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

Re: Interesting, veeery interesting

Is this kind of casual racism ('krauts' etc) acceptable on a public,
international forum? You guys may well have had the kind of personal
relationship where such a thing was taken as an affectionate term, but
I'm not sure that makes it cool to sling it around like that.

Also, Heinrich - Godwin's law is pretty much nonsense. As any
discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving ANY
topic approaches 1. It's the old infinite monkeys, infinite
typewriters thought experiment wearing a different hat.


On 29 September 2011 06:22, Heinrich Mallison
<heinrich.mallison@googlemail.com> wrote:
> Godwin says whoever says you're wrong has already won the argument :p
> On Thu, Sep 29, 2011 at 2:22 AM,  <GSP1954@aol.com> wrote:
>> I know of three complete brachiosaur scapula coracoids from the Tendarguru
>> (BMNH 5937 and HMN Ki24 don't know new catalog # of latter if there is one)
>> & Morrison (BYU 9462). In all three the coracoid is small relative to the
>> scapula. At least it seems so in Migeod's quarry map of 5937 which does get
>> the overall size of the 2200 mm scapcoracoid about right. In both of the 
>> other
>> two the scapular distal tip to glenoid scap-coracoid contact/coracoid
>> antero-post length is high at about 3.25 because the coracoid is small. Of 
>> these
>> three 9462 (Jensen's Ultrasaurus) is the largest and the coracoid is about
>> 650 mm long (again that's antero-posterior).
>> Riggs states the coracoid assigned to the holotype B altithorax is 870 mm
>> and that is close to the measurement from the figure, so its a big momma even
>> when compared to the ilium of the holotype as in Rigg's Pl LXXV. If the
>> scapula/coracoid length ratio is the same as in the others then the combined
>> scapcoracoid was some 3250 mm.
>> Let us curse the from what I know fascist Janensch. He states that the
>> coracoid of the B. brancai lectotype 2181(ex S II) is 840 mm, but the figure
>> seems to indicate a much smaller element. What, you can't count on even the 
>> old
>> Krauts to get these things right? Jeez. I am not sure what is in the
>> mounted skeleton, but the right element does match the original element in 
>> form,
>> and there is no way that is anywhere close to 840 mm, it is more like 620 (if
>> someone has an direct measurement of this element please let me know).
>> In fig 4 at www.miketaylor.org.uk/dino/brachio/extras.html the 2181
>> coracoid measures 710 mm long which I suspect is at least15% too large, and 
>> the
>> supposed B altithorax coraocid is 850 which may be a tad small, so I don't
>> think the size comparison is correct.
>> Note that in the composite B altithorax skeleton incl Taylor's in which
>> 9462 is scaled in the coracoid is just 575 mm. Try to insert the 870 mm
>> coraocid and it just don't fit in well.
>> So I am sticking to the conclusion that the supposed B altithorax holotype
>> coracoid is way too big for it to be assumed to be part of the rest of the
>> skeleton.
>> GSPaul
>> </HTML>