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

RE: Horner's Pachy Lumpin' - Your Thoughts?



  To play devils' advocate on at least one part of this debate, I would like to 
say that, should Horner and Goodwin prove without using circular studies of 
ceratopsians and pachycephalosaurs each invoking the other to prove itself that 
resorption and remodelling occurs, then it is likely that the metaplastic model 
they produce is expected.

  Horner and Goodwin are likely correct in that *Dracorex* is a synonym of 
either *Stygimoloch* or *Pachycephalosaurus, but less seemingly grounded is 
their assertion that the latter two are synonymous based on gross osteology 
(and their own comments, which they admit to being a flaw in their study).  I 
have already commented at length on the topic of inferring synonymy _a priori_, 
then using the resulting taxonomy to prove the ontogeny of the cranial 
morphology, then using that to infer taxonomic reduction.  Despite this, 
however, the histological material they have brought forward is at least sound 
and indicates a good deal we don't know about the transoformation of ostensibly 
agonistic or display-related features.

Cheers,

Jaime A. Headden

"Innocent, unbiased observation is a myth." --- P.B. Medawar (1969)


"Human beings, who are almost unique in having the ability to learn
from the experience of others, are also remarkable for their apparent
disinclination to do so." --- Douglas Adams (Last Chance to See)


"Ever since man first left his cave and met a stranger with a
different language and a new way of looking at things, the human race
has had a dream: to kill him, so we don't have to learn his language or
his new way of looking at things." --- Zapp Brannigan (Beast With a Billion 
Backs)
                                          
_________________________________________________________________
Hotmail: Trusted email with powerful SPAM protection.
http://clk.atdmt.com/GBL/go/196390707/direct/01/