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

Re: Deinonychus and Velociraptor



DAVEH47@delphi.com
<<How do members of the list feel about Paul's (and apparently 
_Jurassic Park_'s) lumping _Deinonychus_ in with _Velociraptor_?  I 
for one just can't believe that they are the same genus; their skulls 
look too different to me.>>

The reason that Paul put _?. antirrhopus_ into the genus 
_Velociraptor_ is because that he claims that Ostrom prepared the 
maxilla incorrectly, and thus made the skull tall and allosauresque.  
He says that when he reveiwed the bones while writing _Predatory 
Dinosaurs of the World_ he realised that the maxilla was really more 
like _Velociraptor mongoliensis_', thus making the whole skull look 
like _V. mongoliensis_'.  In my opinion, _if_ Paul is right about the 
maxilla, then _Deinonychus_ should definately be dropped.  If he is 
wrong, then it should be kept.  As far as it concerns me, I think that 
Paul has it right, but that is my opinion, and it would change if 
evidence to the contrary were discovered.

Peter Buchholz
Stang1996@aol.com