comScore
Uncategorized Friday, October 14th 2011 at 9:45 am

Tyrannosaurus Rex 30% Bigger Than Previously Thought, Grew Twice as Fast

By ( ) Comments

A team of U.S. and British scientists have employed the use of three-dimensional laser scans and computer modeling to weigh five Tyrannosaurus rex specimens, including the largest and most complete T. rex skeleton, “Sue,” owned by the Chicago Field Museum. The team found that Sue would’ve actually weighed 30 percent more than expected, around 9 tons. The smallest, youngest specimen weighed by the team weighed in at less than previously thought, suggesting that during a T. rex’s growth years (10 to 15 years of age), when they were busy listening to music their parents didn’t like and refusing to do math homework, they actually grew more than twice as fast.

John Hutchinson of the Royal Veterinary College in London puts the rapid growth into perspective:

“At their fastest, in their teenage years, they were putting on 11 pounds or 5 kilograms a day. Just think how much meat that is. That’s a hell of a lot of cheeseburgers … it’s a whole lot of duck-billed dinosaurs they needed to be chowing down on.”

The quick rate of growth also suggests that they probably had a high metabolic rate, giving credit to the idea that the T. rex was warm-blooded. Hutchinson also points out that, due to the large body mass, the T. rex wasn’t particularly fast, clocking in at around 10 to 25 miles per hour, though a speed that wouldn’t have them crawling at an inordinately slow pace.

(via Reuters)

Relevant to your interests

Filed Under | • • •
  • Anonymous

    We are lucky they died out when they did.

  • Anonymous

    about 65 million years ago, I think.

  • Schaumbee

    Just in time.

  • Bdefher

     phew

  • Rogerthat1945

    What I dont understand about the `flat earth types` is that none of these so-called scientists realise that the earth was much smaller 100-million years back and gravity was lighter. So these large creatures could move much faster than mentioned here.
    Ice and rock meteors smacking into earth and increasing its size while the earth swelled up during earthquakes all made for a fascinating experience for a lot of evolving creatures.
    Lover gravity ensures terrodactyls? could fly and other big big big dinasaurs could evolve and move.
    rogerthat1945 at yahoo

  • James

    That claim is false. It was not the gravity that differed. The volume of rock hitting the Earth has negligible impact upon the Earth mass and hence gravitational pull. The difference was that the oxygen content within the atmosphere was much higher and meant that life could grow bigger.

  • http://twitter.com/cjjenks Christopher Jenks

    i wonder what type of music they listened to

  • Rogerthat1945

    I was expecting a naysayer.
    Do the MATH bro. Meteorites that hit earth brought oceans of water. Meteorites joined with and created the earth, from its beginning as a five hundred thousand cubic mile block of molten iron originally. It sure has grown in size since then; and meteorites brought Gold and Diamond, copper, nickel and other metals. Then there is all the rock.The earth has gone through a lot more than you appear to realise. As the planets size enlarged over millions of years and life started, then evolved and got wiped out, then started again, then the cycle repeated itself a hundred thousand times until the ice ages. All the time getting pummelled with boulders and Ice and stuff from space (including more material for life to exist). Sorry to break up your 5-minute theory of the universe.

  • Rogerthat1945

    Rock music?

  • Jon4tina

    That’s a pretty weird theory, who teaches stuff like that, is it something you come up with yourself by not really paying attention to documentaries or maybe chatting to a drunk in a bar. I beg you, please DO THE MATH yourself before you teach this drivel to anyone else. Of course some of what you said is correct but he vast majority of impacts responsible for increasing the earths mass happened in the early stages of the solar system, billions of years ago. We do have an upsurge in meteor and comet extinction level impacts shortly after the solar system passes through the densest part of the galaxy during its orbit. Debris is thrown inwards from the oort cloud. In fact I think we’re due one. In fact if the MOON hit us it wouldn’t make the earth visibly much bigger.

  • Methemarcus

    Technosaures

  • Rocketman

    Or even heavy metal..!

  • Rocketman

    I’m actually a “lover” of gravity, as it keeps my feet firmly on the ground..!!!

  • Me

    Marc bolan & T.Rex of course!

