protoavis

["Archaeopteryx ." <archaeopteryx@mail.com>]

I was recently reading chatterjee's book on Avian evolution. Even if you
ignore the fact that the skeleton wasnt articulated and no feathers were
found with it, doesnt something still look wrong with the reconstruction?

The drawing of a full skeleton of protavis just doesnt look right or seem to
support flight as said in the text. The arms are much shorter than
Archaeopteryx or modern birds that size, the bones are also thicker. The
ribs are thick as well. And the claws of the hind legs are very large,
unlike the thin legs of later early birds. I think that is protoavis was a
bird, it was more like a chicken than any flying bird, which really wouldnt
make sense at that stage in evolution.

Recontructed another way, it could very easily be an archosaur, a dinosaur,
etc..


Lauren

__________________________________________________
FREE Email for ALL! Sign up at http://www.mail.com