[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Subject Index][Author Index]
>When I read through the archives I came accross an abundance >of messages
that were highly critical of not only Dr. >Chatterjee and protoavis, but of
the idea that birds are not
>living dinosaurs in general. These posts did nothing to state >the merrits
of their own case, or even to evaluate the new >evidence objectively.
By their very nature, online discussions must proceed by relatively concise
exchanges, which means that it simply is not practical to restate basic
positions each and every time a comment is made. The *evidence* for
dinosaur-bird origins is compelling, and there simply has been no "new
evidence" to the contrary. New arguments from old evidence reinterpreted (and
possibly misinterpreted) do not constitute new evidence.
Caitlin R. Kiernan