Jump to content

anastasis008

Recommended Posts

Hello everyone, I know this is a big  scientific debate and I have researched about it but I haven't come to a conclusion. What do you think?

Thank you

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think you can come to a conclusion when the paleontologists can't agree.  :shrug:

 

Previous topics: 

LINK 1

LINK 2

  • I found this Informative 2

    Tim    -  VETERAN SHALE SPLITTER

   MOTM.png.61350469b02f439fd4d5d77c2c69da85.png      PaleoPartner.png.30c01982e09b0cc0b7d9d6a7a21f56c6.png.a600039856933851eeea617ca3f2d15f.png     Postmaster1.jpg.900efa599049929531fa81981f028e24.jpg    VFOTM.png.f1b09c78bf88298b009b0da14ef44cf0.png  VFOTM  --- APRIL - 2015  

__________________________________________________
"In every walk with nature one receives far more than he seeks."

John Muir ~ ~ ~ ~   ><))))( *>  About Me      

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Of course it's valid

 

We have juvenile T. Rex bones that are identical to adult ones. We have a Braincase study that shows them being different what else can you say.  You read Troodons post.  Also we have tons of baby Trex teeth whose morphology is identical to adult ones

 The problem is we have an influential paleontologist that is driving this that refuses to look at specimens that are not collected by the holy hands of a museum and refuses to look at other influential specimens.   His reputation is at stake as well as being influenced by a huge ego

  • I found this Informative 7
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Maybe, maybe not.

 

The validity of Nanotyrannus rests upon the validity of the holotype specimen; not every specimen referred to as Nanotyrannus necessarily belongs to the same species. If the holotype is indeed T. rex, then these other "Nanotyrannus" could possibly be something entirely different. For example, any tooth labeled as Nanotyrannus should in that scenario be relabeled as Tyrannosauridae indet., not rex due to the ambiguity of additional contradicting specimens like the ones in private hands that can't be studied and published as evidence in academic papers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, JohnBrewer said:

@Troodon  

Thanks John.  My views are pretty well stated in the link 1 that fossildude19 added.  I think everyone needs to form their own opinions based on real facts

 

On 11/4/2019 at 6:30 AM, TyBoy said:

The problem is we have an influential paleontologist that is driving this that refuses to look at specimens that are not collected by the holy hands of a museum and refuses to look at other influential specimens.   His reputation is at stake as well as being influenced by a huge ego

If it were not for this one person this would all be a non issue.

  • I found this Informative 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...