Re: small dinosaurs with feathers

[Jura <archosaur@reptilis.net>]

>My jestful litigatory remarks are not to be misinterpreted as anything 
>other than humour on my part, although I am not emending the crux of my 
>ideas: dinosaurs = "birds" = dinosaurs, and to break the mind-set of 
>vernacularism we should, with delight, use the word (or combinations of 
>words) "theropod" to describe living taxa.

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Why?

With very few exceptions, most of the scenarios I have seen where birds are 
referred to as theropods/dinosaurs, have always been for political reasons 
only. That is to say, birds are referred to as living dinosaurs/branches of 
theropoda only when one wants to impress others with the "fact" that dinosaurs 
didn't all die out 65 mya. By your above statements, we should do the same for 
all other creatures that fall into this category. Why bother with mammal, when 
they are all just therapsids/branches of Cynodontia. 

In a previous e-mail you had talked about a new paper on flight and metabolism. 
In it you mentioned: 

"The flight mechanisms/osteologies of flying theropods, pterosaurs, and 
bats..." 

So to keep up with this theme, it should have read: 

"The flight mechanisms/osteologies of flying theropods, pterosaurs, and flying 
cynodonts...." 

And that's more precise?

---------------------------------------------

If, in scientific discussion and 
>dialogue, we are going to use the word "bird", it should always be put in 
>quotation marks. However arrogant, annoying, or confusing, I have spent a 
>lifetime with pre-K/T dinosaurs, and can view  extant avialian theropods. 

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Most vertebrate paleontologists who study mammals, work extensively with 
pre-K/T therapsids, and yet still separate mammalia from therapsida in most 
discussions. It's not like one is denying their evolution, it's just a way to 
keep more specific.

Oh yes, and if one feels a need to make a big bugaboo about comparing birds to 
Mammalia, then feel free to replace birds with "Aves" throughout this post.

----------------------------------------------

Our 
>goal should be precision -- those who would deny dinosaurs = "birds" (they 
>are the "scholars" with a fetish for "bird" baths) are to be countered at 
>every opportunity with factuality. For me, it is a never-ending source of 
>wonder that, even after the bollide impact, and unimaginable environmental 
>stresses, some theropods survived, and survive today.

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Alas this honestly seems to be the only reason for calling birds, dinosaurs.


Jura

======================================================

"I am impressed by the fact that we know less about many modern [reptile] types 
than we do of many fossil groups." 
- Alfred S. Romer  Osteology of the Reptiles

http://reptilis.net