Tridentinosaurus antiquus (1931) from early Permian in the Alps has now
been discovered not to represent remarkable soft-tissue preservation,
but is mainly painted.-a However, under the paint there are a few poorly preserved bones, so it is, in a fossil.-a The new paper concludes with
"Modern tomographic methods might reveal novel information about the preserved skeleton but, until then, we suggest caution in using T.
antiquus in phylogenetic studies."-a "Caution" is the word for it.
https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/pala.12690
On 2/16/24 4:42 PM, erik simpson wrote:
Tridentinosaurus antiquus (1931) from early Permian in the Alps has
now been discovered not to represent remarkable soft-tissue
preservation, but is mainly painted.-a However, under the paint there
are a few poorly preserved bones, so it is, in a fossil.-a The new
paper concludes with
"Modern tomographic methods might reveal novel information about the
preserved skeleton but, until then, we suggest caution in using T.
antiquus in phylogenetic studies."-a "Caution" is the word for it.
https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/pala.12690
Now that's bizarre. I wonder if the forger's identity could be discovered.
On 2/16/24 5:59 PM, John Harshman wrote:
On 2/16/24 4:42 PM, erik simpson wrote:
Tridentinosaurus antiquus (1931) from early Permian in the Alps has
now been discovered not to represent remarkable soft-tissue
preservation, but is mainly painted.-a However, under the paint there
are a few poorly preserved bones, so it is, in a fossil.-a The new
paper concludes with
"Modern tomographic methods might reveal novel information about the
preserved skeleton but, until then, we suggest caution in using T.
antiquus in phylogenetic studies."-a "Caution" is the word for it.
https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/pala.12690
Now that's bizarre. I wonder if the forger's identity could be
discovered.
I tried Wiki, but there isn't an entry (yet).-a I expect there will be
one before long.-a But I did a little searching, and came across the very relevant gem:
https://pterosaurheresies.wordpress.com/2016/06/10/tridentinosaurus-antiquus-a-glider-ancestor-not-a-protorosaur/
On 2/17/24 8:37 AM, erik simpson wrote:I'd guess that physical paint is easier to spot than good digital
On 2/16/24 5:59 PM, John Harshman wrote:
On 2/16/24 4:42 PM, erik simpson wrote:
Tridentinosaurus antiquus (1931) from early Permian in the Alps has
now been discovered not to represent remarkable soft-tissue
preservation, but is mainly painted.-a However, under the paint there >>>> are a few poorly preserved bones, so it is, in a fossil.-a The new
paper concludes with
"Modern tomographic methods might reveal novel information about the
preserved skeleton but, until then, we suggest caution in using T.
antiquus in phylogenetic studies."-a "Caution" is the word for it.
https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/pala.12690
Now that's bizarre. I wonder if the forger's identity could be
discovered.
I tried Wiki, but there isn't an entry (yet).-a I expect there will be
one before long.-a But I did a little searching, and came across the
very relevant gem:
https://pterosaurheresies.wordpress.com/2016/06/10/tridentinosaurus-antiquus-a-glider-ancestor-not-a-protorosaur/
Let's not bring Peters into it, though all his fakes are apparently sincerely intended. Is digital paint better than physical paint?
On 2/17/24 10:36 AM, John Harshman wrote:
On 2/17/24 8:37 AM, erik simpson wrote:I'd guess that physical paint is easier to spot than good digital
On 2/16/24 5:59 PM, John Harshman wrote:
On 2/16/24 4:42 PM, erik simpson wrote:
Tridentinosaurus antiquus (1931) from early Permian in the Alps has >>>>> now been discovered not to represent remarkable soft-tissue
preservation, but is mainly painted.-a However, under the paint
there are a few poorly preserved bones, so it is, in a fossil.-a The >>>>> new paper concludes with
"Modern tomographic methods might reveal novel information about
the preserved skeleton but, until then, we suggest caution in using >>>>> T. antiquus in phylogenetic studies."-a "Caution" is the word for it. >>>>>
https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/pala.12690
Now that's bizarre. I wonder if the forger's identity could be
discovered.
I tried Wiki, but there isn't an entry (yet).-a I expect there will be
one before long.-a But I did a little searching, and came across the
very relevant gem:
https://pterosaurheresies.wordpress.com/2016/06/10/tridentinosaurus-antiquus-a-glider-ancestor-not-a-protorosaur/
Let's not bring Peters into it, though all his fakes are apparently
sincerely intended. Is digital paint better than physical paint?
"paint".-a Misused AI ought to carry the scientific death penalty.
On 2/17/24 10:36 AM, John Harshman wrote:
On 2/17/24 8:37 AM, erik simpson wrote:I'd guess that physical paint is easier to spot than good digital
On 2/16/24 5:59 PM, John Harshman wrote:
On 2/16/24 4:42 PM, erik simpson wrote:
Tridentinosaurus antiquus (1931) from early Permian in the Alps has
now been discovered not to represent remarkable soft-tissue
preservation, but is mainly painted.-a However, under the paint
there are a few poorly preserved bones, so it is, in a fossil.-a The >>>>> new paper concludes with
"Modern tomographic methods might reveal novel information about
the preserved skeleton but, until then, we suggest caution in using
T. antiquus in phylogenetic studies."-a "Caution" is the word for it. >>>>>
https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/pala.12690
Now that's bizarre. I wonder if the forger's identity could be
discovered.
I tried Wiki, but there isn't an entry (yet).-a I expect there will be
one before long.-a But I did a little searching, and came across the
very relevant gem:
https://pterosaurheresies.wordpress.com/2016/06/10/tridentinosaurus-antiquus-a-glider-ancestor-not-a-protorosaur/
Let's not bring Peters into it, though all his fakes are apparently
sincerely intended. Is digital paint better than physical paint?
"paint".-a Misused AI ought to carry the scientific death penalty.
| Sysop: | Amessyroom |
|---|---|
| Location: | Fayetteville, NC |
| Users: | 65 |
| Nodes: | 6 (0 / 6) |
| Uptime: | 07:55:07 |
| Calls: | 862 |
| Files: | 1,311 |
| Messages: | 264,936 |