On Wed, 17 Apr 2024 20:38:47 -0400, Popping Mad <rainbow@colition.gov>
wrote:
https://www.wsj.com/science/largest-marine-reptile-sea-dragon-whale-a527269f?mod=wknd_pos1
The above link requires a subscription in order to read it. AnotherAs usual, the pop articles do what they can to inflate is subject, but
article about the discovery of Ichthyotitan severnensis appears here:
<https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/remains-what-could-largest-marine-32609308>
and here:
<https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0300289>
On 4/22/24 12:05 AM, jillery wrote:
On Wed, 17 Apr 2024 20:38:47 -0400, Popping Mad <rainbow@colition.gov>As usual, the pop articles do what they can to inflate is subject, but
wrote:
https://www.wsj.com/science/largest-marine-reptile-sea-dragon-whale-a527269f?mod=wknd_pos1
The above link requires a subscription in order to read it.-a Another
article about the discovery of Ichthyotitan severnensis appears here:
<https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/remains-what-could-largest-marine-32609308>
and here:
<https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0300289>
this critter is definitely comparable to the biggest ichthyosaurs known.
On 4/22/24 11:47 AM, erik simpson wrote:
On 4/22/24 12:05 AM, jillery wrote:
On Wed, 17 Apr 2024 20:38:47 -0400, Popping Mad <rainbow@colition.gov>this critter is definitely comparable to the biggest ichthyosaurs known.
wrote:
https://www.wsj.com/science/largest-marine-reptile-sea-dragon-whale-a527269f?mod=wknd_pos1
The above link requires a subscription in order to read it.-a Another
article about the discovery of Ichthyotitan severnensis appears here:
<https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/remains-what-could-largest-marine-32609308>
and here:
<https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0300289> >> As usual, the pop articles do what they can to inflate is subject, but
It is not every day the WSJ gives space to fossil discoveries.
On 4/25/24 06:29, Popping Mad wrote:
On 4/22/24 11:47 AM, erik simpson wrote:
On 4/22/24 12:05 AM, jillery wrote:
On Wed, 17 Apr 2024 20:38:47 -0400, Popping Mad <rainbow@colition.gov> >>>> wrote:As usual, the pop articles do what they can to inflate is subject, but
https://www.wsj.com/science/largest-marine-reptile-sea-dragon-whale-a527269f?mod=wknd_pos1
The above link requires a subscription in order to read it.-a Another
article about the discovery of Ichthyotitan severnensis appears here:
<https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/remains-what-could-largest-marine-32609308>
and here:
<https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0300289>
this critter is definitely comparable to the biggest ichthyosaurs known.
It is not every day the WSJ gives space to fossil discoveries.
Well you know if there were one Plesiosaur, there might be more
than one.-a And in but a blink of an eye in geologic time Scotland
may have been covered with a lot of glaciers.
Nonetheless if this article is paywalled, the articles showing
plesiosaurs in the Great Glen getting tossed a few fish while
in some of those locks may be less expensive.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caledonian_Canal
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Glen
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/River_Ness
On 4/26/24 12:35 PM, trolidous wrote:
On 4/25/24 06:29, Popping Mad wrote:If only Nessie were a Ichthyosaur!-a I'll drink an Ichthyosaur Pale Ale
On 4/22/24 11:47 AM, erik simpson wrote:
On 4/22/24 12:05 AM, jillery wrote:
On Wed, 17 Apr 2024 20:38:47 -0400, Popping Mad <rainbow@colition.gov> >>>>> wrote:As usual, the pop articles do what they can to inflate is subject, but >>>> this critter is definitely comparable to the biggest ichthyosaurs
https://www.wsj.com/science/largest-marine-reptile-sea-dragon-whale-a527269f?mod=wknd_pos1
The above link requires a subscription in order to read it.-a Another >>>>> article about the discovery of Ichthyotitan severnensis appears here: >>>>>
<https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/remains-what-could-largest-marine-32609308>
and here:
<https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0300289>
known.
It is not every day the WSJ gives space to fossil discoveries.
Well you know if there were one Plesiosaur, there might be more
than one.-a And in but a blink of an eye in geologic time Scotland
may have been covered with a lot of glaciers.
