So who comes out on top?
The two of them stand off, maybe charge and then whack the other a little. Then, they back off and go proceed to hunt together realizing that a fight to the death is unproductive and too risky, since neither is a clearcut victor.Maybe they crack open some beers while they're at it.
>>4621102Ok, both are female instead then
>>4621104they start scissoring while i watch
>>4621111I thought this board was for civilized animal discourse not bestiality
>>4621119it's not bestiality when no human is involved. The watching is for purely scientific reasons.Get your mind out of the gutter.
>>4621082Me
>>4621082Either the bear overheats or the utahraptor freezes.
>>4621082Utahraptor loses from the lower oxygen levels and hollow bones
>>4621224I look like this
>>4621224Big eyes for observing and a perfectly aerodynamic head for a quick getaway when thought starts being required.Life always finds a way.
>>4621082Raptor jumps, gets behind the bear and goes for the nape, crushes it and shitty fag bear dies
>>4621356is this a homosexual innuendo i'm too old to understand?
>>4621119Bestiality/zoophilia/faunoiphilia are common and hot topics on this board. Most posters here would love to see some f/f polar bear on utahraptor action. I think you're lost, bud.
>>4621082Are they fighting in Utah or Greenland?
>>4621082A T. rex would wreck an elephant of any sizeA Utahraptor would get wrecked by a polar bear's paws to its face
>>4621082Bear, probably. Stronger skeletal system means it can probably support stronger musclature.
>>4621082Whoever wins.... we eat both.
>>4621082Where are they fighting? Utahraptor lived in the environmental equivalent of the Everglades while polar bears live in the Arctic. If they are fighting in East Texas, the Raptor probably wins, if they are fighting in northern Alaska, the Polar bear probably wins.
>>4621082Utahraptor's bite force was quite high, so I presume it would be able to kill the bear pretty easily.
>>4621560T-Rex ain't wrecking no 5 meter tall 22,000kg palaeoloxodon namadicus
>>4621732Is it your belief a jaguar could kill a male lion?
>>4621739In my opinion, if some ayylmaos set up an environment with P.namidicus and T.rex, the P.namidicus will be on the menu. Will the Tyrannosaurs attack full grown bulls in their prime? Only if other prey is unavailable, or some other circumstance made that specimen the most vulnerable prey item in the area. And FYI, the femur that would describe a 5 meter P.namidicus has been lost in the archives of an Indian museum for 60 years, no one has measured it since 1942. I don’t consider it reliable.
>>4621761you'll understand that i do believe in palaeoloxodon namadicus on the basis of coolness. but this isn't about predation, the phrasing of OP makes it sound like a face to face confrontaation. and both animals would most likely want to avoid that unless it's a bull at the peak of his musth
>>4621740jaguar is not twice as large as a male lion
>>4621952Nor is Utahraptor twice the size of a polar bear
>>4622034You are clearly being disingenuous; the height advantage depicted in the OP image clearly demonstrates the ability of the larger animal to have both a height and reach advantage which is not factored into your analogy. Either you're being disingenuous or you're a dumb fucking nigger.
>>4621732polar bear's bite force is stronger
>>4622043how about you simmer down and emulate human speech more convincingly birdbrain?
>>4621082Something about that pic bothered me so I decided to use measurements I found online which I believe to be more reasonable, as well as a bulkier polar bear for the sake of fairness. Apparently the largest Utahraptor in this chart is the largest specimen known to us
>>4622044height advantage>>4622045nigger nigger nigger
>>4621739You retards still cant refute the basic "Large herbivore unfamiliar with large predator loses to large predator very familiar with large prey" argument.
>>4622144you still can't fathom that they'd be head to head. and you're mean for no reason, you angry man
>>4622157I should also point out by the way that the 22-ton Palaeoloxodon namadicus is based entirely on a single bone fragment that is now lost, making it about as dubious as a "Amphicoelias" which regularly gets disregarded for its lack of fossil evidence. But you don't get held up to the same level of scrutiny if you're not a dinosaur.
>>4622160yammer all you want and point things out while adjusting your glasses sir
>>4622160What level of scrutiny?
>>4622162>sirNow it all makes sense, you people love elephants so much because we're dealing with pajeets. I'm sorry bro, huge elephants are cool but there's just no way these animals would be immune to predation from large theropods, especially carcharodontosaurids and large tyrannosaurs. >>4622157>you still can't fathom the interaction would play out only the way *I* want it to!Lions eat water buffalo all the time and they don't do it by going "head to head".
>>4622165there’s no need to be racist AND uptight in the same sentence
>>4621082bear gets hit, runs away, dinosaur chases and is lizard so exhausted, bear eats dinosaur with no energy left, um delicious gonna do this again, dinosaurs now extinct, coincidece i think not.
