[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Subject Index][Author Index]
Re: Most dinosaurs were scaly
On Tue, December 31, 2013 1:56 am, Jura wrote:
> I'm not sure how often hair is preserved in these sediments,
Here's the answer: it essentially NEVER does.
> but even so,
> naked skin is not scaly skin. It is what is found underneath/between
> scales, hair, and feathers. We are comparing apples and oranges here.
No, we aren't. Again, no one is saying that large dinosaurs were
scale-less. Furthermore, I don't know that people are arguing that they
are PRIMARILY scaleless.
But that is not the same as saying they are fuzz-free.
In any sediment that isn't a lacustrine/lagoonal sediment, you can only
record a "?" for the presence of fuzz. You can't record a "0" (unless you
have 100% body coverage, which none of the mummies have), nor can your
record a "1". Just a "?".
> That said, I am in agreement with you, Matt, and others in that a better
> understanding of how sedimentology affects integument preservation would
> prove most useful. It is something that is sorely needed now that
> preserved soft tissue has become more prevalent in the fossil record.
Thomas R. Holtz, Jr.
Email: email@example.com Phone: 301-405-4084
Office: Centreville 1216
Senior Lecturer, Vertebrate Paleontology
Dept. of Geology, University of Maryland
Faculty Director, Science & Global Change Program, College Park Scholars
Mailing Address: Thomas R. Holtz, Jr.
Department of Geology
Building 237, Room 1117
University of Maryland
College Park, MD 20742 USA