Re: Dinofest

[luisrey@ndirect.co.uk (luisrey)]

>>>Dinofest was awesome!
>>>Especially Nicolas Geist'
>>>convincing talk on the "so-called
>>>proto-feathers" of Sinosauropteryx.
>>>Yah...collagen fibers.  Why was he
>>>even there?
>>>
>>>Jonathan
>>
>>Please don't be shy... elaborate!! We are starving to hear about that
>>
>>Luis Rey
>>
>    Ok, well to be fair, I am biased toward Phil Currie and other's
>interpretations of the Sinosauropteryx fibers as possible
>proto-feathers.

You are not biased, you just are right...

 And of course I understand he was there to
>present an opposing viewpoint.  Basically, he showed some
>slides of a monitor lizard (and a sea-snake) which had been
>partially dissected with some collagen fibers from the back area
>exposed (they looked to me as if they had been teased into
>an upright position to compare to Sinosauropteryx).

Oh no, not again... how incredibly dull and boring. Not only that, the man
is deaf and blind!

>He stated that this explains what the fibers on Sino are.
>His argument was that after death, as the skin deteriorated,
>small ligaments forced the collagen fibers in Sino to stand erect,
>so arguing that the fibers were underneath the skin.

How many times he has to be repeated that those are not even fibers, but
quill- like spikes? That each one can be isolated (you can see it by merely
using a magnifying glass over a good photograph of the specimen) and you
can see how gently pliable, but solid and hollow and far from the 'fuzzy'
look of wool they are (that 'wool-like' look is the one he shows in his
slides of the collagen tissue). He keeps digging with the same shoehorn.

>Also, he
>argued that the fibers were only present along the midline of the
>body, and not on the sides (Phil Currie's talk which preceded Geist's,
>specifically mentioned fibers preserved on other parts of the body,
>and that they are hollow).


He insists in ignoring that also. And not only that, he ignores the other
two specimens odf Sinosauropteryx (just as Ruben, Jones et al).

>  Geist's argument was not very convincing

How can that be...I'm so surprised!

>it seemed for most of the people in the audience.  He also stated
>that we should look for the most parsimonious explanation, and use
>a null-hypothesis.
> So, he effectively falsified his own hypothesis by his own reasoning.
>Sinosauropteryx (and all other dinosaurs) is not closely
>related to monitor lizards, and it seems an impossibility that even
>if the fibers were collagen that they could end up in such a uniform
>position after death.  Not very parsimonious when there are piles
>of evidence which at worst show a close relationship between
>theropods and birds, and none showing small theropods to have the same
>skin as monitor lizards.


By what you are saying, he has also ignored Protarchaeopteryx, Rahonavis, etc.
And the two Protarchaeopteryx specimens don't have spikes or
protofeathers.They have FEATHERS!

>When questioned after his talk, he tried to escape
>as fast as he could with Larry Martin scrambling to answer
>for him.

I wonder what Larry Martin had to say...

 Also, as a note, Currie pointed out that the birds and Sinos
>found in Liaoning, have their feathers (or feather-like structures)
>preserved as a kind of halo around the body.
> My question, has anyone ever found indisputable (or at least reasonable)
>evidence of collagen fiber preservation which appears
>like that of Sinosauropteryx?

NO. Anybody out there to contradict me?

>And isn't Geist a respiratory physiologist???
>Anyway, 3 cents worth.

And Scipionyx is the last nail to the coffin..


Thank you for the comments. Hope to hear more!

Luis Rey

Visit my website on  http://www.ndirect.co.uk/~luisrey