Behemoth, a Sauropod?

Behemoth simply refers to a wild animal of beast, but since the creationists wish to label it a single animal, they can. Though it would be a big mistake. There are many more reasons why behemoth could not have been a sauropod, I only list the reasons that are obvious and cannot be ignored by even the most delusional....who am I kidding..they'll still ignore it. Coombs, W. 1975. Sauropod habits and habitats. Palaeogeography, Palaeoclimatology, Palaeoecology v. 17, pp. 1-33. Upchurch, P., P.M. Barrett, and P. Dodson. 2004. Sauropoda. In The Dinosauria, 2nd edition. D. Weishampel, P. Dodson, and H. Osmólska (eds.). University of California Press, Berkeley. Pp. 259-322. Fiorillo, A. 1991. Dental microwear on the teeth of Camarasaurus and Diplodocus: implications for sauropod paleoecology. In Fifth Symposium on Mesozoic Terrestrial Ecosystems and Biota, Z. Kielan-Jaworowska, N. Heintz, and H. Nakrem (eds.). Paleontological Museum, University of Oslo. Pp. 23-24. Fiorillo, A. 1994. Time resolution at Carnegie Quarry (Morrison Formation: Dinosaur National Monument, Utah): implications for dinosaur paleoecology. Contributions to Geology, University of Wyoming, Laramie v. 30, pp. 149-156. http://rspb.royalsocietypublishing.org/content/275/1638/1015.full http://www.world-science.net/othernews/051117_grassdinofrm.htm http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcgi?artid=2600911