>
> 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?
>
It's not "leading" anywhere. I'm just wondering about the supposed gigantic
size of prehistoric critters. If they got so big...why not big critters now?
And fossils are not bones...they are "rock deposits" which have replaced the
original bones. The shapes the same...but nothing else. ARe the fossile
bones made from the same material that present day bones are? How do we know?
Perhaps hypothesis was an incorrect word to use...perhaps I should have said
theory.
But back to my original question? Is T-Rex possible...from a materials
"strenght to weight ratio" assuming it was composed of calcium bones...and
similar muscels, ligaments etc. as are present day critters?
If not...then what are the fossils?
If so....then why not similarly large critters now?
EvMIck