Feel free to browse through five years of dino-discussion here in the Version 1 Archive! And then join in the ongoing discussion at The Dinosaur Toy Forum: Version 2
" Way out West are boney clues of many an ancient clash, preserved by deadly sand and mud and dark volcanic ash, these late Jurassic sediments, the Morrison Formation, a record of the Allosaurus, Prince of all Predation..." - Jurassic Punk
according to wikipedia the paleogene doesn't exist
Sure it doesn't, it's over... Without a Paleogene the term Neogene would not make any sense and should be replaced by "Tertiary", Neogene and Tertiary are not synonymous.
Edit: Oh, and for very practical, human reasons I voted for Quarternary.
« Last Edit: May 24, 2010, 3:56pm by brontodocus »
according to wikipedia the paleogene doesn't exist
Sure it doesn't, it's over... Without a Paleogene the term Neogene would not make any sense and should be replaced by "Tertiary", Neogene and Tertiary are not synonymous.
Edit: Oh, and for very practical, human reasons I voted for Quarternary.
And Tertiary is no longer valid; it has been divided as two periods--Palaeogene and Neogene--within the Cenozoic.
I believe that the bront will go on... but on DTF v2!
Joined: Feb 2010 Gender: Male Posts: 1,120 Location: Bochum, Germany
Re: Favorite Time Period « Reply #11 on May 24, 2010, 5:01pm »
The term Tertiary may have become out-of-date but is still very commonly used at least in textbooks in Germany, like Haubold & Daber, A.H. Müller, Krumbiegel & Walther, A.E. Richter, I'm not aware of any German literature that rejects it, though I must confess the ones I have are not the newest. But it's no less valid like e.g. non-SI units like pound, inch or horsepower. It's just better not to use them, that's all. And: If one doesn't accept the concept of a Paleogene, then Tertiary would be without alternative.
The term Tertiary may have become out-of-date but is still very commonly used at least in textbooks in Germany, like Haubold & Daber, A.H. Müller, Krumbiegel & Walther, A.E. Richter, I'm not aware of any German literature that rejects it, though I must confess the ones I have are not the newest. But it's no less valid like e.g. non-SI units like pound, inch or horsepower. It's just better not to use them, that's all. And: If one doesn't accept the concept of a Paleogene, then Tertiary would be without alternative.
The term "Tertiary" may still be in use in older texts, but it is not generally used as much anymore as a proper term--the division of Palaeogene and Neogene are much more informative.
Just go here for the update, much of this was established by 1999 http://www.geosociety.org/science/timescale/timescl-1999.pdf--it isn't really up to authors of text books anyway; save for a few Cambrian dates, most of these names and ages have reached a consensus (of sorts--until some other evidence changes things).
Besides, in reference to this poll--it isn't like Tertiary was an option either, hence the choices are incomplete and the poll isn't valid (what if someone wants to choose the age of Indricotherium, Megacerops, Champsosaurs, Andrewsarchus, and Basilosaurus?).
As you may have guessed my favorite time period is the late Jurassic when my favorite dino lived good old Big Al the allosaurus.
But another great time is the mid Cretaceous the Aptian threw the Turonian stage's. There is a great mix of mega sized Jurassic fauna mixing with early Cretaceous favorites.
examples in south America we have Titanosaurs and Carcharodontosaurids mixing with mainoraprtors and early iguanodonts and hadrosaurs. In laurasia we have More of the earlier with tyranosaurids spinosaurids and more mainoraptorids .
Like in europe we have baryonx ,neovenator, iguanadon and eotyrannus. In north America there is acrocantosaurs and deinonychus and such.