Shop Forum More Submit  Join Login
Horner's Lazy T.rex by EmperorDinobot Horner's Lazy T.rex by EmperorDinobot
I absolutely hate how it came out.
This is supposed to look fat and lazy. Like a huge scary scavenging vulture. Of course, I think Tyrannosaurus was a hunter...look at my older drawing.

The original scan is 666 KB. Devil's T.rex?
Add a Comment:
 
:iconoaglor:
Oaglor Featured By Owner Nov 27, 2011  Hobbyist Traditional Artist
Jack Horner's Scavenger T. rex is still more logical than the Young Earth Creationists' Herbivore T. rex. But I would still have to say that T. rex was more of an opportunist.
Reply
:iconemperordinobot:
EmperorDinobot Featured By Owner Nov 27, 2011
And you are...?
Reply
:iconoaglor:
Oaglor Featured By Owner Nov 27, 2011  Hobbyist Traditional Artist
There are young earth creationists that believe that T. rex was an herbivore instead of a carnivore of any kind. These people make Jack Horner look sane. Here are some of their arguments:

-The teeth show too little wear to be chomping on other animals (of course without realizing that the teeth fall off)
-It moved too slowly to be catching up to its prey (saying that it waddled like a duck)
-The arms were too short and weak (Despite the fact that many predators today don't need arms to kill and the fact that the arms could lift hundreds of pounds)
-Predators today such as big cats and wolves had no delicate spines or crests that would get in the way of hunting (even though T. rex didn't either.)
-There are many sharp toothed animals today that eat plants including bears and apes (Despite the fact that many of the creatures that they mentioned also have molars designed to chew those plants)

They also use the argument that "There was no death before Adam and Eve" and "Animals didn't kill each other before the Ark"
Reply
:iconemperordinobot:
EmperorDinobot Featured By Owner Nov 30, 2011
I'm very aware of what those idiots say.
Reply
:iconcaptainrexsinatra:
CaptainRexSinatra Featured By Owner Feb 17, 2011  Hobbyist Digital Artist
13
Reply
:iconcaptainrexsinatra:
CaptainRexSinatra Featured By Owner Feb 15, 2011  Hobbyist Digital Artist
paleo ling has got a point he specializes in hadrosaurs and compares trex with raptors instead of an allosaurus or acrocanthosaurus
Reply
:iconemperordinobot:
EmperorDinobot Featured By Owner Feb 16, 2011
How old are you?
Reply
:iconcaptainrexsinatra:
CaptainRexSinatra Featured By Owner May 21, 2011  Hobbyist Digital Artist
13
Reply
:iconpaleo-king:
Paleo-King Featured By Owner Aug 16, 2010  Professional Traditional Artist
The funny thing is that "proving" that T. rex scavenged anything is next to impossible. Scavenged bones don't heal, there's no way to tell a scavenged carcass from a "hunted" one since they're both DEAD by the time the T. rex has bitten the bones. So Horner essentially chose as his theory an idea that can't even be tested. And it's largely based on outdated notions that T. rex was slow, clumsy, cold-blooded, couldn't run, etc. Horner doesn't even get his running formulas right, it's the metatarsals that contribute most to running speed, NOT the tibia. Having a "short" tibia doesn't make T. rex too slow to hunt, its metatarsals are proportionally a lot longer than those of Triceratops and duckbills.

You can prove T. rex hunted by finding partially healed prey bones with T. rex tooth marks - which have been found in spades!

But how on earth can you prove that T. rex scavenged this or that carcass? Most carcasses that got scavenged simply rotted away, the bones were not fossilized. You'd need the whole scene buried and fossilized, including the scavenging T. rexes. And EVEN THEN, I could simply way that this just as easily be an animal that those same T. rexes had HUNTED and KILLED themselves! Therefore even if they were buried while scavenging, we would never know if they were truly scavenging or simply eating their own kill.

