Re: Selected quotes from Qiang et al......-Reply (come, join the bandwagon)

["Jonathan" <spockjr@email.msn.com>]

>Spockjr said:
>
>I believe it is only the premaxillary teeth of Coelophysis
>which are unserrated.  Not sure about Compsognathus.
>
>Larry probably needs more than a sleeping pill.  Perhaps
>a refresher course in comparative anatomy?
>
>>To which I reply:
>>
>>This is exactly what we need! Come on, people, let's have more of these
>>ad hominem attacks!  I'm sure the cause of science is advanced by light
>>years by stuff like this.  The fact is that A. Feduccia and Larry Martin
>>know more comparative anatomy than just about all the people on this list
>>put together.  Science needs their skepticism much more than it needs
>>bandwagoneering

>>Wiwaxia

To which I counter-reply:

You are right (to some degree), people like Martin and Feduccia
do actually encourage more thorough analysis of data and do deserve
some credit as scientists (although I do have doubts about
them knowing more comparative anatomy than just about
all the people on this list).  It is a bit frustrating
however, because unfortunately the media likes controversy
and the only reason the general public is not more aware of
the "extreme probability" that birds ARE dinosaurs is because these
two gentlemen refuse to accept it.  Their hypotheses are mainly
based on negative evidence and they don't use comparative methods,
is that really such good science? Until they come up with some "actual
data" to support their conclusions, I will find it difficult to respect
their
opinions on bird evolution on the same level as others.  The digit
homology thing is inconclusive.
 Also, they are no less smug about their own conclusions than we
(birds are dinosaurs people) are.