Re: The absurdity, the absurdity (was: Cooperating theropods?)

[Chris Campbell <sankarah@ou.edu>]

Larry Dunn wrote:
> 
> Sankarah wrote:
> 
> >Right, true.  My point here is that Deinonychus would dispatch its prey
> >in a way compeletly different from any extant animals.  This means it
> >can take different prey, and perhaps larger prey, than we might expect
> >from a modern analog.
> 
> Why just look at the claw and ignore the brain and other anatomy of the
> animal?  Especially when there are other rationales for the claw?

Like what?  Climbing's been suggested, but the claw's awfully slender
for that to be its primary purpose.  What else?  Intraspecific
competition?  Awful bloody for that.  And why would it be grooved for
these purposes?  The alternatives seem even more tenuous than the
hunting hypothesis to me.

I don't see what the brain has to do with it; pack tactics can be
practiced by such simple-minded animals as hammerhead sharks, so I don't
think a bright therapod would have much trouble.
 
> >> OTOH, wild dogs generally hunt in packs of ten to twenty.  I tend to
> >> think that the mass difference that's important is the total, not 
> >> individual predator to individual prey.  It's a lot more impressive 
> >> for one wolf to take down a moose than it is for ten wolves to take 
> >> down a moose.
> >
> >True.  And I expect it'd be no problem for a dozen Deinonychus to take
> >down a Tenontosaur.
> 
> But Deinonychus was not a mammal.

So what?  If sharks, birds, and lizards can use pack tactics on
rudimentary levels, I see no reason to leave dinosaurs out.

Chris