Re: birds are birds, dogs are dogs

[Dinogeorge@aol.com]

In a message dated 12/4/00 5:12:10 PM EST, NKing@usi.edu writes:

<< Do you think George "comprehends the fullness of time and richness of life"
 in view of his denial that birds are dinosaurs?  Of course he does!  But
 which richness of life is it?  Perhaps it is all exactly as Tracy said,
 "just a thought." >>

Let us not forget that I do >not< deny that birds are dinosaurs; in fact, I 
assert that dinosaurs are, after all, really birds (the birds came first). 
Some are terrestrial descendants of climbing birds that had not yet evolved 
the ability to fly; others are secondarily flightless cursorial descendants 
of birds that had evolved various kinds of flying ability. And so on, all 
branches off the lineage from primitive archosaur to avialan bird. Needless 
to say, my concept of a "bird" is broader and more inclusive than most 
people's.