I'd recommend changing "giant skeletal horror" to "giant, slender horror"; if you think that's too nice, change it to "giant anorexic horror".
Otherwise, pretty spot on!
Not necessarily. It's entirely possible rex had a relatively thin coating of feathers.
Wording is important
just a tip.
“it is quite likely that T. rex was covered in thick shaggy feathers similar to an emu”
"Ugh we need Hell Creek tyrannosaur feathers soon."
We need answers to questions.
regardless of what those are.
I just want to point out that “it is now known that T. rex was covered in thick shaggy feathers similar to an emu” might not be correct. For now we simply don’t know it exactly. Yutyrannus for example had feathers on areas where we have scaly skin impressions form T. rex, so T. rex could have lost the feathers completely.
The skin imprints which you are talking about are also interpreted as scales by some Paleontologists. So again we don’t know if T. rex was scaly or had feathers.
And my personal opinion after doing some research is that T. rex had no feathers.
But due to the fossils which were found T. Rex must had at least less feathers (and this is fact and no speculation). If less feathers are possible, so it would also be possible that T. Rex has lost the feathers on the whole body.
Yutyrannus had also three fingers and T. Rex two for example. It needs more to lose a finger in evolution than just change the body coverage.
Therefore it is absolutely possible that T. Rex had no feathers at all.
I do not want to deny that feathers make sense. But again if less feathers are possible, so it would also be possible that T. Rex has lost the feathers on the whole body. There is no reason why this would be impossible. We also know Dinosaurs without feathers which have lived in the same climate.
Don’t forget that T. Rex and Yutyrannus are separated by almost 60 million years and have lived on different continents. For example from Mammoth to Elephant there was much less time needed to lose the fur. And a Mammoth is much more similar to an Elephant than Yutyrannus to T. Rex.
Therefore is absolutely not safe to say that T. Rex definitely had feathers.
Not to mention Gorosaurus is from 1968 way after the 1930 and a lot of inaccurate dinosaur monsters had come out before him
- Anguirus from Godzilla raids again 1955
- the beast from 20 thousand fathoms 1953
- The Giant Behemoth 1959
- Gorgo 1961
- and monsters from the original Ultraman 1966
- the dinosaurs in turok - 1954
And Baragon from Frankenstein Conquers the World 1965
and a whole lot of others
Wow, absolute statement about something that is virtually an unknown value, just beautiful, 10/10 akurat. Honestly, did you just take that statement from Youtube, Topix, or some other unreliable place? The true intelligence levels of the nonavian dinosaurs are pretty much unknown, and out best guess based on bracketing spans the range between crocodilians and ravens. If EQ levels are brought up, it's not really a good measure of intelligence, because if it were, whales would be dumb as bricks, while they aren't.
"Its bite is unrivaled."
If we're talking about overall bite damage potential, it is rivalled by other similarly-sizes raptorial macropredatory theropods. Tyrannosaurus' bite was a specialization, not an all-powerful superweapon. If we're talking about raw bite force, most other theropod clades aren't as specialized towards crushing and thus do not have the evolutionary incentive to evolve higher bite forces. Meanwhile, other similarly-sized tyrannosaurines such as Alamotyrannus could easily have rival bite forces, due to their similar jaw construction as tyrannosaurines and similar size.
"Not even its senses could be matched."
WTF!? How? What do you think Tyrannosaurus is?
"That qualifies as kingly to me."
Because you apparently swallowed a bunch of hyperbolic statements about it from what I can only assume are from places like Youtube, carnivoraforum, etc., right? You should be better than this.