[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

To: DML <dinosaur@usc.edu>
Subject: Re: smallest ANCIENT non-bird dinosaur - was what I was asking
From: David Marjanovic <david.marjanovic@gmx.at>
Date: Fri, 02 May 2008 22:38:58 +0200
References: <8CA79BABF7428F4-12C-DEF@webmail-nc20.sysops.aol.com> <4819ED3E.3010909@gmail.com> <00a501c8aba9$99c42350$e90e10ac@LENOVO>
Reply-to: david.marjanovic@gmx.at
Sender: owner-DINOSAUR@usc.edu

What difference does "stem-" make?


A stem-X is not an X. But is more closely related to X than to
anything else alive.

I'd interpret it the other way around: a stem-X _is_ an X, it's just not part of the crown-group _of_ X. The trunk is part of a tree...

Calling this thing a "whale" stretches credibility:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Pakicetus.gif

Yes -- except if you're more interested in teeth and middle ears than in gross shape. Then it becomes interesting.

Follow-Ups:
- Re: smallest ANCIENT non-bird dinosaur - was what I was asking
  - From: "T. Michael Keesey" <keesey@gmail.com>
- Re: smallest ANCIENT non-bird dinosaur - was what I was asking
  - From: Andreas Johansson <andreasj@gmail.com>

References:
- Re: smallest ANCIENT non-bird dinosaur - was what I was asking
  - From: dinoboygraphics@aol.com
- Re: smallest ANCIENT non-bird dinosaur - was what I was asking
  - From: John Conway <john.a.conway@gmail.com>
- Re: smallest ANCIENT non-bird dinosaur - was what I was asking
  - From: David Marjanovic <david.marjanovic@gmx.at>

Prev by Date: Re: smallest ANCIENT non-bird dinosaur - was what I was asking
Next by Date: Re: smallest ANCIENT non-bird dinosaur - was what I was asking
Previous by thread: RE: smallest ANCIENT non-bird dinosaur - was what I was asking
Next by thread: Re: smallest ANCIENT non-bird dinosaur - was what I was asking
Indexes: