Reply to Brian Curtice on Utetitan and Alamosaurus

[Gregory Paul]

Brian Curtice has posted two commentaries on my Utetitan paper, latest on Youtube. 

Both contain numerous basic factual errors which I detail at https://gspaulscienceofnonreligion.substack.com/p/the-science-of-dinosaurs-remember. One is so seriously misleading concerning my paper that I am calling on BC to withdraw his commentaries, or significantly modify them to correct the errors. 

As the reply notes, neither BC nor anyone else has come close to refuting the core conclusion of my paper. That there are two diagnosable titanosaur taxa in the L Cretaceous SW USA, with the best available skeleton now the holotype of one of them. While doing the reply I realized that a specimen I did not pay sufficient attention to in the paper reinforces the validity of Alamosaurus, while increasing its separation from Utetitan. So much so that I am now wondering if they are even in the same subfamily/tribe. 

GSPaul 

[Mickey Mortimer]

So Curtice accidentally used a photo of the wrong scapula. But I'll note you called ischia ilia at least three times in your post. Pot kettle black etc..

Mickey Mortimer 

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Dinosaur Mailing Group" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to DinosaurMailingG...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/DinosaurMailingGroup/12859097.1991683.1777118331936%40mail.yahoo.com.