Size comparisons

[Shadow]

(12-15-2019, 10:38 PM)JurassicDD Wrote:

(12-15-2019, 10:04 PM)DinoFan83 Wrote: Just to show how big Sauroposeidon is. If you don't like my size comparisons, ignore them. Plain and simple!

But you know it's not about not liking your size comps it's about you downplaying Tyrannosaurus and you using outdated information to help you with this or making the same mistakes over and over and over again. You keep ignoring everyone that picks up on what you are doing. You have once again ignored what i have stated regarding Mapusaurus because you refuse to acknowledge what you are doing because you know exactly what you are doing and that is to downplay the animals you do not like while giving the animals you do like an edge. You always use Franoys best size fit for the largest Mapusaurus the 12.2m 7.6 ton estimate and state that's the average size when it's really not its the maximum size we have right now. You have been told countless times on the discord by people who know much more regarding this stuff than you do and they use the most current data to support there claims. The whole discord is about being as accurate as you can be. You then come on there post something that is really old and outdated or just flat out inaccurate then ignore everything that is said to you and carry on doing the same things over and over again. It would not that bad but you are always on forums posting this stuff and people come on here for accurate info and a lot that you post is often misleading.

You can not be trusted when regarding Tyrannosaurus and your size comps along with most things you say are from outdated information or even outdated work by people who are well known to have a bias against Tyrannosaurus like Brolly. And until you start listening to the people correcting your mistakes I will leave a disclaimer on your posts stating this.

Or you can just start listening to people who clearly know better.

Could you put here latest information now concerning Tyrannosaurus and Mapusaurus, I mean estimated average size and then latest estimation for biggest size. It might be a good idea to clarify situation now. @GuateGojira could then put also shortly how he see that information and @DinoFan83 can and should say if he disagree and why. I don´t start to even pretend that I would know too well latest and most detailed information concerning these. Still I think, that at this point it would be good to clarify situation and used sources/studies so, that people interested can check things. 

If there really is a situation, that maximum sizes are used as averages for some species while from another is used average sizes, that is of course wrong and against it, what wildfact tries to accomplish. I have read some postings and it looks like time to interfere a bit and see if we can get some conclusions. Reply