We’ve had a look at the Palaeozoic of Urzeit Park in the last installment, so let’s jump ahead to the second-youngest time covered: the Tertiary. There are seven models in this section, and admittedly two of the them are better suited for a Thursday, being theropods. I’ll lump them into this post though, out of sheer laziness.
Let’s begin with an appropriate scale comparison.
Purgatorius on a Triceratops skull.
No place like Urzeit Park would be complete without an early proboscidean, as freaky as possible, so they have a Deinotherium
Note the Jurassic volcano in the background! Yes, it is a garish as it looks, but it guess once it acquires a bit of dust it will look better.
Next up, the must-have mammal, especially in a place that has an ample supply of sauropods – Paraceratherium.
This model is suspiciously big; one day I’ll have to measure it. In the foreground we have one of the two theropods. Obviously, they can’t have anything volant and tiny, it needs to be a monstrously-looking animal. In this case it’s Phorosrhacos, with one of the rare spelling mistakes on the labels (Phororhacos). In the back you can find Diatryma, too. Here’s a bigger shot:
I’ll keep quiet about the quality of the models, they could be better but could also be much worse.
To end this I have only one more animal to show, because I didn’t get pictures of the Hyracotheriums. This is an animal to compete with the large and fierce theropods: Andrewsarchus. That was one scary – skull, because there’s barely anything else known. Cool, though, especially the fur! What baffles me a bit, though, are the claws.
dinosaurpalaeo 
Oh dear, does this count as a specialised instance of Muphry’s Law? The correct name is Phorusrhacos.
Bah – that’s a stupid copy and paste mistake of mine – I should sleep more LOL
The Phororhacos spelling issue actually has a long history in paleontology, as two years after Ameghiniano named Phorusrhacos, he emmended it to Phororhacos. The emmendation was widely followed until Brodkorb (1967) noted it was improper, though there’s been a lot of confusion since regardless.
As for Andrewsarchus, the hooves are no doubt due its position in Artiodactyla. For instance, Spaulding et al. (2010) found it to be a pan-whippomorph while O’Leary and Gatesy (2008) found it to be a hippopotamoid.