Biggest Dinosaur!

Tar.Aldarion

Biggest dinosaur:


Bigger cousin of rapter:

Nothingcompares

Tara Le d'Arion wrote: »

Biggest dinosaur/QUOTE]

I was just looking up Seismosaurus and it appears it has been renamed Diplodocus hallorum. The taxonomic status of the species within the Diplodocus genus is currently a matter of debate. It is a pretty long dinosaur, is it the longest they reckon was out there? the heaviest?

Galvasean

Depeche_Mode wrote: »

I never liked Oviraptors, I always considered them to be sneaky bastards.

The name 'egg thief' is unfair. Closer examination of the eggs revealed the eggs the Oviraptor was allegedly stealing in fact where actually Oviraptor eggs. Most likely the famous skeleton was of a mother Oviraptor who died protecting her nest.

Nothingcompares wrote: »

what do you mean by that? are you a palaeontologist?

Unfortunately no. By 'we' I mean people.

Nothingcompares wrote: »

I was just looking up Seismosaurus and it appears it has been renamed Diplodocus hallorum. The taxonomic status of the species within the Diplodocus genus is currently a matter of debate. It is a pretty long dinosaur, is it the longest they reckon was out there? the heaviest?

I think it is 'officially' (if you can ever get that kind of consensus in palaeontology) the longest. Although Amphicoelias fragillimus was origionally estimated to be somewhere between 160 and 200 feet long. Unfortunately all known remains of this creature are lost/destroyed.
As for heaviest there are a few candidates including Argentinosaurus, Puertasaurus[/i], and Futalognkosaurus; all weighing in around a hundred tonnes and around 30 meters in length.
Bruhathkayosaurus is said to be even bigger but has yet to be properly described.
Sauroposeidon is believed to be the tallest dinosaur.

Of course these records are always changing as the various types of dinosaur are reclassified and size estimates are redone.

Nothingcompares

Thanks dude

Tar.Aldarion

revised my opinion.


Several sites I read said the seismosaurus was the biggest, going up to 220 tonnes.

Xavi6

Blisterman wrote: »

Pterydactal. Just cause they can fly.

Yeah they were always my favourite too.

Galvasean

Tara Le d'Arion wrote: »

Several sites I read said the seismosaurus was the biggest, going up to 220 tonnes.

Nah there's no way Seismosaurus, or Diplodocus hallorum as it is being called these days, weighed that much. Although surely a candidate for longest dinosaur (estimates hinting at as much as 40meters+) it was nowhere near as massivly built as titanosaurs such as Argentinosaurus or Puertasaurus which weighed about 100tonnes.

Tar.Aldarion

I didn't really believe them, it just looks really long, estimates go up to 54 metres I think.

Galvasean

Depends on who you ask I suppose. Conservative estimates say 38meters. Less conservative say 50. Incidently Supersaurus (also widely believed to be a species of Diplodocus) is said to be 42meters, although conservative estimates put it at 30.

Riamfada

new Thread started at Gal's request. Biggest Dino thred. Pics or it didnt happen !

dlofnep

Utahraptor was the largest dromaeosauridae. Like a velociraptor on steroids.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/4a/Utahraptor_scale.png

lifeisawarfield

If i am not mistaken the last i heard they found a new species, it is called, Argentinasaurus and is the biggest dinosaur. Please correct me if i am wrong.
www.abdn.ac.uk/.../herringshaw/herringshaw.php

dlofnep

Amphicoelias & Bruhathkayosaurus were both larger AFAIK.

Here is a nice size chart of the largest sauropods: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/b/bd/Longest_dinosaurs1.png

Tar.Aldarion

Your link does not work.
I believe it is one of the heaviest, it's supposed to be smaller than one or two I think.

Anyway, here is a size pic from wiki. It's supposed to be the smaller purple one, no idea what the others are supposed to be, look too big!

dlofnep

That's the pic that I just posted. I linked it because it is too large for the forum :P My link works fine for me.

lifeisawarfield

I just have to say this. Wikipedia is an unreliable site, I could but Information on it that is utter trash!

Not that i do no believe that image is correct, i do, as i have not be keeping up to date with paleotology recenlty, because i have been busy doing other things.

Tar.Aldarion

WE were writing at the same time.
Big one is supposed to be Amphicoelias fragillimus I see!

dlofnep

Giants of pategonia is a good mockumentary about the Argentinosaurus and Giganatosaurus. Try get a copy of it.

dlofnep

Tara Le d'Arion wrote: »

WE were writing at the same time.
Big one is supposed to be Amphicoelias fragillimus I see!

Yup, Amphicoelias is speculated to have been the largest dinosaur. However, that's not taking into account the fossils that have yet to be found. I've no doubt we'll inevitably find dinosaurs that dwarf even the Amphicoelias..

Tar.Aldarion

Dunno about that, once things get bigger movement and such seems not quite feasible. :-p
How much would they eat every day? :eek:

dlofnep

Tara Le d'Arion wrote: »

Dunno about that, once things get bigger movement and such seems not quite feasible. :-p

I'm sure we would of thought that when the Apatosaurus was found.

