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

only Grant Harding should read this



This is being sent via the Dinosaur Mailing List, as my compluter refuses to
send an e-mail directly to Grant Harding and I need to respond to his
letter.  I would appreciate it if other list members ignore and delete it.
Thank you.

You wrote-

Dear Sir,

I sent you this letter on May 14, 2000, and have not yet received a
response.  I don't want to seem rude, but I would greatly appreciate an
answer to my question, even if the answer is "No, I haven't done the
analysis yet" or "I've done it, but I don't want to tell you", because I
would respect both of these answers and they would stop me from waiting for
a response.

However, if you have merely been too busy, I understand.  (The same thing
has been happening to me lately what with exams.)  Maybe my letter to you
got lost in the mail - or your letter to me may have screwed up because of
the problem with my reply-to settings (I'll have to fix that one of these
days...).  If that is the case, please discount the above yelling and
screaming.  :)

BTW, if you're wondering, the exact reason I want the results of your
analysis is for use in the soon-to-be-created coelurosaur cladogram pages on
my web site.  I wanted to use an analysis that got rid of the "flighty" bias
for my phylogeny there, and yours is the only one I've heard of.

Anyway, here, once again, is my original letter.  Please respond!

-Grant

*****

Way back on January 20th, "John Jackson" wrote:

>>Whatever one's position on secondary flightlessness (2F) in mani.
>>dinosaurs,
>>it is perhaps much easier to agree on a very important feature of it :
>>that
>>it is intrinsically unparsimonious.
>>
>>As such, it could never be expected to appear in a cladogram even if it
>>existed; the (hypothetically) true structure would be transformed into
>>something else.

To which you responded:

>I'll tell you what, Nick.  Once I get my character list completed (a couple
>weeks from now), I'll make a separate data matrix just for you with
>"flighty" characters deleted.  I'm sure I won't catch all of them, but most
>things related to flight are easy to see (involving arm and pectoral
>girdle).  If you or anyone else would like to inform me on flight-related
>characters not in the pectoral limb or girdle, I'll be glad to consider
them
>as well.  Then I'll run PHYLIP or PAUP (if I have it in time) on the new
>censored data and see how the results are different from the standard
data's
>results.  If your hypothesis is correct, we'll see secondary
flightlessness,
>if not Aves will only include Archaeopteryx, Rahonavis and pygostylians.


Have you done this yet?  When you do, please send me the results.  I am
quite eager to see them, as I believe this is an excellent idea and have
long felt that someone should do this.

Sorry about the lack of response.  I meant to respond to your original
letter, but didn't have the time, then your follow-up letter arrived the day
I left for Hawaii (what horrible luck!).  I just got back tonight and have
404 messages (mostly from the dinosaur mailing list) to check.  Arghh.
Anyway, as for your question, no I haven't done the stated analysis yet.  I
did get PAUP, but it's a new beta without a manual, so although I figured
out how to run analyses, I can't check to see what characters define what
clade (which is important to defending a hypothesis).  I do still intend to
run the flight-related analysis, but it may not be for a while.  Perhaps in
July.  So, again, sorry for the late response and I'll try to get the
analysis done in the next month.  I'll send it to you when it's completed.
Good luck on the website!

Mickey Mortimer