Nonetheless if this article is paywalled, the articles showing
plesiosaurs in the Great Glen getting tossed a few fish while
in some of those locks may be less expensive.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caledonian_Canal
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Glen
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/River_Ness
to it.
On 4/26/24 14:27, erik simpson wrote:
On 4/26/24 12:35 PM, trolidous wrote:
On 4/25/24 06:29, Popping Mad wrote:If only Nessie were a Ichthyosaur!-a I'll drink an Ichthyosaur Pale Ale
On 4/22/24 11:47 AM, erik simpson wrote:
On 4/22/24 12:05 AM, jillery wrote:
On Wed, 17 Apr 2024 20:38:47 -0400, Popping MadAs usual, the pop articles do what they can to inflate is subject, but >>>>> this critter is definitely comparable to the biggest ichthyosaurs
<rainbow@colition.gov>
wrote:
https://www.wsj.com/science/largest-marine-reptile-sea-dragon-whale-a527269f?mod=wknd_pos1
The above link requires a subscription in order to read it.-a Another >>>>>> article about the discovery of Ichthyotitan severnensis appears here: >>>>>>
<https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/remains-what-could-largest-marine-32609308>
and here:
<https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0300289>
known.
It is not every day the WSJ gives space to fossil discoveries.
Well you know if there were one Plesiosaur, there might be more
than one.-a And in but a blink of an eye in geologic time Scotland
may have been covered with a lot of glaciers.
Nonetheless if this article is paywalled, the articles showing
plesiosaurs in the Great Glen getting tossed a few fish while
in some of those locks may be less expensive.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caledonian_Canal
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Glen
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/River_Ness
to it.
So cetaceans can not easily get into our out of the Loch?
On 4/26/24 12:35 PM, trolidous wrote:<rainbow@colition.gov>
On 4/25/24 06:29, Popping Mad wrote:
On 4/22/24 11:47 AM, erik simpson wrote:
On 4/22/24 12:05 AM, jillery wrote:
On Wed, 17 Apr 2024 20:38:47 -0400, Popping Mad
If only Nessie were a Ichthyosaur! I'll drink an Ichthyosaur Pale Alewrote:As usual, the pop articles do what they can to inflate is subject, but
https://www.wsj.com/science/largest-marine-reptile-sea-dragon-whale-a527269f?mod=wknd_pos1
The above link requires a subscription in order to read it. Another
article about the discovery of Ichthyotitan severnensis appears here:
<https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/remains-what-could-largest-marine-32609308>
and here:
<https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0300289>
this critter is definitely comparable to the biggest ichthyosaurs
known.
It is not every day the WSJ gives space to fossil discoveries.
Well you know if there were one Plesiosaur, there might be more
than one. And in but a blink of an eye in geologic time Scotland
may have been covered with a lot of glaciers.
Nonetheless if this article is paywalled, the articles showing
plesiosaurs in the Great Glen getting tossed a few fish while
in some of those locks may be less expensive.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caledonian_Canal
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Glen
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/River_Ness
to it.
On 4/26/24 14:27, erik simpson wrote:
On 4/26/24 12:35 PM, trolidous wrote:here:
On 4/25/24 06:29, Popping Mad wrote:
On 4/22/24 11:47 AM, erik simpson wrote:
On 4/22/24 12:05 AM, jillery wrote:
On Wed, 17 Apr 2024 20:38:47 -0400, Popping Mad <rainbow@colition.gov>
wrote:
https://www.wsj.com/science/largest-marine-reptile-sea-dragon-whale-a527269f?mod=wknd_pos1
The above link requires a subscription in order to read it.-a Another
article about the discovery of Ichthyotitan severnensis appears
butAs usual, the pop articles do what they can to inflate is subject,
<https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/remains-what-could-largest-marine-32609308>
and here:
<https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0300289>
If only Nessie were a Ichthyosaur!-a I'll drink an Ichthyosaur Pale Alethis critter is definitely comparable to the biggest ichthyosaurs
known.
It is not every day the WSJ gives space to fossil discoveries.
Well you know if there were one Plesiosaur, there might be more
than one.-a And in but a blink of an eye in geologic time Scotland
may have been covered with a lot of glaciers.
