Pterosaur origins according to Wikipedia

Not sure
who has established him/herself as the editor of the “Pterosaur” article in Wikipedia, but there was a falsehood in there that had to be edited.

With regard to the “Origins” section, as I read it, the author reported that I did not view the fossils themselves. However, the author approved the Hone and Benton 2007 supertree analysis and the 2011 Nesbitt 2011 archosaur family tree.

The opposite is actually true. 
I had first hand access to Longisquama, Sharovipteryx, Cosesaurus, Langobardisaurus and Macrocnemus, taxa that are related to pterosaurs in order of  increasing phylogenetic distance (Longisquama is the closest). Hone and Benton, as in all authors of supertree analyses, did not even look at these specimens, but reported they were going to join together previous pertinent trees. Instead they only combined the trees they liked. They deleted Peters (2000) from their analysis and added a few typos to the scores to justify their deletion, as we discussed earlier. So there was no Bennett vs. Peters “contest.” W.C. Fields echoed their feelings when he said, “Go away, boy… you bother me.”

So, kids, this is what we’re dealing with.
No one wants to look at fenestrasaurs and there are people out there who are willing to flip the truth.

Not sure
how long the edit will stand. Wikipedia can edited by anyone. Just thought you should know…

4 thoughts on “Pterosaur origins according to Wikipedia

  1. This is EXACTLY the news you should be getting out there, David. Most auditors simply read Darren Naish’s libelous article about you and your methods and believe his bullcrap wholesale. Because of his SA article, I don’t see Naish as a true scientist, but others see those letters attached to his name and see him as God. I see him as an elitist bully, jealous of your abilities. When challenged to check on your work, the Naish allies I have tested admit frankly your abilities and knowledge about pterosaurs so far outstrip their knowledge and abilities that there is no way they can test your claims.

    Looks to me as though you need to come out swinging. Being right and being sincere is only part of the battle. Any claims against you so far as I can see are given without anything substantial to back them up. No photos, no nothing! You want me as an ally? I am here, IF you are willing to shed light on their darkness.

  2. Let’s go get them, my artist brother! I have friends on Facebook who respect you and your work very highly. You probably know them. Let me know if you are interested!

  3. Truth in advertising: I have been making changes here and there over the past few months as better data has come in. So, there were errors, but hopefully the product will get better as we roll along. I’m always interested.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.