big_load wrote:Dschur wrote:Name of trackways dinosaur or others are always named separately from the critter that made them. It is the study of ichnites. They are interesting since it shows the behavior of the animal.
I should have been more specific. If you accept dilophosaur as the maker of Eubrontes Giganteus, doesn't its formal track name (first discovered 1802, described 1836 by Hitchcock) predate general acceptance of the existence of dinosaurs as a whole? There are three famous early descriptions in 1824-1833 (Buckland and Mantell), but Hitchcock still thought Eubrontes was a bird.
No as ichnogenera and taxonomic general are considered totally separate. One cannot supplant the other. And one couldn't accept
Dilophosaurus as the maker of
Eubrontes tracks, as the age range of
Eubrontes exceeds that of
Dilophosaurus, and all medium-sized, early theropods had similar feet. And if Hitchcock described
Eubrontes in 1836, that would not predate even earlier dinosaur discoveries (some of which you mention) from "across the pond." People back then knew that dinosaurs existed, they just didn't know what to make of them.
"The only thing we did was wrong was staying in the wilderness to long...the only thing we did was right was the day we started to fight..."
-Old Spiritual
My book, The Marauders on
Lulu and
Amazon