 | mobile - desktop |
|
| mobile - desktop |
|
 |
 Contact Sales! |
News & Events:
|
Posted by Adam Britton on April 14, 2003 at 17:06:53:
In Reply to: Re: Croc skeleton? posted by Burmuda on April 12, 2003 at 10:49:58:
I think it's a bit much to claim that theory is merely a substitute for experience. A theory is an incompletely tested hypothesis. Einstein had a pretty good one, but even today people question it. Theories cannot always be tested or proven, but they are the next best thing when supported by the available evidence.
Suggesting that T. rex was a scavenger is a viable theory, although these days there's plenty of evidence to suggest that it's false. But just as Horner cannot prove that it's an obligate scavenger, so his opponents cannot prove that it wasn't. The curious thing is why Horner continues to push it so hard as the only possible explanation - at least, that's the impression you get from the popular media.
Adam Britton
---
:Horner doesnt claim anything about T-rex hunting whatsoever, his findings are based on theory and modern creatures, and of course theory is nothing more than a substitute for experience put forth by someone who didnt know what he was talking about. Why would you need grasping arms if you had a mouth full of grasping 6 inch teeth. I havent seen a lion take down an animal without using its jaws, we have no idea what a T-rex or any other dinosaur may have been capable of, how much do you think is possible examining a creature that lived 65 million years ago, an age that is incomprehensible by human minds, and to think that we have all that answers......pffft simple minded i say.
