john5746 Posted February 24, 2006 Posted February 24, 2006 http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/02/23/AR2006022301879.html Mammels may have been more diverse during the Dino age than previously thought?
herpguy Posted February 24, 2006 Posted February 24, 2006 http://www.scienceforums.net/forums/showthread.php?t=18796
AzurePhoenix Posted February 24, 2006 Posted February 24, 2006 On the same note, "Repenomamus" was a rather large mammalian predator that has been recently discovered. Maybe as large as a small dog, with stomach contents that showed it likely preyed on small and/or young dinos. It came from a later era in the cretaceous, but its discovery was similar in magnitude as that of this jurassic "psuedopus," making us rethink our long held thoughts on the place of mammals in the age of the dinosaurs. Does anyone know of any other "large" mammals from those times?
aguy2 Posted February 24, 2006 Posted February 24, 2006 On the same note' date=' "Repenomamus" was a rather large mammalian predator that has been recently discovered. Maybe as large as a small dog, with stomach contents that showed it likely preyed on small and/or young dinos. It came from a later era in the cretaceous, but its discovery was similar in magnitude as that of this jurassic "psuedopus," making us rethink our long held thoughts on the place of mammals in the age of the dinosaurs. Does anyone know of any other "large" mammals from those times? Bigger 'rats' I suspect! aguy2
silkworm Posted February 25, 2006 Posted February 25, 2006 I've been thinking about this all day and just wanted to post this image. I think it's interesting how it sort of looks like a semi-aquatic tree shrew.
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now