Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

How Do You Eat a Triceratops? Start By Ripping the Head Off

timothy posted about 2 years ago | from the steamed-with-beer-and-old-bay dept.

Earth 113

scibri writes "Once a Tyrannosaurus took down a Triceratops, how did it go about eating it? By looking at the bite marks on Triceratops fossils, a group of paleontologists have pieced together the steps, and created an illustrated guide. Step one? Pull off the head."

cancel ×

113 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Sounds like (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41769309)

Sounds like an afternoon on bath salts.

Re:Sounds like (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41769369)

Sounds like my ex-wife's Modus operandi

Re:Sounds like (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41770759)

Worst part is when you wake up and realize it's the wife's pooch. Ricky, you got some splainin' to do.

Re:Sounds like (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41774655)

Funny

MMMM !! BRAINS !! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41769317)

MMMmh ughgh oooo eees szzze !!

How do you fuck a cat? (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41769331)

In the pussy.

Ah Yes! Triceratops ... (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41769359)

... the "gummy bear" of dinosaurs.

Re:Ah Yes! Triceratops ... (4, Funny)

Genda (560240) | about 2 years ago | (#41770757)

No, more of a Jurassic Pinata.

Re:Ah Yes! Triceratops ... (4, Funny)

Nidi62 (1525137) | about 2 years ago | (#41771215)

Actually, when I eat gummi bears, I usually eat the legs first, then the arms, then head, leaving the torso for last. Yes, I like my gummi bears to suffer and probably need some professional help.

Re:Ah Yes! Triceratops ... (3, Informative)

jonadab (583620) | about 2 years ago | (#41773203)

Wait...

There are people who eat gummy bears one at a time (as opposed to just tossing handfuls of them into your gaping maw)?

Huh. I learn somethin' new every day. Thanks, Slashdot.

Re:Ah Yes! Triceratops ... (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41773517)

Yes. It might be a shock to you, but some of us aren't fat asses.

Re:Ah Yes! Triceratops ... (1)

jonadab (583620) | about 2 years ago | (#41776661)

Actually, personally, I don't eat gummi bears at all. I've never cared for them.

(This does not stop me from getting fat eating other foods, of course...)

First shoot it with a .458 magnum - several times (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41769383)

First shoot it with a .458 magnum several times (An elephant gun to those who don't know calibers and it's has MUCH more of a punch than a .50 caliber. A 20mm cannon would be better, but I have yet to see a rifle for that.), start a bonfire (you're NOT going to butcher the beast! IT's too big), and then when it's done, take a machete and hack off chunks.

Re:First shoot it with a .458 magnum - several tim (4, Insightful)

K. S. Kyosuke (729550) | about 2 years ago | (#41769721)

And what if the T-Rex is left-handed? How is he going to operate the bolt mechanism? It's not like specialty rifles tend to cater for physiological minorities.

Re:First shoot it with a .458 magnum - several tim (2)

TubeSteak (669689) | about 2 years ago | (#41770429)

If you can afford a specialty hunting rifle, you can probably afford to have one made or modified for a left handed grip.

Re:First shoot it with a .458 magnum - several tim (2)

gonzonista (790137) | about 2 years ago | (#41771111)

Doesn't matter. Have you seen those tiny arms? T Rex will never be able to shoot straight.

Re:First shoot it with a .458 magnum - several tim (1)

Golddess (1361003) | about 2 years ago | (#41771651)

Have you seen those tiny arms? T Rex will never be able to shoot straight.

He can with science! [woot.com]

Re:First shoot it with a .458 magnum - several tim (1)

Man Eating Duck (534479) | about 2 years ago | (#41775905)

Doesn't matter. Have you seen those tiny arms? T Rex will never be able to shoot straight.

Exactly [mordantorange.com]

Re:First shoot it with a .458 magnum - several tim (1)

LiENUS (207736) | about 2 years ago | (#41770197)

5000 ft lbf of energy is "much more" than 13000 ft lbf? since when?

