[mailto:email@example.com]On Behalf Of Danvarner@aol.com
Sent: Wednesday, November 14, 2001
Subject: Re: Khaan's paleoecology
& artist inaccuracy (long)
In a message dated 11/14/01 7:58:11 AM
Pacific Standard Time, firstname.lastname@example.org writes:
<< Wouldn't it seem more appropriate, however, especially with it being
at the AMNH, if the Oviraptor guarding the nest had some feathers (at least on
the arms), but maybe this painting was done before discoveries suggesting such?
It was probably painted before.
<< One thing is certain, though. If Dan is right
and what is depicted is a full moon, it could not, in reality, appear in that
sky. Why not? Note that the angle made by the shadow of the
Oviraptor's left wrist when joined to the animal's left wrist. This tells
us the sun is very approximately 30 (or more) degrees above the horizon.
Thus, a moon in that sky position should not be full. I enlarged
the image to see if the moon is really full, and although the resolution makes
it difficult to tell, there may be a slight shadow on the left side of the
moon. Yet, if what I may be seeing there is in fact a darkened sliver of
the moon, the shadow still would not be sufficient and at the correct angle to
have been produced by the sun location as implied by the Oviraptor's
I believe you are picking nits here, Ray.
The shadow of the wrist may not be painted to perfection, but it is being cast
on an upslope. The animals are all depicted as fully illuminated unless they
are in the shadow of a dune. The angle of the sun is way less than 30 degrees
in the rest of the picture. Also, you have to consider that this is a
wide-angle panorama. I have painted numerous moonrises and this looks great to
me. Since the moon is already up, the time is a day or two before the absolute
One thing to take into account is that the diagram is a fairly
large diagram and it doesn’t mean that at the front end of the diagram is the
same day as the end of the diagram. Could be changing of the day?
Tracy L. Ford
P. O. Box 1171
Poway Ca 92074