[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Subject Index][Author Index]
Re: Dreadnoughtus weight calculation
In a message dated 9/7/14 2:23:16 AM, tijawi@gmail.com writes:
<< I found GSP's post very interesting. However, it is worth noting
that, from a historical perspective, the name _Dreadnoughtus_ is
perhaps more appropriate than GSP made out. The archetypal dreadnought
(HMS Dreadnought, launched 1906) was a product of the naval arms race
between Great Britain and Germany prior to World War I. The
Dreadnought was part of a broader British strategy of deterrence - the
importance of having a large, powerful and technologically advanced
fleet to reinforce Great Britain's superiority at sea, rather than
deploying warships as a decisive military force. Under First Sea Lord
Fisher, the role of the British war fleet was intended to be mostly
defensive - to protect the homeland; guard the British Empire's
strategic ports; and enforce a naval blockade against Germany should
war break out. As it turned out, the greatest sea-born threat to
Great Britain during World War I turned out to be German U-Boats and
their unrestricted warfare against enemy and neutral shipping. It was
this that ultimately helped draw the United States into World War I. >>
The above analysis is correct. And I am not particualrly opposed to
applying dreadnought to sauropod names. It was the way in which Lacovara et al
did
so, incl in PR in the science media, that is not in accord with history. Had
I reviewed the paper I would have done something about that. And the mass
estimates.
GSPaul
</HTML>