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

Re: pterosaur tracks from SVP

Betty Cunningham wrote:

>Dave Unwin and Don Henderson said that they tried 3 different body
positions-1 bipedal and 2 quadrepedal with different body orientations,
and that this was the only locomotion that came out with the animal
stable (balanced) out of all of them AND that matched the available
tracks AND that matched the possible articulations of the bones.

I appreciate the considerable power of this computer simulation. However, I think, that even though the body orientation was the most stable of the positions chosen, it the possibilities themselves may not be the best. I found that there was a bias against the bipedal orientation.

The posture of the bipedal model assumed the head way out in front of the center of gravity. I'm no physicist but I don't need a computer simulation to tell me that that is not going to work! ;-). I feel that the computer model should have had the the head oriented behind the center of gravity, something like a pelican.

However, the major flaw in what I am saying is that I don't even know if pterosaurs can even assume that posture. So I raise that question of wether or not that option was exhausted of all feasibility.

I would just like to know what other people think/know. Anyone?

Martin Brazeau
1st year Pure&Applied Science
Heritage College,
Hull Quebec

Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com