Re: The flaws of

["Larry Dunn" <larrydunn@hotmail.com>]

From: David Hill <daveyohill@earthlink.net>

>I've taken the liberty to show you why the "small-game hunting 
Deinonychus"
>is incorrect.

Noel: Taking animals smaller than you are doesn't make you a small game 
hunter.  This would in all likelihood make tyrannosaurs small game 
hunters!   And dromaeosaurs may very well have taken animals even larger 
than they were: There's a fossil of a velociraptor in a death embrace 
with a protoceratops that hints at that.  But that doesn't require or 
even suggest packhunting.

>       Point#1: Deinonychus lived 120,000,000 years ago through
>90,000,000.  through that vast period, deinonychus has remained 
unchanged
>except for slight variations in the skull.  This means that 
deinonychus's
>claw must have had a function.

I'm sure it had a function, but it's really hard to say what it was.  
Some paleontologists feel that it may have been used to climb, for 
instance.  

>  Would it be worth deinonychus's effort to
>jump on a small animal, if it could have easily just grabbed it with 
it's
>head or hands?

Well, remember that many predators today that are social and take large 
prey also will eat small animals.  It's not necessarily so clear cut as 
all big prey/all little prey.

>  To pounce on such a small target would have taken allot of
>precision and precalculation, 

But we can separate Intelligence and precision.  An old-world chameleon, 
no genius, can shoot it's long tongue at an insect and often catch it 
right up.  It's amazing.  A dragonfly can pick a flying mosquito right 
out of thin air.  I'd wager that you're better able to learn than the 
dragonfly (that you're more intelligent, in other words), but I'd also 
wager that it'll pluck the mosquito from the air before you can!

>but Larry thinks that deinonychus was to dumb
>to hit a tenontosaur let alone a small mammal.

Oh my, I'm not suggesting it was too dumb to hit a Tenontosaur -- I'm 
saying it did not seem to possess the intelligence usually associated 
with the type of vertebrate pack hunting advocated by some people, is 
all. 

>       Point#2 When you see small game-hunting dinos, you usually
>associate them with a long neck and a snout kink with semi forward 
pointing
>teeth.  The teeth in front of the snout-kink would have proven very 
useful
>for catching small prey.  The teeth combined with the long powerful 
neck
>would have been a very efficient weapon for a hungry predator.  
Deinonychus
>had a relatively short neck and teeth that were all backward pointing, 
they
>were clearly ment for holding and not for lightning-fast strikes.

If I were a packhunting deinonychus and found myself on the back of an 
angry, bucking tenontosaur, I don't think I'd want to try to bite it and 
hold on with my jaws.  I'd want my teeth to stay in my head!  If 
anything, I think I'd want to bite it to slash it up.  But if I were 
catching small animals, I'd want my teeth to point backwards so it'd be 
easier to hold onto lunch as I took it off to the bush to chow down -- 
don't want to drop it!  Especially if some of my "friends" are trying to 
snap it out of my jaws so we can "share!"

Note that some paleontologists believe that tyrannosaurs bit down and 
then held their prey, and look at the teeth of tyrannosaurs!  They're 
like railroad spikes -- huge and thick.

>       Point#3 Coelophysis was a very flexible hunter.  It was adapted for
>making those quick pivots and U-turns.  With all of these abilities to 
aid
>it's hunt, the mammal's scattering technique would have been matched by 
the
>theropods ability to turn and rush.  Deinonychus was a fast runner and 
was
>well adapted for those long stretches while chasing a not so agile 
prey.

Actually, look again at the facts of dromaeosaurs.  Dromaeosaurs' bodies 
were built to be *extremely* maneuverable, a trait better employed in 
catching a small scurrying animal than a lumbering herbivore. Maybe Dr. 
Holtz can help us out here (if he's still reading!) -- dromaeosaurs 
weren't built as much for speed as they were for maneuverability.  

>P.S. Larry, I realy would like to hear what you have to say about my 
last post.

If you mean another one rather than this one, let me know!

Larry

______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com