Re: Anatomical directions for decribing coracoids

[don ohmes <d_ohmes@yahoo.com>]

All things considered, I couldn't agree more. 

Don

----- Original Message ----
From: Mike Taylor <mike@indexdata.com>
To: dinosaur@usc.edu
Sent: Monday, September 24, 2007 8:54:06 AM
Subject: Anatomical directions for decribing coracoids

Mike Taylor writes:
 > Many different sets of directions have been used to describe
 > coracoids, with the edge furthest from the scapular articulation
 > having been variously described as median (e.g. Seeley, 1882),
 > inferior (Riggs, 1904), anteromedial (Powell, 1992), distal (Curry
 > Rogers, 2001) and anterior (Upchurch et al., 2004), and the
 > designation of the other directions varying similarly.  Is any
 > consensus emerging in this area, or should I just pick whichever one I
 > like most?

I can't _believe_ that no-one is sufficiently turned on by as sexy a
topic as this to get a good thread going.  Instead, there you all are
over there talking about feathered raptors and stuff, as though you
were an issue of Nature or something.  While right here, before your
eyes, the infinitely more important and exciting topic of coracoid
anatomical-nomenclature orientation withers and dies.  It's a
disgrace, I tell you.

 _/|_     ___________________________________________________________________
/o ) \/  Mike Taylor    <mike@indexdata.com>    http://www.miketaylor.org.uk
)_v__/\  "Do I understand you correctly, Professor Groves?  Surely you're
     not advancing the astonishing theory that the mentality of
     Neanderthal man compares favourably with that organ which
     ten million years of evolution has developed in his modern
     counterpart?" -- dialogue from "The Neanderthal Man".