Re: [Re: [Re: [Re: Non-serpentine lacertids (was RE:WHAT'S GOING ON?)]]]

[archosaur@usa.net]

"Patrick Norton" <ptnorton@email.msn.com> wrote:
> >Actually I consider both _Sinornithosaurus_ and _Archaeopteryx_ to both
> qualify for the term "non-avian dinosaurs" <
> 
> I'd be interested in hearing your reasoning on that.  Sinornithosaurus
> probably wasn't a flyer.  Even though it was apparently feathered, > whether
it was pre-volant or secondarily flightless has yet to be > determined. But
Archaeopteryx was an obvious flyer, so I wonder about > putting  _A_ in a
non-avian slot.
> 
> PTN
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Better nip this one in the bud before I get painted any farther into this
proverbial corner. 

I had at first thought that all fossils that shared the ambiguity between
dinosaur and avian should be placed there and I had in my mind the rather
muddled history of _Archaeopteryx_ in my head complete with it's "dead end"
evolution.

In retrospect I see a rather large problem here. I all creatures descended
from Avialae should be known as avian then I guess _Archaeopteryx_ does pass
afterall.

So I humbly retract that statement.

Jura 


Jurassosaurus's Reptipage: A page devoted to the study of the reptilia:

http://reptilis.webjump.com

____________________________________________________________________
Get free email and a permanent address at http://www.netaddress.com/?N=1