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

RE: Interesting, veeery interesting



  I can only say that Paul has a certain grudge against the former Weimar 
Republic that he refuses to let go or act on in a form more fitting of 
academical pursuit or dispensation of knowledge. I can say a lot more that 
would be less polite about the habits that might make one use these terms on a 
paleo and science listserv, but that doesn't belong on this one.

  I call Paul to account: Why was it necessary to use these bigoted remarks 
when doing without them would have been sufficient and less incendiary?

Cheers,

  Jaime A. Headden
  The Bite Stuff (site v2)
  http://qilong.wordpress.com/

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


"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)


----------------------------------------
> Date: Thu, 29 Sep 2011 09:50:29 +0100
> From: mrvivianallen@googlemail.com
> To: heinrich.mallison@googlemail.com
> CC: dinosaur@usc.edu
> Subject: 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.
>
> Viv
>
> 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>
> >>
> >