Jack Horner and T rex

[dyno77]

Usually i dont ask about the status of paleontologists ,but i was wondering if any members know if Jack Horner is done for good with paleontology . Despite his controversial claims on T rex and triceratops he still is one of the leading experts in all of paleontology,but will he ever return for interviews or is that it?
Another thing is  that T rex is still on top as the most well known and researched dinosaur but in the 1990s it had its image damaged by Jack horner and all his supporters .I recall alot of news media reporting t rex as a scavenger saying its teeth were thin and it had tiny eyes and arms that were so tiny and weak,and that it was lazy as well. At the time carcharodontosaurus was found and reported as the largest predator and alot of news media went along with it ,it was if they wanted it to be the new king of the dinosaurs..
But T rex recovered with new finds showing it didn't have weak arms and tiny eyes,and was lazy..i do hope there is a in depth look at that particular time when T Rex's image was seriously damaged and alot of experts just went along with it as well as the news media.

[suspsy]

I'll keep it as brief as possible:

1. Horner still contributes to research now and then.
2. His stance on T. rex has changed and he no longer advocates an obligate scavenger hypothesis.

[Gwangi]

I don't think Horner ever took the obligate scavenger hypothesis seriously. More like he was just trolling for press. I read his 1993 book The Complete T. rex and in it he states...

"I'm not convinced T. rex was only a scavenger. Though I will say so sometimes just to be contrary and get my colleagues arguing."

and...

"In the end, to me, this whole predator-versus-scavenger debate is a red herring. Most carnivores aren't fussy like us about where they get their meat, whether from dead animals or live ones. Hyenas are scavengers but they don't think twice about killing for lunch, even their own family members. They are opportunists. Among backboned animals, only air-borne carrion-searchers like vultures and condors are pure scavengers. The rest take whatever east pickings they can find, dead or alive. To my mind, T. rex was simply the greatest opportunist of them all."

[HD-man]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y5gKqGtIIn0

[The Templar of the Past]

I don't think Horner ever took the obligate scavenger hypothesis seriously. More like he was just trolling for press. I read his 1993 book The Complete T. rex and in it he states...

"I'm not convinced T. rex was only a scavenger. Though I will say so sometimes just to be contrary and get my colleagues arguing."

and...

"In the end, to me, this whole predator-versus-scavenger debate is a red herring. Most carnivores aren't fussy like us about where they get their meat, whether from dead animals or live ones. Hyenas are scavengers but they don't think twice about killing for lunch, even their own family members. They are opportunists. Among backboned animals, only air-borne carrion-searchers like vultures and condors are pure scavengers. The rest take whatever east pickings they can find, dead or alive. To my mind, T. rex was simply the greatest opportunist of them all."

Would you happen to have a photo of the book with pages and cover?

It would help me to respond to various critics of Horner.

[andrewsaurus rex]

would T. rex take west pickings as well?   

Sorry.



That's an interesting quote from Horner himself stating he doubted T. rex was a pure scavenger and that he likes to stir the pot by saying it was.  What a scamp.

[The Templar of the Past]

would T. rex take west pickings as well? 

Sorry.



That's an interesting quote from Horner himself stating he doubted T. rex was a pure scavenger and that he likes to stir the pot by saying it was.  What a scamp.

Frankly I believe the whole paleo-community was way too harsh to him scientifically speaking, most often than not the criticism boiling down to the same two hypothesis in a decades-long career.
If those quotes are accurate this makes the whole thing even more hollow, essentially leaving just the Torosaurus hypothesis.

Honestly, there are many things I don't like of the international paleo-community, but I don't know if this is the place to talk about it.

[Gwangi]

I don't think Horner ever took the obligate scavenger hypothesis seriously. More like he was just trolling for press. I read his 1993 book The Complete T. rex and in it he states...

"I'm not convinced T. rex was only a scavenger. Though I will say so sometimes just to be contrary and get my colleagues arguing."

and...

"In the end, to me, this whole predator-versus-scavenger debate is a red herring. Most carnivores aren't fussy like us about where they get their meat, whether from dead animals or live ones. Hyenas are scavengers but they don't think twice about killing for lunch, even their own family members. They are opportunists. Among backboned animals, only air-borne carrion-searchers like vultures and condors are pure scavengers. The rest take whatever east pickings they can find, dead or alive. To my mind, T. rex was simply the greatest opportunist of them all."

