Re: New alvarezsaurid

["Jaime Headden" <jaemei@hotmail.com>]

<The idea that dromaeosaurs are derived from Archaeopteryx is 
inheritantly unstable because it would cause a lot of convergence.>

That's my point. All theories suggest convergence to one great degree or 
another. Archaeopteryx/Dromaeosaurus are a natural group, with cursorial 
dromies and devilish volant archaeopterygians either deriving from a 
MRCA than Oviraptorosaurs (I never doubted this).

All our conversation about Aves convergence shows that birds are very 
likely to produce or drop characters (some diagnostic of birds). It is 
true that all birds can be reasonably assumed to be as derived from 
Archie or Archie-like stock. But there is no present ancestor closer to 
alvarezsaurids and mononykines or whatever than to oviraptorosaurs to 
either refute or acclaim my "evidence". I believe we are on as even a 
keel as BCF and BADD or BAMM are, and thus either of our views are as 
prevalent as others, perhaps more so.

Not to sound rude, but I do find it seemingly unreasonable of you to see 
that I have a point, but you are very correct. There is a lot of 
parallel in *Shuvuuia* and *Oviraptor*, even possibly coeval, but I do 
not think it is coincidence. <shrug>

Give me a rebuttal theory of alvarezsaurid evolution, and I'll reflect 
your points.

Jaime A. Headden

______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com