[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Subject Index][Author Index]

Re: Bakker and popularizing science

> From: Ray McAllister <mcallist@gate.net>
>  >I find warm blooded, 
>  >sexual and colorful dinos not all bad altho there is little evidence for 
>  >the latter. Go Bakker!
> Hmm, don't you mean "former"?  It is the warm-blooded issue for
> which the evidence is equivocal.  In fact there is good reason
> to conclude that dinosaurs had a physiology that doesn't fit
> well in the modern classification (neither warm-blooded nor cold).

Sorry for nitpicking, but neither 'former' nor 'latter' can be used when 
there are three categories :-) However, I agree with the defense of Bob 
Bakker:  a field of science in which everyone agreed with everyone else 
would be as boring as a football game with both teams on the same side.

Stephen Dedman
Sf writer, former English teacher, legal typist, and used dinosaur 
salesman (honest).

> For color, the widespread occurance of display structures:
> hadrosaur crests, ceratopsian frills (shields), theropod
> ridges and crests, and so on indicate a very visual type of
> animal.  Then you add the fact that their descendents, the
> birds, are very colorful, and the sum total is fairly convincing.
> [Note, except for Triceratops, the neck frill bones of ceratopsians
> have big holes in them, making then useless as shields, which
> leaves only display].
> swf@elsegundoca.attgis.com            sarima@netcom.com
> The peace of God be with you.