Would you happen to have a photo of the book with pages and cover?

It would help me to respond to various critics of Horner.

I can do that. Might not be today though.

[The Templar of the Past]

I don't think Horner ever took the obligate scavenger hypothesis seriously. More like he was just trolling for press. I read his 1993 book The Complete T. rex and in it he states...

"I'm not convinced T. rex was only a scavenger. Though I will say so sometimes just to be contrary and get my colleagues arguing."

and...

"In the end, to me, this whole predator-versus-scavenger debate is a red herring. Most carnivores aren't fussy like us about where they get their meat, whether from dead animals or live ones. Hyenas are scavengers but they don't think twice about killing for lunch, even their own family members. They are opportunists. Among backboned animals, only air-borne carrion-searchers like vultures and condors are pure scavengers. The rest take whatever east pickings they can find, dead or alive. To my mind, T. rex was simply the greatest opportunist of them all."

Would you happen to have a photo of the book with pages and cover?

It would help me to respond to various critics of Horner.

I can do that. Might not be today though.

Thanks. Again that would be very helpful and I believe would really do a service to the paleo-community as a whole, setting things straight and making the whole "debate" way less heated.

[JohannesB]

I found the book quite a nice read, from what I can remember. I bought it in 1993, when it came out. It certainly made me start to think more about what is true or not concerning all that was being said about Tyrannosaurus rex.

[The Templar of the Past]

I found the book quite a nice read, from what I can remember. I bought it in 1993, when it came out. It certainly made me start to think more about what is true or not concerning all that was being said about Tyrannosaurus rex.

If you can confirm the quote too that pretty much settles it.

For the most part the treatment of Horner by the community is unfortunate, and while the way he pushed the idea is ethically questionable the backlash to it was pretty disproportionate.

[jamdrugstore]

I found the book quite a nice read, from what I can remember. I bought it in 1993, when it came out. It certainly made me start to think more about what is true or not concerning all that was being said about Tyrannosaurus rex.

If you can confirm the quote too that pretty much settles it.

For the most part the treatment of Horner by the community is unfortunate, and while the way he pushed the idea is ethically questionable the backlash to it was pretty disproportionate.

I think the contemporary attitude towards Horner has more to do with his predatory behaviour towards his graduate student and the whole 'chickensaurus' deal

[SBell]

I found the book quite a nice read, from what I can remember. I bought it in 1993, when it came out. It certainly made me start to think more about what is true or not concerning all that was being said about Tyrannosaurus rex.

If you can confirm the quote too that pretty much settles it.

For the most part the treatment of Horner by the community is unfortunate, and while the way he pushed the idea is ethically questionable the backlash to it was pretty disproportionate.

There were a lot of things surrounding it. His 'marriage' impacted a lot of good will, as well as many of the hypotheses he started pushing (lumping species via ontogeny became associated with him, for example). Plus, being contrarian just to cause arguments isn't the greatest way to increase engagement.
It's one of those things, he became a very public figure (TED talk on reengineering chickens to dinosaurs anyone?) which means people pay closer attention to everything

[Over9K]

The Complete Jack Horner - By Over9K





The Complete T. rex is NOT a book about Tyrannosaurus rex. I know that very well, because I have read it. It's Jack Horner's autobiography of the times he's stood next to skeletons of tyrants, and spewed crap out of his mouth. I don't like that.

I came to know that it is also Jack Horner's very very super special mega important thoughts and feelings on what he imagines T. rex was really like, despite maybe a lack of evidence to back those opinions up, and believe you me, if there's an age-old, but outdated, cliche about dinosaurs, I feel he's gonna tell you why you're stupid for ever believing it, and he will make sure you know who wrote the book (not Over9K, that's for sure) you're reading on EVERY SINGLE PAGE. Perhaps Jack Horner uses safety scissors to trim his toenails, so he can eat the offcuts. I don't have direct evidence of this, but it sounds totally plausible to me, and I'm an expert, because I read his book.

The Complete T.rex is the only "dinosaur book" I have read, and I've read A LOT, where you feel like you're being condescended to. It feels like he got genuinely bratty, because he didn't have enough pictures of himself next to dinosaur bones, so he actually had to put pictures of just dinosaurs throughout the book. I find it to be wholly unacceptable, and anyone that disagrees, is wrong.