Re:First shoot it with a .458 magnum - several tim (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41770519)

Maybe he means the .500 S&W Magnum, and not the .50 BMG... The former has started to be used in rifles, and it's a lot more comparable (both are 300-500 GR, versus the .50's 650-800). Still, ".50 caliber rifle" should imply .50 BMG, and you're right on the money with that being no contest.

Re:First shoot it with a .458 magnum - several tim (1)

Nadaka (224565) | about 2 years ago | (#41770213)

The hecate [wikipedia.org] is a 20mm sniper/anti-material rifle.

Re:First shoot it with a .458 magnum - several tim (1)

Nadaka (224565) | about 2 years ago | (#41770237)

damn it. That article isn't about the 20mm version.

Re:First shoot it with a .458 magnum - several tim (2)

operagost (62405) | about 2 years ago | (#41770515)

Why do the French need such a powerful gun to surrender?

Re:First shoot it with a .458 magnum - several tim (4, Funny)

Chris Burke (6130) | about 2 years ago | (#41770833)

Surrender is safest and easiest when the enemy is dead.

Re:First shoot it with a .458 magnum - several tim (1)

Lehk228 (705449) | about 2 years ago | (#41771575)

one of those new Iranian 14.5mm sniper rifles would do nicely, assuming they don't blow apart when fired and they actually exist, rather than being some more iranian photoshop derived weapons

Re:First shoot it with a .458 magnum - several tim (1)

MDMurphy (208495) | about 2 years ago | (#41772027)

First shoot it with a .458 magnum several times (An elephant gun to those who don't know calibers and it's has MUCH more of a punch than a .50 caliber. A 20mm cannon would be better, but I have yet to see a rifle for that.), start a bonfire (you're NOT going to butcher the beast! IT's too big), and then when it's done, take a machete and hack off chunks.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/.950_JDJ [wikipedia.org]

Re:First shoot it with a .458 magnum - several tim (1)

nicomede (1228020) | about 2 years ago | (#41774671)

It's common knowledge that the military equipment preferred by Tyranosaurs is the F-14 Tomcat. Soooooo cool!

Step 4 (4, Funny)

Bob the Super Hamste (1152367) | about 2 years ago | (#41769395)

Step four: feast on the delicacies beneath the frill.

I am so making a T-shirt with these pictures and captions.

Re:Step 4 (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41769421)

i was expecting a '???' step.

Re:Step 4 (1)

cyberchondriac (456626) | about 2 years ago | (#41769857)

They forgot step 5, "profit".

Re:Step 4 (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41769453)

We'll see you in court sir.

Re:Step 4 (1)

gstoddart (321705) | about 2 years ago | (#41769501)

They're probably copyrighted, and you'd probably get sued.

But, yes, that would be an awesome T-shirt ... probably pretty popular among the paleontologists.

Re:Step 4 (1)

Bob the Super Hamste (1152367) | about 2 years ago | (#41769945)

If I go onto a place like zazzle and have a one off one made up that is not put up for sale I don't think there will be a problem. If I decided that I wanted to sell copies using their images and captions then it would be a problem.

Re:Step 4 (1)

gstoddart (321705) | about 2 years ago | (#41769979)

Just saying, the other dinosaurs are always all over stuff like that. ;-)

I think it would be an awesome t-shirt though, maybe the original authors would agree to using the images.

Re:Step 4 (1)

Bob the Super Hamste (1152367) | about 2 years ago | (#41770133)

If I could get permission to use the images and captions I would pursue selling them as it seems a lot of people have a dark sense of humor much like mine and they probably would do fairly well.

Re:Step 4 (1)

Urza9814 (883915) | about 2 years ago | (#41770471)

Good luck getting them to print it...about two years ago I was trying to have shirts printed for a university club and I couldn't find a printer that would let us include the name of the university due to copyright fears. If they can find your image on Google, they're not gonna print it.

Re:Step 4 (1)

Zordak (123132) | about 2 years ago | (#41771001)

Pedantic and all, but the name of your university is not copyrighted. It's too minimal. But there may be trademark issues.

Re:Step 4 (1)

ackthpt (218170) | about 2 years ago | (#41770187)

They're probably copyrighted, and you'd probably get sued.

