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

RE: See! It's all because they changed Brontosaurus's name! ;-)

The article is from the Bangkok Post:
"It was the second such incident within a week at Pedan cave in Thung
Yai district."
As such, I expect that the incidents took place in Thailand, not China.

I'd probably faint at finding a 300 mya dinosaur.  Then I'd brush the
dust off, take out the picks, shovels, hammers, brushes, and start
digging. :-)

Of course, the reporter probably just assumed it was a dinosaur.  What
else is big, old, and buried in some rock?  :-))

Allan Edels 

P.S. to Mike:  I tried sending a message off-list to you, and it was
returned, twice.  Could you send me a working email address (direct to
me)?  [Humorous]

Thanks, Allan.

-----Original Message-----
From: owner-dinosaur@usc.edu [mailto:owner-dinosaur@usc.edu] On Behalf
Of Michael Skrepnick
Sent: Wednesday, July 03, 2002 3:34 PM
To: Dinosaur List
Subject: Re: See! It's all because they changed Brontosaurus's name! ;-)

> >-B. McFeeters
> >
> >Are they really 300 million-years old?
> Well, I don't know, but I would suppose no.  Terrestrial vertebrate
fossils are very rare in the Carboniferous sediments of China (I take it
this happened in China?).  Even non-tetrapod vertebrate fossils from the
Carboniferous of China are quite rare, and I doubt anyone would confuse
"fish" fossils with those of dinosaurs, but who knows?
> Steve

*** Considering there were a small cluster of learned individuals who
insisting not too long ago that Sinosauropteryx sported a fin / collagen
fibres (anything but feathers), the above is not that much of a stretch
! . . . and because these are lay people in China who commonly would use
"broader" terminology, they can hardly be held accountable for their
generalist description of the fossil material.  Reportedly, during the
"supernatural" event, one of them cried out " Who gho'st there!!"

Mike Skrepnick