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

Re: Albertaceratops (simpson's bi-annual b*tch about dino naming)

----- Original Message ----- From: "Nick" <nick.gardner@gmail.com>
Sent: Wednesday, February 21, 2007 7:01 AM

I am in awe that there has been virtually no discussion at all on any
other aspect of this paper other than the choice in naming.

I, for one, haven't read the paper yet... :-]

"Postcranial characters are excluded because 1) the two ceratopsid
subfamilies are diagnosed almost exclusively on cranial characters;

Maybe they shouldn't be. Just guessing based on other examples of craniocentrism.

2) complete postcranial material is even less well known for
some taxa than is the cranial material;

Missing data is not something to be afraid of.

I suppose overall, I'm finding myself continually dismayed by
how little it seems that ornithischian phylogenetics are progressing
compared to other dinosaur groups that shall not be named.

I don't know what Richard Butler is doing; you may have to do the analyses yourself... would make a nice Ph.D. thesis topic...