At his The Pterosaur Heresies blog, Dave accused me of "lampooning" his Longisquama reconstruction. Err... what? My coloured drawing, produced for Tet Zoo, is on the right. And on the left is the skeletal reconstruction I based it on - published in 2004 by Dave in a Prehistoric Times article. Ok, so I didn't make the appendages on the head fat enough or long enough. But I'm "lampooning" him? Really? I was trying to be accurate!!
There are editorial blogs (more or less official voice of the organization), staff blogs (personal blogs written by our editors and staff), community blogs, and network blogs (written by independent bloggers and freelancers hired specifically for blogging, either as individuals or as co-bloggers on group blogs).
In the years after World War II, the magazine was in steep decline. In 1948, three partners who were planning on starting a new popular science magazine, to be called The Sciences, instead purchased the assets of the old Scientific American and put its name on the designs they had created for their new magazine. Thus the partners—publisher Gerard Piel, editor Dennis Flanagan, and general manager Donald H. Miller, Jr.—created essentially a new magazine. Miller retired in 1979, Flanagan and Piel in 1984, when Gerard Piel's son Jonathan became president and editor; circulation had grown fifteen-fold since 1948. In 1986, it was sold to the Holtzbrinck group of Germany, which has owned it since.
If you google the name of just about any fossil reptile, synapsid or amphibian (I’m using ‘amphibian’ in the maximally inclusive, enormously vernacular and technically wrong sense), you get numerous hits for ReptileEvolution.com, typically high up or even top in the search results. This goes for image searches as well as for normal ones. And, while it’s understandable that this goes for obscure animals where there’s comparatively little information available online (I tested by googling Silvanerpeton, Kotlassia, Owenetta, Eusaurosphargis, and Helveticosaurus), it goes for comparatively well known ones too (I tested by googling Platyhystrix, Seymouria, Diadectes, Placodus and Coelurosauravus – believe it or not, these are “well known” as fossil tetrapods go).
Pterosaurs have generally been assumed to be egg-layers, an inference based mostly on their hypothesised position among archosaurs. Recent finds of baby pterosaurs preserved within eggs (Chiappe et al. 2004, Ji et al. 2004, Wang & Zhou 2004), and of an egg preserved right next to the pelvis of a particular pterosaur specimen (Lü et al. 2011), provide compelling support for that assumption.
But Dave’s claim that numerous unossified baby pterosaurs are preserved alongside – or on or even in – the bodies of adult specimens is discordant with this, since their ‘presence’ led Dave to argue that pterosaurs were viviparous. After the first baby pterosaur preserved inside an eggshell was discovered, Dave seriously proposed that it represented a miniature kind of pterosaur – he named it Avgodectes pseudembryon – that took to hiding inside broken eggshells
(for this work, Dave relies almost wholly on images from the published literature)
Wow. Really bad case of MeFi not engaging with the article here.
Then I saw Brundlefly's comment, and I was disappointed. Was that kind of personal insult really called for? Furthermore, the comment had no argument. At least there was some logic and internal structure to what DB&B said, even if it was only meant for entertainment calue. What Brundlefly wrote was basically "Well, f--- you."
Nice going, Brundlefly. Way to elevate the tone of the discussion there.
« Older Report finds Penn State president, Paterno... | "...it's better to look at the... Newer »
This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments