[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Subject Index][Author Index]
Re: Feduccia et al. (2005) Critique
Excellent critique, Mickey
--- Michael Mortimer <email@example.com> wrote:
> I have mixed reactions regarding this paper. Feduccia's sections were
> painful in their inaccuracy and constant use of extremely outdated ideas.
> In addition, many of his refutations seemed to not incorporate his placement
> of maniraptorans as birds. He argues too hard for things that don't change
> dinosaurian birds, like neoflightless maniraptorans. And the reasons
> maniraptorans couldn't be theropods are never addressed. Also not addressed
> are several relevent critiques to points he's used for years now. Most
> angering is his utter twisting of Paul's words in the Euparkeria quote, to
> completely reverse the intent of Paul's statement.
Yes, this is most disturbing. :(
>_Especially_ after he
> states in press releases that BADists are helping the creationist cause.
> On the other hand, I thought Lingham-Soliar's collagen work was pretty
> decent. He could be on to something for a few specimens, and the
> Psittacosaurus is very important. I also enjoyed how both the basal
> coelurosaur feather issue and the homeotic frameshift issue had only
> tentative conclusions. I agree both need more work. These latter points
> made this the best BAND paper I've read.
If that's the case, it doesn't say much for the whole BAND movement.
Also let me just check the abbreviations here:
BAD - Birds are dinosaurs
BAND - Birds are not dinosaurs
WAIR - Wing assisted Incline running
But what's MANIAC?
Yahoo! Mail - PC Magazine Editors' Choice 2005