Of course we ASSUME that T. rex (and all other predators) occasionally scavenged when fresh meat was scarce... that's the benefit of being a predator, you still have the option of scavenging when food is rare. But if you're only a scavenger you are not much good at hunting and thus it's not really a good option in hard times. But seeing as NO carnivorous vertebrate is 100% scavenger (not even vultures!) there's no way to prove T. rex was one either. Hunting was default mode, scavenging was emergency mode. And who would T. rex scavenge kills from anyway? What other predator or the time could tackle big dangerous prey like triceratops? In fact T. rex probably DID scavenge - it scavenged kills from OTHER T. rexes! Kind of like how big lion prides seize kills from smaller ones. But they are still default hunters with a predatory instinct.
Reply
:iconemperordinobot:
EmperorDinobot Featured By Owner Aug 18, 2010
Well, it's never been an absolute theory, y'know...ok, Horner went with 'this is absolute, the Tyrannosaurus was a scavenger'...But I've seen Vultures go after live rats, and even...other vultures. I think Tyrannosaurus was a hunter. I've always thought of it. This was just one of those drawings you do just to make predator dinosaurs fatter and lazier. Just for fun. Refer to my earlier, running version lol.
Reply
:iconpaleo-king:
Paleo-King Featured By Owner Aug 18, 2010  Professional Traditional Artist
Yeah, I agree... evolving so big and with such powerful legs and jaws just seem like a total waste of resources if all you're gonna do is scavenge.

Also it depends WHAT you want to scavenge. Jackals hunt little lizards, but they can only scavenge when it comes to big prey like buffalo.

Ask yourself, did T. rex have the right equipment for hunting Triceratops or Anatotitan? Yes it did, so it didn't have to settle for the scraps! And Horner's claim that you need long arms to be a predator is bogus too. Raptors only needed long arms because their hunting style involved hanging on with your fingers and slashing with your second toes. And Austroraptor reduced the arms greatly because once you get beyond a certain mass it's not feasible to jump super high and hang on to your prey.

As for Allosaurs' long arms, they were proportionally a lot shorter than raptor arms and couldn't reach further forward than the head... so using the arms to attack prey wasn't such a likely strategy for ANY predator. T. rex was a very efficient hunter because all the weapons were up front in its mouth, not slung under its body like the longer arms of earlier predators. Reducing the arms was a sacrifice to reduce weight up front and allow the head to become larger and deadlier - not because they were useless or the animal was a scavenger. Plus if you really had no use for chasing live prey, you'd get rid of those long metatarsals rather than reducing the arms! The metatarsals are where the legs get most of their speed, and they're a lot longer on T. rex than on any of the herbivores of its day.

BTW, dinosaurs that ARE built like scavengers (Spinosaurs, Therizinosaurs, etc.) tend to have very LARGE arms for a meat eater.
Reply
:icontyrannosaurusprime:
TyrannosaurusPrime Featured By Owner Oct 27, 2010
I hope you don't mind me asking, but did Therizinosaurs eat meat? I thought Therizinosaurs are exclusive herbivores.
Reply
:iconpaleo-king:
Paleo-King Featured By Owner Oct 27, 2010  Professional Traditional Artist
They were probably omnivores.... so meat, plants, maybe eggs, etc.... they were still theropods so they had basically a carnivore's digestive system, though it was hugely expanded to allow them to digest plants too. They still retained some very nasty sharp claws, so they probably occasionally killed other animals or scavenged kills. But their small blunt beaks made them pretty lousy meat-eaters - my point is that they were built like scavengers rather than hunters, i.e. not very fast, not long-legged like T. rex, not very well-balanced for high speeds - this does not necessarily mean that they were total carnivores.... spinosaurs on the other hand were definitely not herbivores, and probably did scavenge pretty often. When they weren't eating fish, that is.
Reply
:icontyrannosaurusprime:
TyrannosaurusPrime Featured By Owner Oct 27, 2010
O.O I see. Thanks for the info!
Reply
:iconemperordinobot:
EmperorDinobot Featured By Owner Sep 7, 2010
Absolutely true. Tyrannosaurus could run at great speeds, and being bigger and better than its herbivorous counterparts (well except maybe certain sauropods from the same time and age) it would really have no trouble hunting anything.
Reply
:iconkelvinzhang87:
kelvinzhang87 Featured By Owner Dec 16, 2009
There are more than enough evidences to prove that T-Rexes were predators and scavengers. The recovery in the tail bone of the Edmontosaur from Montana which bears the tooth mark of a T-Rex indicates that the prey was alive before and after the attack. So this is good evidence of predatory behaviour. Hence what Jack Horner proposed is incorrect.
Reply
:iconemperordinobot:
EmperorDinobot Featured By Owner Dec 16, 2009
exactly! plz refer to my active hunting tyrannosaur in my page.
Reply
:iconpaleo-king:
Paleo-King Featured By Owner Aug 13, 2009  Professional Traditional Artist
Lol Horner's books are full of wacko ideas that just haven't held any water since he formulated them. He's known for ONE good theory - that Maiasaura cared for their babies - and that's IT. The rest of his stuff is simply DENIAL of the facts and evidence.