>>4622164>A fragmentary femur from the same locality was said to be almost a quarter larger; volumetric analysis then yields a very speculative size estimate of 5 metres (16.4 ft) tall at the shoulder and 22 tonnes (24.3 short tons) in body mass, which if correct would make P. namadicus possibly the largest land mammal ever, exceeding even paraceratheres in size. However this estimate based on the "distal femur portion" the author stated should be "taken with a grain of salt" , as the author himself could only suspect that "fossils are likely stored in the Indian Museum of Kolkata; until such a collection can be revised, this size estimate will remain speculative."This then translates to masses of paleonerds blindly taking these measurements as undisputed fact, but when it comes to 50+ meter size estimates for large Sauropods, suddenly there's the appropriate and justified skepticism that comes into play. There's a discrepancy as to how seriously people take these estimates depending on whether it concerns dinosaurs or not. Instead people should be looking at all estimates of long extinct animals with the same scrutiny.
>>4622144We are talking about something a meter taller and 15000 kilos heavier than a Rex if the accepted numbers are to be believed. Any theropod would be a victim 1v1
>>4622170What do you propose for its size then? It's what we have. And if they want to bring it up they will bring it up
>>4622172You're talking about an animal that primarily hunted Triceratops - not as a rarity, primarily. You could almost say that these animals were built to hunt highly armored 9+ ton herbivores with large, forward projecting horns. And that's Triceratops, who specialized in defending itself against T. rex with sharp, forward facing horns, and not a proboscidean, who specialized in defending itself against large felines with blunt, downward facing horns.>>4622173>It's what we have.This board is fucking retarded. It's not "what we have" - it's speculative.
>>462217222 tons is not 15 tons heavier than 13 tons, and the 5 meter/22 ton estimate for P.namidicus is extremely suspect:>>4622170> However this estimate based on the "distal femur portion" the author stated should be "taken with a grain of salt" , as the author himself could only suspect that "fossils are likely stored in the Indian Museum of Kolkata; until such a collection can be revised, this size estimate will remain speculative."No one has measured this material since 1942 and no one has seen this material since the 60s. >>4622173> It's what we have.We don’t have it, any more than we have fossil evidence of blue whale sized sauropods or 20 meter Spinosaurs.Reguardless, if P.namidicus actually gets to 22 tons, the biggest predator that it ever saw in life was MAYBE 2 tons, and certainly not over 12. A Tyrannosaurus is still an out of context problem for P.namidicus.>>4621816>you'll understand that i do believe in palaeoloxodon namadicus on the basis of coolnessI do honestly respect you for the admission that you’re willing to thumb the scales in favor of the animal you like. It’s a far more honest place to play the game from than most animalstans work from. Have a nice day!
>>4622221Triceratops were probably not 9 tons on average, that is a high end. And Tyrannosaurus didn't hunt them by charging forward and locking horns so to speak. Which is the premise of these kinds of threads. >It's not "what we have" - it's speculative.t's "what we have" because you couldn't cough up anything else despite having all the incentives and temperament to do so. So yes, 5 meters and 22 000 kilos is what we have unless you'd like me to consider a more reasonable figure. >>4622232>13 tonsTyrannosaurus was most likely in the 6-9 thousand kilo range on average, Scotty and Sue in the 9,000 range. I'm not sure how big Berta is going to be. >Tyrannosaurus is still an out of context problem for P.namidicus.I would argue the reverse could also be said. This hypothetical thing outweighs the largest triceratops to ever live perhaps twice over and its shoulder stands more than a meter taller than the Rex's hip, at the very least Sue's. It is not the same thing as a comparatively tiny bush elephant encountering a Rex or some other gigantic theropod. Based on size alone it's likely this hypothetical specimen would be a "super tusker" and going about proportions then the tusks would likely be long enough to at least stave off a head on assault from Tyrannosaurus for a while.
>>4621119>I thought this board was for civilized animal discourse not bestialityWhy the hell would you think that?
the bigger one wins
>>4621224The oxygen levels increased.
>>4621082whoever wins.... we lose.
>>4622766from the cretaceous?
>>4622810Yes, but not by much.
>>462282415% sounds like a lot
>>4622766i think he means the raptor would be taken here to lower oxygen levels not that the cretaceous had less oxygen
>>4622053Thought that bear seemed weirdly small. Thanks
>polar bears get absolutely bodied by barren ground grizzlies half their sizeNot looking good for the bear
>>4624600while true it's because the polar bears absconded when the grizzlies came to feed not because they lost in a fight. the only solution is to give both cocaine and see what happens
