Re: New Refs

[NJPharris@aol.com]

In a message dated 11/2/99 6:13:04 PM Pacific Standard Time, 
LOKICORP@compuserve.com writes:

> Barrick, R.E. and Showers, W.J.  1999.  Thermophysiology and biology of
>  _Giganotosaurus_:  comparison with _Tyrannosaurus_.  _Palaeontologica
>  Electronica_ 2(2).

I skimmed through this, and I don't get it.  Barrick and Showers present all 
this evidence for homeothermy in both _Gig_ and _Tyrannosaurus_, and remark 
that both would fall on or near the regression line for metabolic rate for 
birds of their size, yet they come to the conclusion that both were somehow 
intermediate in metabolic regime.  Where do they get this?  If they had 
metabolic rates that would be expected from modern birds of their mass, what 
the heck is wrong with saying they were endothermic/tachymetabolic, plain and 
simple?

--Nick "watching helplessly as his state flushes itself down the toilet on 
election night, but that's a story for another discussion group" Pharris