Re: Thoughts on the new Czerkas book (long)

[Dinogeorge@aol.com]

In a message dated 9/10/02 10:46:38 PM EST, dino.hunter@cox.net writes:

<< a) Theropods (or "theropods" or whatever punctuation you put around
 them)
 are not prohibited from climbing by definition!!! That was a remarkably odd
 statement!<<
 
 Really? I find it right on the money. Other than myself, George, Greg,
 Sankar, what other paleontologist believe theropods could climb? There's a
 ton more palaeontologist don't believe they could climb. >>

The point is not whether or not there were climbing theropods, the point is 
that Steve's writing made it sound as if he thought theropods were prohibited 
from being climbing animals by definition--that is, that theropods were 
>defined< as non-climbing dinosaurs. Of course, that's nonsense, but I dunno 
what Steve's thoughts really are in this situation. The physical >writing< in 
the papers is worse than the science, it seems to me.