[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Subject Index][Author Index]
Re: the complete dinosaur
>In a message dated 97-12-31 03:05:29 EST, firstname.lastname@example.org writes:
>>Has anyone read the new book by James Farlow and M. K. >>Brett-Surman
(Publisher: Indiana University Press) _The Complete >>Dinosaur_? I'm
wondering if it is any good. >>
>It's staggeringly good--one of the best all-around dinosaur books
>available today for the informed reader. Purchase it as soon as
Barnes&Noble gives a good discount if your a member there. It's easy.
But yes, I've got to agree -- took me a long time, too. I just got the
book for Christmas, and I enjoy every turn of the page. One remark,
though, I wanted to put in: does anyone know why the book skipped on
detailing the dinosaur groups?
There was some skipping about that was pretty confusing -- Chapters 17,
19, and 21 through 23 were vague on the different morphologies evident,
and did not detail much of some of the dinosaurs. Only the Ornithopods
(24), Segnosaurs (18), and Sauropods (20) had justice done to them on
their completeness on presented info (except for the lack of describing
titanosaur variation or anything other than "the greatest problem to
This especially rankles because I have been working with this group more
than any other with the exception of theropods and possibly basal
Congratulation, agreeing, and sounding-off,
Jaime A. Headden.
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com