Celrath wrote...
I think the Science make more sense that way though. Two Very similar creatures from the same regain would have either A competed for the same resources until one drove the other out or B inter bread to become the same species which would possibly result in inferential. Given the fossil record doesn't seem to show any hybrid of the two it makes Sense that they are in fact different stages of the same animal. And because I know you will say but since the is know hybrid doesn't that also mean there is no record of the a teen age version of sorts. Well that would also be very rare because it would be more common for the young and old to die wouldn't it. The Fossil record also show a lack of Young Torosaurus which also leans to the fact they are the same.
It only takes one better theory to change the history books.
I don't mean to say that the theory is necessarily wrong, but I just say that until popular scientific opinion backs it up and triceratops becomes officially (however that works) considered a defunct classification, I'm still going to call it a dinosaur. But I also read, even if the theory is true, if they're the same species, it would be more proper to use the first established name, Triceratops, not Torosaurus. So maybe Torosaurus should be the one that "doesn't really exist."