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

Re: bat/ptero wings

David Peters wrote:

Tim, you really do need to see and think about both sides of an argument
before promoting one side over the other.

I have looked at both sides. For example, I have read Peters (2000), and was actually quite taken with the idea that pterosaurs *might* be winged protorosaurs/prolacertiforms. However, in light of more recent studies, I am leaning more toward the traditional hypothesis that pterosaurs are actually closer to dinosauromorphs. Therefore, I do believe that I have thought about both sides of the argument - it's just that I like the other side better.

To do so puts you in the realm of science. With all due respect, to not do so puts you outside of
science, perhaps somewhere between politics, statistics and religion.

Hmmm... I think the "with all due respect" comment is negated by the rest of your response. Anyways, I appreciate you taking the time to explain to me what "science" is all about. I wasn't aware that my skepticism of your pet hypothesis put me outside the realm of science. There you go. I'm so ashamed of my non-scientific conduct that I'm thinking of returning my Ph.D.

Read the papers and get back to me.

Done and done.