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

Septic bites (again)

In answer to Darren Tanke's request for citations regarding one of the
septic bite references, and to pass on to anyone else who might be
interested the answer I sent to Darren Naish on the same subject, here is
the lowdown on the Dino News reference. It was in Dino News No 12, July
1998, p 18-20. The article is a compilation of newly described dinosaurs,
and I mentioned the septic bite is association with Neovenator. Darren
Naish queried this, saying there was no evidence for it, and that it was
not mentioned in the paper describing Neovenator, as I had initially
recalled. I re-checked my sources, and found a newspaper report from
January, 1994 containing what was definitely listed as a quotation from
Steven Hutt (one of the discoverers of Neovenator) attributing the septic
bite to this dinosaur. The article was from a local Australian paper but
with a London byline, so I assume the original was published in a UK
newpaper either in late Dec, 1993 or Jan 1994 and re-published here.
It seemed like a reasonable reference at the time, but Darren Naish tells
me Steve Hutt and the other co-founders are a trifle upset at the
"speculation", from which I guess we draw the conclusion that those
quotations were either invented by the reporter, were said by someone else,
or else something that Steve Hutt said got totally mangled in reporting?
Incidentally, I'm grateful to Darren Tanke for bringing to my attention the
correct terminology (septic bite) for what we are discussing. I cringe
every time I see the words 'poison' or 'venom' used in conjunction with
what I wrote. I was very careful NOT to use those terms, as they do indeed
conjure up visions of Dilophosaurus a la Jurassic Park!
Hope this helps to sort out some of the confusion - if anyone happens to
come across the original newspaper article I (and probably some others)
would like to here about it.
Graeme Worth