Muscles : Most annyoing question in DML history!

[dexter dexter <dexter1647@caramail.com>]

http://hometown.aol.com/lestatk/

Okay, this has been bothering me for a while. For the last
two years or so, I keep hearing t-rex biased fans claiming
that the big guy was "more powerful, faster, more advanced,
more gracile[etc.]" than G. carolinii, you get the picture ?
Now, while I agree it certainly had more gracile limb
proportions and was most likely faster, where comes the
belief that it was more powerful ? Let alone
>proportionally< more (in relative - body weight)? While I
am aware that some of them don't know much about
paleontology, and my strong suspicion is that they base this
only on bite force (G. Erickson's study, I beleive ... So
they took for fact that _G. carolinii_ had the same bite
force as weaker _A. fragilis_), where comes this belief ? Is
this something I completely haven't heard about ? Some sort
of study compairing both animals in "power-to-weight" ratio.

(Now, I am aware the Gig/Rex questions are a real pain for
everyone on the DML, it's something I've been curious about
for awhile...)

Thanks,
Thomas Miller
______________________________________________________
Boîte aux lettres - Caramail - http://www.caramail.com