[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Subject Index][Author Index]
RE: Koreanosaurus, new burrowing ornithopod [Meta]
> Date: Wed, 20 Oct 2010 22:30:33 -0700
> From: firstname.lastname@example.org
> To: email@example.com
> CC: firstname.lastname@example.org
> Subject: RE: Koreanosaurus, new burrowing ornithopod [Meta]
> Anthony Docimo wrote:
> > so....they can't say "based on what we have, this is who
> > we think are related to _Koreanosaurus_" ?
> Unless _Koreanosaurus_ is included in a phylogenetic analysis, then any
> discussion of its relationships is just hand-waving.
on the contrary. if that were true, then nobody here would be calling it an
(we'd all be terrified of repeating the mistake of confusing a dinosaur with a
turtle (ie Therizinisaurs))
> > yes, I know it would be best to find a dozen full and
> > complete skeletons of _Koreanosaurus_. but -
> But - if every dinosaur had to be known from a dozen complete skeletons
> before we could test its relationships, cladograms would be very small. The
> worse that happens with an incompletely known specimen is that its position
> is weakly supported (in a statistical sense), and/or it can make the overall
> topology more unstable.
we know it's a dinosaur, we know it's an ornithopod, we know it isn't a
maniraptor or pterosaur.
so why can we talk about what it may be similar to, but the