Re: Feathers for S excretion

["David Marjanovic" <david.marjanovic@gmx.at>]

> On Sat, 31 Mar 2001 17:08:42
>  David Marjanovic wrote:
>
> >Well, I have suggested that hair might actually have evolved for the same
> >reason. Hairs are shed all the time, not unlike feathers...
>
> Erm...this may be pressing it.  As far as I understand, hair evolved from
sensory bristles in early mammals.  I believe the consensus is that full
hair evolved for insulation.  Saying hair evolved as a sulfur dump is taking
it much farther than suggesting the same for feathers.  The physiological
aspects of mammals and birds, in my impartial opinion, make it tough to
prove that feathers and/or hair evolved because of anything related to
sulfur.

This may really be pressing it, because the fossil record of hair is still
rather negligible, whereas we have now plenty of protofeathers to
discuss. -- What "physiological aspects" do you mean? Sulfate production?

> >*************************************
> >[...] the loser of the US presidential
> >elections, US President G. W. Bush [...] >:->
>
> Last time I checked Bush won.

True. This was intended to be an allusion to the fact that Gore has several
hundred thousand votes more, which would make him the winner everywhere I
know except in the USA. The phrase is from www.dieklone.at, a site that
makes great fun of the biggest and most powerful newspaper in Austria as
well as of Austrian politics which IMHO beg to parodized.