Re: Jurassic Park

[Scott A Hartman <ottscay@uwyo.edu>]

Tim,

>>>_Sinosauropteryx_ may have had feathers, but there's no evidence that
_Compsognathus_ (the only other known compsognathid) did.  The
type specimen of _Compsognathus_ from Bavaria is quite naked, yet
pterosaurs and _Archaeopteryx_ from the same limestones show at
least some trace of body covering - fur for pterosaurs, feathers for
_Archaeopteryx_.            <<<

This is really a dinosaur myth.  FIrst perpetuated by John Ostrom, and
still popular with John Ruben and friends, it is important to check and
see how many archaeopteryx specimens show NON-wing feather impressions.
I'll give you a hint, if you start counting with digit III, when you are
through you could inadvertantly offend someone.  It's a good bet that
Compsognathus didn't have wing feathers (certainly, Sinosauropteryx
doesn't).  And with only 1 Archaeopteryx showing evidence of body
insulation, I don't see how a lack of preserved protofeathers on
Compsognathus is evidence that they weren't there (otherwise one could
argue that the other specimens of Archaeopteryx also were featherless,
except for their wings.  This would go nicely with Ruben's ectothermic
Archaeopteryx idea...).  Additionally, there are many pterosaur specimens
that don't show any evidence of integuement at all.
     Finally, I wouldn't discount the possiblity that there had been
traces of protofeathers preserved around an elbow, or on the tail.  But
the original preparators had no reason to look for them.  Considering that
most recent work on pterosaur skin has required the aid of a microscope,
they can be forgiven for possibly obliterating those traces from
Compsognathus a century before Ostrom got there.  

Scott Hartman