Re: dinosaur argument

[Stang1996@aol.com]

<<are two wooden pterosaurs hanging from the ceiling.  Now, as far as I know,
pterosaurs are not dinosaurs, even though they lived during the same era.  I
told my supervisor of this, and he 1)laughed and 2) told me I was wrong.  I
do not believe that I am, however, >>

Depends on who you ask.  According to the generally accepted notion of what a
dinosaur is and isn't; pterosaurs aren't.  According to Bob Bakker they are,
but that is because he redefined what a dinosaur is and isn't.  In any case,
if you place dinosaurs + birds into a group with their sister taxon of
Lagosuchids (I hope I am getting this cladistic nomenclature right.  Why'd
you guys have to go and screw everything up and invent cladistics!?),
Pterosaurs would be the  sister taxon of That taxon (Dinosaurs + Birds, +
Lagosuchids).  IMHO, Dinosauria should be interchangable as Ornithodira
(Dinosaurs, Pterosaurs, Lagosuchids, and Ornithosuchids), so in that case
pterosaurs would be dinosaurs.  In any case, the consensus opinion of
dinosaur paleontologists is that pterosaurs are not dinosaurs, but are
closely related.

Hoping you are not utterly confused,

Peter Buchholz
Stang1996@aol.com

P.S. What does Plesiomorphic mean, what is the opposite of Plesiomorphic?
 It's one of those lovely jargonistic terms I found in "The Dinosauria" while
I's trying to plow through it (Might as well plow through those flower pots
in front of the Capitol Building).