Re: Dino Notes

[pwillis@ozemail.com.au (Paul Willis)]

>In a message dated 96-01-09 07:30:11 EST, dino@revelation.unomaha.edu (John
>Schneiderman) writes:
>
>>Wasn't Dravidosaurus recently determined not to be a dinosaur?
>>I think it was announced by Sankar Chatterjee in 1995.
>>
>>
>
>So far, it's just a pers. comm. to me. And I think he's right. I've never
>been able to reconcile the photos in the _Dravidosaurus_ paper with true
>stegosaur remains, and the single associated tooth might be ankylosaurian
>rather than stegosaurian.

Looking at the illustration on page 439 of the Dinosauria, I find it had to
interpret this skull fragement as plesiosaur (as mentioned in an earlier
post). Has Gupta got anything to do with this?

Cheers, Paul

pwillis@ozemail.com.au