[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
jeff@jeffhecht.com  http://www.jeffhecht.com
Boston Correspondent: New Scientist magazine
525 Auburn St., Auburndale, MA 02466 USA
tel. 617-965-3834