[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Subject Index][Author Index]

Re: Dinos' loss was not mammals' gain

To: DML <dinosaur@usc.edu>
Subject: Re: Dinos' loss was not mammals' gain
From: Dann Pigdon <dannj@alphalink.com.au>
Date: Fri, 30 Mar 2007 08:31:03 +0930
In-reply-to: <003d01c77245$4a930f10$d645fea9@your86xldwkpm6>
References: <20070328193022.95618.qmail@web52907.mail.re2.yahoo.com> <011f01c77182$ed1c4ad0$0400a8c0@LENOVO>
Reply-to: dannj@alphalink.com.au
Sender: owner-DINOSAUR@usc.edu

So the paper suggest that mammal diversity didn't 'explode' until 10-15 million years after the K/Pg boundary.

Wasn't that around the time that grasses really began to take over? A coincidence... or not?

___________________________________________________________________

Dann Pigdon
GIS / Archaeologist         http://www.geocities.com/dannsdinosaurs
Melbourne, Australia        http://heretichides.soffiles.com
___________________________________________________________________

Follow-Ups:
- a Tyrannosaur theory
  - From: Anthony Docimo <keenir@hotmail.com>

References:
- Dinos loss, was not mammals' gain.
  - From: Jura <pristichampsus@yahoo.com>
- Re: Dinos' loss was not mammals' gain
  - From: David Marjanovic <david.marjanovic@gmx.at>
- Re: Dinos' loss was not mammals' gain
  - From: K and T Dykes <ktdykes@arcor.de>

Prev by Date: Re: Dinos' loss was not mammals' gain
Next by Date: NOT The Most Important Papers in the History of the Universe
Previous by thread: Re: Dinos' loss was not mammals' gain
Next by thread: a Tyrannosaur theory
Indexes: