[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Subject Index][Author Index]
Re: Preview of new stegosaur plate paper
> Date: Wed, 18 May 2005 09:08:48 -0700 (PDT)
> From: don ohmes <firstname.lastname@example.org>
>>>>> Engineering and mass allocation considerations indicate that the
>>>>> relative size of passive defense structures must scale
>>>>> negatively with body size.
> [snip snip snip]
> I said PASSIVE defense structures. Antlers are aggressive
> structures, not defensive, and are ACTIVE, not passive. AND I DID
> NOT SAY "MUST'.
(I know I shouldn't get sucked into this, but ...)
How do you interpret your original statement that "Engineering and
mass allocation considerations indicate that the relative size of
passive defense structures MUST [my emphasis] scale negatively with
body size" compatible with your NOT HAVING SAID "MUST"?
/o ) \/ Mike Taylor <email@example.com> http://www.miketaylor.org.uk
)_v__/\ "Your passion for God will never exceed the level of your
revelation of _his_ passion for _you_." -- Mike Bickle.
Listen to free demos of soundtrack music for film, TV and radio