Re: World's 'largest dinosaur' found (with crocs & fish)

["Tommy Bradley" <htomsirveaux@hotmail.com>]

Peter Markmann
> > Could this be yet more evidence for the (at least semi-) aquatic sauropod?

Quoting Ken Carpenter:
> Remember that where you are buried does not necessarily mean where you 
> lived.

What I'd like to suggest is fossilization conditions.  Is it not true that 
any prehistoric creature has to be in "just the right place" and at "just 
the right time" to be fossilized? And so it is likely that these "near 
water" finds are more likely fossilized due to their locations being "right 
place, right time?"  Whereas some locations may not be "right place, right 
time" yet still inhabited by Prehistoric animals?
I was just wondering if this was taken into consideration when the idea of 
"Possible Aquatic Sauropods" was brought up.

Tommy Bradley

_________________________________________________________________
Learn how to help protect your privacy and prevent fraud online at Tech 
Hacks & Scams. http://special.msn.com/msnbc/techsafety.armx