• Blue_Morpho@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    8
    ·
    2 months ago

    That’s not a link to the actual paper. The King of the Hill meme above claims that the actual paper says that physical limits apply to maximum size. This implies the article misrepresents the research paper.

    • scratchee@feddit.uk
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      1 month ago

      I don’t think that’s what the meme is claiming.

      I think instead it’s just claiming that all fossils have the same implied increase in maximum size implied by the paper, not just T rex.

      I’m guessing the illiterate paleo fans were excited that maybe T rex was king of the dinosaurs again, but the logic fails if all the dinosaurs get bigger max sizes…

      • Blue_Morpho@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        1 month ago

        If that were the case then the first sentence wouldn’t claim that there are physical limits.

        I dug up the paper.

        “Biomechanical and ecological limitations notwithstanding, we estimate that the absolute largest T. rex may have been 70% more massive than the currently largest known specimen (~15,000 vs. ~8800 kg).”

        https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/ece3.11658

        That is the paper says, if we ignore biomechanical limits, statistically there could be a T-Rex that’s 70% bigger than what we have already found.

        • scratchee@feddit.uk
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 month ago

          That does make sense, though I read it as:

          [the new, expanded] upper body size limits…

          Is how I read it, but your interpretation works well too, so I don’t really know now.