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


Having spent the whole of my lunch hour drinking heavily (could be 
worse.. I could have been attending the Australian crocodile biology 
symposium - no heavy drinking going on there I bet) , I am having 
trouble constructing a coherent email that makes sense. But here 


At some point in one of the many interviews he has now given on the 
subject, Steve Hutt mentioned that his new theropod may have been 
somewhat cat-like in its behaviour. He probably meant that it might 
have been an agile ambush hunter (he most likely did *not* have Tom's 
'grapple and slash' analogies in mind). Thereafter, journalists 
referred to the animal as 'cat-like dinosaur', and the ones that 
then based little news items on _these_ news items saw the words 
'Cretaceous' and 'Cat', and thought.. Cretaceous cat. Thus local 
radio and a number of little newspaper articles ended up talking 
about a newly discovered fossil cat from the Cretaceous of the Isle 
of Wight. I kid you not.

I emphasise, there is nothing cat-like whatsoever about this new 
animal. It is simply a case of journalistic misunderstanding and 
misemphasis. I repeat.. there is *nothing* especially cat-like about 
this new theropod.

I will report on the Cretaceous biodiversity conference when (a) I 
have sobered up, (b) I have returned Johnsgard (1993) to the library 
and picked up Bininda-Emonds et al.'s big monograph on phocid 
monophyly, and (c) I have attempted to correct some of the incorrect 
emails concerning New Zealand rallids posted earlier on this list.

Why are people from _Science_ trying to get in touch with Paul Davis? 

"I like dicynodonts, but I couldn't eat a whole one"

Yours drunkenly,