RE: Regarding Spinosaurus

["Tracy L. Ford" <dino.hunter@home.com>]

-----Original Message-----
From: owner-dinosaur@usc.edu [mailto:owner-dinosaur@usc.edu]On Behalf Of
Mickey_Mortimer11
Sent: Friday, January 11, 2002 6:13 PM
To: dinosaur@usc.edu
Subject: Re: Regarding Spinosaurus

Mickey M. wrote

People really overstate the size of some dinosaurs' vertebral neural spines.
Sure, Spinosaurus, Ouranosaurus and Amargasaurus had impressive humps/sails,
but the others aren't that great.  Rayososaurus' wasn't much higher than
Diplodocus and probably shorter than Dicraeosaurus.  Rebbachisaurus' is said
to be high for a sauropod, but has it ever been illustrated even?
Yes, one has been illustrated in Bonaparte 1999.
Bonaparte, J. F., 1999, Evolucion de las vertebras presacras en
Sauropodomorpha: Ameghinana, tomo 36, n. 2, p. 115-188.
I couldn't believed it was illustrated (finally), but it was only one vert.
The only others that I've seen were in situ by Lapparent.

Nigersaurus' dorsal vertebrae haven't been described or illustrated.
Suchomimus doesn't have any noticeable hump/sail, just as much as
Ceratosaurus or sinraptorids. <<
I disagree, the tallest spines in Suchomimus is over the pelvis (taller than
Ceratosaurus and sinraptorids) and had a 'tall' tail.
 There's been no details released on the supposed completish Spinosaurus
skull, so calling it a new species is
unwarrented.

I must state the Holtzian statement hear (not for Mickey, but everyone
else), WFTDP....

Mickey Mortimer

Tracy L. Ford
P. O. Box 1171
Poway Ca  92074