Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 7, 2015 23:47:43 GMT 5
Yes, it's back after more than a century of being defunct. But not without another taking it's place. Dinheirosaurus isn't valid now. Paper's here: peerj.com/articles/857/ |
|
stomatopod
Junior Member
Gluttonous Auchenipterid
Posts: 182
|
Post by stomatopod on Apr 8, 2015 0:00:23 GMT 5
Posted that a few hours ago in recommended literature.
Morrison must have been a hell.
|
|
|
|
Post by Infinity Blade on Apr 8, 2015 0:35:45 GMT 5
'Thunder lizard' was always such a cool name.
|
|
|
|
Post by creature386 on Apr 11, 2015 17:01:53 GMT 5
As someone in another forum said, for those who read old dino books, this is like re-finding a long lost friend.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 12, 2015 10:34:59 GMT 5
I see it as more like resurrecting a long deceased friend back to life. Brontosaurus wasn't forgotten, but was defunct for over a century.
And after it's resurrection, it dragged Dinheirosaurus to the grave to take it's place.
Gotta get used to Supersaurus lourinhanensis soon. Seems that we can't have our cake without a price.
|
|
Dakotaraptor
Junior Member
Used to be Metriacanthosaurus
Posts: 193 
|
Post by Dakotaraptor on Apr 24, 2015 2:14:01 GMT 5
At least it back without Camarasaurus skull.  Also Diplodocus longus being nomen dubium surprises me. |
|
