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

Re: Megalosaurus = Torvosaurus in Europe -- reply to Qilongia



     Objectionable? I am well aware of the literature since 1954 (when I first began studying dinosaur systematics), and have most of the 1824ff studies  around me (including original editions of Owen, Marsh, et al. on my shelves),  especially  Gregory Paul's still useful 1988 study, and his various Hunteria papers (all in my files), and the 1990 collaborative volume, etc., etc. It is Mr Madsen who insists on aligning Proceratosaurus with the ceratosaurs, and it is this my comments were directed toward. Your comments are without basis in fact. I, for one, having examined Proceratosaurus , believe the specimen's "nasal horn" to be an artifact of preservation, just as I do not believe Ornitholestes had a nasal horn. However, there are similarities between the two worth examining in greater detail, which is why I tentatively position both coelurosaurs as closer to ! ! each other than either is to other, further derived taxa. Please, save your editorial emendations for those who obtain their knowledge of phylogenetics from Turok, Son of Stone.