[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Subject Index][Author Index]
Re: Majungatholus: Apparent Cannibal
Mickey Mortimer (Mickey_Mortimer111@msn.com) wrote:
<Actually, Sampson et al. (1998) did not go to any length to show
Majungasaurus was not an individual of Majungatholus. They simply said the
former was indeterminate (unlike Majungatholus' holotype), so could not be
the holotype of a valid species.>
My Krause et al. was Sampson et al., but on this note, I did say they
relegated it to a nomen dubium. Your reading does not contradict this.
This was sorta the meaning of a name and type that is considered
indeterminate. My look at the fossil finds numerous distinctions between
*M. crenatissimus* and all other known carnotaurine jaws, as well as
*Ceratosaurus*. The jaw is, believe it or not, distinct. It is not the
same as the UV skull, so this is not any measure of attempting to make M.
crenatissimus the housing name for the more complete Maeverano material.
Jaime A. Headden
Little steps are often the hardest to take. We are too used to making leaps
in the face of adversity, that a simple skip is so hard to do. We should all
learn to walk soft, walk small, see the world around us rather than zoom by it.
"Innocent, unbiased observation is a myth." --- P.B. Medawar (1969)
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Tax Center - File online, calculators, forms, and more