Re: The absurdity, the absurdity (was: Cooperating theropods?)

["Larry Dunn" <larrydunn@hotmail.com>]

From: Jack <jconrad@lib.drury.edu>

>> Yes, that's precisely the problem: the assumption of group behavior.  
>
>Discussing, not assuming, group behavior.  To discuss group behavior 
you
>first look at how the animal would do both with and without group 
behavior
>(at least that is the approach I would take).  Then you decide which 
seems
>most feasible to you.

I'm not adverse to discussing group behavior.  Group behavior seems very 
unlikely based on the evidence and analogies to extant cooperating 
terrestrial vertebrates.

>  Chris has made some very good arguments.  Although
>I am not in complete agreement with his ideas, I feel his position is a
>strong one.  

You see, I disagree.  There's no evidence to support his hypothesis; 
worse, a group of inyellectual constructs without precedent (without 
alluding to hydras and sea lions) are required to all fall into place at 
once for this "piling on of the raptors" idea to work.  

And why go to the trouble when we have evidence of dromaeosaur predation 
that suggests that they preyed upon animals closer to their own size?

>I understand your disgust for the position of assuming pack behavior,

Not disgust, just curiosity. 

I'm not the science student here.  I thought that grad students were 
indoctrinated to leave the in-toto speculation to the lay people and to 
hypothesize based on a rigorous analysis of the facts instead of 
creating farfetched hypotheses (like instinctual, accidental 
cooperation) without any precedent or supporting evidence.

Larry

______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com