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

Re: Prehistoric Sharks

--- Mike Everhart <mjever@southwind.net> wrote:

> Any ideas why they
> jumped  from the truly
> ancient sharks all the way across the Cretaceous to
> show Carcharodon
> megalodon?

Isn't it _Carcharocles megalodon_ now?  Or was it
placed back in _Carcharodon_?

> There are really a lot of well preserved
> late Cretaceous
> sharks from the Western Interior Seaway and
> elsewhere that deserve a bit
> of press now and then..........

I agree that _C. mantelli_ and its buds deserve more
press, but the rationale was probably as such: "let's
show the really ancient ones, you know, the 'first'
ones, then let's show the really freaking HUGE one
--it looked like the JAWS shark, you know."

That said, the evidence of consumption of a mosasaur
by a cretoxyrhina is just too interesting.  A shame
not to discuss that, really.

Then again, I'm continually outraged that
_Camptosaurus_ doesn't get more media coverage ....


"Atheism: a non-prophet organization."

Do You Yahoo!?
Talk to your friends online with Yahoo! Messenger.