Can the Carnegie Spinosaurus represent a different Spinosaur?

[SidB]

I think that this discussion shows the considerable value of sites such as D @Dinoguy2 's Carnegie one especially, because they give us a needed perspective on the value of currently inaccurate interpretations from an historical perspective. It has to be fully understood that Forest Rogers never sculpted this superbly crafted figure as an intentionally retro piece. Indeed, it was hailed in its time as the best and most accurate mass-produced Spinosaurus of its time. A sweep through Dinoguy's site will clarify this picture. For myself, I would never attempt to modify Roger's masterpiece. It has considerable value in itself, just as it is.

[Tyto_Theropod]

I think that this discussion shows the considerable value of sites such as D @Dinoguy2 's Carnegie one especially, because they give us a needed perspective on the value of currently inaccurate interpretations from an historical perspective. It has to be fully understood that Forest Rogers never sculpted this superbly crafted figure as an intentionally retro piece. Indeed, it was hailed in its time as the best and most accurate mass-produced Spinosaurus of its time. A sweep through Dinoguy's site will clarify this picture. For myself, I would never attempt to modify Roger's masterpiece. It has considerable value in itself, just as it is.

I completely agree, with all this, which I hope I conveyed in my post.  Whilst I mostly collect up-to-date dinosaurs, I sometimes enjoy standing my older models beside new ones and contemplating how far we've come in our understanding of prehistoric life - especially in the last few years.