Size comparisons

[GuateGojira]

(04-16-2022, 03:11 AM)Mwarcaar Wrote: "130 cm is not unreliable, check that the estimations between 120 - 130 cm came from real experts and has been reconstructed based in real bones, so they are realiable and if you ask to any scientist that work with them they are going to tell you that thise sizes are facts."

experts or not estimations are only speculations, in no way are they facts and these experts themselves do not agree with each other
 it is impossible to know the exact size of an animal based on the size of its skull alone. it can be seen on any living or prehistoric species. some individuals of the same species sometimes have a large head and an average size and others may have a large size and a smaller head.  it is not for nothing that there are high estimates and low estimates (120 and 130 for the 392 mm skull)
if we take the low estimate of 120 cm (which is only an estimate, it can be more or less) it is about the size of the largest modern lions and tigers

"Also, there is no form to know if that specimen is an average sized Smilodon populator, do you have a sample of animals of the same sex and in a range of age to confirm that? If not, that is your personal speculation."

that is not my personal speculation, i read it here on wildfact.com on one of your post.

https://wildfact.com/forum/topic-smilodo...tor?page=4

Post #54
“Average Smilodon populator skulls are around 35 cm long, with the length measured from premaxillary to condyle,” 

You have a confusion here. The estimation of shoulder height for the specimen of Uruguay (392 mm) is 130 cm, the estimation of 120 cm came from OTHER specimens, which we can corroborate easely as this shoulder height was already in litterature before the skull from Uruguay was found, so there is no dissagreement at all.

Of course that is possible to know the size of an animal based on the skull, you can ask @tigerluver which is an expert on this and he can explain to you. Animals are simetric and that is a fact that we can easily corroborate with modern cats and there is no reason to believe that Smilodon was different. That is something that any Biologist and Paleontologist can do with a collection of measurements, is just a simple escalation.

About the average size of the skulls of Smilodon populator, I just totally forgot the statement of Aldo Manzuetti, so I guess that he measured a sample of skulls and got that result. However, that shows that 1 m of tall (estimated for an specimen of a similar sized skull) is just average for Smilodon populator, which again prove that a height up to 130 cm is completelly possible for the larger specimens.

120 cm is not the same height as modern lions and tigers. The maximum shoulder height measured for lions and tigers "between pegs" is of 114 cm, and that is with the legs streched, so the real standing height could be about 110 cm in both species. They are shorter than Smilodon populator. Reply