MOCpages : Share your LEGO® creations
LEGO models my own creation MOCpages toys shop T. Rex - An amazingly designed dino!Animal
Welcome to the world's greatest LEGO fan community!
Explore cool creations, share your own, and have lots of fun together.  ~  It's all free!
T. Rex - An amazingly designed dino!
Rate it  12345       Add a comment Add a comment   Zoom in  Zoom in
Tyrannosaurus Rex - The Tyrant Lizard King
About this creation
The most famous dinosaur of all time, T. Rex, has captured the hearts and imaginations of millions of children and adults alike. T. Rex is most commonly depicted as a meat-ripping predator bumbling on the scene during the late Cretaceous period, 65 million years ago. However, modern scientific discoveries are challenging many of these ideas.



Contrary to popular belief, just because an animal has sharp teeth does not necessarily mean that it ate meat. For example, black bears have a diet primarily of vegetation, although we typically think of bears being vicious and carnivorous. Fruit bats have teeth like lions or wolves, and yet, as their name implies, they only eat fruit. Likewise, T. Rex's teeth may not have always been used for eating meat, and his foot-long, serrated teeth teeth would actually be quite adept at tearing the flesh off fruits or vegetables like durians, jackfruits, melons, or pumpkins.



The notion that T. Rex was a senseless, stupid brute is also being challenged. Based on the fossil trackways of many theropod dinosaurs, paleontologists now believe that theropod dinosaurs like T. Rex walked with their tails straight out, as seen on my model here. As it turns out, T. Rex's tail was the perfect size and length to balance his large body and head. His head is also perfectly designed, with large openings in the skull used to lighten up the load which this incredible monster carried on the top of his neck.



K/T scans of his skull also reveal that T. Rex had a sense of smell and a bite more powerful than any other creature on the face of the earth!





And what about those tiny arms he has? While not the most useful in attacking and grabbing prey, his puny arms are actually part of his amazing design. In order to keep this T. Rex on two legs with such large and powerful jaws, T. Rex needed to have smaller arms and a longer tail in order to balance his weight in standing and walking. It is also thought that T. Rex's arms were heavily muscled and very useful in helping him stand up from a sleeping position. T. Rex's arms were far from useless, and were an example of amazing design!



Lastly, the age of T. Rex also needs to be questioned. In 2005, dinosaur-enthusiast Dr. Mary Schweitzer announced a discovery which rocked the world of paleontology forever. Soft tissues, red blood cells, DNA, and even blood vessels had been preserved in a slice of supposedly 70 million year old T. Rex femur bone. As Schweitzer stated in an interview, "I just got goose bumps, because everyone knows those things don't last 65 million years." Skeptics of this discovery later claimed that these soft tissues were actually contamination called "biofilm" formed by bacteria, although further examination by Schweitzer's team rebuked them by showing that these really were soft-tissues, blood cells, DNA, and blood vessels belonging to the dinosaur. In fact, many more examples of soft-tissue in dinosaur bones have been discovered, all which show that these dinosaurs cannot possibly be millions of years old!



So, what other explanation is there for these "anomalies" which contradict the traditional view of dinosaurs. Well, in Genesis 1 we read that God created all land-dwelling, air-breathing animals on Day 6 of Creation Week, which, according to the biblical genealogies and chronologies, happened about 6,000 years ago. At the end of Creation Week, God pronounced His creation to be very good and He gave Adam, Eve, and all the animals only fruits, vegetables, herbs, and plants to eat. This means that there would have been no death and no carnivores in the original creation, since everything was originally very good and all creatures were originally vegetarian. Later, Adam and Eve rebelled against God's command to not eat of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, which resulted in the Curse of death, decay, and corruption in the world. Later, in Genesis 6-9, it is recorded that man became so wicked and violent that God judged the world with a catastrophic, global Flood, which would be responsible for burying billions of plants and animals in layers of sand and mud, which would later become fossils in rock layers. Using this knowledge, we can go to fossil sites and dinosaur museums and see evidence of God's design in Creation and judgement on sin in the fossils of the massive creatures like T. Rex.

