Skip to comments.
Dinosaurs May Have Been Smaller Than Previously Thought (Svelteosaurus)
ScienceDaily ^
| June 22, 2009
| Unknown
Posted on 06/24/2009 4:19:47 AM PDT by decimon
The largest animals ever to have walked the face of the earth may not have been as big as previously thought, reveals a paper published June 21 in the Zoological Society of Londons Journal of Zoology.
(Excerpt) Read more at sciencedaily.com ...
TOPICS: History; Science
KEYWORDS: creation; dinosaurs; evolution; godsgravesglyphs; junkscience; leviathan; oldearthspeculation; paleontology; piltdownman; sciencefiction; storkzilla
1
posted on
06/24/2009 4:19:47 AM PDT
by
decimon
To: SunkenCiv
2
posted on
06/24/2009 4:20:28 AM PDT
by
decimon
To: decimon
and they aren’t the source of oil
3
posted on
06/24/2009 4:21:10 AM PDT
by
MAD-AS-HELL
(Hope and Change. Rhetoric embraced by the Insane - Obama, The Chump in Charge)
To: decimon
4
posted on
06/24/2009 4:23:42 AM PDT
by
ETL
(ALL the Obama-commie connections at my FR Home page: http://www.freerepublic.com/~etl/)
To: decimon
I knew something was 'funny' about this story! The headline is misleading. They're talking about mass and bulk, not height or length.
"Scientists have discovered that the original statistical model used to calculate dinosaur mass is flawed, suggesting dinosaurs have been oversized.
Widely cited estimates for the mass of Apatosaurus louisae, one of the largest of the dinosaurs, may be double that of its actual mass (38 tonnes vs. 18 tonnes)."
Dinosaurs May Have Been Smaller Than Previously Thought:
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/06/090621195620.htm
5
posted on
06/24/2009 4:29:45 AM PDT
by
ETL
(ALL the Obama-commie connections at my FR Home page: http://www.freerepublic.com/~etl/)
To: ETL
How big was the Ophrasaurus?
6
posted on
06/24/2009 4:37:07 AM PDT
by
gov_bean_ counter
(Barak Obama: Pontificator in Chief and Poster Child for the Peter Principle)
To: MAD-AS-HELL; decimon
>>>Widely cited estimates for the mass of Apatosaurus louisae, one of the largest of the dinosaurs, may be double that of its actual mass (38 tonnes vs. 18 tonnes).
So they aren’t actually being microsized.
>>>and they arent the source of oil
Are you sure? I never heard of a squeaking Brontosaurus.
7
posted on
06/24/2009 4:37:54 AM PDT
by
tlb
To: ETL
They're talking about mass and bulk, not height or length. Yup. More svelte.
8
posted on
06/24/2009 4:37:56 AM PDT
by
decimon
To: MAD-AS-HELL
True sea water trapped under ground does strange things.
9
posted on
06/24/2009 4:38:08 AM PDT
by
Vaduz
To: decimon
Just proves that all evolutionists are liars and potential terrorists. (just kidding)
Actually less massive dinosaurs makes the most sense. We know that the bones were fairly lightweight and at some point they would be crushed under the weight of a super massive dinosaur.
10
posted on
06/24/2009 4:42:12 AM PDT
by
cripplecreek
(The poor bastards have us surrounded.)
To: tlb
So they arent actually being microsized.No, they've just adjusted the BMI.
11
posted on
06/24/2009 4:42:28 AM PDT
by
decimon
To: gov_bean_ counter
How big was the Ophrasaurus? Not sure about that. but here's an artist rendition of how the Hilderbeastosaurus might have looked...
12
posted on
06/24/2009 4:45:52 AM PDT
by
ETL
(ALL the Obama-commie connections at my FR Home page: http://www.freerepublic.com/~etl/)
To: ETL
13
posted on
06/24/2009 4:46:44 AM PDT
by
cripplecreek
(The poor bastards have us surrounded.)
To: decimon
14
posted on
06/24/2009 4:47:44 AM PDT
by
Daffynition
("If any of you die, can I please have your ammo?" ~ Gator113)
To: cripplecreek
Actually less massive dinosaurs makes the most sense.It does to me. With less mass they are more agile and need less food to maintain their mass.
15
posted on
06/24/2009 4:51:09 AM PDT
by
decimon
To: cripplecreek
That aint right. Well, some scientists do speculate that the Hilderbeastosaurus had an even larger butt. This is mere speculation, however.