Tara Le d'Arion wrote: »

How much would they eat every day? :eek:

Hrm, a couple of trees I'd imagine :P

Galvasean

Galvasean wrote:

I think it (Seismosaurusis 'officially' (if you can ever get that kind of consensus in palaeontology) the longest. Although Amphicoelias fragillimus was origionally estimated to be somewhere between 160 and 200 feet long. Unfortunately all known remains of this creature are lost/destroyed.
As for heaviest there are a few candidates including Argentinosaurus, Puertasaurus[/i], and Futalognkosaurus; all weighing in around a hundred tonnes and around 30 meters in length.
Bruhathkayosaurus is said to be even bigger but has yet to be properly described.
Sauroposeidon is believed to be the tallest dinosaur.

Of course these records are always changing as the various types of dinosaur are reclassified and size estimates are redone.

Galvasean wrote: »

Nah there's no way Seismosaurus, or Diplodocus hallorum as it is being called these days, weighed that much. Although surely a candidate for longest dinosaur (estimates hinting at as much as 40meters+) it was nowhere near as massively built as titanosaurs such as Argentinosaurus or Puertasaurus which weighed about 100tonnes.

Sorry for quoting myself, I didn't feel like saying it all again.

Tara Le d'Arion wrote: »

Dunno about that, once things get bigger movement and such seems not quite feasible. :-p
How much would they eat every day? :eek:

A study into the maximum size of sauropods indicated a maximum weight of 150 tonnes before their legs would become so thick they wouldn't be able to move properly.


I was looking up data on Brachiosaurus and found a surprise. Turns out that Brachiosaurus skeleton, which was supposed to be the largest mounted dinosaur skeleton in the world is not actually a Brachiosaurus at all! It is in fact Giraffatitan! Who'd a thunk it? Of course not everyone in the palaeontological community agrees there is enough difference to separate the two genera, but it has become the general consensus that they were two different types of animal.

Galvasean

dlofnep wrote: »

Utahraptor was the largest dromaeosauridae. Like a velociraptor on steroids.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/4a/Utahraptor_scale.png

What I find particularly interesting about Utahraptor is that it's legs where extremely thick, as if they were built for kicking rather than running.

Galvasean

Right, I've been reading up some more on giant sauropods and man there's a lot of big ones out there, especially in South America...

Andesaurus: A titanosaur found in Argentina. Cretaceous period. Up to 40metres long apparently.
It's tail bones curiously had ball and socket joints (sauropods usually have flatter tail joints), suggesting the tail was very flexible and strong. It also had a spiny ridge running down it's back. These differences separate it from Argentinosaurus.

Antarctosaurus: another South American titanosaur, possibly up to 40metres long. Late Cretaceous.
Made up of several specimens. Some believe it to be a griffin (ie: made up of more than one kind of animal and therefore not a valid dinosaur name). It had relatively slim legs for a titanosaur suggesting it wasn't as bulky as some of the others.
Incidentally one thigh bone believed to belong to Antarctosaurus was 2.3metres tall (7ft 8), which is one of the biggest dino bones yet found.
Unconfirmed reports say partial Antarctosaurus remains have also been found in India and Africa.

Paralititan Eygyptian titanosaur. Between 24 and 30metres long. Late Cretaceous.
Estimates suggest a weight of 80 tonnes. Very similar build to Argentinosaurus. Shared it's habitat with the giant carnivores Carcharodontosaurus and Spinosaurus.

'Bruhathkayosaurus': Indian titanosaur(?), Late Cretaceous. Estimated at over 40metres long.
Very little is known about this dinosaur. When first discovered in 1989 it was believed to be some sort of gigantic theropod but later reclassified as a titanosaur in 1995 based on the assumption that nothing else on land grew that big! This sketchy background keeps it from being officially recognized as the world's largest dinosaur.
Interestingly it's tibia (lower leg bone) was 25% bigger than that of Argentinosaurus.

Galvasean

Galvasean wrote: »

A study into the maximum size of sauropods indicated a maximum weight of 150 tonnes before their legs would become so thick they wouldn't be able to move properly.

Page 81 of Walking With Dinosaurs: The Facts by Michael Benton, published 2000.

Tar.Aldarion

Galvasean wrote: »

Right, I've been reading up some more on giant sauropods and man there's a lot of big ones out there, especially in South America...

Andesaurus: A titanosaur found in Argentina. Cretaceous period. Up to 40metres long apparently.
It's tail bones curiously had ball and socket joints (sauropods usually have flatter tail joints), suggesting the tail was very flexible and strong. It also had a spiny ridge running down it's back. These differences separate it from Argentinosaurus.

Antarctosaurus: another South American titanosaur, possibly up to 40metres long. Late Cretaceous.
Made up of several specimens. Some believe it to be a griffin (ie: made up of more than one kind of animal and therefore not a valid dinosaur name). It had relatively slim legs for a titanosaur suggesting it wasn't as bulky as some of the others.
Incidentally one thigh bone believed to belong to Antarctosaurus was 2.3metres tall (7ft 8), which is one of the biggest dino bones yet found.
Unconfirmed reports say partial Antarctosaurus remains have also been found in India and Africa.

