From: Harvey Newstrom (harv@gate.net)
Date: Tue May 26 1998 - 14:26:51 MDT
EvMick wrote:
> If this is true. Then it appears to me that the dinosaur hypothosis has a
> problem.
You think dinosaurs are merely a "hypothosis"?
> > (BTW, it is hard to call dinosaurs a hypothesis, since we do indeed
> > have their sizeable bones)
>
> One minor quibble. I think we have fossils of bones. Not the same thing.
You quibble that we don't really have dinosaur bones?
Where is this leading? Do you doubt that dinosaurs really could have
existed? Do you doubt that fossils are really the remains of dinosaur
bones? What "hypothosis" would you propose instead?
-- Harvey Newstrom <mailto:harv@gate.net> <http://www.gate.net/~harv> PGP 5.5 Fingerprint: F746 7A20 EB7D 27BA 80A5 4473 D8E1 6A54 1EB0 56F7 PGP Public Key available from <ldap://certserver.pgp.com>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Nov 01 2002 - 14:49:07 MST