 | mobile - desktop |
|
| mobile - desktop |
|
 |
 Available Now at RodentPro.com! |
News & Events:
|
Posted by WW on November 23, 2002 at 17:22:12:
In Reply to: Another sad truth posted by rayhoser on November 23, 2002 at 15:06:16:
:In the 2001 paper: [...]
:There were no fewer than 31 uses of the word "ventral"
Correct, just counted them.
: including several times with direct reference to the comparative counts between PNG Pailsus and Aussie ones and also between these and "Pseudechis australis".
:Wrong again WW.
Bzzzzt - wrong answer, Ray, thanks for playing. Not one of the mentions of ventral scale counts gives an actual count for "P. rossignolii".
Moreover, throughout the text, you discuss lower ventral counts for P. australis compared to "Pailsus" - since P. rossignolii actually has LOWER counts than most P. australis, as we now know thanks to Richard Mastenbroek's paper, that again suggests that you had no idea of the ventral scale count of P. rossignolii.
:Others may also wish to check out the above misleading statements by WW by directly checking the 2001 paper at:
:http://www.smuggled.com/boycan2.htm
Indeed. And if any reader finds an actual ventral scale count for "Pailsus rossignolii" in any of Ray's 2000 or 2001 papers, then I would really like to know.
There is only one person on this forum who is likely to be hurt by the truth, and it ain't me.
Cheers,
Wolfgang
