[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Subject Index][Author Index]
Re: feathered pterosaur???
From: Williams, Tim <TiJaWi@agron.iastate.edu>
To: 'firstname.lastname@example.org' <email@example.com>
Date: Friday, February 01, 2002 10:46 AM
Subject: Re: feathered pterosaur???
>"Chinese paleontologists put forward for the first time the hypothesis that
>pterosaur's feather and dinosaur's ancient feather are of the same origin
>according to their similarity, and further inferred that they have the same
>Oh dear. I know a few people who are going to get VERY excited at that
>idea. (And I'm not certain it's the first time that particular hypothesis
>has been advanced, even in print.)
>On another topic... I have no problem with citing (or "hinting" at)
>research or work-in-progress that one has received by word of mouth.
>However, it might be better to avoid "name-dropping" when doing so. Sure,
>mention that someone is working on a certain project, and that a
>is in the pipeline (even "in press"); but I can see good reasons for
>refraining from mentioning the identity of the researcher. I don't have
>anybody in mind when saying this; I've done it too. But Pete Buchholz
>a good point. Statements that begin with "so-and-so told me..." are very
>difficult to discuss any further, because (a) the supporting data are not
>available to the general public; (b) disagreeing with the statement on the
>basis of published or available data could be construed as criticizing the
>researcher; and (c) "so-and-so" may not be on the list to defend
Quess I`m one of the "excited" ones, as I have already expressed that I
think Birds and Pterosaurs might have a common ancestry. I know that
pterosaurs having even feathers of common origin dosen`t even clinch my
arguement, (because one can say, and it probably will be said, that this
only means that the earliest common ancestors of both theropods and
pterosaurs had feathers, pterosaurs evolving in the Triassic, and birds
later in the Jurassic from those theropods.)
Wang Xiaolin as the researcher for the Chineedse Acadamy of Sciences was
cited in this article. Do you think that the statement "pterosaur's feather
and dinosaur's ancient feather are of the same origin according to their
similarity, and further inferred that they have the same ancestor. " is just
a misrepresentation of his statements?
PS...I wish there were a clearer picture of the specimen. When I try to blow
it up in Photoshop,it gets very grainy, and the details are lost. (I assume
Jeholopterous is the specimen we are reffering to?..Thanks Dan Varner for
the links to that pict!) I don`t suppose there are any detailed picts
available as yet???