"Bigger Than T.rex" - New Spinosaurus TV Special

[Meso-Cenozoic]

I had posted this on the Spinosaurus New Look! discussion page, but thought it would be beneficial to some here, too.

There's going to be a NOVA/National Geographic TV special entitled, "Bigger Than T. rex" that will have its premiere on PBS, November 5th at 9pm (I'm guessing EST).

Here's the link, which also includes a preview video...

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/nature/bigger-than-t-rex.html

[Alexxitator]

Can't wait to see this! Tye for the link!

[Patrx]

I am looking forward to seeing this. But gosh, what a terrible title 

[Balaur]

I am looking forward to seeing this. But gosh, what a terrible title 

Agreed. We've already known for a while that it was bigger, but just how much was not known. I think they are trying to play it off as being bigger, but really it should be that it's weirder.

[stargatedalek]

then again, is a theropod with short legs really that much weirder than a theropod with an immense head

[Balaur]

then again, is a theropod with short legs really that much weirder than a theropod with an immense head

No, but an aquatic non-avian dinosaur is much weirder than a terrestrial bone crunching short armed tyrannosaur. 

[Yutyrannus]

I am looking forward to seeing this. But gosh, what a terrible title 

Indeed. Not only was it already known that Spinosaurus was larger than Tyrannosaurus, but Spinosaurus is also far from the only one. Several theropods are as large or larger than Tyrannosaurus.

[Manatee]

I am looking forward to seeing this. But gosh, what a terrible title 

I second this. The only thing that could have made it worse would be to say "Bigger than T-Rex": people misspelling the name of the most famous dinosaur irks me.

[HD-man]

No, but an aquatic non-avian dinosaur is much weirder than a terrestrial bone crunching short armed tyrannosaur. 

Semi-aquatic: http://www.sciencemag.org/content/early/2014/09/10/science.1258750

[Balaur]

No, but an aquatic non-avian dinosaur is much weirder than a terrestrial bone crunching short armed tyrannosaur. 

Semi-aquatic: http://www.sciencemag.org/content/early/2014/09/10/science.1258750

I think people know what I say when I say that. I know it didn't spend 100% of its time in the water, more like 85%.

[Yutyrannus]

No, but an aquatic non-avian dinosaur is much weirder than a terrestrial bone crunching short armed tyrannosaur. 

Semi-aquatic: http://www.sciencemag.org/content/early/2014/09/10/science.1258750

Possibly. It could easily be either.

[Meso-Cenozoic]

I also agree with the title being lame.   It was definitely a marketing ploy directed to pull in the casual viewer. They knew it wouldn't matter what they called it for us, because we'd tune in anyway.
They could've gone the SyFy channel route and called it something like "Spinocroc"! LOL!!

I picked up the new National Geographic mag today that has this as their cover story. Haven't got to read it yet, but it looks like a nice precursor to this TV special.

[Gwangi]

Penguins need to come on land to lay eggs and they're aquatic right? Crocodiles are arguably less aquatic than penguins, are they semi-aquatic or aquatic? How about turtles? I don't think it is a distinction worth getting too persnickety about.

[HD-man]

I think people know what I say when I say that. I know it didn't spend 100% of its time in the water,

Fair enough. As you may have noticed, I'm just very nit-picky about how certain terms are used.

Penguins need to come on land to lay eggs and they're aquatic right? Crocodiles are arguably less aquatic than penguins, are they semi-aquatic or aquatic? How about turtles? I don't think it is a distinction worth getting too persnickety about.

Actually, penguins, crocs, & most freshwater turtles are semi-aquatic. Softshell turtles are fully aquatic. However, I get what you're saying. In retrospect, "aquatic" refers to both semi-aquatic & fully aquatic animals.

[stargatedalek]

some animals are even more confusing, for example auks can spend months at sea without ever touching land
but I believe they are still considered semi-aquatic...

I find aquatic vs semi-aquatic to be rather arbitrary

[Gwangi]

some animals are even more confusing, for example auks can spend months at sea without ever touching land
but I believe they are still considered semi-aquatic...

I find aquatic vs semi-aquatic to be rather arbitrary

Agreed, which was basically what I was trying to say. Personally I think any animal that spends the majority of its time in the water like a penguin, or pinniped can safely be considered aquatic. I imagine Spinosaurus only really came ashore to lay eggs, probably like a loon which is also quite clumsy on land.

[Meso-Cenozoic]

A reminder that this special premiers on Wednesday. Just two more days! 

[Meso-Cenozoic]

Did anyone else watch the premiere of this tonight? I liked the CGI recreations of it. I found it odd that even though they depicted the new Spino look with the shortened hind legs, they didn't mention or really refer to them specifically at any point. They spoke about the bottoms of the feet and toes being flat, but nothing about the oddly short legs. I thought these were the most revolutionary findings about the new look. Strange.

[Takama]

Did anyone else watch the premiere of this tonight? I liked the CGI recreations of it. I found it odd that even though they depicted the new Spino look with the shortened hind legs, they didn't mention or really refer to them specifically at any point. They spoke about the bottoms of the feet and toes being flat, but nothing about the oddly short legs. I thought these were the most revolutionary findings about the new look. Strange.

I was wondering more about the CGI reconstruction which seemed to have longer legs then what was discoverd

[Meso-Cenozoic]

They were definitely longer in the first half. But didn't they gradually shorten them as the program progressed? Although, I don't think the fully rendered CGI's were ever as short as that animated walking one was. Maybe when it was shone swimming?