Re:Gilgamesh and US DINOS

[NEIL CLARK <NCLARK@museum.gla.ac.uk>]

> The fish was disected and there was no indication that it had 
> evolved for a land enviroment, and gave no indication to tell us how 
a fish 
> became an amphibian.
> 

What?  Just as an lizard when dissected, probably doesn't give us 
any indication of how a lizard became a mammal!.... probably 
because it never did.  A bit of a chicken and egg story.  The egg came 
first because the parent non-chickens produced an egg containing a 
mutation that developed into a chicken.  In the same way, I wouldn't 
expect any extant animal to give any physical evidence of mutations 
that evidently didn't happen in their direct line.  (For mutation read 
any equivalent evolutionary developmental concept applicable to 
your own pet theory (of which there are many variations on details)).

Does this make sense?  And where are the dinosaurs in this?

I will be in Washington from the 3rd August and hope to visit the new 
exhibition on dinosaurs in New York as well as the Smithsonian while 
I am over.  I will be bringing a replica of the Scottish caudal vertebra 
with me to compare with some of the specimens there.  I also hope to 
write a short piece for the UK branch of the Dinosaur Society on the 
exhibitions, so if there is anyone from these establishment listening 
in, can I have a contact please?

Neil