Re: Science feather strength debate

[Don Ohmes <d_ohmes@yahoo.com>]

> On 11/4/2010 9:14 AM, Mike Habib wrote:
>> Not to mention that asymmetrical feathers are not actually required
>> for flight, from a first principles standpoint, despite the now
>> popular notion that there must be a 1:1 correspondence.

>>> On Nov 4, 2010, at 7:19 AM, David Marjanovic<david.marjanovic@gmx.at>
>>> wrote:

>>>> However, some flightless birds retain asymmetrical vanes (e.g.,
>>>> flightless grebes)
>>>
>>> Oho. Reference, please?

On 11/4/2010 10:09 AM, Don Ohmes wrote:

> The fact that some flightless birds *retain* asymmetrical vanes should
> not negatively affect the status of asymmetrical vanes as indicators of
> volancy.

Also -- if some flightless birds retain asymmetrical vanes, while others 
don't, and those birds that do not have them are "further" from their 
earlier volant state -- then that would tend to support the notion that 
asymmetrical vanes evolve under flight conditions, would it not?