Re: Protarchaeopteryx: what is it?

[Dinogeorge <Dinogeorge@aol.com>]

In a message dated 98-04-05 01:02:30 EST, gbabcock@best.com writes:

<< What is _Protarchaeopteryx_?  The _Scientific American_ article on the
 origin of birds stated that the fossil represented a maniraptoran theropod
 which might or might not be a bird.  Has the second specimen (neither
 depicted nor described in the _S.A._ article) revealed any new information
 which would enable paleontologists to better identify its affinities?  Is
 it a bird or not? >>

Nothing firm has yet been published about the second _Protarchaeopteryx_
specimen, so it would be wisest to avoid speculating about it until there are
some publicly available photos and/or a description. I can certainly
sympathize with the dinosaur list's tremendous interest in these new forms,
but we really should let the workers have their say and get their papers into
print before chiming in ourselves.

(The above comment is not meant to criticize the writer of the note I happen
to be responding to. It's just a general comment on certain posts of this
nature that I've read on the list in recent weeks.)