[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Subject Index][Author Index]

Re: Removing segnosaurs from ...



<<How about Monolophosaurus?  Now, I don't think that there is any
 close relation between the two, but it does have a whopping huge 
naris.  Also, a point needed to be made is that we, at present, do not 
know which cranial characters of Erlicosaurus are unique to that 
genus, and which apply to the Therizinosauroidea as a whole.  The 
skull of Alxasaurus is very fragmentary, and none of the other taxa 
have good cranial material.>>

Monolophosaurus has small nares compaired to Erlikosaurus, still.

<<Did you take the photo from the mounted skeleton?  Much of that 
is (how to put this politely) conjecture.  In the actual material, it is 
quite present.>>

I took the photograph from the type material.  There is no semi-lunate 
carpal in the type material and none in my photograph.

There are still the lower jaw and feet that are very similar to 
prosauropods and can't be labelled as reversions.  How do you 
reconcile that with a theropodan ancestory of Segnosauria (NOT 
therizanosauroidea)?

On an aside, when did we start spelling Erlikosaurus with a "c"?

Peter Buchholz
Stang1996@aol.com

-Boycot Taco Bell's "Texas Tacos" and "Border Light" menu items.
-Suport the abolition of the $1.00 bill in the United States in favor of a 
 $2.00 bill and $1.00 coin.