woops! Sorry everybody (: Aaah! The EYE is back!‏ + C

[Sim Koning <simkoning@msn.com>]

I'm such an idiot. I haven't been on this list for so long that I forgot to 
switch my e-mail setting to "show plain text". I've combined all three messages 
into one so I'm not flooding everyone's inbox.

 Sorry =(
-----------------------------------------------------------
-E: Aaah! The EYE is back!‏-

That is my favorite show =) For those of you who've missed it, you can watch 
all the episodes on youtube http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nyN6GQXwPvc

> Date: Sun, 21 Sep 2008 20:28:50 -0700
> From: marksabercat@yahoo.com
> To: ddkrentz@charter.net
> CC: dinosaur@usc.edu
> Subject: Re: Aaah! The EYE is back!
> 
> Turning to the paleofiction genre, there's "Primeval"--really superior 
> animation (the gorgonopsids, dromaeosaurs and "bat creature" from the future 
> are some of the best animation I've seen from any TV series)and intriguing 
> plots. The human characters are almost as engaging, especially the darkly 
> weird Helen. --Mark Hallett 
> 
> 
> --- On Sun, 9/21/08, David Krentz  wrote:
> 
>> From: David Krentz 
>> Subject: Aaah! The EYE is back!
>> To: "dinosaur Mailing List" 
>> Date: Sunday, September 21, 2008, 7:55 PM
>> I just noticed that the TV series called EVOLVE has also
>> adopted 
>> the dreaded EYE in its logo. Enough already! Jeeeeez.
>> These logos 
>> all look like the Eye of Sauron to me.
>> 
>> D
> 
> 
> 
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
RE: Campbell's even crazier than a MANIAC? (archeopteryx climbing)‏ 
From: Sim Koning (simkoning@msn.com) 
Sent: Tue 9/23/08 12:54 AM 
To:  dinosaur@usc.edu 


> Date: Mon, 22 Sep 2008 13:01:30 +1000
> From: dannj@alphalink.com.au
> Subject: RE: Campbell's even crazier than a MANIAC? (archeopteryx climbing)
> To: dinosaur@usc.edu
> 
> Quoting Tim Williams :
> 
>>> Sim Kining wrote:
> 
>>> An eagle's talons are highly specialized for predation, so are the claws of 
>>> large cats, 
>>> neither seem to have a problem climbing around or perching in trees. 
> 
>> Neither of these has claws *as* specialized as the sickle claw (and its
>> supporting digit) of dromaeosaurids. Not even seriemas (cariamas).
> 
> Indeed. Eagle and cat claws tend to have circular or ovoid cross sections (as 
> do the claws of just 
> about any climbing, perching or grasping creatures). The narrow blade-like 
> sickle claws of the 
> larger dromaeosaurs would seem to be ill-suited to standing up to twisting or 
> sideways forces.

http://www.evolutionnyc.com/ImgUpload/P_886549_950527.jpg
 
Cat claws are just as blade like, if not more so, than dromaeosaur claws.
 
 

>> Yeah sure, maybe the sickle-claw of dromaeosaurids was used for climbing,
>> branch-grasping, etc. But it clearly didn't evolve for this purpose. It
>> sounds like a counsel of despair to argue that the sickle-claw was an
>> arboreal tool - especially when there's no elongated, reversed hallux on the
>> other side of the foot.
> 
> Given that those retractable swivel-toes seem to have been designed 
> intentionally to keep the 
> sickle claws clear of the ground, I also doubt they were regularly driven 
> into trees. Perhaps the 
> smaller, less blade-like claws of Dromaeosaurus itself (or Tro-odon for that 
> matter) may have 
> been used as climbing aids on occasions, 
 
>but animals like Velociraptor or Deinonychus probably 
> preserved the claw tip as much as possible for use in hunting. It's best to 
> climb with a sturdy hook, 
> not a narrow blade.

Cats sharpen their claws by digging them into trees. Dromaeosaurs (and other 
theropods) may have done the same.
 
> It begs the question though; are the more 'advanced' dromaeosaurs with the 
> blade-like toe claws 
> decended from earlier climbing animals? Perhaps dromaeosaur ancestors had 
> stouter, chunkier toe 
> claws for climbing, and the lance-like toe claws of the larger and later 
> dromasoesaurs were 
> specialised forms - too specialised to continue being used as climbing aids. 
> 
> How do the toe claws of juvenile Velociraptors compare to those of the 
> adults? If juvies have less 
> blade-like toe claws, then maybe they were used as climbing aids in 
> juveniles, but changed shape 
> as they matured to the point that adults were no longer able to use them for 
> climbing.

  All I can saw is if this friggin dog can do it, I'm sure Dromaeosaurs, with 
their massive hook like claws could pull it off too. 
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i-fOUiDCurk&feature=related

  I'm confused, is this debate about whether or no dromaeosaurs could climb 
trees, or perch on branches? These are two different things. An animal can be 
well adapted for climbing and not be able to perch as birds do. So the issue of 
whether or not dromaeosaurs could perch is rather irrelevant to whether or not 
they could climb trees. Yes, they didn't have a reversed hallux, but they did 
have a giant hook designed to dig into things. Dromaeosaurs also had hands, 
something birds completely lack. Many smaller dromaeosaurs, such as 
archeopteryx, may have simply run up trees. There has been some interesting 
work done on this topic.
 
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2008/01/080123-bird-flight.html