16
posted on
06/24/2009 4:59:17 AM PDT
by
ETL
(ALL the Obama-commie connections at my FR Home page: http://www.freerepublic.com/~etl/)
To: Daffynition
I tried that Primordial Soup. You wouldn’t believe the methane.
17
posted on
06/24/2009 5:03:32 AM PDT
by
decimon
To: decimon
18
posted on
06/24/2009 5:07:12 AM PDT
by
6SJ7
(atlasShruggedInd: ON)
To: decimon
Agreed about the lighter Dino’s. This solves a few conundrums in paleontology about bone size (tail bones and femurs). They just couldn’t seem to get things to add up correctly. It will be interesting to see if this pans out.
19
posted on
06/24/2009 5:07:43 AM PDT
by
Paradox
(When the left have no one to villainize, they'll turn on each other.)
To: 6SJ7
20
posted on
06/24/2009 5:21:55 AM PDT
by
ETL
(ALL the Obama-commie connections at my FR Home page: http://www.freerepublic.com/~etl/)
To: ETL
......some scientists do speculate that the Hilderbeastosaurus had an even larger butt......
Current studies seem to indicate her butt was so large it broke her arm
21
posted on
06/24/2009 5:23:19 AM PDT
by
bert
(K.E. N.P. +12 . The boy's war in Detriot has already cost more then the war in Iraq.)
To: decimon
We could ask Helen Thomas, she’s probably seen a few dinos.
22
posted on
06/24/2009 5:24:48 AM PDT
by
Pistolshot
(The Soap-box, The Ballot-box, The Jury-box, And The Cartridge-Box ...we are past 2 of them.)
To: decimon
I’m not fat, it’s just big bones.
23
posted on
06/24/2009 5:25:55 AM PDT
by
count-your-change
(You don't have be brilliant, not being stupid is enough.)
To: bert
‘her butt was so large it broke her arm’
That would make her a Buttasoros... er, no those were the gay dinos. Sorry, I just couldn’t help it...
24
posted on
06/24/2009 5:55:43 AM PDT
by
Leg Olam
(TOP SECRET! Os plan, 1 invade Poland 2 annex Sudetenland...)
To: ETL
Widely cited estimates for the mass of Apatosaurus louisae, one of the largest of the dinosaurs, may be double that of its actual mass (38 tonnes vs. 18 tonnes)."What's a tonne?
25
posted on
06/24/2009 5:55:58 AM PDT
by
frithguild
(Can I drill your head now?)
To: frithguild
To: frithguild
They actually estimate a dino’s mass (or weight) by dunking a toy model of it into a volume-calibrated container of water. When they see how much of the water is displaced, they know the volume of the model. And since about 97-99% of body weight is water, volume is closely proportionate to weight. To complete the approximation for the actual, full-sized creature they step up the calculation through simple multiplication.
27
posted on
06/24/2009 6:50:46 AM PDT
by
ETL
(ALL the Obama-commie connections at my FR Home page: http://www.freerepublic.com/~etl/)
To: decimon; StayAt HomeMother; Ernest_at_the_Beach; 1ofmanyfree; 21twelve; 24Karet; 2ndDivisionVet; ...
28
posted on
06/24/2009 3:12:56 PM PDT
by
SunkenCiv
(http://www.troopathon.org/index.php -- June 25th -- the Troopathon)
To: decimon
not have been as big as previously thought
Maybe those devils did wear Prada.
29
posted on
06/24/2009 3:37:39 PM PDT
by
eleni121
(The New Byzantium - resurrect it!)
To: count-your-change
30
posted on
06/24/2009 3:59:42 PM PDT
by
null and void
(We are now in day 156 of our national holiday from reality.)
To: decimon
I tried that Primordial Soup. You wouldn’t believe the methane. In the soup or caused?
31
posted on
06/24/2009 4:28:51 PM PDT
by
FrogMom
(No such thing as an honest democrat!)
To: FrogMom
I tried that Primordial Soup. You wouldnt believe the methane. In the soup or caused?
Double entendre.
32
posted on
06/24/2009 4:56:18 PM PDT
by
decimon
To: gov_bean_ counter
according to the new model,Hillary’s cankles are only 14.73 inches in circumference and he ass weighs in at only 93.83 pounds
33
posted on
06/24/2009 5:50:04 PM PDT
by
bert
(K.E. N.P. +12 . The boy's war in Detriot has already cost more then the war in Iraq.)
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson