[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Subject Index][Author Index]
Re: Bakker and popularizing science
>From: Ray McAllister <firstname.lastname@example.org>
>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).
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].
The peace of God be with you.