[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Subject Index][Author Index]
Re: Re: Re: Life's scale reduction since the Dinosaurs
>On Thu, 25 Jan 1996, th81 wrote:
>> >Odd. You do realize, of course, that the largest dinosaurs came at the
>> >*middle* of the Mesozoic,
>> A Dino Myth alert! Unless Amphicoelias was real, all the largest sauropods
>> are Cretaceous: Cenomanian Argentinosaurus and late Senonian (Campanian?
>> Maastrichtian? Have to check) Argyrosaurus and "Antarctosaurus" giganteus
>> outclass the big Jurassic sauropods.
>Sorry for the mental lapse. BTW, what do you mean "unless Amphicoelias
>[fragillimus] was real?" Even the one dorsal vertebra indicates that
>there was SOMETHING very large wandering around back then!
It turns out that the broken neural arch was never even collected! No
photographs, not lithographs, only field measurements and a line drawing.
It is not unreasonable that it was real, but it cannot be confirmed (unless
Ken Carpenter or someone else manages to find new bits of it!).
>Anyway, the presence of ultra-large sauropods at the end counters the
>"shrinking life" theory even better.
>Or maybe the "shrinking life" theory is just a corollary of the "growing
>earth" theory. I must tell the guys over at sci.bio.paleo about this one...
Indeed! At least it matches the "physics" of a growing Earth: Ted Holden
has got the whole situation bass-ackwards!
Thomas R. Holtz, Jr.
Dept. of Geology
University of Maryland
College Park, MD 20742