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

RE: Feduccia et al. (2005) Critique

Mickey Mortimer wrote:

"Like the term ?thecodont,? a collective term to describe Triassic basal archosaurs, coelurosaur and carnosaur describe, respectively, small and large theropod dinosaurs."
No they don't, you ignorant man. Please stop brandishing about your pre-90's dinosaur phylogenetic knowledge as if it were relevent.


The word that comes to mind when reading Feduccia's work is 'spin'. If you read carefully, there are no outright lies in the paper. Even the most ludicrous statements are referenced, even if (as with GSP's judiciously-edited quote) they are taken completely out of context and/or are atrociously out-of-date. Yet, critical information is omitted again and again, and contrary evidence (when not ignored) is peremptorily dismissed (e.g., WAIR). Not to mention that the paper is replete with naive falsification and self-contradictions. Overall, it is a classic example of well-crafted misinformation.

Phil Bigelow wrote:

But why bother publishing such a deception in the first place?  Alan is a
true puzzle.  Time is against him.  His tactic (if it is indeed a tactic)
is akin to rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic.  In the long run,
the energy expended in the exercise won't matter.

Nice analogy. I would say that the BAND 'hypothesis' has already hit the iceberg.