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

RE: FW: Thoughts on Eotyrannus

It may very well be that Tany was previously named, so offer your
evidence. Personal opinion (contrary to what Bakker may think) is not
scientific fact.  ;-)
Kenneth Carpenter, Ph.D.
Curator of Lower Vertebrate Paleontology/Chief Preparator
Department of Earth Sciences
Denver Museum of Nature & Science
2001 Colorado Blvd.
Denver, CO 80205
Phone: 303-370-6392
Fax: 303-331-6492
for PDFs of some of my publications, as well as information of the Cedar
Mountain Project: 

-----Original Message-----
From: owner-dinosaur@usc.edu [mailto:owner-dinosaur@usc.edu] On Behalf
Of Tim Williams
Sent: Sunday, September 25, 2005 4:05 PM
To: dinosaur@usc.edu
Subject: RE: FW: Thoughts on Eotyrannus

Darren Naish wrote:

>  Note that it's _Fusinasus_, not _Fusinasius_. Not exactly my
>name - I hope
>everyone agrees that _Eotyrannus_ is a tad better :)

Yes, I heard this name a long time ago, and I remember telling Darren
"Fusinasus" sounded like a genus of fungus, and that anything was an 
improvement on that name (though perhaps not "Kittysaurus", which is

>A novel analysis found a more or less standard
>tyrannosauroid tree BUT with _Tanycolagreus_ as the most
>basal tyrannosauroid,

Hmmm... now, isn't there another named small-bodied tyrannosaur from the

Morrison, known from material that does not currently overlap that of 
_Tanycolagreus_; and wasn't some material now referred to
originally referred to this (other) tyrannosaur taxon...?  (Sorry for
circumspection, but I don't want to raise anyone's ire by suggesting
*maybe* two Morrison coelurosaur taxa might be synonymous.  ;-)  )