Re: Pelvis

[Caique Soares Mulatinho <ephodes@gmail.com>]

David,


I must ask for excuses when I used "lies"... however, I still find
that much speculation in pterosaurs phylogeny exists. I know that we
have little material to work with, after all they are discovered
random. in that u spoke on ontogenia, I agree, but has much
exaggerated and unknown features between what is ontogenetic and
character.

2007/5/23, David Marjanovic <david.marjanovic@gmx.at>:
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Caique Soares Mulatinho" <ephodes@gmail.com>
> Sent: Tuesday, May 22, 2007 8:12 PM
>
> > infact... i agree with some of your ideas
> >
> > but How can we compare when doing a clad , when we have diferent
> > ontogenetic stages betwin  them...
>
> We must make sure that the characters we want to compare don't change with
> ontogeny. If they do, we must code them as unknown in juveniles or neotenous
> individuals (Wiens et al. 2005, Systematic Biology). Alternatively, we can
> make sure that we only compare adults.
>
> > hypotheses and hypotheses
> >
> > I think we should be more realistic when writing about especulate
> > philogeny.
> >
> > why do we create so many lies on scientific papers?
> >
> > guys lets wake up , before we fall from bed.
>
> We don't speculate anymore, we make hypotheses and test them.
>
> And what do you mean by "lies"?!?
>
> By the way, there is no separate paper on pterosaur pelves, but of course
> all phylogenetic analyses of Pterosauria use characters from the pelvis as
> well as from the rest of the skeleton.