Although it would be nice to think that our site views have octupled in the last day because of Mike’s fine and funny posts about what search terms bring people to SV-POW!, the real reason is that we were blessed by incoming links from both pages of this Cracked.com article.

Christine Argot of the MNHN, Paris, drew our attention to this wonderful old photo (from here, original caption reproduced below): [{.size-full .wp-image-9874 aria-describedby=“caption-attachment-9874” loading=“lazy” attachment-id=“9874” permalink=“http://svpow.com/2014/03/01/the-case-of-the-bandy-legged-diplodocus/1-7_diplodocus_2_l/” orig-file=“https://svpow.files.wordpress.com/2014/02/1-7_diplodocus_2_l.jpg” orig-size=“2362,1772”

{.aligncenter .size-full .wp-image-9829 loading=“lazy” attachment-id=“9829” permalink=“http://svpow.com/2014/02/21/photography-and-illustration-talk-part-7-manipulating-photographs/illustration-talk-slide-32/” orig-file=“https://svpow.files.wordpress.com/2014/02/illustration-talk-slide-32.jpg” orig-size=“1280,960” comments-opened=“1”

{.aligncenter .size-full .wp-image-9722 loading=“lazy” attachment-id=“9722” permalink=“http://svpow.com/2014/02/19/photography-and-illustration-talk-part-6-taking-notes/illustration-talk-slide-23/” orig-file=“https://svpow.files.wordpress.com/2014/02/illustration-talk-slide-23.jpg” orig-size=“1280,960” comments-opened=“1”

{.aligncenter .size-full .wp-image-9707 loading=“lazy” attachment-id=“9707” permalink=“http://svpow.com/2014/02/15/photography-and-illustration-talk-part-4-scale-bars/illustration-talk-slide-16/” orig-file=“https://svpow.files.wordpress.com/2014/02/illustration-talk-slide-16.jpg” orig-size=“1280,960” comments-opened=“1”

[This is part 4 in an ongoing series on our recent PLOS ONE paper on sauropod neck cartilage.

I was very pleased, on checking my email this morning, to see that my and Matt’s new paper, The neck of Barosaurus was not only longer but also wider than those of Diplodocus and other diplodocines, is now up as a PeerJ preprint!

{.aligncenter .size-full .wp-image-8833 loading=“lazy” attachment-id=“8833” permalink=“http://svpow.com/2013/09/11/beards-of-the-mesozoic-bob-nicholls-edition/apatosaurus1b/” orig-file=“https://svpow.files.wordpress.com/2013/09/apatosaurus1b.jpg” orig-size=“2942,2362” comments-opened=“1”

{.aligncenter .size-full .wp-image-8344 loading=“lazy” attachment-id=“8344” permalink=“http://svpow.com/2013/09/09/self-study-the-atlas-axis-complex-in-sauropods/omnh-baby-apatosaurus/” orig-file=“https://svpow.files.wordpress.com/2013/04/omnh-baby-apatosaurus.jpg” orig-size=“2272,1704” comments-opened=“1”

I recently handled the revisions on a paper that hopefully will be in press very soon. One of the review comments was “Be very careful not to make ad hominem attacks”. I was a bit surprised to see that — I wasn’t aware that I’d made any — so I went back over the manuscript, and sure enough, there were no ad hom s in there. There was criticism, though, and I think that’s what the reviewer meant.