Re: Birds? Serious question

[Joshua Dyal <j-dyal@geocities.com>]

Jeffrey Martz wrote:

>      If I remember right, Chatterjee actually suggested that _Protoavis_
> was the first bird, and that _Archaeopteryx_ was an example of
> convergence, not that there was a link between Protoavis, Arcahopteryx,
> and birds, with dinosaurs showing traits convergent to all three.
>      Leaving this debate aside, I think that the link between
> _Archaeopteryx_ and dinosaurs is extremely solid, and gets more solid all
> the time.  New dinosaurs are popping up all the time that have new and
> diffeent bird-like, or more to the point _Archaeopteryx_ like traits,
> the funny ischia and pubis of Unenlagia (sp?) being a notable example.

Isn't that the whole point, though, that all these animals are much
later than Archeopteryx?  If these new finds have more and more
Archeopteryx like traits, that seems to suggest that they are
secondarily flightless descendants of Archeopteryx, not ancestors.

-- 
Joshua Dyal
j-dyal@geocities.com
http://www.geocities.com/TimesSquare/Arcade/1958/