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

Re: Museology

Jeffrey Martz wrote:
> Brian Franczak wrote...
> Actually, I take exception to this last remark. While the details
> (coloration, ornamentation, etc.) will vary from illustration to
> illustration, the morphology of the animal (the important issue) does
> not; there is consensus about the animal's life appearance (horizontal
> stance, positioning of legs beneath the body, etc.).
> [Jeffrey Martz]
>      Sure, but these are both things that can be inferred directly     > from 
> the bones, and shown using mounted skeletons.

The AMNH spent three years and multiple millions of dollars renovating
their dinosaur halls. Yet except for _Tyrannosaurus_, _Struthiomimus_,
and _Apatosaurus_, all the other major mounts (_Triceratops_,
_Anatotitan_, _Stegosaurus_, _Tenontosaurus_) are still standing exactly
as they have stood since they were originally put on display. In other
words, in sprawling, tail-dragging, inaccurate poses. Hardly informative
visually, especially since there is no signage to point out any of the
mounts' inaccuracies (any more than there is signage indicating the
wrong feet on _rex_). And it seems unlikely at this point that these
skeletons are going to be "corrected" anytime in the near future.

Brian (franczak@ntplx.net)