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

Fw: And now for a little ego-boost... National Geographic online

Brad, I can't read your postings :P

That's because they don't have line breaks and therefore get the "truncated" message attached. (Hotmail even actively removes the line breaks in the quoted material!) Here is the latest one, with line breaks:

----- Original Message -----
From: "Brad McFeeters" <archosauromorph2@hotmail.com>
To: <dinosaur@usc.edu>
Sent: Sunday, November 18, 2007 7:42 PM
Subject: RE: And now for a little ego-boost... National Geographic online

The *Ceratosaurus* in that scene might be seen not so much as dragging its tail, but merely standing in a tripodal posture- maybe it wants to appear more threatening to the *Stegosaurus*, or maybe it's raising its front end away from the advancing plates. It's a painting of a fight encounter, not of dinosaurs walking. Rather than looking at the trackways, why not look at the skeleton to see if basal theropods were capable of even standing tripodally? Has there been a study on this? Sauropodomorphs are still often depicted in that pose, so it wouldn't be too surprising if it was also possible in other saurisichians. The ceratosaur's hips and knees do look pretty badly disarticulated, though, and I don't know why Knight didn't know better about that.

Date: Fri, 16 Nov 2007 17:11:15 -0500> From: Danvarner@aol.com> Subject: Re: And now for a little ego-boost... National Geographic online
To: dinosaur@usc.edu>
Charles R. Knight's dinosaur images have been beaten-up for over thirty > years now. We got the message. Yes, his dinosaurs sometimes dragged their tails,
and, yes, some of them were depicted living up to their armpits in swamps,
and, yes, they weren't painted in bubblicious colors. The Geographic
illustrations were painted in 1939 in the context of their time. Now, can we move on
without repeating this hackneyed storyline without end? DV