Re[2]: Archaeopterix? What Archaeopterix....?!

["Cunningham, Betty" <bcunning@nssi.com>]

> Feathers are not flat and it's almost impossible that the creature would 
>be fossilised with *all* the wing and tail feathers nicely flat in one 
>plane.

feathers flatten out quite nicely when covered with sediment.  Nor are all 
the feathers visible, just most of the primaries and secondaries and much 
tail featherage.  Arguments still exist as to feather placement on the body, 
neck, and head.
     
>besides what do astronomers know about geology or paleontology?
     
>>Is that relevant. 

possibly.  If asked to depend on the judgement between Dr. Ostrom, a 
paleontologist that found the 'missing' archie pretending to be a compy, OR
an astronomer's researched opinion, my money would be on the fellow with the
      PHD in paleontology and comparitive anatomy.   Sorry, but there it 
     is.
     
     -Betty Cunningham