[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Subject Index][Author Index]
Jordan Mallon wrote:
>Just out if curiosity, is the name Atlascopcosaurus also dumb because it is
>not descriptive? If its a physical description we want, then no, because
>it does not provide even an inkling as to the dinosaurs characteristics.
>However, I think it is descriptive in that it provides some case history
>into the background of the dinosaurs discovery (Atlas Copco was the name of
>the company that helped excavate this dinos bones). Same case scenario for
>Leaellynasaura (named after the discoverers daughter) and Bambiraptor (the
>boy who found it nicknamed it Bambi because of its small and cute
How about Qantasaurus, named after the Australian airline? To a lesser extent,
what about dinosaurs and other creatures named after mythical figures, like the
recently named Jobaria? Sereno and his colleagues named this sauropod after a
mythical figure of Tuareg tradition (and the name that the nomads gave the
dinosaur bones). Is this 'unscientific', too? Or, are these names dumb?
Dino Land Paleontology http://www.geocities.com/stegob
Send FREE April Fool's Greetings to your friends!