# Brontosaurus **URL:** \ **Category:** Cecil's Columns/Staff Reports\ **Created:** [January 13, 2003, 1:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/brontosaurus/148290 "2003-01-13T13:58:57Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![geoworld](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/ebca7d/32.png) [@geoworld](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/geoworld)\ **Post date:** [January 13, 2003, 1:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/brontosaurus/148290/1 "2003-01-13T13:58:57Z")
Being new to this place let me first say what a wonderful site it is. Now that the flattery is out of the way I must attempt to correct one of the columns I just read. In “Did dinosaurs have a separate brain in their behinds?” both Ruth and Cecil talk about whether the Brontosaurus had two brains. I am sorry to disappoint the readers, much as my students are disappointed when they hear the news, there is no Brontosaurus. The dinosaur that was called Brontosaurus was in fact an amalgamation of the body of an Apatosaurus and the head of a Camarasaurus. So the question should have been did the Apatosaurus have two brains. Yours in Paleontology, GeoWorld ---
**Author:** ![Desmostylus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/c57346/32.png) [@Desmostylus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Desmostylus)\ **Post date:** [January 13, 2003, 2:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/brontosaurus/148290/2 "2003-01-13T14:02:23Z")
[Did dinosaurs have a separate brain in their behinds?](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?s=&threadid=155710) ---
**Author:** ![Speaker\_for\_the\_Dead](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/c77e96/32.png) [@Speaker\_for\_the\_Dead](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Speaker_for_the_Dead)\ **Post date:** [January 13, 2003, 2:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/brontosaurus/148290/3 "2003-01-13T14:07:18Z")
I’m afraid **Wikkit** isn’t a dinosaur. [The Apatosaurus, on the other hand, is.](http://www.straightdope.com/classics/a2_003.html) Oh, and generally things like this go in the **Comments on Cecil’s Columns** Forum, for future reference. ---
**Author:** ![SavageNarce](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/b5e925/32.png) [@SavageNarce](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SavageNarce)\ **Post date:** [January 13, 2003, 2:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/brontosaurus/148290/4 "2003-01-13T14:08:53Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by geoworld \* > **…my students are disappointed when they hear the news, there is no Brontosaurus…** Well, if you think your students are disappointed, just think how Emily and Charlotte must feel! 😃 And **Des** , your link seems to go to an argument about cricket wickets, not double-brained dinos.😕 ---
**Author:** ![Desmostylus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/c57346/32.png) [@Desmostylus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Desmostylus)\ **Post date:** [January 13, 2003, 2:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/brontosaurus/148290/5 "2003-01-13T14:08:54Z")
> [@](#): > > But let’s start with dinosaurs. Actually, it wasn’t the brontosaurus that supposedly had two brains, it was the stegosaurus, the one with the spikes running up and down its back. So what’s the problem **geoworld**? Are you saying “No, it wasn’t the Brontosaurus that _didn’t_ have two brains, it was actually the Apatosaurus the _didn’t_ have two brains?” Or what, exactly? ---
**Author:** ![Desmostylus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/c57346/32.png) [@Desmostylus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Desmostylus)\ **Post date:** [January 13, 2003, 2:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/brontosaurus/148290/6 "2003-01-13T14:10:29Z")
Mea Culpa. Pasted the wrong link. ---
**Author:** ![CalMeacham](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/calmeacham/32/35_2.png) [@CalMeacham](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CalMeacham)\ **Post date:** [January 13, 2003, 2:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/brontosaurus/148290/7 "2003-01-13T14:15:45Z")
I’d like to register my complaint about the whole Brontosaurus/Apatasaurus deal. It is true that the Brontosaurus name was already used, and incorrectly appropriated. In an unrelated detail, it’s true that they got the head wrong, too. Considering the wild and wooly history of dino hunting and claims in the late 19th and early 20th centuries, I’m not surprised. But the true Brontosaurus and the true Apatasaurus aren’t all that different, and the name change isn’t likely to cause confusion among experts, so why make a big deal about it? Why insist that “Brontosaurus” isn’t the right name? There are too many parallel cases where the same thing has happened (names incorrectly applied, or proper notice of prior naming not being noted), but we don’t change _those_ names. Case in point: “Platypus”. Apparently the name had already been used for a beetle, so the “proper” name for the Australian monotreme is something else entirely – a name that’s so obscure, I can’t remember it. And how about the Dolphin/Mahi-Mahi confusion? Nobody ever claims that “Mahi Mahi is the proper name” – they just use it without comment. For that matter, how about “Styrofoam”. In the plastics industry, Styrofoam is not the light and pebbly plastic foam that hot-beverage cups are made of, but something else entirely. Yet packages still routinely are labeled “styrofoam” for those cups. So howcum they always make the big deal about “brontosaurus” being the “incorrect” name. Let the kids call it a Brontosaurus. ---