But, yes, that would be an awesome T-shirt ... probably pretty popular among the paleontologists.

They'll send around their lawyers, indistinguisable from T. Rex, which will rip your head off.

Really wondering if this was the case or the bite marks were the result of battle. Once you, as T. Rex, got around those horns and had a good grip, would you risk letting go? Seems more to me like T. Rex would have bull-dogged a Triceratops, attempt to break its neck or get it in a position of asphyxiation, unable to breath through a twisted windpipe.

But I'm just a software developer, what do I know.

Re:Step 4 (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41769829)

Alternative shirt has Barney and Barney's triceratops friend

Re:Step 4 (2)

avgjoe62 (558860) | about 2 years ago | (#41770029)

I REALLY did not want the image of Barney eating Baby Bop planted in my head. I already suspected that purple monstrosity was perverted - this will just make me cringe even more every time I hear that sodding theme song...

Re:Step 4 (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41769939)

I was leaning more towards "Step three: nibble on the soft flesh of Triceratops' face."

Re:Step 4 (2)

ackthpt (218170) | about 2 years ago | (#41771007)

I was leaning more towards "Step three: nibble on the soft flesh of Triceratops' face."

Step 5: T. Rex throws the carcass on a grill, pulls out a few brews and throws a BBQ party.

Read the article! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41769433)

Step one: get a good grip on the neck frill.

Geez, come on.

Which end of a hot dog do you bite first? (1)

mmell (832646) | about 2 years ago | (#41769447)

The end that's closer to your mouth!

Re:Which end of a hot dog do you bite first? (2)

ackthpt (218170) | about 2 years ago | (#41770215)

The end that's closer to your mouth!

Most predators I've seen go for the soft tissues, first. Liver, stomach, intestines, etc., muscle tissue usually eaten after it has "seasoned" a few days.

As they are looking at fossils I'm wondering how they are determining the order in which feeding took place. Perhaps T. Rex hung around such a large kill for days, feeding until it was sated or felt like getting something fresh.

Suck the head ... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41769529)

Pinch the tail ...

Just like crawdads!

One question (1)

AwesomeMcgee (2437070) | about 2 years ago | (#41769565)

After tearing the head off, how much salt did the tyrannosaurus use to make it edible?

The Oatmeal is slacking (4, Funny)

boristdog (133725) | about 2 years ago | (#41769569)

The Oatmeal should have been all over this guide like...well, like a T-rex on a Triceratops.

Re:The Oatmeal is slacking (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41769689)

Qwantz has it covered! [qwantz.com] . ..OK. it is unrelated. but my god that domain name in the strip makes me laugh.

Re:The Oatmeal is slacking (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41770337)

The Oatmeal should have been all over this guide like...well, like a T-rex on a Triceratops.

You think that'd stop Innis from stealing a perfectly good joke? You've got another thing coming, friend. That exact diagram (perhaps redrawn) will either be his next comic, or he'll wait a month until it's not on the forefront of everyone's minds and do it. Make sure you get ready to share it to all your friends!

Re:The Oatmeal is slacking (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41770439)

I wouldn't call what the Oatmeal does 'drawing'.

Taking down a triceratops? (5, Insightful)

camperdave (969942) | about 2 years ago | (#41769589)

"Once a Tyrannosaurus took down a Triceratops, how did it go about eating it?"

I thought T-Rex was downgraded from a hunter/killer to a carcass plundering carrion eater, like a buzzard. Besides, didn't these Triceratopses have soft underbellies and such? Seems to me that the neck and face bits would be the LAST to go, not the first.

Re:Taking down a triceratops? (1)

Remus Shepherd (32833) | about 2 years ago | (#41769729)

The soft underbellies were mostly organs and guts -- nutritious but not meaty. The meatiest parts of the triceratops were the huge neck muscles.

It's not clear whether the T-Rex killed the triceratops himself, or found and ate already dead carcasses. But either way, the scientists have concluded from bite marks that this is how the feasting went.

