206

T. rex (mander.xyz)

submitted 3 months ago by fossilesque@mander.xyz to c/science_memes@mander.xyz

13 comments fedilink hide all child comments

top 13 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[-] Contramuffin@lemmy.world 82 points 3 months ago

I'm going to need context here

[-] randomsnark@lemmy.ml 60 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

I came to the comments looking for context, but since nobody has provided it yet, did some googling. I believe this is the reference: https://news.sky.com/story/tyrannosaurus-rex-could-have-been-even-bigger-than-previously-thought-study-suggests-13184470

[-] saltesc@lemmy.world 11 points 3 months ago

may have weighed roughly 15 tonnes instead of 8.8, and measured 15 metres instead of 12.

I find that very hard to believe for a bipedal land animal. Hit age 3 and your knees and hips are just done.

[-] Lommy241@lemmy.world 20 points 3 months ago

Glad to see I wasn't the only one who couldn't understand this. Was worried I had a stroke.

[-] refalo@programming.dev 16 points 3 months ago

Maybe they're saying we don't really know how big or small they got.

[-] breadsmasher@lemmy.world 34 points 3 months ago

Does this mean that due to undersampling, we can only assume we have found the biggest fossils/skeletons/remains, and cannot know how big they could really get?

[-] Blue_Morpho@lemmy.world 17 points 3 months ago

I think it's the opposite. They're saying that physical limitations on size exist (bone strength, lung capacity) even if you only found one skeleton. So significantly bigger TRexs aren't possible.

[-] DaTingGoBrrr@lemmy.ml 5 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

Not according to this post https://lemmy.ml/comment/12594857

Edit: here's a direct link to the article if the link above is broken for some reason

https://news.sky.com/story/tyrannosaurus-rex-could-have-been-even-bigger-than-previously-thought-study-suggests-13184470

[-] Blue_Morpho@lemmy.world 8 points 3 months ago

That's not a link to the actual paper. The King of the Hill meme above claims that the actual paper says that physical limits apply to maximum size. This implies the article misrepresents the research paper.

[-] scratchee@feddit.uk 3 points 3 months ago

I don’t think that’s what the meme is claiming.

I think instead it’s just claiming that all fossils have the same implied increase in maximum size implied by the paper, not just T rex.

I’m guessing the illiterate paleo fans were excited that maybe T rex was king of the dinosaurs again, but the logic fails if all the dinosaurs get bigger max sizes…

[-] Blue_Morpho@lemmy.world 3 points 3 months ago

If that were the case then the first sentence wouldn't claim that there are physical limits.

I dug up the paper.

"Biomechanical and ecological limitations notwithstanding, we estimate that the absolute largest T. rex may have been 70% more massive than the currently largest known specimen (~15,000 vs. ~8800 kg)."

https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/ece3.11658

That is the paper says, if we ignore biomechanical limits, statistically there could be a T-Rex that's 70% bigger than what we have already found.