RE: Pterosaur story

[Danvarner@aol.com]

 tholtz@geol.umd.edu (Thomas R. Holtz, Jr.) writes:


<<  From: owner-dinosaur@usc.edu [mailto:owner-dinosaur@usc.edu]On Behalf Of
> Danvarner@aol.com
>
> National Geographic has a remarkably sloppy story at:
> http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2003/10/1029_031029_pteros
> aurs.html
> Pterosaurs are alternatively dinosaurs and birds.

Dan,

I did see those mistakes: the webpage title ("dinosaur flyers were
sharp-eyed,...") and the line "Bennett said that the orientation of the
semicircular canals in Anhanguera reflect selection for a down-turned
"normal" head position, but he is uncertain what a normal posture was for
this bird".

However, the rest of the time they seem to get it correct: >>

       Those were the parts that bothered me. I can understand or even expect 
it in the mainstream press, but this is National Geographic and part of a 
headline. Some editor should have caught this. DV