Re: Bruhathkayosaurus matleyi?

[Rahul Daryanani <rahul721@hotmail.com>]

Well, I guess we'll just have to wait for a publication or paper to end the 
dispute (personally, I think somone seeing the tibia/log of wood would be 
more than enough to decide what it really was).

> The thing is, a titanosaur of this size would be a momentous dicovery.

If it was anywhere near the range of Mickey's estimates, then 'momentous' 
would be putting it lightly. When Argentinosaurus was discovered, everyone 
went so gaga over it. So if a sauropod TWICE THE SIZE of Argentinosaurus was 
discovered........ Thing is I just find the giant sauropods very 
fascinating. My own estimates vary from 35-45 m and between 120 to well over 
200 tons (these estimates number about 10, and most are rubbish)

But as Mike said, Brachiosaurus is probably the best represted of the 
sauropods, and the estimates made range more than 400% (180 tonnes doesn't 
deserve to be a proper estimate). That's what we can get, from a COMPLETE 
SKELETON. Here we have one incomplete tibia (assuming it is a tibia). So you 
can imagine what's going to happen when the paper comes. I shudder to 
think.....

Cheers,
Rahul

_________________________________________________________________
Catch all the cricketing action right here. Live score, match reports, 
photos et al. http://content.msn.co.in/Sports/Cricket/Default.aspx