[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Subject Index][Author Index]
Re: Feathers on Bloody Everything
At 13:26 -0400 6/10/98, Joshua Smith wrote:
> If we get a large "theropod" footprint in the Maastrichtian of
>Wyoming, let's say in the Lance Formation, for example, this footprint
>will probably be ascribed to if it is really large _T. rex_. Why?
>Because, the overall theropod pedal structure is conservative enough
>so that the track will look like a _T. rex_ foot could have made it and
>we don't have anything else from the fossil record that is large enough.
>So, it will be called a _T. rex_ track and a paper saying just that will
>probably come out. The key point here is that "we don't have anything
>large enough in the fossil record." We don't have anything in OUR fossil
>record. The animal that actually made that track might in fact be
>there and we just haven't found it yet. Whatever animal made
>_Saurexallopus_ hasn't shown up in the osteological record, but I am
>pretty sure it was there, at least long enough to walk in some wet sand.
Anybody want to deluge me in details about what Saurexallopus is and why
it's so different from any bones?
Laurie Nyveen email@example.com
Editor, Netsurfer Digest - <http://www.netsurf.com/nsd/index.html>
DNRC Minister of Adding "ue" to Words That End in "log"
"All we are, basically, are monkeys with car keys."
- Grandma Woody (Northern Exposure)