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


Peter Von Sholly wrote:
<< As for BCF, I can only add my own sentiments: BFD.  I am
personally sick unto death of hearing a few individuals' long-winded
tirades and counter-tirades on the subject.  But knock yourselves
out...that's merely my take on it. Without a fuller picture from the fossil
record, it seems pointless to get too dogmatic about any of this. >>
Dinogeorge replied:
< I agree. Almost every discussion on this list would benefit from a fuller
fossil record. There is no way to test or confirm any but the most trivial
hypotheses about dinosaur endothermy; dinosaur behavior, habits, ecology, and
lifestyles; dinosaur phylogeny and relationships; dinosaur diseases; and
dinosaur life appearance (color, stance, and so forth). On this list,
therefore, we should discuss nothing but historical aspects of dinosaurology,
dinosaur descriptions and nomenclature, and the reconstruction and life
restoration of existing dinosaur specimens in motion pictures and as art. >
This would rob the subject of its value as a puzzle.  Speculation is the mother and father of science; human brains were designed to make use of uncertain knowledge.  Besides how far could we get with reconstructing dinos' life appearances without guessing and arguing?  (I half suspect George was being ironic when he said the above!)
One of my main points though is that K-BCF is being airbrushed out of history by those who ought to know better.