[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Subject Index][Author Index]
Re: Deinonychus and Velociraptor
DAVEH47@delphi.com
<<How do members of the list feel about Paul's (and apparently
_Jurassic Park_'s) lumping _Deinonychus_ in with _Velociraptor_? I
for one just can't believe that they are the same genus; their skulls
look too different to me.>>
The reason that Paul put _?. antirrhopus_ into the genus
_Velociraptor_ is because that he claims that Ostrom prepared the
maxilla incorrectly, and thus made the skull tall and allosauresque.
He says that when he reveiwed the bones while writing _Predatory
Dinosaurs of the World_ he realised that the maxilla was really more
like _Velociraptor mongoliensis_', thus making the whole skull look
like _V. mongoliensis_'. In my opinion, _if_ Paul is right about the
maxilla, then _Deinonychus_ should definately be dropped. If he is
wrong, then it should be kept. As far as it concerns me, I think that
Paul has it right, but that is my opinion, and it would change if
evidence to the contrary were discovered.
Peter Buchholz
Stang1996@aol.com