Re: A critique of Sullivan's pachycephalosaur paper,

[David Marjanovic <david.marjanovic@gmx.at>]

----- Original Message -----
From: "Michael Mortimer" <mickey_mortimer111@msn.com>
Sent: Tuesday, June 20, 2006 7:42 AM

> Sullivan's diagnosis for Pachycephalosauridae reads like one of those
> classic 'diagnoses' from the 1950's that lists symplesiomorphic or 
> variable
> characters in addition to synapomorphies.  "Ornithischian dinosaurs with
> thickened, fully-flat
> or incipiently to fully-domed frontoparietals."  So... the thickening is 
> all
> that needs to be mentioned then.  "Supratemporal fenestrae absent to
> well-developed."  Uh... this would exclude which states now?

This is apparently not _intended_ to be a diagnosis (or "definition"). It is 
a description, at best a determination key. "If you see an animal that fits 
this description, it probably is a pachycephalosaurid."

What it could actually be good for is another question...

> [...] detailed evaluations of "Troodon" bexelli and Heishansaurus

Wow!