Nonetheless if this article is paywalled, the articles showing
plesiosaurs in the Great Glen getting tossed a few fish while
in some of those locks may be less expensive.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caledonian_Canal
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Glen
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/River_Ness
to it.
So I did a little surfing on this on Wikipedia.
What are the odds.
The least common ancestor of the Ichtyosaurs and
something else was a:
species of sauropsida
species of synapsida
synapsida and sauropsida are closer to each other than
they are to ichthyosauria
ichthyosauria are actually derived from amphibians
Do you have any inside information from all of those
paywalled technical journals?
On 4/26/24 14:27, erik simpson wrote:
On 4/26/24 12:35 PM, trolidous wrote:here:
On 4/25/24 06:29, Popping Mad wrote:
On 4/22/24 11:47 AM, erik simpson wrote:
On 4/22/24 12:05 AM, jillery wrote:
On Wed, 17 Apr 2024 20:38:47 -0400, Popping Mad <rainbow@colition.gov>
wrote:
https://www.wsj.com/science/largest-marine-reptile-sea-dragon-whale-a527269f?mod=wknd_pos1
The above link requires a subscription in order to read it.-a Another
article about the discovery of Ichthyotitan severnensis appears
butAs usual, the pop articles do what they can to inflate is subject,
<https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/remains-what-could-largest-marine-32609308>
and here:
<https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0300289>
If only Nessie were a Ichthyosaur!-a I'll drink an Ichthyosaur Pale Alethis critter is definitely comparable to the biggest ichthyosaurs
known.
It is not every day the WSJ gives space to fossil discoveries.
Well you know if there were one Plesiosaur, there might be more
than one.-a And in but a blink of an eye in geologic time Scotland
may have been covered with a lot of glaciers.
Nonetheless if this article is paywalled, the articles showing
plesiosaurs in the Great Glen getting tossed a few fish while
in some of those locks may be less expensive.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caledonian_Canal
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Glen
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/River_Ness
to it.
So I did a little surfing on this on Wikipedia.
What are the odds.
The least common ancestor of the Ichtyosaurs and
something else was a:
species of sauropsida
species of synapsida
synapsida and sauropsida are closer to each other than
they are to ichthyosauria
ichthyosauria are actually derived from amphibians
Do you have any inside information from all of those
paywalled technical journals?
On 4/30/24 10:47 AM, trolidan wrote:
On 4/26/24 14:27, erik simpson wrote:It would help a lot if you could actually cite the sources for these
On 4/26/24 12:35 PM, trolidous wrote:<rainbow@colition.gov>
On 4/25/24 06:29, Popping Mad wrote:
On 4/22/24 11:47 AM, erik simpson wrote:
On 4/22/24 12:05 AM, jillery wrote:
On Wed, 17 Apr 2024 20:38:47 -0400, Popping Mad
https://www.wsj.com/science/largest-marine-reptile-sea-dragon-whale-a527269f?mod=wknd_pos1wrote:
Another
The above link requires a subscription in order to read it.
here:article about the discovery of Ichthyotitan severnensis appears
<https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/remains-what-could-largest-marine-32609308>
<https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0300289> >> -a>>>> As usual, the pop articles do what they can to inflate is
and here:
subject, but
If only Nessie were a Ichthyosaur!-a I'll drink an Ichthyosaur Pale Ale >> -a> to it.this critter is definitely comparable to the biggest ichthyosaurs
known.
It is not every day the WSJ gives space to fossil discoveries.
Well you know if there were one Plesiosaur, there might be more
than one.-a And in but a blink of an eye in geologic time Scotland
may have been covered with a lot of glaciers.
Nonetheless if this article is paywalled, the articles showing
plesiosaurs in the Great Glen getting tossed a few fish while
in some of those locks may be less expensive.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caledonian_Canal
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Glen
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/River_Ness
So I did a little surfing on this on Wikipedia.
What are the odds.
The least common ancestor of the Ichtyosaurs and
something else was a:
species of sauropsida
species of synapsida
synapsida and sauropsida are closer to each other than
they are to ichthyosauria
ichthyosauria are actually derived from amphibians
Do you have any inside information from all of those
paywalled technical journals?
various notions. Were the citations all provided in a single Wikipedia article? If so, what?
