[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Subject Index][Author Index]

RE: Saurischian pages finished

From: Steven Mahon <floridamahon@yahoo.com>
Reply-To: floridamahon@yahoo.com
To: dinosaur@usc.edu
Subject: Saurischian pages finished
Date: Wed, 14 Jul 2004 14:02:44 -0700 (PDT)

Hello all!

I know it's been a while since a message but I've been
busy w/ the end of the school year, plus my hardrive
crashed (& all my PHYLIP data lost).
Anyways, I've been constantly editing my website since
I haven't gotten around to it in a while, & finally,
all of the Saurischian pages are done!!
Here's the url-
http://www.geocities.com/floridamahon/classifoclado.html
follow the link
Please email me your comments & questions, so I can
fix them!

 Thanks,
   Steven Mahon

- Is there any good reason for regarding *Arctosaurus* as a possible saurischian?

- "Some paleontologists think Prosauropoda is a paraphyletic group (a group that is missing part of the tree). But, new studies show that it isn't a paraphyletic group, so its validity is upheld." Which studies would those be? And your cladogram seems to support paraphyletic "prosauropods", in excluding thecodontosaurids and melanorosaurids from Prosauropoda sensu stricto.

- "Some [sauropods] grew over 100ft. long, & others grew over 80 ft. high!" Which ones were over 80 feet high?!

- Where did you get your definition of Dromaeosauridae, and why is *Bambiraptor* not a dromaeosaurid?

_________________________________________________________________
MSN Premium helps eliminate e-mail viruses. Get 2 months FREE* http://join.msn.com/?pgmarket=en-ca&page=byoa/prem&xAPID=1994&DI=1034&SU=http://hotmail.com/enca&HL=Market_MSNIS_Taglines