Re: BAD vs. BADD (was: Re: Most popular/common dinosaur misconceptions)

[dinoboygraphics@aol.com]

> > Long story short, as a disparity guage, the Linnean
> > rank system tends to work very well.

> It tends not to work at all.

Actually, it works much more poorly than "not at all".  Not at all 
would imply a largely inconsequential hueristic device, but the fact 
that it doesn't in any way accurately measure disparity, but causes 
people to believe it does makes it misleading, sometimes to an almost 
vicsious degree.  I am still asked on a regular basis if a pterosaur or 
theropod with dermal insulation is still a "reptile".  Whether Spotilia 
"knew better" or not he still published and then regurgitated for the 
popular press an idea that can't even be framed when held to a 
phylogenetic framework.  Much of the resistance to dino-fuzz covered 
coelurosaurs and winged non-avian maniraptorans seems to stem from 
Linnean-style typological thinking.  The popular idea that the fossil 
record doesn't show abundant (and I mean *abundant*) transitional forms 
stems from the habbit of lumping them into existing "ranks" (after all, 
if Tiktaalik is a fish and Ventastega a tetrapod, there aren't any 
intermediate forms...!).  The fact that on this very list it was 
claimed that inner ear bones (which are likely homoplastic anyways) and 
fur makes whales, bats, and pyrotheres all mammals, while running with 
slightly less femoral excursion makes extant birds different from 
theropods, shows how badly misleading the system is.

As a gauge of disparity, the Linnean system is an absolute disaster.

Scott Hartman
Science Director
Wyoming Dinosaur Center
110 Carter Ranch Rd.
Thermopolis, WY 82443
(800) 455-3466 ext. 230
Cell: (307) 921-8333

www.skeletaldrawing.com


________________________________________________________________________
Check out AOL.com today. Breaking news, video search, pictures, email 
and IM. All on demand. Always Free.