Re: Sinornithoides in DA... the first Sleeping Dragon.

[MariusRomanus@aol.com]

In a message dated 8/15/2005 5:17:45 AM Alaskan Standard Time, 
DragonsClaw@gmx.net writes:

>> Now I would like to understand what exactly you are proposing:

1. Mei was not found in a sleeping posture, but rather in a protective
posture reflecting a futile attempt to counter some catastrophic onslaught?
2. Mei was found in a sleeping posture, but died before it was buried due to
the effects of deadly volcanic gasses?
3. Mei was found in a sleep-like posture that was caused by the effects of
volcanic gasses, but doesnt reflect it's "normal" sleeping posture?
4. Mei was found in a sleep-like posture that was caused by the effects of
volcanic gasses and does reflect it's "normal" sleeping posture? <<

I think I was clear enough. The gist of it is that I'm not saying "This is 
the reason!!!". Instead, I was proposing a combination of factors pretty much 
consistent with observed instances of death due to outgassing. Re-read if you 
like.

>> Concerning the mode of burial I would think that Xu & Norell proposed 
"Pompeii-like depositional conditions" which I would agree with since it 
explains 
both the excellent preservation of the specimen and the apparently undisturbed 
3D-mode of it. Why didnt Mei make an attempt to run away when the ash started 
to fall? Possibly because it had been killed in it's sleep by the vulcanic 
gasses before. <<

Uh huh...

>> So for my sense the easiest explanation for the specimen would be: Mei was 
sleeping in it's natural bird-like posture. It got killed by the volcanic 
gasses in it's sleep. When the ash began to fall, Mei was already dead and thus 
buried gently by a layer of ash thick enough so it could be found well 
preserved 128 - 139 million years later. <<

And that's what I'm questioning. From how I understand it, the paper doesn't 
equivically state, "Mei was buried in ash like Pompeii". Instead, it calls the 
Lujiatun beds alluvial deposits mainly comprised of tuffaceous conglomerate 
debris flows, sandstones, and mudstones. This would be a mixed 
pyroclastic-epiclastic deposit... Not a simple ash fall. It goes on to say the 
most 
fossiliferous localities are preserved in tuffaceous ashes up to 3m thick. Does 
this 
apply to Mei? Such instances are considered Pompeii-like events, though not all 
are volcanic in origin. The article never states which of those types of burial 
was the modus operendi... It says only that sedimentology is consistent with 
a life-pose. I'm assuming, as you have, that one should take this as meaning 
"ash fall". It doesn't make sense for it to have been a wave of vaporized rock, 
even though as written, the Lujiatun beds are mostly associated with "debris 
flows". This is what I was curious about.

Kris
http://hometown.aol.com/saurierlagen/Paleo-Photography.html