But that's not all! Just as God judged man's sinful disobedience with a global Flood, He will also judge man's disobedience with a global judgement of fire. The Bible says that all have sinned and have fallen short of the glory of God, which is bad news, since the punishment for sin is death and Hell. However, just as God provided a way of salvation through the Ark of Noah in the first global judgement, God has also provided us a way to escape His second global judgement: the sacrificial death of His Son, Jesus Christ on the Cross, and His Resurrection from the dead on the third day. Jesus took the punishment for our sins by living a sinless life and letting His Blood pour out for us on the Cross, which cleans us and makes us right with our Creator who we have all sinned against. All that you have to do to receive this free gift of eternal salvation is to repent (turn away from your sins) and believe on the Lord Jesus Christ.



Comments

 I made it 
  July 11, 2013
Quoting Bob the inconceivably invincible Great MOC here! I've just gotta say, I find it highly unlike T. rex was an herbivore: 1) Fossil coprolites have bone fragments in them, and judging by the size and location of these coprolites, they're probably from a Tyrannosaurus. 2) Also, there are Triceratops and Edmontosaurus skeletons that show damage inflicted by a large predator. Judging by its size, location, and powerful bite force, Tyrannosaurus is the most likely culprit for this damage. 3) T. rex had stereoscopic vision, which is incredibly helpful for a predator, but doesn't do much for an herbivore. Those points provide good evidence that T. rex was a predator, and there is no evidence whatsoever that Tyrannosaurus ate plants, so the natural conclusion is that it was a strict carnivore.
Thank you for pointing that out. I agree with you. The point I was making is not complete until the last paragraph on the Garden of Eden. T. Rex was obviously a carnivore (there are other, historical reasons why I believe this too), but the Bible says that God originally created all animal to eat plants. After the Fall, however, T. Rex would have used his sharp teeth (originally created to eat large fruits) to hunt and kill. Thanks again! ~ Caleb
 I like it 
  July 11, 2013
Great MOC here! I've just gotta say, I find it highly unlike T. rex was an herbivore: 1) Fossil coprolites have bone fragments in them, and judging by the size and location of these coprolites, they're probably from a Tyrannosaurus. 2) Also, there are Triceratops and Edmontosaurus skeletons that show damage inflicted by a large predator. Judging by its size, location, and powerful bite force, Tyrannosaurus is the most likely culprit for this damage. 3) T. rex had stereoscopic vision, which is incredibly helpful for a predator, but doesn't do much for an herbivore. Those points provide good evidence that T. rex was a predator, and there is no evidence whatsoever that Tyrannosaurus ate plants, so the natural conclusion is that it was a strict carnivore.
 I made it 
  July 9, 2013
Quoting Nathanael Frusher Nice!!! Is that a Answers In Genesis magazine behind the T Rex?
**Gasp!** How did you know! ;) Yes, my room is covered in wall-to-wall posters from Answers Magazine. Thanks for noticing! - Caleb
 I like it 
  July 9, 2013
Nice!!! Is that a Answers In Genesis magazine behind the T Rex?
 I like it 
  July 8, 2013
Masterfully sculpted!
 I like it 
  July 7, 2013
Excellent work of art. Great sculpting! -LB Senior
  June 22, 2013
oh, there IS more than one of you.
 I made it 
  May 28, 2013
Quoting Nick Barrett Brilliant, a stunning piece of sculpture.
Thanks! You have some stunning MOCs too!
 I made it 
  May 28, 2013
Quoting David Roberts A grand looking dinosaur. The smooth curves are brilliantly made from basic bricks and I love the use of colour. As I don't think that we know what colours dinosaurs were, this could be what they actually looked like!
Thanks for the kind words about my sculpture! Though we don't know what colors they were now (as, we weren't there), scientists recently discovered actual dinosaur skin, which may help unlock that mystery!
 I like it 
  May 28, 2013
A grand looking dinosaur. The smooth curves are brilliantly made from basic bricks and I love the use of colour. As I don't think that we know what colours dinosaurs were, this could be what they actually looked like!
 I like it 
  May 28, 2013
