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

RE: Dinosaurs Decoded



 <EBD4AF76CB183C4CA50B6C12DD1B9FCF028850@burpee.Burpee.int>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0




----------------------------------------
> Date: Mon=2C 12 Oct 2009 23:35:07 -0500
> From: Scott.Williams@burpee.org
> To: dinosaur@usc.edu
> Subject: RE: Dinosaurs Decoded

> The same thing goes for the Nano vs T.rex question.....overwhelming histo=
logical evidence is side stepped to make way for differences which can be e=
xplained as juvenile characters.=20
=20
 When I was watching one of Science Channel's programs on Nanotyrannus ("my=
stery dinosaur" if I recall)=2C it ended saying that the primary difference=
 (after everything else had been explained as a result of individual growth=
 to a larger size) was the Quadratojugal Bone in the way back of the skull/=
jaw....but wouldn't that be one of the last things to change?
=20
(at least=2C after things like dentition change)
                                          =0A=
_________________________________________________________________=0A=
Hotmail: Trusted email with powerful SPAM protection.=0A=
http://clk.atdmt.com/GBL/go/177141665/direct/01/=