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

RE: Paul's New Dino field guide

I noted a small typo on page 96: Rhoetosaurus brownie.

Either an overzealous spellchecker is responsible, or GSP had the munchies.

(It certainly made me hungry...)


--- On Tue, 25/5/10, Michael Mortimer <mickey_mortimer111@msn.com> wrote:

> From: Michael Mortimer <mickey_mortimer111@msn.com>
> Subject: RE: Paul's New Dino field guide
> To: dinosaur@usc.edu
> Received: Tuesday, 25 May, 2010, 3:53 PM
> Ian Paulsen wrote-
> > Here are some sample pages from Greg Paul's
> forthcoming Dino Field Guide:
> >
> > http://press.princeton.edu/chapters/s1_9287.pdf
> Hmm.  Gotta say I'm disappointed.  I loved PDW
> and DA, but this seems far less technical (not that PDW was
> even particularly technical).  No specimen numbers are
> included, so the length and mass estimates are not very
> useful. Still, I was hoping for discussions of individual
> taxa ala PDW, but at most a well known genus might get a
> couple sentences.
> My biggest problem though is that as a field guide, the
> main objective would be to describe and illustrate the
> distinguishing features so that one could identify dinosaur
> species.  But of the 12 taxon entries shown, 8 say
> "insufficient information" or "standard for group x" under
> the anatomical characteristics section.  And these
> aren't nomina dubia either, except perhaps
> Dystrophaeus.  To say Herrerasaurus' anatomy is
> standard for baso-theropods is just wrong.  You can
> even see some of the diagnostic characters used by Sereno
> and Novas in Paul's skeletal reconstruction- opisthopubic
> pelvis, shortened tibia, posterior ischial outline a right
> angle, etc..  It would have been better to discuss or
> list each species' diagnosis, then have skeletal
> reconstructions and/or a few of the most distinctive bones
> illustrated, with lines pointing toward several of the most
> obvious characters.  Then if you hypothetically had a
> complete dinosaur specimen, you could actually use the field
> guide to identify it.  As it is, it's like opening a
> Peterson Fiel
cribed only as having a ruddy breast,
> while the wood thrush, varied thrush and veery are merely
> said to be "standard for songbirds."  As for Bicknell's
> thrush?  Insufficient information.
> Mickey Mortimer    
> _________________________________________________________________
> Hotmail is redefining busy with tools for the New Busy. Get
> more from your inbox.
> http://www.windowslive.com/campaign/thenewbusy?ocid=PID28326::T:WLMTAGL:ON:WL:en-US:WM_HMP:042010_2