[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Subject Index][Author Index]

Re: Missing Link?

To: <birdbooker@zipcon.net>
Subject: Re: Missing Link?
From: "K and T Dykes" <ktdykes@arcor.de>
Date: Wed, 14 Oct 2009 19:48:20 +0200
Authentication-results: msg-ironport2.usc.edu; dkim=neutral (message not signed) header.i=none
Cc: <dinosaur@usc.edu>
References: <Pine.LNX.4.58L0.0910141032230.356@zipcon.net>
Reply-to: ktdykes@arcor.de
Sender: owner-DINOSAUR@usc.edu

<<I have seen a number of press stories recently with the term Missing Linkused in the headline or elsewhere in the story. Does using that term botherPaleontologists? I recall reading somewhere that the term is inaccurate.>>

It certainly shouldn't be taken as fully accurate for something somebody'sjust found. Not, that is, assuming they didn't somehow lose it again. Evenso, in such a case, I suppose that could be accurately termed amissing-found-missing link.

References:
- Missing Link?
  - From: Ian Paulsen <birdbooker@zipcon.net>