[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Subject Index][Author Index]

Re: smallest ANCIENT non-bird dinosaur - was what I was asking



dinoboygraphics@aol.com wrote:
Mike Keesey wrote:
If you use it for the crown group, then it's definitely not a bird,
but there are many Mesozoic non-birds smaller than _Microraptor_.

Let me take a moment to endorse this particular definition. It is problematic to to define Archaeopteryx into birds a priori and doing so has repeatedly resulted in people extrapolating derived crown-group features and behavior back to all "birds".

But wait--the scientific community doesn't get to define vernacular terms anyhow. No one's talking about defining the actual term "bird" scientifically. We're talking about "aves", which will never match vernacular usage of "bird" no matter how much we argue about it (we should probably give up). Don't try to tell me not to call Hesperornis a bird--the idea's laughable--but if it falls outside aves, who cares really?


--
Palaeontography: http://palaeo.jconway.co.uk