[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Subject Index][Author Index]
Re: The absurity, the absurdity (was: WUSSY RAPTORS)
Thanks for your reply. Based on what I had originally been told about
this assemblage, I understood that none of the _Deinonychus_ appeared to
have suffered attack by the other _D._. They did appear to have suffered
broken legs - which could indicate a flash flood, or an attack by a
However, based on the long message by Brian Franczak (sorry if I
misspelled your last name, Brian), in which he delineated all the
assemblages of _D._ with _T._, it appears that no exceptional explanations
are required for these. The teeth of several _D._ were found shed with one
_T._ specimen (60% complete, I believe). Ostrom, and other later authors
reasoned that at least 3 _D._ had to have been present, because for one _D._
to have lost the number of teeth would be too exteme (I think the number was
11). They infered that perhaps 5 or 6 individuals were present at what they
envisioned an active kill site. In light of this, I feel that while a group
of _D._ COULD HAVE brought down a _T._, a group of _D._ passing by a corpse
could have stopped (even one at a time) to enjoy what still appears to be
one of their favorite meals.
Thanks for your time,
From: Larry Dunn <firstname.lastname@example.org>
To: email@example.com <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: Tuesday, April 14, 1998 3:05 AM
Subject: Re: The absurity, the absurdity (was: WUSSY RAPTORS)
>From: "Allan Edels" <email@example.com>
>> While I respect your opinion, and your idea of the search for the
>>I would like to know what you think of the fossil assemblage with the
>>_Tenontosaurus_ and 3 _Deinonychus_.
>Well, who knows? There are an almost infinite set of possibilities.
>But, based on the present context, I think you may be suggesting that
>the pack-hunt hypo is the best, or even a good one, and you may be
>asking me what *other* rational explanations there are.
>To believe that the fossil site had anything to do with a packhunting
>scenario, here's what we have to assume:
>Numbers of Deinonychus killed a tenontosaur, and several of them were
>also killed, either by the tenontosaur or by other Deinonychus.
>The corpses all lay there, where they are quickly covered up and
>I don't think that this gels with present theories about fossilization.
>I think there are more likely explanations. I don't mean to offer this
>as my own hypo, *because I don't have one,* but here's one rational
>The Deinonychus, the tenontosaur and many other animals were drowned in
>a flash flood. Their corpses and others were washed along by the
>waters, and the dinosaurs we're discussing were deposited in some mud
>near a rise, where more mud quickly poured over them and they were
>deeply covered. Maybe other animals were cariied along and got stuck
>as well and were fossilized, but these fossils disintegrated, or maybe
>they were stuck but were close enough to the surface that they were dug
>out and scavenged in the feast that followed.
>Pure fiction, but sounds more like a fossilization event to me than a
>bunch of corpses from a prey event just laying around in situ for
>centuries until covered up and fossilized.
>Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com