RE: Rauhut's Thesis

["Tracy L. Ford" <dino.hunter@home.com>]

-----Original Message-----
From: owner-dinosaur@usc.edu [mailto:owner-dinosaur@usc.edu]On Behalf Of
Mickey Mortimer
Sent: Monday, July 09, 2001 4:46 PM
To: dinosaur@usc.edu
Subject: Re: Rauhut's Thesis

T. Mike Keesey wrote-

> I also wanted to ask (sorry if it was addressed and I missed it) whether
> _Dilophosaurus sinensis_ was considered.

He writes that it is distinct from D. wetherilli and probably not
congeneric, citing Lamanna et al. (1998), but is too poorly described to
include in the analysis.

Mickey Mortimer
I for one, am all for a band on using Rauhut's thesis until he himself
either publishes it or writes to the list stating it's ok for it to be used.
It seems to be a too important thesis to be left alone.

Tracy L. Ford
P. O. Box 1171
Poway Ca  92074