Brilliant, a stunning piece of sculpture.
 I made it 
  May 27, 2013
Quoting claw paradox just want to point out one thing, sinocalliopteryx gigas was discovered with a juvenile drojmaeosaur leg and other assorted parts in its stomach, according to multiple internet rescources and a book that I have. this hit me as ironic the first time I read it, since sinocalliopteryx was a compsognathid. Of course, this could be in debate too; I don't know, however I think a deinonychosaur leg would be instantly recongnizable due to the enlarged toe claw. and that's all I will say on this topic.
Yes, indeed. Sinocalliopteryx has been discovered with a supposed Dromeosaur leg in it's stomach, but another specimen has been discovered with the fossils of Confuciusornis, which is agreed to be fully bird. I agree that a Deinonychosaur leg would be recognizable, though I am honestly skeptical about the whole classification system of extinct animals. I think that evolutionary bias has guided much of the way fossils are classified, in respect to dromeosaurs and birds. University of Kansas paleontologist Larry Martin commented on another ‘feathered dinosaur’ claim saying, ‘You have to put this into perspective. To the people who wrote the paper, the chicken would be a feathered dinosaur’.
  May 24, 2013
just want to point out one thing, sinocalliopteryx gigas was discovered with a juvenile drojmaeosaur leg and other assorted parts in its stomach, according to multiple internet rescources and a book that I have. this hit me as ironic the first time I read it, since sinocalliopteryx was a compsognathid. Of course, this could be in debate too; I don't know, however I think a deinonychosaur leg would be instantly recongnizable due to the enlarged toe claw. and that's all I will say on this topic.
 I made it 
  May 24, 2013
Quoting claw paradox ok. however, also note that Anchiornis (and similar specimens) are classified as paravian deinonychosaurians. also, Anchiornis had very long legs for a flying dinosaur/primitive bird in relation to body size, and the wing feathers had a more rounded, less aerodynamic profile, compared to its cousins, archaeopteryx and microraptor. hoatzin's wing claws were used to climb tree brances without falling to the ground, as their wings develop, they lose the claws. both penguins and ostriches are highly specialized species of birds (avian dinosaurs?) the reconstructions may be opinionated, but maybe both sides of this debate are wrong. maybe these specimens are not what either of us believe, but somewhere in between? whichever one it is, we cannot be definite because we were not there. can we stop arguing now?
We can stop arguing, but I would like to say a few more things on this matter before we stop. These species of dinosaurs (Anchiornis and Microraptor) are both classified as dinosaurs (Dromeosaur specifically) because of evolutionary beliefs, not facts. The facts are, this fossil has feathers, a beak, and long forelimbs (wings), which are all characteristics of birds. They were a very special kind of bird, as they have some very special characteristics not typically found in modern birds, but that doesn't mean that they are dinosaurs, just like dinosaurs are a special type of reptile. As I already said, reptiles gaining the genetic information to change into birds is scientifically impossible, and the differences between birds and dinosaurs is a major biological problem (i.e. feathers, breathing systems, blood, etc). Not to mention, fossil ducks, flamingos, parrots, albatross, penguins, owls, sandpipers, loons, cormorants, and avocets have been found alongside the dinosaurs. Humorously, a supposed dinosaur ancestor, Sinocalliopteryx, has been discovered with the remains of birds in its stomach. I think this presents a powerful case against bird evolution and for God creating the birds BEFORE the dinosaurs! (Day 5 vs. Day 6)
  May 24, 2013
ok. however, also note that Anchiornis (and similar specimens) are classified as paravian deinonychosaurians. also, Anchiornis had very long legs for a flying dinosaur/primitive bird in relation to body size, and the wing feathers had a more rounded, less aerodynamic profile, compared to its cousins, archaeopteryx and microraptor. hoatzin's wing claws were used to climb tree brances without falling to the ground, as their wings develop, they lose the claws. both penguins and ostriches are highly specialized species of birds (avian dinosaurs?) the reconstructions may be opinionated, but maybe both sides of this debate are wrong. maybe these specimens are not what either of us believe, but somewhere in between? whichever one it is, we cannot be definite because we were not there. can we stop arguing now?
