[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Subject Index][Author Index]
> From: email@example.com [mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org]On Behalf Of
> Sent: Tuesday, March 29, 2005 2:38 PM
> To: email@example.com
> Subject: Bruhathkayaosaurus
> Is the size or validity of this dinosaur still highly conjectural or has the
> specimens found been determined to be definitely animillian and from a
> titanosaur. If it is considered credible, why isn;t the Bruhathkayaosaurus,
> recognized as the largest dinosaur?
It is still far from certain it is an animal and not a tree. In fact, there has
been no serious publication on it since the initial
paper. Perhaps some day, but not yet.
Hence the lack of recognition of it as the largest.
P.S. Peter Dodson has pointed out that I mistyped "Tony Bryant" for "Harold
Bryant" as a participant on the Dino Expo 2005 list.
Thomas R. Holtz, Jr.
Department of Geology Director, Earth, Life & Time Program
University of Maryland College Park Scholars
Building 237, Room 1117
College Park, MD 20742
Phone: 301-405-4084 Email: firstname.lastname@example.org
Fax (Geol): 301-314-9661 Fax (CPS-ELT): 301-405-0796