[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Subject Index][Author Index]
Rahul Daryanani writes:
> The old [weight estimates for Bruhathkayosaurus] (175-220 tons),
> and the new ones (157 tons), both seem a tad heavy for a land
> animal. The lower one puts it in the range of the heaviest Blue
> Whale (160-180 tons), and the higher one far exceeds it. In my
> humble opinion, a land animal would be completely unable to support
> such a weight.
What calculations have you done?
> P.S. Just out of curiosity, what were the estimates for
> Bruhathkayosaurus matleyi when it was still considered to be a
There were none -- just as there have been no published estimates of
its size as a sauropod. The _only_ published work on this think
remains the original atrocious description.
/o ) \/ Mike Taylor <email@example.com> http://www.miketaylor.org.uk
)_v__/\ "Locality is a global issue" -- Stephen Johnson.