 I made it 
  May 24, 2013
Quoting claw paradox the debate rages on... food for thought:http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2010/01/100127-dinosaurs-color-feathers-science/o/ preserved melanosomes found in Anchiornis. I understand the boundary between birds and dinosaurs has become rather muddled, what with all this new "birds are dinosaurs" stuff. Personally, I am an evolutionist, and not a creationist, but i understand your point of view.
After examining the article and reading a little more (http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/2013/02/09/news-to-note-02092013), I see that this fossil (Anchironis) is really no different than the other fossil birds paleontologists have discovered in the Lioang Providence. They have beaks, feathers, and upward-bending/folding wings, just like modern birds. I agree that they certainly have some "irregular" features, like no keel-bone. However, it is thought that this could help them fly better than their keeled counterparts, as they would have had very strong flapping muscles attached to the wishbone. Also, ostriches and baby hoatzins have wing claws, and penguins have fused backbones. You have to realize that most of what goes into these reconstructions is based on evolutionary beliefs and not just the fossils. The fossils never speak for themselves, and are always interpreted through a worldview. Please note that it is not just creationists as myself that disagree with the dino-to-bird concept. There is actually a whole evolutionary campaign called BAND (Birds Are Not Dinosaurs).
  May 24, 2013
the debate rages on... food for thought:http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2010/01/100127-dinosaurs-color-feathers-science/o/ preserved melanosomes found in Anchiornis. I understand the boundary between birds and dinosaurs has become rather muddled, what with all this new "birds are dinosaurs" stuff. Personally, I am an evolutionist, and not a creationist, but i understand your point of view.
 I made it 
  May 23, 2013
Quoting claw paradox oh, and I appreciate your use of the period instead of a dash in the genus abbreviation.
Thanks! I appreciate people who notice things like that! I honestly didn't recognize the difference, but thanks!
 I made it 
  May 23, 2013
Quoting claw paradox nice! I like the cartoon-ish feel. and the rainbow colors. By the way, I see you have commented on some of my REALLY old creations. and to answer your comment on dromaeosaurs having protofeathers, plenty of dromaeosaur fossils have had protofeathers on them, mostly found in China. Larger-sized dromaeosaurs, such as Velociraptor Mongoliensis and Rahonavis, have been found with quill stubs on their bodies, pointing to presence of feathers. I should've added arm feathers too, however 1. I could'nt attach them to the battle droid arms, and 2. I was going for the "jurassic park" kinda feel. plus, quills on the top of the neck just look cool. you should see my deinonychus V3. it is one of my latest creations, and is VASTLY improved over my old designs. look here for more info on dromaeosaurs with feathers. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dromaeosauridae#Feathers I got the pteranodon idea from some dragon wing design I saw somewhere. and I have this albertosaurus/gorgosaurus head lying around waiting to be posted. wellll, it seems I have been rambling on for quite a while now. sorry about that.