Re:Taking down a triceratops? (1)

thomasw_lrd (1203850) | about 2 years ago | (#41770049)

I've always seen predators and scavengers start on the organy undersides. That's where most of the fats are, and also the parts that will rot the quickest. Seems like dinosaurs would need similar nutrition requirements to todays buzzards?

Re:Taking down a triceratops? (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41769745)

Maybe after getting to a Triceratops and scaring away whatever was eating it, this was a way to get at 'still good' parts that weren't accessible to smaller dinosaurs yet...

Re:Taking down a triceratops? (1)

Schmorgluck (1293264) | about 2 years ago | (#41769891)

I thought T-Rex was downgraded from a hunter/killer to a carcass plundering carrion eater, like a buzzard.

Yeah, heard of that too. Something about their body structure being inappropriate for actual fighting. Their wee upper limbs, in particular.

Re:Taking down a triceratops? (1)

Chris Burke (6130) | about 2 years ago | (#41770809)

Ah, but if the jaws are big enough then it doesn't need the arms (and there's some evidence that the jaws were powerful and teeth strong enough to be used for killing large prey). And one theory for why the arms are so small is to allow for such big jaws while staying balanced.

Of course a predator as big as T-Rex would have still eaten carrion -- or just stole fresh kills from other, smaller predators since that's one of the advantages of being big. Like their modern cousins, the eagles.

On a somewhat tangential note, those wee arms were a lot stronger than you might think. Tendon attachment marks on fossils suggest that T-Rex arms were extremely strong. One theory is that it used the arms to help it get upright, basically letting it do a small push-up to help get its weight under it.

Re:Taking down a triceratops? (1)

lgw (121541) | about 2 years ago | (#41769911)

This has been debated by experts for over a century now. It's hard to get solid evidence about habits. The teeth of the T-Rex were strong enough to wrestle down live prey (to judge from bite strength, whihc can be determined from bite marks). Its seems likely it could run faster than its prey (to judge form biomechanics, but that doesn't speak to metabolism). T-rex certainly seems able to be a predator, whatever you want to read into that.

I just assume they were like modern lions: not shy about taking cariron, but willing and able to make thier own when the opportunity arose.

Re:Taking down a triceratops? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41770301)

"Once a Tyrannosaurus took down a Triceratops, how did it go about eating it?"

I thought T-Rex was downgraded from a hunter/killer to a carcass plundering carrion eater, like a buzzard. Besides, didn't these Triceratopses have soft underbellies and such? Seems to me that the neck and face bits would be the LAST to go, not the first.

The article specifically says the bite marks in the triceratops frills weren't healed, which to me implies that healed bite marks have been found on triceratops fossils. If you Google tyrannosaur healed bite marks [google.com] you get a good number of hits with references to specific instances of herbivore fossils with healed tyrannosaur bite marks.

Figures - like a dog, T. Rex probably ate whatever he could.

Re:Taking down a triceratops? (1)

onyxruby (118189) | about 2 years ago | (#41771167)

That's the wonderful thing about science. It takes 'thought' and turns it upside down. Besides who are we puny humans to argue with a T-rex?

Re:Taking down a triceratops? (4, Informative)

Chuckstar (799005) | about 2 years ago | (#41771673)

I thought T-Rex was downgraded from a hunter/killer to a carcass plundering carrion eater, like a buzzard.

There's still debate on this subject, but IMHO there's really too much evidence to the contrary to believe that T.Rex was a scavenger specialist (although pretty much all predators will eat carrion when available). The most interesting evidence are fossil bones of T.Rex prey that have partially-healed tooth marks that could only have been made by T.Rex. This is evidence of an animal that survived a T.Rex attack long enough for bone to partially heal (months/years). That would be hard if T.Rex were only a carrion specialist.

There was always a lot of skepticism of the scavenger hypothesis. Just looking at T.Rex would tend to create skepticism. T.Rex is big, muscular, has incredibly strong jaws, lots and lots of sharp piercing teeth... definitely was the scariest thing around at the time. The biggest, scariest meat eater in any ecosystem is rarely a scavenger specialist.

