[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Subject Index][Author Index]
Re: CNN article(complete) on tiny Indian Dino eggs
Although the title of this post refers to DINO eggs, the article (as posted
here by Betty C. ) seems to indicate that the eggs are the SMALLEST fossil
eggs ever found, and that they might be fish eggs, NOT DINO EGGS!
From: Phil Bigelow <firstname.lastname@example.org>
To: email@example.com <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: Wednesday, July 08, 1998 4:28 PM
Subject: Re: CNN article(complete) on tiny Indian Dino eggs
>>What makes the finding unique is that the eggs are microscopic,
>>soft-shelled belonging to the late Gondwana Age, PTI quoted D. P. Das
>>and P. M. Datta as saying.
>>The new fossil eggs are, however, smaller than ampharyngodon <fish>
>>according to the geologists.
>Oh, common! I didn't fall off the turnip truck yesterday! (it was
>actually a few years ago,and my head is much better now, thank you).
>This is one of those moments when I wish I could ask Dr.s Das and Datta
>the following question:
>If it doesn't quack like a duck, and it doesn't walk like a duck and it
>swim like a duck, then maybe it isn't a duck?
>Well, I guess the parent could have been the size of a hummingbird,
>so maybe I'm asking the wrong question.
>Has anybody on the list actually read Das and Datta's paper in _Current
>Science Journal_? It sounds to me as though they may have found fossil
>"If all the young ladies who attended the Yale promenade dance were laid
>end to end, no one would be the least suprised." Dorothy Parker
>You don't need to buy Internet access to use free Internet e-mail.
>Get completely free e-mail from Juno at http://www.juno.com
>Or call Juno at (800) 654-JUNO [654-5866]