Re: The absurity, the absurdity (was: WUSSY RAPTORS)

["Allan Edels" <edels@email.msn.com>]

Larry:

    Thanks for your reply.  Based on what I had originally been told about
this assemblage, I understood that none of the _Deinonychus_ appeared to
have suffered attack by the other _D._.  They did appear to have suffered
broken legs - which could indicate a flash flood, or an attack by a
_Tenontosaur_.

    However, based on the long message by Brian Franczak (sorry if I
misspelled your last name, Brian), in which he delineated all the
assemblages of _D._ with _T._, it appears that no exceptional explanations
are required for these.  The teeth of several _D._ were found shed with one
_T._ specimen (60% complete, I believe).  Ostrom, and other later authors
reasoned that at least 3 _D._ had to have been present, because for one _D._
to have lost the number of teeth would be too exteme (I think the number was
11).  They infered that perhaps 5 or 6 individuals were present at what they
envisioned an active kill site.  In light of this, I feel that while a group
of _D._ COULD HAVE brought down a _T._, a group of _D._ passing by a corpse
could have stopped (even one at a time) to enjoy what still appears to be
one of their favorite meals.

    Thanks for your time,

        Allan Edels
-----Original Message-----
From: Larry Dunn <larrydunn@hotmail.com>
To: dinosaur@usc.edu <dinosaur@usc.edu>
Date: Tuesday, April 14, 1998 3:05 AM
Subject: Re: The absurity, the absurdity (was: WUSSY RAPTORS)


>From: "Allan Edels" <edels@email.msn.com>
>
>>    While I respect your opinion, and your idea of the search for the
>truth,
>>I would like to know what you think of the fossil assemblage with the
>>_Tenontosaurus_  and 3 _Deinonychus_.
>
>Well, who knows?  There are an almost infinite set of possibilities.
>But, based on the present context, I think you may be suggesting that
>the pack-hunt hypo is the best, or even a good one, and you may be
>asking me what *other* rational explanations there are.
>
>To believe that the fossil site had anything to do with a packhunting
>scenario, here's what we have to assume:
>
>Numbers of Deinonychus killed a tenontosaur, and several of them were
>also killed, either by the tenontosaur or by other Deinonychus.
>
>The corpses all lay there, where they are quickly covered up and
>eventually fossilized.
>
>I don't think that this gels with present theories about fossilization.
>I think there are more likely explanations.  I don't mean to offer this
>as my own hypo, *because I don't have one,*  but here's one rational
>possibility:
>
>The Deinonychus, the tenontosaur and many other animals were drowned in
>a flash flood.  Their corpses and others were washed along by the
>waters, and the dinosaurs we're discussing were deposited in some mud
>near a rise, where more mud quickly poured over them and they were
>deeply covered.   Maybe other animals were cariied along and got stuck
>as well and were fossilized, but these fossils disintegrated, or maybe
>they were stuck but were close enough to the surface that they were dug
>out and scavenged in the feast that followed.
>
>Pure fiction, but sounds more like a fossilization event to me than a
>bunch of corpses from a prey event just laying around in situ for
>centuries until covered up and fossilized.
>
>Larry
>
>______________________________________________________
>Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
>