Paralititan Eygyptian titanosaur. Between 24 and 30metres long. Late Cretaceous.
Estimates suggest a weight of 80 tonnes. Very similar build to Argentinosaurus. Shared it's habitat with the giant carnivores Carcharodontosaurus and Spinosaurus.

'Bruhathkayosaurus': Indian titanosaur(?), Late Cretaceous. Estimated at over 40metres long.
Very little is known about this dinosaur. When first discovered in 1989 it was believed to be some sort of gigantic theropod but later reclassified as a titanosaur in 1995 based on the assumption that nothing else on land grew that big! This sketchy background keeps it from being officially recognized as the world's largest dinosaur.
Interestingly it's tibia (lower leg bone) was 25% bigger than that of Argentinosaurus.

Us herbivores shall inherit the earth, now to work on becoming bigger!

Any links to that documentary thing aout Argentinosaurus and Giganatosaurus about? Think I saw it but would like to see it or any others again. Especially with teh big dinos.

lifeisawarfield

I do believe that every so often there is a dino month on the documentry channel. But i think that is if you have got Sky.:p;)

Galvasean

It's a bit outdated now. The Argentinosaurus was a scaled up Diplodocus and the Giganotosaurus was a scaled up Allosaurus.

WindSock

Galvasean wrote: »

The name 'egg thief' is unfair. Closer examination of the eggs revealed the eggs the Oviraptor was allegedly stealing in fact where actually Oviraptor eggs. Most likely the famous skeleton was of a mother Oviraptor who died protecting her nest.

Them lads had beaks, didn't they? Looks like they were made to feast on the gooey yolk of an egg.

Galvasean

WindSock wrote: »

Them lads had beaks, didn't they? Looks like they were made to feast on the gooey yolk of an egg.

beaks alright



Although a big beak like that could be used for just about anything. They were probably nasty predators when they needed to be.

dlofnep

Galvasean wrote: »

What I find particularly interesting about Utahraptor is that it's legs where extremely thick, as if they were built for kicking rather than running.

The did a reconstruction of a raptor a few years back, which suggesting that the claw was more for grip than slashing. Although, if that is the case with the Utahtaptor, then it's possible. But it could also be due to the fact that it was abnormally large for a dromaeosauridae and required the extra strength to maneuver. That's just a wild guess though!

Galvasean

Here's an interesting article. A possible reason why the sauropods reached their gigantic size:
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2008/10/081009-dinosaur-big.html

edit: Reminiscent of the Nigersaurus article from a while back:
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2007/11/071115-nigersaurus.html

dlofnep

Is it possible that gravity was less on Earth then? Have you ever heard of a theory like that Galvasean?

Galvasean

Nope, never heard anything like that before.

dlofnep

I read of a theory called the expanding Earth theory. And while it was dismissed by all major scientists - One issue highlighted was the possibility of a weak gravity during the period of the dinosaurs which allowed them to gain such mass and still being mobile.

I'm not sure what might affect Earth's gravity, perhaps the size of it and speed at which it spins. Still an interesting tidbit all the same.

marco_polo

dlofnep wrote: »

I read of a theory called the expanding Earth theory. And while it was dismissed by all major scientists - One issue highlighted was the possibility of a weak gravity during the period of the dinosaurs which allowed them to gain such mass and still being mobile.

I'm not sure what might affect Earth's gravity, perhaps the size of it and speed at which it spins. Still an interesting tidbit all the same.

Gravity is proportional to the mass of a planet and inversly proportional the distance from the center. So for example the surface gravity would be weaker on a planet that is larger than earth but with the exact same mass, so you would feel lighter.

I haven't heard of the theory you are referring to but Earth has been pretty much the same size since its formation.

Galvasean

Apparently they have found tracks in Canada which belong to a dinosaur rivaling the largest of them all:
http://www.cbc.ca/technology/story/2008/10/12/bc-sauropod-tracks.html

dlofnep

marco_polo wrote: »

Gravity is proportional to the mass of a planet and inversly proportional the distance from the center. So for example the surface gravity would be weaker on a planet that is larger than earth but with the exact same mass, so you would feel lighter.

I haven't heard of the theory you are referring to but Earth has been pretty much the same size since its formation.

Ok thanks

marco_polo

dlofnep wrote: »

Ok thanks

I wikied the Expanding Earth theory afterwards, its pretty crazy stuff :pac:

I often wonder myself why the dinosaurs reached such unparrelled sizes for land animals. Wouldn't have been easier for them all to call a truce and all agree to be a little bit smaller.

Although perhaps the large mammals such as Mammoths and the Sabre Tooth would have continued to get bigger if they had had the same amount of time as the dinosaurs to evolve.

*EDIT* Having done a small bit of research it seems some of the largest mammals existed 20-30 million years ago, so it would seem that there was not a constant size progression.

dlofnep

Yes, there were insanely huge land mammals back in the day. But with size, came uglyless. Boy were they ugly.