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

RE: Bruhathkayosaurus matelyi?

Rahul Daryanani wrote:

By the way, Chatterjee himself supposedly confirmed that B. matelyi was a sauropod.


Tracy Ford is an awfully nice fellow, but I would prefer to see something more concrete (like a publication). However, I'm not disputing the possibility that _Bruhathkayosaurus_ is a titanosaur. I just like to see a detailed description to this effect, and not rely on what's on the grapevine.

The thing is, a titanosaur of this size would be a momentous dicovery. The __Bruhathkayosaurus_ issue reminds me of another contentious Indian taxon, _Dravidosaurus_. This has gone from being a stegosaur to a plesiosaur to a stegosaur (again). If _Dravidosaurus_ is indeed a stegosaur, it would be an important discovery as the youngest known member of the group, carrying the stegosaur banner into the Late Cretaceous. What's needed is a detailed description of the taxon, which would help to clear this mess up; but this hasn't come to fruition yet.



Talk now to your Hotmail contacts with Windows Live Messenger. http://clk.atdmt.com/MSN/go/msnnkwme0020000001msn/direct/01/?href=http://get.live.com/messenger/overview