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

Re: RE: Warm Blooded vs. Cold Blooded

>You still fail to see my one and only point. Simply, that it cannot be said
>that sauropods could not take in as much food per day than giant mammals
>because the former have small skulls, because mouth size is comparable at a
>given mass in the two groups. That is it. All your suggestions are irrelevant
>to this key point.

And you still seem completely oblivious to the assumptions inherent in your
assertion. You cannot simply divorce a single correlation from the the
enormous tangle of functions and dependancies as glibly as you do. I could
also point out that a reticulated python  has a mouth width to body mass
even less than that of a sauropod or mammal (I would be guessing but I
would bet vital parts of my anatomy on it) and therefore draw a conclusion
that they must have a simlar or higher metabolic rate than either sauropods
of mammals. "But", you would but me, "Thats completely different because
the reticulated python can dislocate its jaw to swallow larger items", in
which case your but would be making the same line of argument that I am
making at the moment: that there are so many other factors effecting the
situation that any analogy is rediculous. The difference between your case
and mine is that, in the case of the reticulated python, we can see the
difference in mechanism in the osteology of the animals concerned where as
I am asserting that these diferences (in sauropods) are likely to exist but
are unobservable.

Now where is that beer?

Cheers, Paul