If you'd rather read a book actually about Tyrannosaurus rex, I recommend Witton's KING TYRANT (I'm reading it now) or Hone's Tyrannosaur Chronicles, which I have read thrice now. They're remarkably free of text like "I think...", and "I know..." and "I believe...", and I think you will enjoy them, I know they're damn good because I read them and I believe they are way, way, way better than anything Jack Horner wrote. (But maybe not as good as this post.)

***This post was/is satirical parody, or parodical satire... not really sure...

[Gwangi]

I don't remember The Complete T. rex well enough to have an opinion about it. I think I was about 13 when I read it, almost 30 years ago.  I do remember the bit about the scavenger hypothesis though, and that's literally the only reason I referenced the book. It was not an endorsement. The only reason I have a copy is because I found the same copy I checked out of my school library many years later at a used book sale. Thought that was neat.

[Over9K]

I don't remember The Complete T. rex well enough to have an opinion about it. I think I was about 13 when I read it, almost 30 years ago.  I do remember the bit about the scavenger hypothesis though, and that's literally the only reason I referenced the book. It was not an endorsement. The only reason I have a copy is because I found the same copy I checked out of my school library many years later at a used book sale. Thought that was neat.

My post is meant in mirth, not to impugn anyone's memory, or opinion of what is, in actuality, an important volume in the history of dinosaur literature.

[The Templar of the Past]

(lumping species via ontogeny became associated with him, for example)

Though there isn't anything inherently wrong with lumping, for example three of the four examples he brought up here (https://www.ted.com/talks/jack_horner_where_are_the_baby_dinosaurs/transcript) are agreed to be valid as far as I'm aware.

[ZoPteryx]

Among backboned animals, only air-borne carrion-searchers like vultures and condors are pure scavengers. The rest take whatever east pickings they can find, dead or alive. To my mind, T. rex was simply the greatest opportunist of them all.[/i]"

I've worked with Horner on a few occasions in recent years, and this is exactly what he thinks as far as I can tell. I recall a kid asking him about T. rex being a scavenger, and Horner said "Yes, I think it was basically like a hyaena." And the kid asks "But don't hyaenas do a lot of hunting too?" Horner just smiled and said "Yep. They hunt, they scavenge, they just do whatever is easiest."

Seems like a reasonable take to me. He's cheeky though, I think he enjoys getting a rise out of people when he says stuff like that, making them defend their counter-theories. May not be the most productive strategy, imho, but I guess everyone will have a differing opinion on that.

(lumping species via ontogeny became associated with him, for example)

Though there isn't anything inherently wrong with lumping, for example three of the four examples he brought up here (https://www.ted.com/talks/jack_horner_where_are_the_baby_dinosaurs/transcript) are agreed to be valid as far as I'm aware.

Agreed. In a constrained stratigraphic setting, like particular levels within the Hell Creek Formation, it's probably the safer approach. That said, I do worry about researchers' tendency to "lump-and-forget," which can hide potential diversity and lead to bloated wastebasket taxa.

[andrewsaurus rex]

i didn't know about Jack Horner's 'controversial' marriage...  Not really a big deal is it?  He's a bit of  a celebrity and celebs often marry someone way younger than them.  Maybe not totally dignified for a scientist but not a big deal.  Not really worth mentioning imo (even though i just mentioned it...lol).

Being controversial with theories for the sake of controversy is not that unusual either.  Bakker has done that his whole career.  May not win you a lot of friends but it does get you recognition.  There's a bit of a show biz element to paleontology, like it or not and they both did come up with some creative theories which got everyone thinking and talking and created a new excitement and energy around dinosaurs.  Not the way i would like to see every paleontologist behave but the odd 'hot dog' may be a good thing.

I met Jack Horner once many years ago at the Royal Ontario Museum.  He was taking questions and i noticed when guys asked him questions he gave a brief answer.  But if a girl asked she got a long detailed explanation.  Maybe just a quirk of the day but i chuckled about it.

[suspsy]

I think it is absolutely a big deal when a man in his late 60s marries a 19 year old girl who was his graduate student. It was inappropriate then and it's even more inappropriate now.