Re: Duckbill necks

["Peter Von Sholly" <vonrex@gte.net>]

> From: luisrey <luisrey@ndirect.co.uk>
> To: vonrex@gte.net
> Cc: dinosaur@usc.edu
> Subject: Re: Duckbill necks
> Date: Wednesday, September 02, 1998 2:24 AM
>
I wrote:
> >So why restore ALL hadrosaurs that way, instead of just whatever ones
seem
> >most likely?  And to reiterate, why put dermal spines on ALL sauropods?
> >Some modern iguanas have similar structures and some do not.

Luis wrote:
        > it might be because he likes  the sauropods like that... who cares? 
You
are
> very much free to choose and be as creative as viable  possibilities may
> allow you.

I know you used the word "viable" but to me we are coming dangerously close
to the old "do anything you want with dinosaurs, it doesn't matter because
we can't know for sure anyway" way of doing things.  And these speculative
explorations reverberate endlessly out there.  And I do think it's possible
that Greg simply likes sauropods like that.  But as the next batch of
popular books appears we can expect to see thick hadrosaur necks and tons
of spiny sauropods (along with more one-row-of-plates stegosaurs).  
Who cares?  I care.  I'm tired of unfounded ideas-of-the -moment being
thrown out there carelessly, confusing people and making it seem as though
dinosaur-folk don't know what they're doing.
Amargasaurus, for instance, seems inadequately known to be phonying up
whole skeletons and making toys out of.  What is known is neat and
fascinating and I want to see what this bizarre animal looked like as much
as the next person, but we do not know enough to justify these images.
How about the new "weird sauropod" from Argentina?  Augustia, was it? 
Anybody out there making paintings and model kits of that yet?  Go ahead,
"you are very much free to choose and be as creative as viable possibilites
may allow you".  And nobody can prove you're wrong anyway.