BIRDS AS SUBSET

[steve.cole@genie.com]

Dr Holtz: Good sir, as you are aware, I have an Archy on my den
wall so I did know that birds were around in the Jurrasic,
and I'm the one who posts those almost useless newswire stories
from the Chinese on the "birds" they found. Even so, dinosaurs
dominated their time and birds dominate (the skies in) our time,
so I think the concept of "successor order" is a valid one.
I really get a chuckle whenever I read the term "non-avian dinosaurs".
It's accurate under one definition of terms, and silly under another.

Reminds me of a family of friends I have (names changed to
protect the innocent). The Patriarch (Smith, let's call him)
had five sons and one daughter. Each son married and had one
or two children, some of whom are now married. The daughter had
married (Jones, let's call him) and bore him seven or eight sons
(I forget which) many of whom are now married to nice girls who
are cranking out younguns. The result is that the Smith Family Reunion
is populated about 67% by people named Jones!
So you could say that "Joneses are Smiths" or you could opine
that "Joneses are descended from Smiths" and you might even
in a closed environment see the Joneses eventually force the
extinction of the Smiths, but there is something funny about
all of the Smith's introducing people whose last names is "Jones"
as "one of the Smiths" while the Joneses furiously insist on
being called by their legal names.
<chuckle>--Steve C