I'm going with Sauropterygia, a subgroup of Diapsida, a subgroup of Sauropsida.
On 4/30/24 12:19, John Harshman wrote:
On 4/30/24 10:47 AM, trolidan wrote:
On 4/26/24 14:27, erik simpson wrote:It would help a lot if you could actually cite the sources for these
On 4/26/24 12:35 PM, trolidous wrote:<rainbow@colition.gov>
On 4/25/24 06:29, Popping Mad wrote:
On 4/22/24 11:47 AM, erik simpson wrote:
On 4/22/24 12:05 AM, jillery wrote:
On Wed, 17 Apr 2024 20:38:47 -0400, Popping Mad
https://www.wsj.com/science/largest-marine-reptile-sea-dragon-whale-a527269f?mod=wknd_pos1wrote:
Another
The above link requires a subscription in order to read it.
appears here:article about the discovery of Ichthyotitan severnensis
<https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/remains-what-could-largest-marine-32609308>
<https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0300289> >>> -a>>>> As usual, the pop articles do what they can to inflate is
and here:
subject, but
If only Nessie were a Ichthyosaur!-a I'll drink an Ichthyosaur Pale >>> Alethis critter is definitely comparable to the biggest ichthyosaurs >>> -a>>>> known.
It is not every day the WSJ gives space to fossil discoveries.
Well you know if there were one Plesiosaur, there might be more
than one.-a And in but a blink of an eye in geologic time Scotland
may have been covered with a lot of glaciers.
Nonetheless if this article is paywalled, the articles showing
plesiosaurs in the Great Glen getting tossed a few fish while
in some of those locks may be less expensive.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caledonian_Canal
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Glen
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/River_Ness
to it.
So I did a little surfing on this on Wikipedia.
What are the odds.
The least common ancestor of the Ichtyosaurs and
something else was a:
species of sauropsida
species of synapsida
synapsida and sauropsida are closer to each other than
they are to ichthyosauria
ichthyosauria are actually derived from amphibians
Do you have any inside information from all of those
paywalled technical journals?
various notions. Were the citations all provided in a single Wikipedia
article? If so, what?
I'm going with Sauropterygia, a subgroup of Diapsida, a subgroup of
Sauropsida.
Here is a cut and paste from the Wikipedia article I was
surfing through earlier.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ichthyosauria
Evolutionary history
Origin
The origin of the ichthyosaurs is contentious. Until recently, clear transitional forms with land-dwelling vertebrate groups had not yet been found, the earliest known species of the ichthyosaur lineage being
already fully aquatic. In 2014, a small basal ichthyosauriform from the upper Lower Triassic was described that had been discovered in China
with characteristics suggesting an amphibious lifestyle. In 1937,
Friedrich von Huene even hypothesised that ichthyosaurs were not
reptiles, but instead represented a lineage separately developed from amphibians. Today, this notion has been discarded and a consensus exists that ichthyosaurs are amniote tetrapods, having descended from
terrestrial egg-laying amniotes during the late Permian or the earliest Triassic. However, establishing their position within the amniote evolutionary tree has proven difficult, due to their heavily derived morphology obscuring their ancestry. Several conflicting hypotheses have been posited on the subject. In the second half of the 20th century, ichthyosaurs were usually assumed to be of the Anapsida, seen as an
early branch of "primitive" reptiles. This would explain the early appearance of ichthyosaurs in the fossil record, and also their lack of clear affinities with other reptile groups, as anapsids were supposed to
be little specialised. This hypothesis has become unpopular for being inherently vague because Anapsida is an unnatural, paraphyletic group. Modern exact quantitative cladistic analyses consistently indicate that ichthyosaurs are members of the clade Diapsida. Some studies showed a
basal, or low, position in the diapsid tree. More analyses result in
their being Neodiapsida, a derived diapsid subgroup.
