Re: TYRANNOSAURIAN IMPLOSION [long; part 2 of 2]

[Dinogeorge@aol.com]

In a message dated 1/27/01 3:01:35 AM EST, NJPharris@aol.com writes:

<< I feel it necessary to reiterate my strenuous disagreement with this 
 assessment of _S. isanensis_.  Please see:
 
 http://www.cmnh.org/fun/dinosaur-archive/1997Jun/msg00271.html >>

You could well be right. But since I haven't seen the specimen or casts of it 
myself, I have to go with the opinion of the describers for now. As I 
mentioned, a good skull would settle the question. And it's surely not a 
tyrannosaurid in any case.