  • Rogerthat1945

    The “Official” theory used to be that the Sun revolved around the earth. I`m not one to believe outdated drivel, unless there is evidence for it. Just like the `documentaries` you don`t quote (all relying on schoolboy complexity [as did scientific history]).
    And did you really say that “if the moon hit the earth it wouldn`t make the earth much bigger”? :-)
    If you need an answer; I suppose it would depend on what caused the moon to impact the earth. i.e. Speed, cause and trajectory; to predict effect.
    Mass attracts mass, And the moon has a lot of it (compared to a cabbage) I suppose.
    I`m outta here for now. Its been fun. :-D

  • Rogerthat1945

    “Earth, wind and Fire”

    ?(look it up youngsters)

  • Miss Helen Stillburn

    Are you sure the sun doesn’t go around the earth? You haven’t been listening to these scientist types again have you? you know the people that can’t come to an agreement on global warming and such stuff… and im sure that if lots of space dust, rocks and planets did hit planet earth and the other planets. Would that not affect their gavitational constants to a degree that they were no longer a constant?. Newton will be miffed.

  • Jon4tina

    “Visibly” bigger. Obviously it would be 73,430,000,000,000,000,000 tonnes heavier but only added to the surface. So no, visibly not much bigger. Lol. Stick to the LSD m8. It’s safer for the rest of the world.

  • Hobart

    gesundheit

  • dennis norman

    Me and our Fred and Barney had a couple of steaks for dinner
    Wilma said they arnt has good has Brontosaurus to tough

  • Div_ide

    Oh god I lulz’d when I read this. To imply that 100 million years ago the planet was smaller and gravity less to such an extent that it made the evolution of gigantic creatures possible is ridiculous. The gentlemen below got it right. It was the oxygen content in the atmosphere that made this possible. The planet impacts happened very early in the life of the earth. We have one documented case of an extinction level event caused by a huge asteroid and even with that space rocks mass added to that of the earth there could be no discernable change in planetary gravity? Are you aware of the number of impacts it would take to alter the gravity of ANY planet? Not to mention the fact that 100 million years is the blink of an eye geologically. This crackpot theory should be stored next to “faked moon landing” and “ufo coverup”.

  • Div_ide

    P.S. Gravity is affected by mass and not by size. The earth could be the size of Jupiter and if it had the same mass the gravity would be the same. DO THE MATH.

  • melissa

    do you know how sexy reading this is!!!!

  • dennis norman

    ayup me duk thee ar ded sexy as long as yu put woodinholewen itsparky
    an dunt gu kantin oer gate an giza lachlifter we am skintan thel be orate las
    Awuduslad

  • Megapixel

    Surface gravity was lower during the Age of Dinosaurs. It had nothing to do with the Earth’s accreting of space debris. The Gravity Theory of Mass Extinction explains how the concentration of continents (i.e., Pangea) shifted the core elements (inner/outer cores and the densest part of the lower mantle) away from their current central position. This shift, by definition, would alter (i.e., lower) the surface gravity on Pangea

  • http://profiles.google.com/gil.druart Gil Druart

    I think I should leave the directions to the B-Ark here.

  • Chuck

    No!

  • Luke

    surface gravity is the same for any spherically symmetrical density distribution, so the only way that works is if gravity is asymmetrical, and one hemisphere has a stronger field than the other. But the oceans move until surface water “weighs” the same on both sides of the planet–thats why the moon causes tides–which would exactly offset the claimed change in surface gravity.

  • Luke

    thats actually not true lol

  • Fuckuall

    This is such B.S.

    It’s like saying 6ft tall humans are 30% bigger than we previously thought, because we met Hulk Hogan.

    And then these same *MORONS* say we humans were 30% smaller 200 years ago.

  • SuperSmart

    I know nothing about gravity but after reading this post I found that I am 30% stupider and weigh 0.30% less, must have been those damn meteors hitting the ocean at least they are full of gold!

  • Megapixel

    On a rotating body, such as the Earth, movement of the continents (as in the formation of Pangea), particularly when those continents move laditudinally, would alter the Earth’s angular momentum. The only way the Earth’s angular momentum could be conserved would be a change in the Earth’s spin rate or the movement of the core elements I described above.

    There is no evidence of any significant change in the Earth’s spin rate when Pangea was formed. The only other possibility is the core element shift, which as I stated would entail a change in surface gravity.

  • This little piggy

    A nine ton guard dog. I wonder what the pet food bill would be?

  • Miss Helen Stillburn

    some super market must have brought T Rex out and is now on a marketing spree. Next it will be all T Rexes are twins buy one get one free…