This is discussion archived from a time before the current discussion method was installed.
Working Title: Tyrannosaurus Rex: From YKTTW
Fast Eddie: Pulling this sort of quibble-y bit. Anyway. It contains the dreaded first-person thing. —, (with the possible exception of Tarbosaurus bataar, though I've seen some arguments that that dinosaur should be renamed Tyrannosaurus bataar.)
Tarbosaurus is a valid genus, so, despite what it may be, Tyrannosaurus baatar is not valid, and rex is the only species in the genus. Nanotyrannus, on the other hand... Or Daspletosaurus, there is even a fossil of an animal between Daspleto and T.rex in its characters, and from the time between both genus.
Trouser Wearing Barbarian: Removed "Unless it was a scavenger, which is a truly depressing possibility", because it's not a possibility that's taken very seriously by most scientists
. Most large carnivores are both hunters and scavengers, and it's unlikely that T. rex was an exception.
- Farseer Lolotea: What I wonder is this: Why does it in any way diminish the Bad Ass cred of T. rex any to acknowledge that it may have behaved...well, a lot like a lion?
St Fan: Hey, there are two "Dinosaucers" entries in Western Animation, and they contradict each other. Anybody knowing the series can remove the incorrect line?
I was surprised Tyrannosaurus Reich wasn't on there, he is so awesome. added.
Also just beginning to make it into the public consciousness was the fact that, like many birds of prey, the females were much larger and more powerfully built than the males
This lurker always finds it hilarious when tropers bring this up (usually with a snarky Science Marches On forked in there somewhere) when the hypothesis for sexually dimorphic Tyrannosaurs is itself an example of Science Marches On. While it's *plausible* that female Tyrannosaurs may have been larger than the males, there's no solid scientific evidence that currently supports this viewpoint (the idea that female rexes could be distinguished from males by their tailbones has since been discredited), and thus it should not be jumped on as an example of Science Marching On as often as it is.