Another problem with the scavenger specialization idea is that T.Rex would have had pretty good binocular vision. Very useful for a predator. Scavengers don't need it so much.

We still don't have good evidence about T.Rex's hunting style, though. I think one of the reasons the scavenger specialist idea has been so intriguing is that people had a hard time figuring out how T.Rex could take down something like Triceratops, given it's pretty tough defenses. Also, there is some evidence that T.Rex would not have been a fast runner, so how did it chase down some of the prey that seems like it would have been fast runners?

When they find the partially-healed T.Rex bite marks I mentioned above, however, they tend to be on the prey's back. This would be pretty standard for a failed take-down, even among today's predators. Was it in fact a fast runner catching up from behind? If so, how did it take down Triceratops, which would probably turn and defend itself. Perhaps T.Rex was an ambush hunter, like today's Komodo Dragons, coming out of large brush and attacking from the side. Maybe T.Rex was a social hunter and surrounded its prey. I like to imagine T.Rex could leap over Triceratops horns, get behind it, get a grip on it's back, and shake it to death... But I have NO evidence for that, it's just fun to imagine.

Re:Taking down a triceratops? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41772031)

1. T. Rex only had to be faster than it's prey. So what if it was not a fast runner by cheetah or even lion standards. That doesn't matter. What matters Is how fast T. Rex was compared to Triceratops. Or the duck-bill of the era.

2. How could T. Rex take down prey? With jaws and teeth like that? How about one chomp and wait? Kinda like the komodo dragon, except that instead of waiting for the prey to sicken and die from bite-caused infections, T. Rex could just wait for the prey to bleed out or even just fall over dead right on the spot.

Re:Taking down a triceratops? (1)

pkphilip (6861) | about 2 years ago | (#41773833)

The most interesting evidence are fossil bones of T.Rex prey that have partially-healed tooth marks that could only have been made by T.Rex.

How does one go about confirming that a specific mark on the vertebrae of an animal definitely came about because a T-Rex bit it? Couldn't it have been caused by a tree trunk falling on the animal or be caused by another animal other than a T-Rex? Even herbivorous animals fight with each other and can cause serious damage to each other.

Re:Taking down a triceratops? (1)

camperdave (969942) | about 2 years ago | (#41776045)

How does one go about confirming that a specific mark on the vertebrae of an animal definitely came about because a T-Rex bit it?

Cross sectional shape of the mark. Spacing and placement relative to other marks. etc. A falling tree isn't going to hit the animal and put a series of triangular puncture marks on opposite sides of the vertebrae, for example.

Re:Taking down a triceratops? (1)

OhANameWhatName (2688401) | about 2 years ago | (#41774083)

That would be hard if T.Rex were only a carrion specialist.

What if the dinosaur was asleep?

Re:Taking down a triceratops? (1)

Grayhand (2610049) | about 2 years ago | (#41773357)

That's Horner's BS theory. There is no part of a T-Rex to hint at it being a scavenger. His claim is that an excellent sense of smell means scavenger. Most scavengers are small not oversized. His turkey vulture example is a poor one. Their size means they can cover more territory to find food. T-Rexs weren't built as long distant runners, they were built to fight by anyone's standards. They were likely short distance sprinters as in ambush hunters. You don't ambush stalk carrion. If they attacked Triceratop's necks there was a good reason. Necks have major arteries so their teeth would be perfect for opening up arteries so the triceratops would bleed out. They've also been found to have the same pockets in their teeth as Komodo Dragons so bacteria would build up, also not a feature of pure carrion eaters. Once their prey is bitten they'd just have to follow until their prey was weak from infection and blood loss. Their size would keep away the actual scavengers.

Re:Taking down a triceratops? (1)

Chris Burke (6130) | about 2 years ago | (#41774257)

What's funny about the turkey vulture comparison is that of (new world, at least) vultures, they're the only ones with a good sense of smell. I think it's a lot easier to find (non-avian) predators with excellent senses of smell.

