Re: Avian origin questioned by John Ruben

[dinoboygraphics@aol.com]

It's not fair to characterize Ruben as the only person publishing such 
papers, nor is it fair to view his entire career in light of his papers 
on bird origins.  Also, while Ruben, Larry Martin, Alan Fedduccia, and 
a few others do seem to organize their responses with one another, it 
probably isn't fair to characterize their collaboration as "an 
organization devoted to denying birds are dinosaurs".

That said, it's true that Ruben and his colleagues have published 
several papers of questionable veracity on the subject, and that these 
papers often seem to have similar flaws, including an apparent lack of 
familiarity with dissenting data (which in this case is the vast 
majority of the data), and claims that do not always follow from the 
data.  In this particular case, the paper quoted by Science Daily does 
not actually make any claims about bird origins; those claims rest 
solely in the press release, which you can read here: 
http://oregonstate.edu/ua/ncs/archives/2009/jun/discovery-raises-new-doubts-about-dinosaur-bird-links

That's right...there isn't any mention at all of birds origination from 
dinosaurs or anywhere else in the paper.  Why Oregon State would 
release a press statement who's main theme are claims not made in the 
actual paper is beyond me (although I'll blame a scientifically 
illiterate PR person taking Ruben's line and not checking the statement 
against anything).  It's even more sad that Science Daily, an 
ostensibly=2
0respectable source of online science news, would simply 
publish the press release more or less wholesale without any additional 
investigation/reporting to a public that doesn't have the means to 
check up.  But that's the reality; the SD article and the press release 
are literally making things up that are not in the peer-reviewed paper. 
 BTW, I complained to SD about their brand of "reporting" and frankly 
I'd encourage other list members who are concerned about the quality of 
science news to do so as well.  A couple of interviews, basic 
familiarity with the subject matter, or even browsing the actual paper 
all would have immediately called into question the wisdom of basing a 
news story entirely around the OSU press release.

That's why it's always important to go back to the original source, and 
you can pass that along to your anti-science acquaintance.

Scott Hartman
Science Director
Wyoming Dinosaur Center
110 Carter Ranch Rd.
Thermopolis, WY 82443
(800) 455-3466 ext. 230
Cell: (307) 921-8333

www.skeletaldrawing.com

-----Original Message-----
From: mkivi@cc.joensuu.fi
To: dinosaur@usc.edu
Sent: Mon, Aug 3, 2009 2:46 pm
Subject: Avian origin questioned by John Ruben






http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/06/090609092055.htmÂ;
Â

The link above was actually sent to me by a creotard - I mean 
creationist who thought this single piece of paper is a proof agains 
evolution.Â



A plaoentologist (known as AronRa in youtube) "friend" of mine 
commented on the article:Â
Â

"Every article trying to deny the ancestry of aves within theropoda are 
written by John Ruben. In the 1990s, Ruben formed an organization 
called B.A.N.D. (Birds Are Not Dinosaurs) for the purpose of denying 
the already mounting evidence to the contrary. Don't ask me why. It 
never made sense. At this point, his argument is already lost. Birds 
definitely ARE dinosaurs, but Ruben is determined never to admit that."Â
Â

Any thoughts?Â

I'd mostly like to know about the credentials of this, Ruben character 
as well as any possible new discoveries on the behalf of theropoda/aves 
connection. The newest udate I have so far is Epidexipteryx hui - the 
protofeathered dinosaur that predates Archaeopteryx sp.Â