What is the current consensus on the posture of Spinosaurus?

[PaleoMatt]

Is it quadraped or Bipedal. Knuckle or Palm walker. I seriously don't know anymore...

[Takama]

MY understanding?

WE DONT HAVE A CLUE

[Daspletotyrannus]

Clearly Spinosaurus floats in the air.   

[Neosodon]

The answer is no. There is no consensus on Spinosaurus's posture. At least not until we discover more fossil material. If we tried to come to a consensus now I'm sure it would go downhill fast.

[Reptilia]

WE DONT HAVE A CLUE

This.

[Joey]

If you want to know what posture Spinosaurus had, you should check out Trey the Explainer's video.

[PaleoMatt]

If you want to know what posture Spinosaurus had, you should check out Trey the Explainer's video.

Yea but I mean since then because it has changed.

[The Atroxious]

If you want to know what posture Spinosaurus had, you should check out Trey the Explainer's video.

The guy does make some good break downs of current knowledge, but I hesitate to use him as a source since he has some pretty clear biases (which is understandable) that he pushes while glossing over noteworthy counter-arguments that don't support his own biases (which is less forgivable). In that sense, he's a bit like Duane Nash, albeit less extremist and edgy, which makes him more palatable.

I think he's pretty good if you want a general overview of paleontological issues, but not as the best available source of information. He has a tendency to jump to conclusions in the absence of evidence, and makes it sound like the issue is better understood than it actually is, as he does with the topic at hand, Spinosaurus.

[stargatedalek]

Is it quadraped or Bipedal. Knuckle or Palm walker. I seriously don't know anymore...

All we know is what Spinosaurus wasn't, which is actually a fair bit of information, and people like to ice over the subtleties of that and say "anything goes" but that isn't really true.

We know Spinosaurus wasn't supporting it's full weight with its hind legs. Nothing about the size of the legs, or the balance of the animal has any relevance here. It's all about muscle atrophy, the legs simply couldn't hold upright under the animals weight.

We also know Spinosaurus wasn't supporting its weight with its fingers, not even a little bit.

This leaves a lot of margin for creative liberty, but neither a traditional biped nor quadruped system works.

[Reptilia]

Maybe because what they call Spinosaurus is actually a chimera? That is a possibility.

[Neosodon]

Is it quadraped or Bipedal. Knuckle or Palm walker. I seriously don't know anymore...

All we know is what Spinosaurus wasn't, which is actually a fair bit of information, and people like to ice over the subtleties of that and say "anything goes" but that isn't really true.

We know Spinosaurus wasn't supporting it's full weight with its hind legs. Nothing about the size of the legs, or the balance of the animal has any relevance here. It's all about muscle atrophy, the legs simply couldn't hold upright under the animals weight.

We also know Spinosaurus wasn't supporting its weight with its fingers, not even a little bit.

This leaves a lot of margin for creative liberty, but neither a traditional biped nor quadruped system works.

This is the most likely scenario if you go by the small legged reconstruction. But since the skeleton is only 40% complete it is possible the legs could be bigger than some of the earlier estimations.

http://markwitton-com.blogspot.com/2014/09/the-spinosaurus-reboot-sailing-in.html

[ZoPteryx]

I think the safe bet is to say it was a biped, possibly even a tail dragger based on undescribed tracks.  The Ibrahim et al. team claim they have evidence to the contrary, but they have yet to present it in a convincing fashion.

It's kind of like the ornithoscelida hypothesis in that it sounds plausible, but we need more testing and more specimens before we can comfortably overturn the mainstream view.

[AcroSauroTaurus]

Is it quadraped or Bipedal. Knuckle or Palm walker. I seriously don't know anymore...

All we know is what Spinosaurus wasn't, which is actually a fair bit of information, and people like to ice over the subtleties of that and say "anything goes" but that isn't really true.

We know Spinosaurus wasn't supporting it's full weight with its hind legs. Nothing about the size of the legs, or the balance of the animal has any relevance here. It's all about muscle atrophy, the legs simply couldn't hold upright under the animals weight.

We also know Spinosaurus wasn't supporting its weight with its fingers, not even a little bit.

This leaves a lot of margin for creative liberty, but neither a traditional biped nor quadruped system works.

Which leaves two possibilities.(that I can think of) Spinosaurus either crawled on its legs and lower arms(similar to an "army crawl", or it never left the water...

[PaleoMatt]

Well it must have left the water to lay eggs

[RobinGoodfellow]

Well it must have left the water to lay eggs

Crocodile's nest is very close to water.... probably Spinosaurus' behavior was similar.
At National Geographic Exhibition I read  that Spinosaurus' bones were heavy and quite solid, like modern marine mammals (whales).
Probably Spino spent most of the time in water.

[stargatedalek]

Is it quadraped or Bipedal. Knuckle or Palm walker. I seriously don't know anymore...

