Re: origin of bats/reply 2 to TMK

[ptnorton <ptnorton@suscom-maine.net>]

> > > That's a pretty safe assumption, based on the analyses done to date.<<
>
> I beg to differ; historically the majority of workers just assumed flight 
> without testing it.  Recent papers that deal with the issue are fairly 
> split and point out several important constraints.  Archie may well have 
> flown, but if so not in a manner very similar to crown group birds.

Thanks. I'm aware of the recent published works and the constraints. You 
seem to agree, however, that Archie "may well have flown".  My opinion is 
that it did fly, although probably not very well at least as compared to 
modern birds. But the fact that it had some rudimentary flight capabilities 
is, as you seem to agree, is not much in question.