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


>Peter Von Sholly wrote:
><<I would not expect MANY of these foorprints, I would expect SOME.  It seems
>dromaeosaurs are turning up everywhere these days.  I think the reason
>there anen't any is that the animals didn't walk on two toes.  We are
>looking for prints that don't exist.

Just a retoric, reiterative question. How can we expect to have footprints
of every kind of dinosaur when we have just a minute fragment of the
remains and traces of all the dinosaurs that lived during 160 million
I know Paleontology should be based on hard evidence but restricting
ourselves to such meagre slices of the past, thinking that we have 'a
lot'(I would say we we don't even have enough!) and start going over and
over again about the 'mistery of no sickle claws footprints' seems like a
waste of time. Just as some posts before said: it was almost a miracle to
find one or two Tyrannosaurus footprints (and there have been almost twenty
partial or semi-complete skeletons  of individuals recovered).
The opposite is also true: zillions of footprints can belong to dinosaurs
that we don't even imagine. How many species are out there or simply have
disappeared without ANY kind of trace? We know that to get fossilized is an
extremely rare privilege.
It is no mistery that we haven't found footprints of dromaeosaurs... it is
just bad luck.And bad luck can disappear any second a new discovery is
made... it can also remain forever.

Luis Rey

Visit my Website on http://www.ndirect.co.uk/~luisrey