Re: the tonight show

[NJPharris@aol.com]

In a message dated Tue, 9 Jan 2001  9:09:46 AM Eastern Standard Time, "Ken 
Kinman" <kinman@hotmail.com> writes:

<< 
     I'll have to disagree with you on this one, although it does depend on 
how one defines "closely related", and therefore might be viewed as partially 
quibbling over semantics.>>

Well, unlike HP Kinman, I do not buy the argument from morphological 
difference.  However, the longer generation times for large birds could be 
taken to mean that a given individual ratite is, in some meaningful way, 
marginally more closely related to an individual _Velociraptor_ than, say, a 
given individual hummingbird is--much as my father's cousin is more closely 
related to my great grandparents than I am.

But it wouldn't be a very significant difference.

--Nick P.