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

Re: Dreadnoughtus weight calculation



In a message dated 9/7/14 2:23:16 AM, tijawi@gmail.com writes:

<< I found GSP's post very interesting.  However, it is worth noting

that, from a historical perspective, the name _Dreadnoughtus_ is

perhaps more appropriate than GSP made out. The archetypal dreadnought

(HMS Dreadnought, launched 1906) was a product of the naval arms race

between Great Britain and Germany prior to World War I.  The

Dreadnought was part of a broader British strategy of deterrence - the

importance of having a large, powerful and technologically advanced

fleet to reinforce Great Britain's superiority at sea, rather than

deploying warships as a decisive military force.  Under First Sea Lord

Fisher, the role of the British war fleet was intended to be mostly

defensive - to protect the homeland; guard the British Empire's

strategic ports; and enforce a naval blockade against Germany should

war break out.  As it turned out, the greatest sea-born threat to

Great Britain during World War I turned out to be German U-Boats and

their unrestricted warfare against enemy and neutral shipping.  It was

this that ultimately helped draw the United States into World War I. >>

The above analysis is correct. And I am not particualrly opposed to 
applying dreadnought to sauropod names. It was the way in which Lacovara et al 
did 
so, incl in PR in the science media, that is not in accord with history. Had 
I reviewed the paper I would have done something about that. And the mass 
estimates. 

GSPaul
</HTML>