All we know is what Spinosaurus wasn't, which is actually a fair bit of information, and people like to ice over the subtleties of that and say "anything goes" but that isn't really true.

We know Spinosaurus wasn't supporting it's full weight with its hind legs. Nothing about the size of the legs, or the balance of the animal has any relevance here. It's all about muscle atrophy, the legs simply couldn't hold upright under the animals weight.

We also know Spinosaurus wasn't supporting its weight with its fingers, not even a little bit.

This leaves a lot of margin for creative liberty, but neither a traditional biped nor quadruped system works.

This is the most likely scenario if you go by the small legged reconstruction. But since the skeleton is only 40% complete it is possible the legs could be bigger than some of the earlier estimations.

http://markwitton-com.blogspot.com/2014/09/the-spinosaurus-reboot-sailing-in.html

As you didn't read the first time, the size of the legs means nothing. It's about muscle atrophy.

[Neosodon]

Is it quadraped or Bipedal. Knuckle or Palm walker. I seriously don't know anymore...

All we know is what Spinosaurus wasn't, which is actually a fair bit of information, and people like to ice over the subtleties of that and say "anything goes" but that isn't really true.

We know Spinosaurus wasn't supporting it's full weight with its hind legs. Nothing about the size of the legs, or the balance of the animal has any relevance here. It's all about muscle atrophy, the legs simply couldn't hold upright under the animals weight.

We also know Spinosaurus wasn't supporting its weight with its fingers, not even a little bit.

This leaves a lot of margin for creative liberty, but neither a traditional biped nor quadruped system works.

This is the most likely scenario if you go by the small legged reconstruction. But since the skeleton is only 40% complete it is possible the legs could be bigger than some of the earlier estimations.

http://markwitton-com.blogspot.com/2014/09/the-spinosaurus-reboot-sailing-in.html

As you didn't read the first time, the size of the legs means nothing. It's about muscle atrophy.

Sources? You seem to be a little overconfident in your understanding of Spinosaurus muscle atrophy. With the front heavy build and bone density of Spinosaurus it would still be very awkward on land even with larger and more muscular legs. But it would be able to use them to waddle up on land to lay eggs and cross to other waterways.

[stargatedalek]

Sources? You seem to be a little overconfident in your understanding of Spinosaurus muscle atrophy. With the front heavy build and bone density of Spinosaurus it would still be very awkward on land even with larger and more muscular legs. But it would be able to use them to waddle up on land to lay eggs and cross to other waterways.

My source is the material included with the Ibrahim paper.

You really aren't in any position to demand sources anyway, you claim things with no explanation as to why they would be true let alone actually sourcing anything. Nothing about Spinosaurus anatomy shows any indication of waddling, however you'd chose to quantify that.

[The Atroxious]

I think the safe bet is to say it was a biped, possibly even a tail dragger based on undescribed tracks.  The Ibrahim et al. team claim they have evidence to the contrary, but they have yet to present it in a convincing fashion.

It's kind of like the ornithoscelida hypothesis in that it sounds plausible, but we need more testing and more specimens before we can comfortably overturn the mainstream view.

Interesting. I retain my reservations on Spinosaurus bipedal locomotion due to the fact that neither the pelican posture, nor the pangolin posture completely mitigates and explains away the balance and musculature issues, given just how different pelicans and pangolins are from Spinosaurus in a musculoskeletal sense (issues like thoracic spine flexibility and pelvic shape/position are never taken into account from what I've seen) but it'd be interesting to read about this find. I'm especially curious about stride length if this find is, indeed, Spinosaurus.

Of course I'm also interested to see the rest of the Ibrahim information as well, but it looks like we're in it for the long haul on this one.

[Neosodon]

Sources? You seem to be a little overconfident in your understanding of Spinosaurus muscle atrophy. With the front heavy build and bone density of Spinosaurus it would still be very awkward on land even with larger and more muscular legs. But it would be able to use them to waddle up on land to lay eggs and cross to other waterways.

My source is the material included with the Ibrahim paper.

You really aren't in any position to demand sources anyway, you claim things with no explanation as to why they would be true let alone actually sourcing anything. Nothing about Spinosaurus anatomy shows any indication of waddling, however you'd chose to quantify that.

I'll be more specific.  Is there anywhere in the paper that says Spinosaurus could not walk even if it had larger and stronger legs than what they were estimating. We can't see the musculature of Spinosaurus so I'm curious how you can be so positive.

Maybey you didn't notice but I posted several sources and you seem to misunderstand that I'm claiming or trying to prove something and I'm not. Actually I lean towards the belly crawl side. I'm just presenting the other side out of respect for the scientists and people who have supported the bipedal Spinosaurus and there is a chance they could be right.

I'm not sure what your issue is with the term waddle (walk with short steps and a clumsy swaying motion) but if spinosaurus could take a bipedal stance I can't think of any better way to describe it's locomotion. Maybe hopping or galloping would be a better term.