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


    Here's hoping one or more of you dinolisters can help me out by carefully answering a question (one comment first, please):
    COMMENT: Again and again I hear (even on this list) that grasses did not develop until after the cretaceous was 'gone with the wind'. (Or, should I say the BOOM!?)
    QUESTION: Yet, in Philippe Taquet's wonderful, recent book, DINOSAUR IMPRESSIONS [Cambridge University Press, 1998, ISBN 0 521 58372 1 hardback], I read on page 47, first paragraph, "The first pollen grains from flowering plants are known from the Barremian and Aptian deposits.  Among these flowering plants are found the first grass-like plants..."
    I suspect Taquet knows his subject, but because of what I'd earlier read (elsewhere), I wonder if someone among you can proffer a reasonably contemporary reference that 'proves him wrong'.
    Conversely, I'd appreciate it if someone can give me a reference that 'proves him right'! 
    I want an accurate, up-to-date answer for a reason of my own; but, ALONG ANOTHER AVENUE: If Taquet is right, might this offer artists rendering at least Late Cretaceous scenes a freer hand at the ground cover?
    AN AFTER-THOUGHT: And, finally, if Taquet IS right, is there any artist among us now sufficiently free of the need for 'political correctness' as to be willing to produce a work (and dare publish it) with -- say -- Hadrosaurs or Ceratopsians grazing grass?
    Please don't flame me for that last question.  But, after all, the best artists I've even come across seemed to have the attitude of, 'To hell with political correctness!'
    How say you, one or all?  All facts and all artistic opinions are welcome.
    Ray Stanford