Stygimoloch is NOT a baby Pachycephalosaurus.

NOT all chasmosaurs are juvenile forms of Triceratops!

And the biggest blow to Horner... T.rex DID hunt and kill other dinosaurs. How else do you explain all the Triceratops bones with HEALED puncture wounds in the bone? T.rex was the only predator that could bite into the bones of a still living animal - and the prey escaped to heal a bit.

T.rex coprolites also contain bits of Triceratops bone. Disgusting, but it proves T.rex both hunted AND ate Triceratops. Makes sense.... since 90% of big herbivores at the time were Triceratops, there wasn't much else to hunt at the end of the Maastrichtian.
Reply
:iconemperordinobot:
EmperorDinobot Featured By Owner Aug 14, 2009
Tell it to him, not to me. I believe T.rex was a very active and powerful hunter. Go see my other T.rex.
Reply
:iconpaleo-king:
Paleo-King Featured By Owner Aug 14, 2009  Professional Traditional Artist
Lol me too. I saw your other one, it's pretty nice with the pose. I doubt anyone here takes Horner's theories seriously (though I'm sure some once did long ago).
Reply
:iconemperordinobot:
EmperorDinobot Featured By Owner Aug 14, 2009
Horner is just an attention hoar.
Reply
:iconhanxopx:
HANxOPX Featured By Owner Apr 11, 2009  Hobbyist Digital Artist
Horner is stupid=p awesome work btw
Reply
:icondracontes:
dracontes Featured By Owner Mar 30, 2009  Hobbyist General Artist
Devil's Advocate T. rex methinks.

While I think it's laudable to stir up some controversy John Horner needs to change his tune as it's quite old. Very few carnivores either turn their noses at carrion or fail to react to live prey close by when hungry.

Actually in Greg Paul's "Predatory Dinosaurs of the World" there is a reconstruction of what Tyrannosaurus would look like if it was a slowpoke scavenger. Elephantine is a term that comes to mind.
Reply
:iconemperordinobot:
EmperorDinobot Featured By Owner Mar 30, 2009
Devil's Advocate indeed. I've seen GP's reconstruction, with totally straightened out legs, but I tried making this look more like poultry.
Reply
:iconpaleo-king:
Paleo-King Featured By Owner Aug 14, 2009  Professional Traditional Artist
I saw that and it was weird.

But that's how people used to think of T.rex. Paul is mocking them in a sense.

Yours isn't that awful, but it's a bit JP-ish and over-bulked. (So were my rexes before I read Bakker and Paul's books).

I think that even today the most accurate T.rex restoration EVER done is Paul's painting of a T.rex pair from 1988. It STILL has yet to be surpassed, IMO.
Reply
:iconderkompsognatus:
DerKompsognatus Featured By Owner Oct 27, 2009
Yea I agree! Those are THE most accurate rexes ever seen in paleoart so far.
Reply
:iconemperordinobot:
EmperorDinobot Featured By Owner Aug 14, 2009
Go look at my other T.rex.
Reply
:iconirinthony:
irinthony Featured By Owner Mar 30, 2009  Hobbyist Digital Artist
Hmmm if you wanna make it fat and lazy then draw him lying down!
Reply
:iconpaleo12:
Paleo12 Featured By Owner Mar 29, 2009
looks like he will tip back immediately
Reply
:iconemperordinobot:
EmperorDinobot Featured By Owner Mar 29, 2009
Exactly. I didn't articulate the legs well enough, because I tried to make him look like a chicken (semi horizontal femur covered in musculature, like...a bird, but this isn't possible in Tyrannosaurus, now is it?)
Reply
:iconpaleo12:
Paleo12 Featured By Owner Mar 29, 2009
yeah, tail is too heavy for that.
Reply
:icontonymuyo:
tonymuyo Featured By Owner Mar 29, 2009  Hobbyist Traditional Artist
I always thought that theory was rather stupid. But this picture is excellent!
Reply
Add a Comment:
 
×




Details

Submitted on
March 29, 2009
Image Size
742 KB
Resolution
2779×1150
Link
Thumb

Stats

Views
2,576
Favourites
18 (who?)
Comments
32
Downloads
429
×