[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Subject Index][Author Index]
Re: Dino Geek and Scum
That version was edited down from what I wrote, and omits some comments that
the editors evidently decided were not needed for our audience as a whole. The
most important was the observation (by Dave Unwin) that the fossils could
contain BOTH dinosaur tissue and biofilm. On reflection, I think that should be
the working hypothesis.
At 5:57 PM -0700 7/29/08, Dino Guy Ralph wrote:
>Read a Washington Post article on our very own King of the Dino Geeks at
>The article includes a nice plug for the classic Holtz & Rey dinosaur
>encyclopedia, of course.
>Plus, New Scientist asks the musical question: "Is it _T. rex_ tissue or
>just scum?" See
> (IMHO short answer: It's _T. rex_ tissue).
>Dino Guy Ralph
>Docent at the California Academy of Sciences
>Dinosaur and Fossil Education
>Member of the Society of Vertebrate Paleontology
Jeff Hecht, science & technology writer
Boston Correspondent: New Scientist magazine
525 Auburn St., Auburndale, MA 02466 USA