How do you suppose that there can be any research about that if you state that Nobody can prove it did or didn't happen. I think the better wording is that you support his fantasizing.
My bad, I was trying to be too diplomatic by saying nobody could prove anything. In hindsight, I should have said it would be difficult to prove and impossible to disprove. It may seem unscientific, since a proper scientific theory must have a criterion for failure, but this is the ultimate result of a lot of theories about the prehistoric earth. Since we can't go back in time and witness these things it eventually comes down to people debating which is more likely and which is less likely. James' research is indeed helpful, as the evolution of Deinonychus into smaller dinosaurs with smaller claws could be explained by the fact that they had at least formed primitive social structures. This would allow them to forgo the more difficult life of a solitary predator, instead focusing on teamwork and communication to bring down prey, like modern day pack animals. This of course requires moderate communicative skills and at least a reasonably organized social structure.
In fact the more I think about James' research the more sense it makes. Modern day ants are known to farm a species of fungus for food, even going so far as to cut pieces from leaves specifically for the purpose of cultivating it. If ants can do this there is no logical reason why a highly social dinosaur species might not do something similar, such as cultivating a species of plant which was a known favorite food of their Saurolophus prey. Before you dismiss this idea there are a few points to consider:
1) - Think about this from the point of view of small changes, that's how evolution works. If a Dromaeosaur were to hatch with a mutated sense of smell that made it more attracted to the plants that Saurolophus ate, that would make it more likely to hang around areas with these plants -> more likely to catch prey. This mutation would be advantageous and over time it would spread throught he population. The one hatches which has a mutation causing it to become more territorial, driving out other species from this area of Saurolophus plants, establishing a semi-permanent home. The rest of their pack / tribal society follows suit. Through small steps like these it is entirely possible that a basic (and i stress the word basic here) agrarian society could have developed, with Dromaeosaurs cultivating the plants to feed wandering livestock.
2) - We can witness similar things happening today. Nature is filled with species which manipulate other species, species with symbiotic relationships with one another, etc. Symbitoic relationships such as the fungi - leaf cutter ant mirror the relationship of the plants and Dromaeosaurs discussed above, with one species cultivating and controlling the other for the benefit of both. In fact evolutionary biologists have theorized that symbiosis may have played a much more important role in the development of life on earth than was originally thought, for example the theory that the organelles inside cells were once separate basic organisms in the primordial soup which were then incorporated inside a larger host cell, for the benefit of both.
All in all, given modern day examples of symbiosis, advanced communicative skills and social structures, I find James' theories very intriguing and quite possible. I think the mockery he has received from the round earthers, is unwarranted, and many of them are simply not thinking about this from an evolutionary perspective. They just think "dinosaur navy lolololol wat a n00b" and respond with ridicule, but when you think about these things in small, logical, evolutionary steps you begin to see the possibility, even the likeliness, of the theory.