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

RE: Vancleavea campi - what is it? - not an archosauriform.

> Date: Fri, 4 Dec 2009 21:59:07 -0600
> From: davidpeters@att.net
> To: dinosaur@usc.edu
> Subject: Vancleavea campi - what is it? - not an archosauriform.
> One of the reasons why Vancleavea campi does not have an antorbital fenestra 
> and upper temporal fenestrae is because it is not an archosauriform. It is a 
> askeptosaurid thalattosaur 
 Is it possible that it is simply an archosauriform that lost those two bones?
> For those who still think you have to stare at a specimen in person to 
> publish on it, well, now you see how that can prove to be a wee bit myopic.
 But it's not a bad idea to see the specimen itself, imho.
Windows Live Hotmail is faster and more secure than ever.