Thanks for your kind comments about my model, however, I would have to disagree with your claim that these dromeosaurs have feathers or 'protofeathers'. When one examines the true fossil evidence, it isn't as clear cut as the reconstruction artists make it out to be. In many cases, these fossils are simply birds and have been misinterpreted as dinosaurs. Take for example, Microraptor and Caudipteryx. Sometimes they are only guesses made based on no fossil evidence, as in the case of the Ornithomimus and Velociraptor "quill-knobs" which are simply bone holes, with no preserved feathers or quills. And in some cases, the dinosaur fossils are misinterpreted. Many of these "protofeathers" are actually deteriorated collagen fibers which were preserved before rotting away. Another problem is that there is no mechanism which can add the needed genetic information to turn scales (skin folds) into complex feathers with hooks, shafts, barbs, etc, or to develop the complex breathing system of birds, etc. Also, there are many problems with the origin of birds being dinosaurs, such as the fact that dromeosaurs are lizard-hipped dinosaurs, not bird-hipped dinosaurs. Also, fully-formed, modern bird fossils have been found in dinosaur rock layers, and Archaeopteryx, the supposed first bird, is in the Jurassic rock layer, proceeding the Cretaceous dromeosaurs. There are other problems, but 'nuff said... Thanks for liking my page by the way!
  May 23, 2013
oh, and I appreciate your use of the period instead of a dash in the genus abbreviation.
 I like it 
  May 23, 2013
nice! I like the cartoon-ish feel. and the rainbow colors. By the way, I see you have commented on some of my REALLY old creations. and to answer your comment on dromaeosaurs having protofeathers, plenty of dromaeosaur fossils have had protofeathers on them, mostly found in China. Larger-sized dromaeosaurs, such as Velociraptor Mongoliensis and Rahonavis, have been found with quill stubs on their bodies, pointing to presence of feathers. I should've added arm feathers too, however 1. I could'nt attach them to the battle droid arms, and 2. I was going for the "jurassic park" kinda feel. plus, quills on the top of the neck just look cool. you should see my deinonychus V3. it is one of my latest creations, and is VASTLY improved over my old designs. look here for more info on dromaeosaurs with feathers. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dromaeosauridae#Feathers I got the pteranodon idea from some dragon wing design I saw somewhere. and I have this albertosaurus/gorgosaurus head lying around waiting to be posted. wellll, it seems I have been rambling on for quite a while now. sorry about that.
 I made it 
  May 15, 2013
Quoting MCLegoboy ! It's got kind of a cartoon feel. I really like it. Nothing is ever perfect, but with the big feet, it's got more of a friendlier aproach. I don't know if that's what you wanted or if it's just supposed to be a dinosaur, but that's what I get from it. Nicely done.
Thanks! I actually started building him from ground up, so when I built the feet, I was planning for a larger dinosaur. To be quite honest, I didn't even know which dinosaur I wanted to make him when I started. I considered a sauropod or a triceratops, but the three-toed feet were perfect for a theropod like T. Rex. After building half of the legs, I realized that I needed to make him smaller due to a lack of pieces, but I really loved the feet, so I left them on. I agree, he is very cartoony, but I like it, and I'm glad you do too! Don't forget to read the comments I put on him!
 I like it 
  May 15, 2013
It's got kind of a cartoon feel. I really like it. Nothing is ever perfect, but with the big feet, it's got more of a friendlier aproach. I don't know if that's what you wanted or if it's just supposed to be a dinosaur, but that's what I get from it. Nicely done.
 I made it 
  April 20, 2013
Quoting Mihe Stonee The tail is a little bit short. More like a baby T-Rex -but it still looks amazing !
Thanks! I actually built him from the bottom up, so I underestimated how big his top section would be, hence, his tail is a bit short. Thanks for noticing. I'm always looking for ways to make him better!
 I like it 
  April 20, 2013
The tail is a little bit short. More like a baby T-Rex -but it still looks amazing !
 
By Foundations Creation Club Builders
Add to my favorite builders

15
people like this. See who.

968 visitors
25 comments
Added April 14, 2013
 

The background images used on this page are © Todd Lehman,
available at http://www.lugnet.com/fibblesnork/lego/backgrounds/


LEGO models my own creation MOCpages toys shop T. Rex - An amazingly designed dino!Animal


You Your home page | LEGO creations | Favorite builders
Activity Activity | Comments | Creations
Explore Explore | Recent | Groups
MOCpages is an unofficial, fan-created website. LEGO® and the brick configuration are property of The LEGO Group, which does not sponsor, own, or endorse this site.
©2002-2014 Sean Kenney Design Inc | Privacy policy | Terms of use