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

Re: Munich pterosaur symosium

To: david.marjanovic@gmx.at
Subject: Re: Munich pterosaur symosium
From: John Conway <john.a.conway@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 17 Sep 2007 23:51:37 +0100
Cc: DML <dinosaur@usc.edu>
In-reply-to: <001401c7f96a$1582c610$e90e10ac@LENOVO>
References: <18345110.1190053966644.JavaMail.root@elwamui-milano.atl.sa.earthlink.net>
Reply-to: john.a.conway@gmail.com
Sender: owner-DINOSAUR@usc.edu

David Marjanovic wrote:

Were those in-situ specimens uncrushed...?
Disclaimer: I have no opinion about the pteroid.

Yes, some were; including the AMNH 22555 /Anhanguera santanae/ specimen before it was fully prepared. Looked pretty convincing to me.

--
John Conway
Palaeontography: http://palaeo.jconway.co.uk

Follow-Ups:
- Re: Munich pterosaur symosium
  - From: Guy Leahy <xrciseguy@sbcglobal.net>

References:
- Munich pterosaur symosium
  - From: david peters <davidrpeters@earthlink.net>
- Re: Munich pterosaur symosium
  - From: David Marjanovic <david.marjanovic@gmx.at>

Prev by Date: Re:
Next by Date: 3:10 to New Papers
Previous by thread: Re: Munich pterosaur symosium
Next by thread: Re: Munich pterosaur symosium
Indexes: