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

RE:

Mike Taylor wrote-

Hi, Mickey.  Do you have a source for that?  In fact, do you even have
a source for the idea that it could be a tree-trunk?  I've seen it
floating around this list many times, but never attributed to anyone.
(Not being picky -- I really want to know.)

Seems that Holtz first suggested it on the DML-
http://dml.cmnh.org/1995Sep/msg00701.html
Unless it was originally in Ford's article in the Dinosaur Society's newsletter, which I don't have access to at the moment.

Honestly, I consider it possible (though doubtful considering Chatterjee's examination). Yet this assertion has gained legitimacy despite the fact it's based purely on incredulity. Sure the publication doesn't provide compelling evidence the structure is a tibia, but it doesn't provide compelling evidence it's NOT a tibia either. It's not so huge that petrified wood becomes the null hypothesis. This is especially true since the only paleontologists who have seen the material firsthand agree it's dinosaurian. Frankly I'd like to see this idea put to rest until someone who has examined the material supports it.

Mickey Mortimer