[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Subject Index][Author Index]
Re: imperator...I think
--- Buckaroobwana@aol.com wrote:
> I hope I didn't upset anybody when I asked about
> this specimen.
You know, it's just that the obsession with size gets
to be a little tiresome after a while. Dinosaurs were
interesting animals that came in all shapes and sizes,
and their skeletons give clues to all sorts of
interesting behaviors. People who see things
differently seem to have a lot invested in _T. rex_ in
particular, seeing it as some sort of talisman of
power, and they're evidently crestfallen by the much
ballyhooed "dethroning" of _T. rex_.
I'm also very interested in the Rigby _T. rex_ because
it is a new T. rex and apparently several _T. rex_
specimens are at the site, which is pretty cool. Most
knowledgeable posters here are forthcoming with
answers about this specimen (I've asked too), but
please see that there's a limit to how much a regular
group of list participants, patient though they may
be, will be willing to answer, or even read, the same
group of highly slanted questions:
"No way T. rex was a scavenger. Right?"
"What's up with that huge new _T. rex_ that's bigger
The idea that only one dinosaur is interesting to many
people, and why that is, is, frankly, slightly
depressing. I mean, is the tiger the only interesting
felid because it is the biggest? Is a humpback whale
boring or inferior because blue whales are bigger?
This is a pretty grumpy perspective, but, well, there
> If the Godzila vs Mechagodzilla is the new one made
> in 1993...then you're in
> for a treat!
It is. A treat? I guess ... if you consider having a
railroad spike pounded through your skull with a two
by four to be a "treat." Pounded in by the blunt end,
"Atheism: a non-prophet organization."
Do You Yahoo!?
Talk to your friends online with Yahoo! Messenger.