Does it deserve it's crown as the "Greatest Predator That Ever Lived"?
In terms of fame? Yes.
>>5114126I could see ability too.
>>5114126No
>>5114125No.
>>5114125Nah, that would be us or cats
>>5114126Living predators are more famous.
It's the coolest animal that ever lived
>>5114125Who do you think deserves it more?
>>5114171Spinosaurus aegypticus
>>5114240Good one
>>5114125KWAB look at those little babby arms
>>5114140its so dumb that this is actually realtry throwing a rock at any mid-sized animalthat's not gonna do jack garbage
>>5114611Ok, a spear
>>5114611Only because of your weak baby arms.
>>5114713Are whales the animals with the highest kill counts at the time of their death?
>>5114611A half pound rock thrown by a 130 lb person who isn't sedentary can kill a grizzly bear if it hits them right. I wouldn't go hunting grizzly with a basket of half pound stones, but if you get a troup of early hominids on the savanna and each has a basket of rocks, they'll absolutely drive lions off off kills and fuck up anything that wants to predate on them.
>>5114920What if they catch it and throw it back
>>5114165>>5114240how's elementary school going?
Dragonflies are the most successful predators on the planet, their success rate is like 97%.
>>5114125>bigggest baddest thing that could kill anythingyeah pretty much
>>5114921THROW BACK HARDER DOOFUSGRUG KNOW THISGRONL KNOW THISENTIRE TRIBE KNOW THISWHY YOU NOT KNOW THIS?YOU APPLE TRIBE?
>>5114921Throw it from a stick so hard they can't even throw it back halfway.
>>5115243>>5114920>>5114140Behold!
>>5114713>predatorI mean I guess, in the same way that a bottom feeding crustacean that feeds on bacteria is a predator.
>>5115322Bacteria aren't animals, whereas what the whale's attacking is a swarm of these.
>>5114125No, the blue whale does.
>>5114140Cats are not even on the same level as eagles and other large raptors, which are more closely related to T. Rex anyway.>>5114920>A half pound rock thrown by a 130 lb person who isn't sedentary can kill a grizzly bear if it hits them right.This is not remotely true, especially not with the weight qualifiers you added.
>>5115344>sardinesIt literally says krill in the file name
>>5114904Yes. Kill count would be in the tens if not hundreds of billions
>>5114904You mean krill count?
>>5114125Yes.
>>5115607whales eat both
Everything currently know about it points to it being one of the most interesting animals to ever live besides ourselves. I don't even consider it my favorite dinosaur but I do think it easily deserves its title.
>>5117089trvke
>>5114131lol'd
>>5114125We became the greatest predator that ever lived once we discovered the greatest weapon
>>5114138*steps out of the water*yeah real apex fucking predator lmao
>>5118515Thats not an atlatl
>>5114131On /vr/, I occasionally describe video games as "harder than Jimmy Savile in a children's ward".
>>5118589atlatls are overrated compared to spears
>>5114920is this a pasta like "what can an elephant really do?"
>>5114125>Gaslight an entire scientific community into thinking a single predator could take over half the niches in an ecosystem.>It takes two decades before scientists realize there was in fact a medium sized predator in Hell Creek.Before I would've said yes but this is too embarrassing in retrospect to let slide now. As an animal Rex is so overhyped it even blinds professionals, which is hilarious to think about. But in terms of pop culture impact yeah, there's not many animals out there which are so infamous their scientific name became the same as their common name.
>>5120930I mean, given that adults probably lived to like ~30 on average with an upper boundary of ~50 and that they didn't hit maturity until 18 or so it wasn't unreasonable to think that juveniles and sub-adults dominated the medium niche as well.>muh NanotyrannusYes yes it's valid but the confusion is entirely understandable. IIRC until 1999 nanotyrannus consisted of one (1) juvenile skull and it wasn't even placed into the correct genus until 1988 when it was re-examined.>But in terms of pop culture impact yeah, there's not many animals out there which are so infamous their scientific name became the same as their common name.Isn't that the case with pretty much everything that doesn't have an existing frame of reference, at least as far as genus goes? "Saber-toothed cats" got the name because they're very similar to the big cats that exist today but with huge curved teeth and the Irish Elk got its name because it was an Elk found in Ireland but there's no frame of reference for Hatzegopteryx or Mosasaurus or even more recent animals like Livyatan.
