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


Tracy L. Ford (dino.hunter@cox.net) wrote:

<The front half (which seems to be lost in the mess) is from a New Genus
of Bird and that is the important part of the specimen, while it is the
back half that has caught the attention of everyone. Lest not forget that
Storrs Olsen has deemed the back half as being Archaeoraptor, which is the
same as Microraptor and has, for now, priority over the specimens.>

  This must be regarded carefully, in my opinion, as we must consider the
amplitude of Storrs Olson's note regarded what he decided to designate
"Archaeoraptor" (reasons are unimportant in this case). At which point
does this note become a published document when it, as in dissertations,
is released pretty much only among in-house personnel and colleages? Such
a publication does not, unless it's been released to a distribution
center, to other libraries and does not permit broad access. It what other
ways does this "authoratative" note constitute publication?

Jaime A. Headden

  Little steps are often the hardest to take.  We are too used to making leaps 
in the face of adversity, that a simple skip is so hard to do.  We should all 
learn to walk soft, walk small, see the world around us rather than zoom by it.

Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Sports - Coverage of the 2002 Olympic Games