The point about soaring explaining the size of vultures is a good one, though size can still be use. Condors can more easily eat large and thick-hided carrion than the smaller vultures, and this could apply to t-rex. Also just like its size could scare off scavengers, it could also scare predators off a kill for an easy meal - though its doubtless that happened in any case. In vultures its the black vulture who dominates at kills, but there its about their superior dexterity on the ground.

Who knows anymore (1)

SmallFurryCreature (593017) | about 2 years ago | (#41775031)

One tactic T-rex might have used is the same as the giant lizard (komodo dragon), it rushes the prey, takes one septic bite, then trails the enemy till it dies.

The hyena was considered a carrior eater but makes more kills then the lion who was considered a predator.

And considering build, the Hyena seems closer to the T-rex then a buzzard. Powerful jaw and neck muscles that can deliver a massive traumatic bite to anything living or dead.

Slashdot title of the year award goes to (1)

Intrepid imaginaut (1970940) | about 2 years ago | (#41769601)

This story.

Paleontology Job Opening (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41769637)

Job Description: Dig up and examine dinosaur bones, then sit around doodling how a T. Rex may have ripped off the head and eaten a triceratops. Additional funding may be available to create an animation of the fight leading up to the kill, as imagined by "experts" in the field.

Successful applicants may expect to master subtle intonations of the phrase "Woah, dude!" and become pizza connoisseurs.

Please send your applications to Rexomania in game at Orgrimmar. Alliance scum need not apply.

Ask Slashdot: (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41769767)

I can't help but feel like this article should have been an "Ask Slashdot." Inquiring Cretacious minds want to know....

Gone of the Head. (2)

VortexCortex (1117377) | about 2 years ago | (#41769839)

It all seems familiar somehow.
Step one: "Removing the head, or destroying the brain..."
Let me guess, step two is: "You've got red on you.",
and step three involves being "a bit bite-y."

If that T-Rex is wielding a cricket bat it's proof what killed off the dinosaurs wasn't the asteroid -- It was the Zombies it caused.

What a stupid question. (2)

The Grim Reefer (1162755) | about 2 years ago | (#41770027)

"Once a Tyrannosaurus took down a Triceratops, how did it go about eating it?"

Any way it wanted to, of course.

I can just picture Miss manners telling it to place a napkin on it's lap and which fork to use...

Then becoming one of the hors d'oeuvres

You keep using that word... (1)

EGenius007 (1125395) | about 2 years ago | (#41770075)

"Theirs was the immortal battle"

Simple Answer (1)

Penurious Penguin (2687307) | about 2 years ago | (#41770139)

- Primordial Bath Salts

Triceratops (4, Funny)

khr (708262) | about 2 years ago | (#41770153)

Triceratops... It's what's for dinner!

Easy (1)

PPH (736903) | about 2 years ago | (#41770161)

I grab the triceatops by the hind legs, flip it on its back and rub its belly. This puts it in a trance and then its helpless

Bon Apetite.

It's like the elephant joke... (1)

Phydeaux (82550) | about 2 years ago | (#41770313)

It's like the elephant joke...

How do you eat an elephant?

One bite at a time...

This ain't jurassic park (1)

partyguerrilla (1597357) | about 2 years ago | (#41770341)

Wouldn't it remove the feathers first? Aren't dinosaurs supposed to be all feathered now?

Start by locating the cloaca (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41770485)

First you have to find the cloaca. It's probably under the tail about here somewhere. Next, you want to get your tongue in there; a triceratops is pretty big, so you might have to use your whole face. Don't be afraid to get a little creative, because the triceratops will appreciate it. Paleontologists are unsure where the triceratops cli... Wait, you didn't say "How do you eat out a triceratops?" Uh, nevermind...

Easier method (1)

Princeofcups (150855) | about 2 years ago | (#41770511)

Why didn't T. Rex just use it's hands to pull the head off? Oh wait.

Pull off the head (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41770567)

fnar, fnar

Finally! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41770665)

After suffering through so many useless science and technological news stories, Slashdot has finally posted something of practical use for its readers.