>>5114125Mandatory FEATHERS mention to make the anti-paleoschizo seethe and froth at the mouth.
>>5114713I HATE TECHNICALLY CORRECT ANSWERS I HATE TECHNICALLY CORRECT ANSWERS I HATE TECHNICALLY CORRECT ANSWERS
>>5120975is Paleoschizo still here?
>>5114713kill count is not the only metric that matters, but what kind of prey a predator can tackle
>>5121613His husky had a health scare and he got too mentally exhausted to keep up the act
>>5114125I mean the movie version does. iRL it was mid
>>5118515The earth itself defends us
There's been a push to make them more awesome, recently
>>5121681what could beat T Rex IRL?
>>5121733>and they also carried a Remington 700 with thermal scope, suppressor, and subsonic rounds to take out their prey before they know what hit 'em!
>>5120964>Yes yes it's valid but the confusion is entirely understandable. IIRC until 1999 nanotyrannus consisted of one (1) juvenile skull and it wasn't even placed into the correct genus until 1988 when it was re-examined.Most of the arguments made in the 2025 Nano paper were actually things we knew already for a long time. Like it's tooth count differing, or it's arms being proportionally bigger. Nano wasn't a dubious taxon due to being only known from meager material, like most of those taxon usually are. There were already insane assumptions on ontogeny that had to be made to justify the synonym argument, like Rex's arms somehow shrinking as it grew. (Which contradicts what we know about vertebrate growth) You could also just compare Hell Creek to other ecosystems we know about to see how absurd the concept was. In the late cretaceous, NA megafauna mirrored Asian megafauna, and in Asia, lightly built tyrannosaurs like Alioramus weren't cucked out of existing because they had to compete with juvenile Tarbosaurus. The very discovery of Bloody Mary should've been the smoking gun that switched everyone to accepting Nano. Instead it took the publishing of a paper over a decade later to change people's minds.
>>5120930Cope. Rex is still tops.
>>5122288>The very discovery of Bloody Mary should've been the smoking gun that switched everyone to accepting NanoWasn't Bloody Mary inaccessible to most researchers?
>>5123184It was, my point was more so that the very knowledge of its existence should’ve put more people in the Nano camp. You don’t need a formal paper published to acknowledge some things. Like how people were talking about “Predator X” long before it was described as a Pliosaurus species. General consensus after Mary should’ve been “well I guess Nano is real and we’re just waiting for the paper to make it official”.
>>5120930immature T.rex was still a relatively slender and agile animal. It was probably hunting different thngs than its parents
>>5118515why would this be more effective than a large spear?
>>5114125mammals can cope all they want, but yes
>>5114713do they ever accidentally swallow vertebrates?
>>5125608They eat fish, yes.
>>5121681Youtube parroting tranny, real t-rex was bigger and bulkier than the movie one.
>>5125715T. Rex was a scavenger that had feathers and couldn't even lift its spine vertically
>>5126502The first two statements are not true but the third one is
>>5115416>Cats are not even on the same level as eagles and other large raptors, which are more closely related to T. Rex anyway.Cats combine the best aspects of both prey and predator, at a scale where it works incredibly well. They apparently have just enough cognitive power to function well in isolation and adapt to colony life. If the question is, which predator is deadlier, the answer is us. Rocks and sharpened sticks aren't to be fucked around. If you account for things beside pure hunting/killing potential, cats come back into the running because of their insane reproductive rates. The whole discussion is dumb anyways because it doesn't set any variables. Otherwise its probably some insect or single-cell organism.
>>5126502why do trannies and other pedophiles have so much vitriol and hate toward dinosaurs, they hate children and happiness and truth that much? just kill yourselves then, please ffs
