[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Subject Index][Author Index]
Re: *Brachiosaurus* labyrinth paper...
David Marjanovic (email@example.com) wrote:
<Sorry... in fact I didn't. _Because_ the stress of longitudinal compression is
much less than that of bending, the cross-sectional area of the intervertebral
discs must increase (towards the base of the neck) faster in an animal with a
habitually horizontal neck than in one with a habitually vertical one.
Consequently, a horizontally carried neck will appear greatly overdesigned for
a vertical posture. This discrepancy is the subject of Christian & Heinrich
(1998) and Christian (2002).>
What OTHER loading regimes and postures would cause stresses on the cervical
vertebra that the authors cited assert would indicate vertical cervical
posture? And if the neck was held vertically in its entirety, this would also
contradict the osteology, which would show that, at most, the neck _curves_
upward at the base. Indeed, as indicated by Dinomorph scanning and modelling
work, the basal vertebrae would seem incapable of the extreme positions
advocated in the past, and the neck was more or less below 45 degrees. Would
the weight of the neck at its size and the supra-horizontal posture not account
for Christian's findings? Sadly, I've not read the paper, either, since I can't
read a whole lot of German, nor have I had access to the papers to try.
And you call yourself a NERD?! I say ... good day!
Not really. Try: http://www.memory-alpha.org/en/wiki/Bat'leth
Jaime A. Headden
"Innocent, unbiased observation is a myth." --- P.B. Medawar (1969)
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around