Re: other challenges

[HPB1956@aol.com]

Jaime A. Headden wrote:

> Again, to back previous posts, they do not say  *Longisquama* is a bird 
ancestor,
> but that the fossil may, with further study, suggest the ancestry of birds.

Concerning Longisquama, this week I read here in Germany short reports in two 
news magazines and one newspaper  about it. All of them told the "first 
feather found" story as proof for the non dinosaurian origin of birds. One of 
the reports didn't even mention that there are doubts about the validity of 
the observations and conclusions made by Ruben! Seems to me like Ruben is a 
master in public relations.

Concerning BANDits (Bird Are No Dinosaurs), it looks like that these 
scientists try to find a killer character, which would make a dinosaurian 
ancestry implausible. E.g. respiratory turbinates, 2-3-4 digital formular and 
hepatic piston respiration fall into this category. Furthermore they state 
that some characters like feathers could have developed only once. And of 
course it's them who have found the real thing.

For me it's more interesting to see these "wings" of Longisquama confirmed as 
integumentary structures, of whatever kind. Together with these chinese 
dinosaurs like Sinosauropteryx it would show how versatile reptilian 
integument is, not just bare scales and scutes.

Cheers from Germany

Heinz Peter Bredow