tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-879226427561095229.post3150134216114359070..comments2024-02-10T20:36:43.004+11:00Comments on Duae Quartunciae: The Evolution of Wingssylashttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10594421176931832170noreply@blogger.comBlogger6125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-879226427561095229.post-7235627180418744852007-06-05T09:11:00.000+10:002007-06-05T09:11:00.000+10:00Larry Moran beat me to it. See Did Dinosaurs Have ...Larry Moran beat me to it. See <A HREF="http://sandwalk.blogspot.com/2007/06/did-dinosaurs-have-feathers.html" REL="nofollow">Did Dinosaurs Have Feathers?</A>. This is about the paper that SteveF mentions. Quoting Kevin Padian: <I>"It is appalling that Proceedings B chose to publish this nonsense."</I><BR/><BR/>That was pretty much the reaction I had on looking at the paper, though not quite so strong. They seemed to focus on just one fossil, and trying to resurrect an unusual interpretation, and ignoring a mountain of other evidence across a range of fossils where feather impressions are far less ambiguous.sylashttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10594421176931832170noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-879226427561095229.post-33367291738995993752007-06-03T22:43:00.000+10:002007-06-03T22:43:00.000+10:00Yes, there was also some scepticism on the IIDB th...Yes, there was also some scepticism on the IIDB thread with Dlx2 (who is some sort of palaeontologist, quite possibly dino) making some interesting arguments. However, the best point (IMO) was made by Martin Brazeau: <BR/><BR/>"Yeah, I think therein lies the key point. Dinosaurs aren't the only things found in the Liaoning beds. There are heaps of other reptiles, amphibians, birds, fishes, etc. If their argument follows, then there should be plenty of apparently feathered non-dinosaurs. There are none."<BR/><BR/>Simple and elegant and bloody annoying that I didn't think of it!<BR/><BR/>As for Feduccia softening his approach, actually I was wondering a similar thing. In the press releases accompanying the paper, one quote was:<BR/><BR/>"Lingham-Soliar's team do not take issue with the theory itself"<BR/><BR/>Given that Feduccia was part of the team, perhaps this could be taken to imply a bit of softening up? Or more likely just crappy journalism.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-879226427561095229.post-82642595095877442062007-06-01T12:20:00.000+10:002007-06-01T12:20:00.000+10:00Thanks, Steve. I had not seen that paper... but it...Thanks, Steve. I had not seen that paper... but it is also relevant to <I>another</I> paper I have been looking at.<BR/><BR/>Your paper is <I>"A new Chinese specimen indicates that ‘protofeathers’ in the Early Cretaceous theropod dinosaur Sinosauropteryx are degraded collagen fibres"</I>, by T. Lingham-Soliar1, Alan Feduccia and Xiaolin Wang, in Proc. R. Soc. B; (2007) published on-line doi:10.1098/rspb.2007.0352.<BR/><BR/>This paper was evicerated by the folks at the dino mailing list. See the <A HREF="http://dml.cmnh.org/2007May/msg00382.html" REL="nofollow">message on May 23</A> and following. If their criticisms have any merit then the paper is badly flawed. Alan Feduccia is somewhat notorious in this whole area, as a longstanding skeptic about the association between birds and theropods, in spite of all evidence to the contrary. He is in danger of crossing the line from maverick to crank. A bit presumptuous of me, as paleontology is an area in which I am particularly weak. I'm relying very much on interpretations by others. But I have been contemplating a blog post speculating that Feduccia might be softening his stance somewhat. This latest paper suggests maybe not so much. But basically, don't go betting the farm on the paper's conclusions.sylashttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10594421176931832170noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-879226427561095229.post-43887432496001407872007-05-31T03:36:00.000+10:002007-05-31T03:36:00.000+10:00Hey Sylas,You might like to check out a thread I j...Hey Sylas,<BR/><BR/>You might like to check out a thread I just started over at IIDB on the evolution of flight. <BR/><BR/>http://www.iidb.org/vbb/showthread.php?t=208970<BR/><BR/>It was motivated by this recent paper which is very relevant to your blog post:<BR/><BR/>http://www.pubs.royalsoc.ac.uk/media/proceedings_b/RSPB20070352.pdf<BR/><BR/>Cheers<BR/><BR/>SteveAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-879226427561095229.post-28384289279898086062007-05-14T16:22:00.000+10:002007-05-14T16:22:00.000+10:00If you like this, check out also Another Booboo Fr...If you like this, check out also <A HREF="http://dododreams.blogspot.com/2007/05/another-booboo-from-babu.html" REL="nofollow">Another Booboo From Babu</A> at "Thoughts in a Haystack". John Pieret holds up Babu G. Ranganathan of the Bob Jones University for some well deserved ridicule. Babu makes precisely the kind of shallow and ignorant comments about half wings that is so utterly demolished by the fossil evidence I have described here.sylashttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10594421176931832170noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-879226427561095229.post-994586300897654332007-05-04T07:29:00.000+10:002007-05-04T07:29:00.000+10:00Good post. You should submit it to one of these n...Good post. You should submit it to one of these new fangled carnival thingies. Get a bit of traffic going.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com