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

Re: Tarbosaurus?



In a message dated 7/24/00 1:45:07 PM EST, znc14@TTACS.TTU.EDU writes:

<< Is that any way to respond to a scientific challenge? You are simply
 dodgeing Alan's point, which is that you CANNOT ignore the geological
 factors when making paleoecological statements. If you feel unequipped to
 address the sedimentological factors, perhaps you should refrain from making
 generalizations about them, or about characteristics of the fossil record
 which are certainly influenced by them. >>

As I said before, the SEDIMENTOLOGICAL FACTORS ARE IRRELEVANT to this 
discussion. They DON'T NEED to be addressed here. READ MY LIPS. How many 
times do I have to point this out before it SINKS IN?? If you think they're 
relevant, SHOW HOW, don't just SAY that they're relevant.

I claim that whatever sedimentological factors operated in the Nemegt and the 
Hell Creek would sample the two populations the same way. Show me how they 
would not. Show me how the speed or depth of the water, the soil acidity, 
rainfall, size of particulate matter deposited, etc. would affect the >ratio 
of fossilized subadults to adults< in a tyrannosaurid population. GET REAL, 
MAN!