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

Re: Interesting information in article on Feathered Dinosaurs at the ROM

On 14 Mar 2005, at 22:48, Allan Edels wrote:

And, Stephen has had at least 2 controversies to bring them to the
public's attention.  (Remember the _Stegosaurus_ plate organization he
was promoting?)

I don't mind researchers of any kind, background or persuasion coming out with interesting ideas to provoke controversy to be tested by science. Debate should always be welcome.
I do mind however that suddenly someone can come 'rediscovering America' basing the whole of their argument (and that implies a whole "new" view of birds origins, no less) based on the length of a phalanx ( page 114 of that priceless, but unfortunately barely readable volume "Feathered Dinosaurs and the Origin of Flight"). And on top of everything they add also a title which is also a misleading since they were argumenting that birds weren't actually directly related dinosaurs or just weren't dinosaurs at all! In fact... for them not only dromaeosaurs, but even therizinosaurs are >not< dinosaurs anymore! Birds come from some Early Triassic magical reptile separated from the rest that could actually fly...
A 'Feathered Dinosaurs' title obviously sells a mess a lot better. Maybe someone soon will be advocating Class Longisquamidae?

The "controversy" which really damaged the Czerkas team was not the "Archaeoraptor" blunder, but their stubbornness of trying to shove inside everyone's throat their own version of the Philosopher's Stone... and not even being able to know how to write and have evaluated a proper scientific paper.
Excellent artists though... if only they stuck to it instead of planning the Second Coming over and over again. But then, I suppose we all have big egos...only some bigger than others ...

Luis Rey

Visit my website on http://www.ndirect.co.uk/~luisrey