Re: Fw: late night thoughts: misunderstand what?

[Andreas Johansson <andreasj@gmail.com>]

On 6/17/07, don ohmes <d_ohmes@yahoo.com> wrote:

> ........... I think it unlikely that the first seriously big theropod appeared before or after the first seriously big sauropod (within the margin of error). They probably moved pretty much in lock-step. From the functional perspective, top herbivore/top predator form a predation pair. The fact that the most extreme cases of giantism in both occurred simultaneously in geological time is, in my view, evidence for an arms race

Simultaneous occurence means nothing if you've got non-overlapping
ranges. *Tyrannosaurus* and *Puertasaurus* are both Maastrichtian and
of near extremal size for thero's and sauro's respectively, but found
on different continents. The sauropods actually known from tyrannosaur
turf are, AFAIK, all comparative runts.

> (I term I dislike, but have no immediate substitute for). Further, 
> vulnerability does not equal extinction. Consider the amazingly vulnerable and 
> evolutionarily enigmatic 'possum (American style). Restate your point, and then 
> think about it. If the level of vulnerability required for an arms race was 
> defined by extinction, there could no arms races...  that said, I am more 
> interested in your evidence _against_ selective symbiosis (arms race). Finally! 
> A potential substitute for 'arms race'. Maybe. -- DO

Calling a predator-prey relationship "symbiosis" is perfectly perverse.

--
Andreas Johansson

Why can't you be a non-conformist just like everybody else?