Since the 1980s, a close relationship was assumed between the
Ichthyosauria and the Sauropterygia, another marine reptile group,
within an overarching Euryapsida, with one such study in 1997 by John
Merck showing them to be monophyletic archosauromorph euryapsids. This
has been contested over the years, with the Euryapsida being seen as an unnatural polyphyletic assemblage of reptiles that happen to share some adaptations to a swimming lifestyle. However, more recent studies have
shown further support for a monophyletic clade between
Ichthyosauromorpha, Sauropterygia, and Thalattosauria as a massive
marine clade of aquatic archosauromorphs originating in the Late Permian
and diversifying in the Early Triassic.
That Ichthyotitan seems like it was almost as large as a blue whale.
Comparing with a calculator and interchanging units.-a I am thinking
the Nina, Pinta, and Santa Maria were about two thirds the length
of a blue whale, but modern cruise ships, aircraft carriers, or
tankers and container ships made of metal are about 10 to 20 times
the length of a blue whale and have the surface area of about
a hectare on the ocean.-a Some of the largest Roman galleys also
made of wood might have been three or four times the length of some
of those 1500s ocean going vessels, but they likely often used
oars more for motive power.
As for Nessie, I have no idea how easily a cetacean could have
used the lock and damn system underneath the shadow of a ship
in the Caledonian Canal in say the middle 1800s.
On 5/3/24 3:45 PM, trolidan wrote:
On 4/30/24 12:19, John Harshman wrote:
On 4/30/24 10:47 AM, trolidan wrote:
On 4/26/24 14:27, erik simpson wrote:It would help a lot if you could actually cite the sources for these
On 4/26/24 12:35 PM, trolidous wrote:<rainbow@colition.gov>
On 4/25/24 06:29, Popping Mad wrote:
On 4/22/24 11:47 AM, erik simpson wrote:
On 4/22/24 12:05 AM, jillery wrote:
On Wed, 17 Apr 2024 20:38:47 -0400, Popping Mad
https://www.wsj.com/science/largest-marine-reptile-sea-dragon-whale-a527269f?mod=wknd_pos1wrote:
Another
The above link requires a subscription in order to read it.
appears here:article about the discovery of Ichthyotitan severnensis
<https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/remains-what-could-largest-marine-32609308>
<https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0300289>
and here:
subject, butAs usual, the pop articles do what they can to inflate is
Pale AleIf only Nessie were a Ichthyosaur!-a I'll drink an Ichthyosaurthis critter is definitely comparable to the biggest ichthyosaurs >>>> -a>>>> known.
It is not every day the WSJ gives space to fossil discoveries.
Well you know if there were one Plesiosaur, there might be more
than one.-a And in but a blink of an eye in geologic time Scotland >>>> -a>> may have been covered with a lot of glaciers.
Nonetheless if this article is paywalled, the articles showing
plesiosaurs in the Great Glen getting tossed a few fish while
in some of those locks may be less expensive.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caledonian_Canal
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Glen
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/River_Ness
to it.
So I did a little surfing on this on Wikipedia.
What are the odds.
The least common ancestor of the Ichtyosaurs and
something else was a:
species of sauropsida
species of synapsida
synapsida and sauropsida are closer to each other than
they are to ichthyosauria
ichthyosauria are actually derived from amphibians
Do you have any inside information from all of those
paywalled technical journals?
various notions. Were the citations all provided in a single
Wikipedia article? If so, what?
I'm going with Sauropterygia, a subgroup of Diapsida, a subgroup of
Sauropsida.
Here is a cut and paste from the Wikipedia article I was
surfing through earlier.
You will note that many of the claims are considered obsolete, and there
are exactly zero claims, even obsolete ones, that ichthyosaurs are not sauropsids, i.e. that they're synapsids.