**Author:** ![geoworld](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/ebca7d/32.png) [@geoworld](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/geoworld)\ **Post date:** [January 13, 2003, 2:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/brontosaurus/148290/8 "2003-01-13T14:18:30Z")
Are you saying “No, it wasn’t the Brontosaurus that didn’t have two brains, it was actually the Apatosaurus the didn’t have two brains?” Exactly. ---
**Author:** ![geoworld](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/ebca7d/32.png) [@geoworld](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/geoworld)\ **Post date:** [January 13, 2003, 2:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/brontosaurus/148290/9 "2003-01-13T14:26:36Z")
So howcum they always make the big deal about “brontosaurus” being the “incorrect” name. Let the kids call it a Brontosaurus. The problem with that is Marine Biologists refer to “dolphins” as dolphins. Paleontoloists do not refer to Apatosaurus as Brontosaurus. ---
**Author:** ![CalMeacham](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/calmeacham/32/35_2.png) [@CalMeacham](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CalMeacham)\ **Post date:** [January 13, 2003, 2:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/brontosaurus/148290/10 "2003-01-13T14:38:00Z")
> [@](#): > > The problem with that is Marine Biologists refer to “dolphins” as dolphins. Paleontoloists do not refer to Apatosaurus as Brontosaurus. Yeah, but plastics professionals don’t refer to “styrofoam” as Styrofoam, either. I say let “Brontosaurus” stand. ---
**Author:** ![RM\_Mentock](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e274bd/32.png) [@RM\_Mentock](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RM_Mentock)\ **Post date:** [January 13, 2003, 3:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/brontosaurus/148290/11 "2003-01-13T15:16:45Z")
geoworld, have you ever read Bully for Brontosaurus, by Stephen Jay Gould? ---
**Author:** ![Darwins\_Finch](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/darwins_finch/32/20304_2.png) [@Darwins\_Finch](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Darwins_Finch)\ **Post date:** [January 13, 2003, 5:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/brontosaurus/148290/12 "2003-01-13T17:15:45Z")
In agreement with **CalMeachem** , my take on the issue can be found [in this thread](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?s=&threadid=103278). Although I just noticed that I had misspelled “nomenclature” in my post there… Also, keep in mind, as I have also pointed out elsewhere (though I don’t remember where), _Brontosaurus_ remains a junior subjective synonym for _Apatosaurus_. This means that the name _Brontosaurus_ is not available for future use, since it’s still somewhat “attached” to _Apatosaurus excelsis_, and that future examinations could reveal that _A. excelsis_ is actually **not** an _Apatosaurus_ specimen. In such a case, the _A. excelsis_ specimen would revert to _Brontosaurus excelsis_. ---
**Author:** ![FriendRob](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/ecc23a/32.png) [@FriendRob](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FriendRob)\ **Post date:** [January 13, 2003, 6:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/brontosaurus/148290/13 "2003-01-13T18:29:30Z")
This is one of my pet peeves. Apparently people like to correct each other so much that they will take any opportunity… We call dogs “dogs”. It is not incorrect if you fail to call them _canis domesticus_ (or whatever). Likewise, why do some people now insist on the spelling “Neandertal” instead of “Neanderthal”, with the corresponding pronunciation (nee-ann-der-tall, versus nee-ann-der-tholl)? “Neanderthal” has been an English word for a hundred years, why is it suddenly incorrect? Anyway, nee-ann-der-tall is incorrect in any language: the correct German pronunciation would be nay-ahn-dair-tall. These are examples of _shibboleths_. Their real intent is to distinuish those “in the know” from the hoi polloi. My advice is to use Brontosaurus and Neanderthal proudly. ---
**Author:** ![psiekier](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/psiekier/32/116_2.png) [@psiekier](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/psiekier)\ **Post date:** [January 13, 2003, 6:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/brontosaurus/148290/14 "2003-01-13T18:47:56Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by CalMeacham \* > \*\*I’d like to register my complaint about the whole Brontosaurus/Apatasaurus deal… > > … and how about the Dolphin/Mahi-Mahi confusion? Nobody ever claims that “Mahi Mahi is the proper name” – they just use it without comment.\*\* You usually won’t find it referred to as “Dorado,” either - but maybe you should. I think the appelation “Mahi-Mahi” is solely for commercial purposes. If you wonder why, ponder the phrase “Dolphin-Safe Tuna.” > [@](#): > > **For that matter, how about “Styrofoam”. In the plastics industry, Styrofoam is not the light and pebbly plastic foam that hot-beverage cups are made of, but something else entirely. Yet packages still routinely are labeled “styrofoam” for those cups.** Isn’t “Styrofoam” the registered trademark of the Dow Chemical Corporation? Perhaps it’s use is so much like “I need a Kleenex” or “Could you Xerox that for me?” > [@](#): > > \*\*So howcum they always make the big deal about “brontosaurus” being the “incorrect” name. Let the kids call it a Brontosaurus. \*\* I’m fine with that. 