Signed,
A Tyrannosaurus Rex

What Wine Would You Serve? (3, Funny)

avgjoe62 (558860) | about 2 years ago | (#41770729)

White? Red? Or would you serve it with some fava beans and a fine chianti?

Re:What Wine Would You Serve? (1)

_Ludwig (86077) | about 2 years ago | (#41774331)

Poultry normally goes with whites, but the meat of large muscular birds such as ostrich more closely resemble beef than chicken. However, large sedentary reptiles’ meat is more “chickeny.” I don’t picture a Triceratops doing a whole lot of running around, but it’s hard to say whether it would be more akin to an ostrich or an alligator. A Zin (NOT white Zin, ever) should cover the bases if you don’t know what you’re getting into, although it probably wouldn’t be the ideal choice for either. And of course all bets are off if you’re heavily spicing it, making a curry stew or whatever.

This is not science (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41770771)

While it is an interesting "story", this is not science. Every man and his dog can look at marks on a rock you pick up from the street on your way to work, and tell you "the history of it", the hypothesis of how it acquired the marks, etc. It will be an interesting story, but it is not science.
Why? Because there is no way to test that hypothesis. There is no way to test whether these assertions are true.
So while interesting, it just remains as stories. Plausible stories perhaps, but nothing more.

This most emphatically is science (1)

DragonWriter (970822) | about 2 years ago | (#41771161)

While it is an interesting "story", this is not science. Every man and his dog can look at marks on a rock you pick up from the street on your way to work, and tell you "the history of it", the hypothesis of how it acquired the marks, etc. It will be an interesting story, but it is not science. Why? Because there is no way to test that hypothesis.

Incorrect. Hypotheses about behavior inspired by review of any set of fossil evidence, like the one here, will produce predictions about what can expect to be found (and, more important, about what would not be expected to be found) in other fossil evidence not in the examined set on which the hypothesis was based. This provides a route to falsification of exactly the type seen everywhere else in empirical science.

You can't directly observe the hypothesized behavior, but that's typical of scientific models -- what you can do is validate whether future observations match or conflict with what you would expect to be true if the hypothesis drawn from current observations were correct.

Apparently just like a chocolate bunny (2)

jbezorg (1263978) | about 2 years ago | (#41770857)

/ that's all I got...

The important question remains unanswered... (2)

hey! (33014) | about 2 years ago | (#41771091)

Hot sauce or garlic butter?

If the flavor is kind of just "meh", you break out the pepper sauce. If the taste is *nasty* you go for the garlic butter.

Just in time for the American Thanksgiving feast.. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41771937)

I was getting tired of turkey anyways...

Where the rubber meets the road: (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41772253)

http://i.imgur.com/CsCxz.jpg

The lie of dinosaurs (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41772621)

Is there a consensus dinosaurs ever existed? Many paleontologists seem to be full of their own speculative crap.

How did T-rex eat a Triceratops? (1)

reboot246 (623534) | about 2 years ago | (#41773461)

A very clumsy 69?

Headless Chicken Triceratops? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41773547)

If dinosaur brains were par for retarded chickens, then removing the (hard to get at) head might still leave the hindbrain running around with the much more yummy rest. If the crest wre really blood-filled, mauling it might cause fainting from blood-loss and hypotheria - thoiugh Dame Nature probably had emergency reactions for such situations. Cracking the hindbrain first - like big cats "do" - would make much more sense. Then bite off enough from the rear to quickly bleed it to death. Besides, triceratops didn't have armored underbellies, did they? Remember. A wounded predator, is often a dead predator.

Wayback Machine (1)

sudonim2 (2073156) | about 2 years ago | (#41774181)

Trilobite! Trilobites! Betcha can't eat the heads!

If you eat a triceratops when you first wake up... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41774293)

If you eat a triceratops when you first wake up... nothing worse will happen to you all day, unless later on in the day the Earth is struck by a giant meteor, ultimately wiping out every species with a mean adult body weight over 25 pounds.

Incidentally, if you can eat a triceratops, you probably fall in this category.

Really? (1)

kakaburra (2508064) | about 2 years ago | (#41774663)

How the hell is this on /.??
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>