And the end is the most current idea: definitely diapsids associated
with Sauropterygia and probably archosauromorphs.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ichthyosauria
Evolutionary history
Origin
The origin of the ichthyosaurs is contentious. Until recently, clear
transitional forms with land-dwelling vertebrate groups had not yet
been found, the earliest known species of the ichthyosaur lineage
being already fully aquatic. In 2014, a small basal ichthyosauriform
from the upper Lower Triassic was described that had been discovered
in China with characteristics suggesting an amphibious lifestyle. In
1937, Friedrich von Huene even hypothesised that ichthyosaurs were not
reptiles, but instead represented a lineage separately developed from
amphibians. Today, this notion has been discarded and a consensus
exists that ichthyosaurs are amniote tetrapods, having descended from
terrestrial egg-laying amniotes during the late Permian or the
earliest Triassic. However, establishing their position within the
amniote evolutionary tree has proven difficult, due to their heavily
derived morphology obscuring their ancestry. Several conflicting
hypotheses have been posited on the subject. In the second half of the
20th century, ichthyosaurs were usually assumed to be of the Anapsida,
seen as an early branch of "primitive" reptiles. This would explain
the early appearance of ichthyosaurs in the fossil record, and also
their lack of clear affinities with other reptile groups, as anapsids
were supposed to be little specialised. This hypothesis has become
unpopular for being inherently vague because Anapsida is an unnatural,
paraphyletic group. Modern exact quantitative cladistic analyses
consistently indicate that ichthyosaurs are members of the clade
Diapsida. Some studies showed a basal, or low, position in the diapsid
tree. More analyses result in their being Neodiapsida, a derived
diapsid subgroup.
Since the 1980s, a close relationship was assumed between the
Ichthyosauria and the Sauropterygia, another marine reptile group,
within an overarching Euryapsida, with one such study in 1997 by John
Merck showing them to be monophyletic archosauromorph euryapsids. This
has been contested over the years, with the Euryapsida being seen as
an unnatural polyphyletic assemblage of reptiles that happen to share
some adaptations to a swimming lifestyle. However, more recent studies
have shown further support for a monophyletic clade between
Ichthyosauromorpha, Sauropterygia, and Thalattosauria as a massive
marine clade of aquatic archosauromorphs originating in the Late
Permian and diversifying in the Early Triassic.
That Ichthyotitan seems like it was almost as large as a blue whale.
Comparing with a calculator and interchanging units.-a I am thinking
the Nina, Pinta, and Santa Maria were about two thirds the length
of a blue whale, but modern cruise ships, aircraft carriers, or
tankers and container ships made of metal are about 10 to 20 times
the length of a blue whale and have the surface area of about
a hectare on the ocean.-a Some of the largest Roman galleys also
made of wood might have been three or four times the length of some
of those 1500s ocean going vessels, but they likely often used
oars more for motive power.
As for Nessie, I have no idea how easily a cetacean could have
used the lock and damn system underneath the shadow of a ship
in the Caledonian Canal in say the middle 1800s.
On 5/3/24 17:16, John Harshman wrote:
On 5/3/24 3:45 PM, trolidan wrote:
On 4/30/24 12:19, John Harshman wrote:
On 4/30/24 10:47 AM, trolidan wrote:
On 4/26/24 14:27, erik simpson wrote:It would help a lot if you could actually cite the sources for these
On 4/26/24 12:35 PM, trolidous wrote:<rainbow@colition.gov>
On 4/25/24 06:29, Popping Mad wrote:
On 4/22/24 11:47 AM, erik simpson wrote:
On 4/22/24 12:05 AM, jillery wrote:
On Wed, 17 Apr 2024 20:38:47 -0400, Popping Mad
https://www.wsj.com/science/largest-marine-reptile-sea-dragon-whale-a527269f?mod=wknd_pos1wrote:
appears here:
The above link requires a subscription in order to read it. >>>>> Another
article about the discovery of Ichthyotitan severnensis
<https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/remains-what-could-largest-marine-32609308>
<https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0300289>
and here:
subject, butAs usual, the pop articles do what they can to inflate is
ichthyosaursthis critter is definitely comparable to the biggest
Pale AleIf only Nessie were a Ichthyosaur!-a I'll drink an IchthyosaurWell you know if there were one Plesiosaur, there might be more >>>>> -a>> than one.-a And in but a blink of an eye in geologic time Scotland >>>>> -a>> may have been covered with a lot of glaciers.known.
It is not every day the WSJ gives space to fossil discoveries. >>>>> -a>>
Nonetheless if this article is paywalled, the articles showing
plesiosaurs in the Great Glen getting tossed a few fish while
in some of those locks may be less expensive.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caledonian_Canal
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Glen
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/River_Ness
to it.
So I did a little surfing on this on Wikipedia.
What are the odds.
