[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Subject Index][Author Index]
FWIW, It's a commentary by John Ruben, discussing the four-winged Microraptor
paper by D. Alexander, Larry Martin et al in an earlier issue of PNAS. Think
more like a Nature News & Views than a peer reviewed paper.
At 6:38 PM -0800 2/9/10, T. Michael Keesey wrote:
>On Tue, Feb 9, 2010 at 5:51 PM, Denver Fowler <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
>> A new study just published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of
>> Sciences provides yet more evidence that birds did not
>> descend from ground-dwelling theropod dinosaurs, experts say, and continues
>> to challenge decades of accepted theories about the evolution
>> of flight.
>>From the article, it looks their beef is with the "ground-dwelling"
>parting, not so much the "theropod dinosaurs" part.
>> PNAS has recently published widely disputed (to put it mildly) papers on
>> venomous theropods, and arthropod-velvet worm hybridisation hypothesis on
>> the origin of larvae. Now this. Is peer review alive and well at PNAS?
Jeff Hecht, science & technology writer
email@example.com or firstname.lastname@example.org
525 Auburn St., Auburndale, MA 02466 USA
tel. 617-965-3834 http://www.jeffhecht.com
- Re: PNAS
- From: "T. Michael Keesey" <email@example.com>