RE: Gauthier & de Quieroz et al.

["Williams, Tim" <TiJaWi@agron.iastate.edu>]

I'd just like to make it clear, in case there's any shadow of a doubt, that
the following excerpt ("hoopla - Egyptian sauropod - fragments" etc) are HP
Pickering's words, not mine.  I completely agree with Josh Smith's
sentiments (as my previous post made clear - I hope).

By the way... a previous post mentioned Coomb's (1980) paper on tracks of
swimming sauropods.  Does anyone know of a paper which mentions evidence for
such behavior in theropods?

>Quoting "Williams, Tim" <TiJaWi@agron.iastate.edu>:
>
> Stephan Pickering wrote:
>  
> > I remember
> > vividly the media hoopla over the Egyptian sauropod based upon
> > fragments, which is Sauropoda indet., should not have been
> >given a name, etc. etc. 
> 
>Excuse me?  I am sure that you have seen this material first hand, have 
>spent weeks analyzing it and examining it and have compared it to as 
>many taxa as the authors did, and have been able to objectively conclude
>that it deserves to be designated as Titanosauriformes indet.  Oh, wait,
>excuse me, you meant Sauropoda indet.   Perhaps you wrote it 
>incorrectly and your in depth analysis of this material actually led you
>to conclude that it is Dinosauria indet.  I am sure the reviewers of 
>this manuscript would be forever in your debt if you were to illustrate 
>their errors for them.  You might, while you are at it, also define for 
>us all just exactly what the word fragment means to you.  




------------------------------------------------------------ 

Timothy J. Williams 

USDA-ARS Researcher 
Agronomy Hall 
Iowa State University 
Ames IA 50014 

Phone: 515 294 9233 
Fax:   515 294 3163