Re: Do 3 middle-ear bones really = 1 mammal? (was RE: SCIENCE AND CLASSIFICATION)

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

> >The new definition of Aves, if done correctly, will do for birds
> >what has so long been successfully done with mammals.
>
> "Decades ago" the Mammalia was thought to be polyphyletic; Simpson himself
> carried the banner for this cause.

Apart from the fact -- need I repeat it again? No problem for me, but I'm
certainly boring the list -- that all those bones were involved in hearing
before they all got separated from the lower jaw, that having a double jaw
joint was a widespread condition throughout the Mesozoic.

> Ah yes, the "three-ossicles" thing.  Check out Cifelli's paper in JPal -
it
> might set you straight on how "easy" you believe it is to define a
"mammal"
> anatomically.  Short version: It ain't easy, and mammal paleontologists
> don't pretend that it is.
>
> [...]
> You live in Vienna?  Cry me a river, David.  You live in one of the most
> beautiful cities in the world - take a scenic route to the library.  ;-)

It already takes me 3/4 of an hour by bus and subway :.-(