale-Version doesn't only look very funny, it would also be very interesting to imagine what could have evolved from it if Spinosaurus wouldn't have died out (is this last part correct grammar?)
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Carlosdino In reply to ZaubererbruderASP [2014-01-13 10:50:17 +0000 UTC]
Yep! Imagine that! Evolved aquatic spinosaurs! (I'm not English or American, but I think the grammar is ok)
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
ZaubererbruderASP In reply to Carlosdino [2014-01-13 14:17:58 +0000 UTC]
But the sail would also make a good fin. If it was a sail
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Carlosdino In reply to ZaubererbruderASP [2014-01-13 14:41:02 +0000 UTC]
I think that a hump is a better option! (in the real animal, not in the "whale")
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
epicdjs [2013-05-25 00:57:16 +0000 UTC]
I like B the best, classical spinosaurus always bothered me for some reason.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Carlosdino In reply to epicdjs [2013-05-25 14:47:29 +0000 UTC]
Yep, I prefer it too
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
Orionide5 [2012-12-24 03:18:32 +0000 UTC]
C and D are hilarious! But I think they might rob Spinosaurus of the agility needed to catch fish.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Carlosdino In reply to Orionide5 [2012-12-24 09:48:15 +0000 UTC]
Yes, C and D are extremes XD
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
DrawingDinosaurs [2012-04-09 11:16:36 +0000 UTC]
Funnily enough, Scott Hartman's recent Spinosaurus skeletal is actually rather similar to C and D.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Carlosdino In reply to DrawingDinosaurs [2012-04-09 11:23:14 +0000 UTC]
Yes, I know, but C and D are greatly exaggerated in fact
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
masonday [2012-04-08 18:51:52 +0000 UTC]
COOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOL!!!!!!!!!!!!
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Carlosdino In reply to masonday [2012-04-08 23:08:03 +0000 UTC]
Thanks for all the cools! XD
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
Carlosdino In reply to Durbed [2012-02-14 21:23:46 +0000 UTC]
Sí, si lo de la forma ballenoide no es más que pura y divertida especulación, por darle una vuelta de tuerca más al tema, pero vamos.... no es para creérselo, jejeje.
No fastidies, no lo había pensado eso nunca!! Tan grandísimo y pesado era como para no poder soportar una joroba?? Siempre da la sensación de que los espinosáuridos son bastante livianos en comparación con otros grandes terópodos...
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Durbed In reply to Carlosdino [2012-02-14 21:41:16 +0000 UTC]
Comparados con grandes tiranosaurios quizá si, pero por lo menos Spinosaurus o Suchomimus son bastante robustos, más que la media en un teropodo. En el caso de Spinosaurus necesitaria una buena constitución para soportar la estructura de la espalda y unas 13 toneladas tirando por lo bajo. Seguramente el hecho de tener unas patas traseras relativamente cortas (esto no es seguro, pero algunos restos encontrados recientemente indican que casi arrastraba el pubis por el suelo, aunque podian pertenecer a un ejemplar más joven )tambien le ayudaria a mantener mejor el equilibrio.
Aquji se puede apreciar bien [link] (ten en cuenta que en una postura más realista las piernas estarian bastante más flexionadas...)
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Carlosdino In reply to Durbed [2012-02-14 22:04:59 +0000 UTC]
Vaya, no tenía ni idea.... fue precisamente estas últimas reconstrucciones son las que inspiraron la idea del espino-ballena, jejeje.
Tú te quedas entonces con la hipótesis de la vela?
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Durbed In reply to Carlosdino [2012-02-14 23:56:55 +0000 UTC]
Lo de la joroba extendida? humm, creia que en el boceto B ya incluias esta nueva reconstrucción; pero si, seguramente la joroba tendria la longitud del Spinoballena, aunque algo más esbelto. XD
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Carlosdino In reply to Durbed [2012-02-15 09:56:38 +0000 UTC]
No, el B no es más que la joroba añadida a la versión clásica.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Carlosdino In reply to Durbed [2012-02-18 10:59:54 +0000 UTC]
Sí, suena bastante factible. Me lo apunto para futuras reconstrucciones!
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
Milvolarsum [2012-02-13 13:07:59 +0000 UTC]
Truth be told:
A/B Encounter=running away
C/D Encounter= laughing my ass off
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
unlobogris [2012-02-10 22:41:29 +0000 UTC]
Bra-vísimo xD
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Carlosdino In reply to unlobogris [2012-02-10 23:48:50 +0000 UTC]
Mérito suyo, caballero jejeje
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
BrooksLeibee [2012-02-10 21:42:05 +0000 UTC]
All of them seem a bit "fat". XD
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
BrooksLeibee In reply to Carlosdino [2012-02-11 00:34:37 +0000 UTC]
Most professional reditions done by real paleontologists have the spinosaurus as a thinner beast. So I'm sticking on that part. ^ ^
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
mexicanzilla [2012-02-10 20:28:32 +0000 UTC]
La ''D'' esta muiy exagerada para mi gusto
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Carlosdino In reply to mexicanzilla [2012-02-10 20:32:36 +0000 UTC]
Bueno, me consuela que tu crítica sea solo sobre eso, jejeje
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
mexicanzilla In reply to Carlosdino [2012-02-11 04:36:39 +0000 UTC]
POr que?
que seria una mala critica ¿?
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
| Next =>