Re: Megalania

[Roy Nash <moschops@zetnet.co.uk>]

At 15:35 19/07/98 -0700, rudewolf wrote:
>5x 3.3 =16.5divided by 10= 1.65 feet for the Komodo Dragon ??????   Help.
>Roy Nash has fallen & he can't do math anymore!

You are quite right I've never been any good at maths ! However this
estimate of size comes from my source as do the quotes below (see previous
mail). The difference in size can be explained by the following:

(1)     Megalania weighed "about 600 kilograms" - it was this that is 10 x the
Komodo  Dragon;

(2)     Megalania was "at least 5 metres and perhaps 7";

(3)     Megalania was NOT simply a scaled up version of the Komodo Dragon. The
skull   reconstructed in the Museum of Victoria Australia is 80 centimetres
long and        therefore relatively larger than to overall body. 
Reconstructions
of the body             show a more massive body with a much thicker shorter 
neck.

Regards, Roy Nash