Re: Pelecanimimus and Sinosauropteryx

[Dinogeorge@aol.com]

In a message dated 97-06-12 02:16:02 EDT, martz@holly.ColoState.EDU (Jeffrey
Martz) writes:

<< If you look at the way a feather develops in a bird's skin, you
 don't see "ornamental scales".  The protofeather begins as a sort of
 "hair" (what later serves as the rachis) before developing (at least in
 contour feathers) barbs and barbules.  The fact that feather development
 starts out exactly like a scale before differentiating into the lone 
 rachis implies to me that this is a case of ontogeny
 recapitulating phylogeny. >>

First you say feathers aren't scales (...don't see "ornamental scales"...),
then you say they are (...feather development starts out exactly like a
scale...). Which shall it be?