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

Re: Dinosaurs versus mammals

Soren Eriksson wrote:

>I am new to this list
        Welocome. I gather you've probably recently seen just about enough
object lessons in what *not* to do over the dinolist? :)

>Now for my QUESTION: In all books and TV-programs there has not been a clear
>analysis and answer to why mammals (and the protomammals before them)
>were so profoundly outcompeted by the dinosaurs for such a long time (or
have I 
>missed that?).
        You seem to be forgetting what might be the simplest explanation:
dinosaurs got there the firstest with the mostest.

>Being just an amateur on this list, please tell me if this question is already 
>answered and if my thoughts are simply too unprofessional! This is my first
>try to contribute something.
        In general, with complex questions like this, where oppinions are
likely to be pretty varied, it is ok to ask even if it is written somewhere.
Someone on the list always knows of (or has) a different interpretation
which might be useful (or amusing). :)

        And for those of you out there from Ivy League schools, I'll have
you know that y'all don't have the corner on the snooty market,
thankyouverymuch. As an alumnus of one of the "southern ivies" (most
recently noted for our rather fatal graduation ceremonies), I should point
out that UVa students have been snooty since oh around 1824-5 (and they even
had a geology program and a museum back then, too). May not be as long as
Harvard, but then, Ivy Leaguers don't really know how to drink either, do
they? ;)
      Jonathan R. Wagner, Dept. of Geosciences, TTU, Lubbock TX 79409
      "The cost of living hasn't affected its popularity." - Unknown