😉 ---
**Author:** ![Polycarp](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/82dd89/32.png) [@Polycarp](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Polycarp)\ **Post date:** [January 14, 2003, 12:33am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/brontosaurus/148290/15 "2003-01-14T00:33:46Z")
**Darwin’s Finch** basically covered the synonymy – with this caveat: the official scientific name of an animal is assigned using rules devised by an international commission of zoologists (link to this in another active GQ thread), with the idea of fairness uppermost. And the principal rule, with caveats discussed in “Bully for Brontosaurus,” is this: The man who first describes the creature in the proper zoological/paleontological monograph form, giving the characteristics that distinguish it from other similar forms, is the man who has the right to name the critter. In the case of _Brontosaurus_, a description of a fragmentary _Apatosaurus_ was published first – so that name stands, in the absence of an extraordinary ruling by the commission. You can call it whatever you like, including “that bleeping big thing” if you so choose. But the official Linnaean nomenclature is the one first given it, which is _Apatosaurus_. But just as we usually say “grizzly bear” instead of _Ursus horribilis_, there’s no reason why the English vernacular term for _Apatosaurus_ cannot be “Brontosaurus.” Minor question for palaeo. geeks: What’s the status of _Brontosaurus ajax_? If **it** were discovered to be a separate genus from _Apatosaurus_, would it retain the right to use _Brontosaurus_, which it was first named as, or would that name remain with the type _B. excelsis_ (=_A. excelsis_) specimen and a third name be required for _ajax_? Details: “platypus” = _Ornithorhynchus anatinus_ In a reform of German orthography, words containing “-th-” (which is sounded as /t/) dropped the ‘h’ and this was done for the Neander Valley _(t(h)al)_ where the type Neandertal specimen was found. However, again owing to the rule of priority in zoology and paleontology, the hominid named after that is either _Homo neanderthalensis_ or _H. sapiens neanderthalensis_, depending on whether it’s a separate species or a subspecies of _H. sapiens_ – in either case, the trivial or subspecific name retains the “th” because that is what it was originally named. Styrofoam, by the way, is a trademarked trade name, I believe by Dow Chemical, for their foamed polystyrene product. Nobody has ever drunk out of a Styrofoam cup, because that company doesn’t make them. A polystyrene-foam cup, yes, but not a Styrofoam one. ---
**Author:** ![Jabba](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/b5e925/32.png) [@Jabba](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jabba)\ **Post date:** [January 14, 2003, 12:42am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/brontosaurus/148290/16 "2003-01-14T00:42:17Z")
**FriendRob** lamented: > [@](#): > > These are examples of _shibboleths_. Their real intent is to distinuish those “in the know” from the hoi polloi. Since _hoi_ is Greek for “the” ( nominative singular), it’s just _hoi polloi_, not ‘the _hoi polloi_’. 😉 ---
**Author:** ![manhattan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/manhattan/32/7_2.png) [@manhattan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/manhattan)\ **Post date:** [January 14, 2003, 12:52am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/brontosaurus/148290/17 "2003-01-14T00:52:35Z")
Off to C on CC. ---
**Author:** ![tomndebb](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/b9e5f3/32.png) [@tomndebb](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tomndebb)\ **Post date:** [January 14, 2003, 1:04am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/brontosaurus/148290/18 "2003-01-14T01:04:47Z")
> [@](#): > > These are examples of shibboleths. Their real intent is to distinuish those “in the know” from the hoi polloi. My advice is to use Brontosaurus and Neanderthal proudly. While each of these certainly can be used as shibboleths (as **geoworld** has demonstrated), there is nothing in the use of either that _requires_ them to be so used. I generally use Apatosaurus and Neander **t** al (and _H. sapiens neander **th** alensis_ if it comes up), but I would never rebuke someone who used the other forms. [TalkOrigins.org](http://TalkOrigins.org) addresses the Neander Valley discovery on [this page](http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/homs/spelling.html). **Jabba** , you’re really going to rile up his antipedantic instincts, if you keep that up–although I guess we can cut you some slack since you didn’t point out his failure to italicize the phrase. 😉 ) ---
**Author:** ![mangeorge](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/d78d45/32.png) [@mangeorge](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mangeorge)\ **Post date:** [January 14, 2003, 1:07am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/brontosaurus/148290/19 "2003-01-14T01:07:46Z")
Do Paleontoloists (what???) have two brains? Only if there are four of them… 😉 \ Welcome, **geoworld** , to the SDMB. Peace, mangeorge ---
**Author:** ![Sauroposeidon](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/c4cdca/32.png) [@Sauroposeidon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sauroposeidon)\ **Post date:** [January 14, 2003, 2:27am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/brontosaurus/148290/20 "2003-01-14T02:27:31Z")
> [@](#): > > Minor question for palaeo. geeks: What’s the status of _Brontosaurus ajax_? If it were discovered to be a separate genus from _Apatosaurus_, would it retain the right to use _Brontosaurus_, which it was first named as, or would that name remain with the type _B. excelsis_ (=_A. excelsis_) specimen and a third name be required for ajax? “_Brontosaurus ajax_” was’t first named as _Brontosaurus_, and is in fact the type species of _Apatosaurus_. _Apatosaurus ajax_ will always belong to the genus _Apatosaurus_, and cannot be discovered to be a seperate genus from itself. [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/brontosaurus/148290.md?page=2)