Re:Flights of Fancy (was Duckbill necks)

[luisrey@ndirect.co.uk (luisrey)]

>I did think of something to argue about:  these flights of fancy are fine
>as long as they are not put forth as science.  And that's the problem.
>Should we just put armor and dermal spines willy nilly on all sauropods
>because some may have one (or maybe both) of these features?


I insist: why not? That's the only hard evidence we have!

  Go ahead, but
>you may be proven dead wrong at some later date and you can't just go back
>and change things once they'er out there.

If we don't risk what's the point to make any reconstruction anyway? Greg
Paul put everything at a stake when he feathered dromeaosaurs... maybe he
will be proven wrong one day! Remember Daniel C. Dennett talking about
"invisible ladders" in science... sometimes you reach a point of relative
certainty and looking back it might be that the 'theoretical ladder' that
took you where you stand so securely now was in reality invisible, nonsense
or simply wrong. Science finds solutions in a complex web of paths that
most of the time will be proven wrong in one way or another.

 > And getting the anatomy right is
>not so simple when dealing with so many unknowns.

We are juggling with some certainties and an enormous amount of
probabilities and guess work.
"Absolute certainty" is for religious people...and it's a chimaera.

 >Your point about "absence of evidence not
>being evidence of absence" is well taken.  But I think it can be taken too
>far.

Everything can be taken too far. Knowing the art of backpedaling in front
of the evidence is a characteristic of wise scientists. However, in matters
of artwork and reconstruction of dinosaurs, if we can't 'correct' errors on
old pieces of artwork ar least we can seen our paitings with some nostalgia
and as part of the developmental history of paleontology.
But never, NEVER  fear to risk in your reconstructions if you are convinced
and have studied the matter thoroughly. You might even have a real good
guess and hit the right spot one day... and that's even more rewarding.



P.S. About Stegosaurus tail: Tracy Ford published a good article in
Prehistoric Times demonstrating why the tail was rather stiff and raised in
the correct angle it's currently reconstructed... it's got to do among
other things with the plates... but check the article out for the details.


Luis Rey

Visit my website on http://www.ndirect.co.uk/~luisrey