Re: Bird analysis update 3: reweighting

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

> Forgetting all the birdy stuff for a moment, some of these analysis show
> Archaeopteryx below taxon that lived tens of millions of years later.  I
> know that cladiograms do not define evolution, but any hierarchy consists 
> of
> parent-child relationships that imply evolutionary sequences.

Those gaps of tens of Ma are currently inevitable, no matter what the 
phylogenetic trees look like. There is Solnhofen (end of Late Jurassic), 
then there is nothing, then there is *Noguerornis* (early Early Cretaceous), 
then there's another gap, and only then comes Liaoning (middle and late 
Early Cretaceous). No bird fossils are yet known from those gaps.
       I'm more concerned about why *Caudipteryx* came out where it is. 
~:-|

> If Solnhoften is still being quarried it is likely to be on an industrial 
> scale
> and less likely to find anything interesting.

I've been there. Solnhofen is still being quarried -- on a small industrial 
scale which means the workers find fossils every day.