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

Re: walking with beasts fact files



I'm most concerned with the accuracy of the animals appearance and behavior.
>From the pictures availible do they look like the species they are said to
portray?  For instance does the Smilodon seem to really be Smilodon
populator? the Phorusrhacos, Phorusrhacus longissimus etc.
----- Original Message -----
From: <NJPharris@aol.com>
To: <david.marjanovic@gmx.at>; <dinosaur@usc.edu>
Sent: Thursday, November 01, 2001 12:19 PM
Subject: Re: walking with beasts fact files


> While we're venting our peeves, I must say I am much bothered by the
implication in the phylogram that there was some sort of unified "ape"
lineage after the "hominids" branched off.  Maybe by "apes" they meant
"gibbons" (which do account for the majority of living ape species)?  In
that case, the "ape" and "hominid" lineages should have split way before the
Pliocene.
>
> --Nick P.