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

Re: BCF and BADD



In a message dated 95-11-29 12:43:37 EST, swf@ElSegundoCA.ATTGIS.COM (Stan
Friesen) writes:

>The minimum way out of this problem is for at least some small theropods
>to have been arboreal. This is not as strange as it might sound. In a
>small animal arboreal adaptations can be quite minimal - squirrels have
>feet that are not that much different than those of terrestrial rodents.
>(In fact there are very few rodents that cannot climb at need). Thus
>a small (Compsognathus-sized) theropod might well be able to climb
>without any special adaptations at all.

Why stay with "minimal"? Go for the whole enchilada!

And you're absolutely right about the arboreality adaptations. Given _just_
the skeletons, I don't think any zoologist could show that squirrels are
primarily arboreal, prairie dogs and gophers are fossorial, and rats are
neither.

That's why, when you find something in the skeleton that looks--even
vaguely--like an adaptation for arboreality, it greatly strengthens the
argument.