Re: Albertaceratops (simpson's bi-annual b*tch about dino naming)

[David Marjanovic <david.marjanovic@gmx.at>]

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Nick" <nick.gardner@gmail.com>
Sent: Wednesday, February 21, 2007 7:01 AM

> I am in awe that there has been virtually no discussion at all on any
> other aspect of this paper other than the choice in naming.

I, for one, haven't read the paper yet... :-]

> "Postcranial characters are excluded because 1) the two ceratopsid
> subfamilies are diagnosed almost exclusively on cranial characters;

Maybe they shouldn't be. Just guessing based on other examples of 
craniocentrism.

> 2) complete postcranial material is even less well known for
> some taxa than is the cranial material;

Missing data is not something to be afraid of.

> I suppose overall, I'm finding myself continually dismayed by
> how little it seems that ornithischian phylogenetics are progressing
> compared to other dinosaur groups that shall not be named.

I don't know what Richard Butler is doing; you may have to do the analyses 
yourself... would make a nice Ph.D. thesis topic...