So apparently my initial motivation to make this blog failed miserably as I have not blogged a single thing since I made this thing close to a year ago. I'm now here to change that. Hopefully.
Now. Before I start talking about different other issues and discoveries in the field, there is something I want to clear up that I have wanted to say for a long time, as certain people sometimes get the wrong impression (and before you get an impression of me, PLEASE read the entire entry):
Being involved in this field for a few years now, I have gotten to meet numerous paleontologists, zoologists, and an especially large number of graduate students. It’s fascinating hearing each one of their ideas and interests and it’s refreshing to know that there is such a wealth of interest in studying animals, past and present. And the amount of knowledge out there BLOWS MY MIND. Seeing them in their institutions or at meetings such as SVP, conversations always pop up regarding news of the latest dinosaur or some controversy or another that has riled up the field making everyone want to punch each other. There is ONE controversy that always gets me in trouble, though: The dino-bird debate.
Are birds actually direct descendants of theropod dinosaurs? Now, I know what a lot of you are thinking. “Is he serious? That’s set in stone! It’s a done deal!” Well, given the fact that I know quite a number of people (albeit many of whom have not published on the subject but are still nonetheless highly educated and respected in their field) that still have not bought into it, it is not a done deal. But the people that do believe it just publish on pretending it is absolute truth and that anyone who tries to disprove this theory is an annoying fly buzzing around their heads with the sole intention of wanting to piss them off.
Have I lost you yet? No? Good. Because let me make something perfectly clear: I AM NOT FULLY SET ON ONE THEORY OR THE OTHER. I DO, however, have a certain amount of bias on my plate given my roots. See, I received my undergraduate degree at the University of Kansas in 2009. And yes, this is where one of the self-proclaimed “anti-Christs” of the dino-bird theory is a current professor of Vertebrate Paleontology -- Dr. Larry Martin. Larry is one of the most brilliant paleontologists I have had the great pleasure to meet. Working with him was what led me to my current status as a grad student. He is always coming up with new and exciting questions and ideas with a great story to tell behind any evolutionary concept. I owe him a great deal for everything he has taught me.
That being said, I understand this automatically puts me in some hot water. I could go on and just say that I am a Hopkins grad student and that would be it. But everyone always asks me where I did my undergrad and many times when I say “KU” I automatically get the “Cool…So… How’s Larry doing?” with the automatic assumption that I am from the “dark side”. This is followed by “So…What’s your stance on the whole dino-bird debate?”
Now, something you should know about me. When you ask me a question, I WILL give you an honest answer. It doesn’t matter who you are. What is my stance? It is that I have no stance but that I have been shown quite a large amount of anatomical evidence that challenges the dino-bird stuff that is considerably convincing. To this day, given that I am now on the east coast, I keep asking everyone about these certain anatomical differences, some of which are primitive characters on an animal supposedly derived from a theropod dinosaur. But no one has given me any convincing arguments yet. Now, don’t get me wrong. I am in FULL support of the idea that birds and maniraptorans are related. However, it’s the whole “maniraptorans are coelurosaurs” thing I am still iffy on and the idea that some maniraptorans are secondarily flightless birds is very attractive, given all the evidence I have been shown (and there is quite a great deal).
What is the term the Dinosaur Mailing List gives for people with this stance? “MANIACs” (Maniraptorans Are Not In Actuality Coelurosaurs)? There is that and “BANDits” (Birds Are Not Dinosaurs) which is different. But at any rate, I am still VERY much open-minded in listening to what everyone has to say about this. That IS to say, however, that you say it in a kind and civilized manner. I’ve had a couple people, one of whom is one of the most prominent dinosaur paleontologists today, literally YELL at me because I disagreed with them, when in fact all I did was ask them questions (very politely, I might add). It aggravates me when people don’t sit and listen to each other and instead just scream and yell at whoever doesn’t agree with them. It really will get you nowhere.
If anyone wants to talk about the issues in this area or is still very much unclear about what types of things the “other side” has to say (i.e. evidence challenging the theory of dinosaur-origin of birds OR bird flight) I would be MORE than happy to discuss them on this blog. I did help with the Microraptor research that was done at KU and I do know quite a great deal of what was done there and WHY it was done. And now, being in the east coast a year and a half now, I have seen both sides and know both sides very well as I have experienced them both and talked to many people on each side. I know that in the past I have gotten over-excited about dinosaurs not being birds, but I have learned a lot recently and now am very interested in what everyone else has to say. I really am a nice guy, I promise. But I like a good friendly discussion. J
So let me know if you would like to chat about this. I’m all ears toward anyone who would like to discuss it. I think it will definitely help all of us understand things a little more clearly rather than being blinded of what the “opposite” side always has to say (and I do mean BOTH sides).
Side note: I am by no means researching birds for my PhD. I am interested in Ornithischian jaw mechanics, which has absolutely nothing to do with birds. I just think this concept is incredibly intriguing given all the hubbub.
