That's my thought too. It ain't that sexy to say, but the Sauropoda simply win on pure size. Even on their own, facing a pack of really large predators, they would simply be too big to bring down unless sick or previously injured. Argentinosaurus would likely win. (Yes, I'm a Dinosaurs 3D: Giants of Patagonia fanboy.)ReziSt said:Brachiosaurus easy.
Isn't anything big enough to take this guy down in a 1v1.
Holy cow. Yeah, I'm changing my vote to that one. That thing is HUGE.Alar said:I'd have to vote for amphicoelias fragillimus. Why? It's the biggest dinosaur in existence. Gigantosaurus got nothin' on him. Amphicoelias is the biggest, by far. He could squash an entire pack of savvy raptors with one foot!
True but there was a form of raptor discovered in Utah that did match the size of the jurrasic park raptors. They aren't velociraptors, they are the mighty, UTAHRAPTOR!!Callex said:Velociraptors are actually smaller than Jurassic Park would have you believe; they're about the size of a large dog.
EDIT:
Ahh, you see, I just heard it years ago, and had no idea it was just made up.Travis Higuet said:No... it isn't known, because its not true. I dunno if you are aware of this, but Jurassic Park was not a documentary with live footage of actual dinosaurs. Spinosaurus was semi aquatic... like a giant bipedal crocodile, without the ability of modern crocodiles/alligators to "twist" off chunks of flesh from their prey. Spinosaurus couldn't "death roll", and his jaws were designed to catch large fish in river deltas, not take down prey nearly as large as himself. The Tyrannosaurus Rex on the other hand had stronger jaws with much larger teeth, specifically designed to take large chunks out of other large dinosaurs.Megacherv said:Isn't it known that a Spinosaurus can (well, could) kill a T-Rex?