• givesomefucks@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    “It does seem like this is a prehistoric hunt, captured in stone, like a freeze frame,” University of Edinburgh paleontologist Steve Brusatte, who was not involved with the study, said in an email.

    If you read the study, they flat out said they dont know and have several hypothesis.

    They’re just running with the one that is least plausible because some people will believe the headline and share it on social media.

    I don’t understand what you’re not getting, but I don’t think explaining anymore will help

    • Flying SquidOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      1 year ago

      If you read the study, they flat out said they dont know and have several hypothesis.

      I have read the study. It says that it was either predation or scavenging and gives reasons why. It also explains why the mammal would be the one being the aggressor. It does not suggest in any place in that study what you suggested. This is what you said:

      The simplest explanation was the mammal was on defense

      Please show where the paper agrees with that supposed simplest explanation.