The least common ancestor of the Ichtyosaurs and
something else was a:
species of sauropsida
species of synapsida
synapsida and sauropsida are closer to each other than
they are to ichthyosauria
ichthyosauria are actually derived from amphibians
Do you have any inside information from all of those
paywalled technical journals?
various notions. Were the citations all provided in a single
Wikipedia article? If so, what?
I'm going with Sauropterygia, a subgroup of Diapsida, a subgroup of
Sauropsida.
Here is a cut and paste from the Wikipedia article I was
surfing through earlier.
You will note that many of the claims are considered obsolete, and
there are exactly zero claims, even obsolete ones, that ichthyosaurs
are not sauropsids, i.e. that they're synapsids.
Maybe it is less uncertain than I thought.
For amphibians it did mention Friedrich von Huene
in the 1930s.
And the end is the most current idea: definitely diapsids associated
with Sauropterygia and probably archosauromorphs.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ichthyosauria
Evolutionary history
Origin
The origin of the ichthyosaurs is contentious. Until recently, clear
transitional forms with land-dwelling vertebrate groups had not yet
been found, the earliest known species of the ichthyosaur lineage
being already fully aquatic. In 2014, a small basal ichthyosauriform
from the upper Lower Triassic was described that had been discovered
in China with characteristics suggesting an amphibious lifestyle. In
1937, Friedrich von Huene even hypothesised that ichthyosaurs were
not reptiles, but instead represented a lineage separately developed
from amphibians. Today, this notion has been discarded and a
consensus exists that ichthyosaurs are amniote tetrapods, having
descended from terrestrial egg-laying amniotes during the late
Permian or the earliest Triassic. However, establishing their
position within the amniote evolutionary tree has proven difficult,
due to their heavily derived morphology obscuring their ancestry.
Several conflicting hypotheses have been posited on the subject. In
the second half of the 20th century, ichthyosaurs were usually
assumed to be of the Anapsida, seen as an early branch of "primitive"
reptiles. This would explain the early appearance of ichthyosaurs in
the fossil record, and also their lack of clear affinities with other
reptile groups, as anapsids were supposed to be little specialised.
This hypothesis has become unpopular for being inherently vague
because Anapsida is an unnatural, paraphyletic group. Modern exact
quantitative cladistic analyses consistently indicate that
ichthyosaurs are members of the clade Diapsida. Some studies showed a
basal, or low, position in the diapsid tree. More analyses result in
their being Neodiapsida, a derived diapsid subgroup.
Since the 1980s, a close relationship was assumed between the
Ichthyosauria and the Sauropterygia, another marine reptile group,
within an overarching Euryapsida, with one such study in 1997 by John
Merck showing them to be monophyletic archosauromorph euryapsids.
This has been contested over the years, with the Euryapsida being
seen as an unnatural polyphyletic assemblage of reptiles that happen
to share some adaptations to a swimming lifestyle. However, more
recent studies have shown further support for a monophyletic clade
between Ichthyosauromorpha, Sauropterygia, and Thalattosauria as a
massive marine clade of aquatic archosauromorphs originating in the
Late Permian and diversifying in the Early Triassic.
That Ichthyotitan seems like it was almost as large as a blue whale.
Comparing with a calculator and interchanging units.-a I am thinking
the Nina, Pinta, and Santa Maria were about two thirds the length
of a blue whale, but modern cruise ships, aircraft carriers, or
tankers and container ships made of metal are about 10 to 20 times
the length of a blue whale and have the surface area of about
a hectare on the ocean.-a Some of the largest Roman galleys also
made of wood might have been three or four times the length of some
of those 1500s ocean going vessels, but they likely often used
oars more for motive power.
As for Nessie, I have no idea how easily a cetacean could have
used the lock and damn system underneath the shadow of a ship
in the Caledonian Canal in say the middle 1800s.
| Sysop: | Amessyroom |
|---|---|
| Location: | Fayetteville, NC |
| Users: | 65 |
| Nodes: | 6 (0 / 6) |
| Uptime: | 11:52:08 |
| Calls: | 862 |
| Files: | 1,311 |
| D/L today: |
5 files (10,064K bytes) |
| Messages: | 265,373 |