RE: protoavis

["Tracy Ford" <dino.hunter@home.com>]

-----Original Message-----
From: owner-dinosaur@usc.edu [mailto:owner-dinosaur@usc.edu]On Behalf Of
Patrick Mellor
Sent: Thursday, April 26, 2001 10:25 AM
To: rob_redwing@hotmail.com; dinosaur@usc.edu
Subject: Re: protoavis


----- Original Message -----
From: "Rob Gay" <rob_redwing@hotmail.com>
To: <dinosaur@usc.edu>
Sent: Thursday, April 26, 2001 4:16 PM
Subject: Re: solnhofen


> >What happened to Protoavis? (you say no support for BCF) Was it ever
proved
> >to be a chimera, and why is it that Protoavis seems to be ompletely
ignored
> >and no one ever talks about it.<
> Indeed, most of _Protoavis_ seems to be made up of several animals. The
> skull is part of a megalancosaurid, the hindlimbs are non-avian theropod,
> the "hand" is some archosaur with a crocodile-normal ankle, and wait for
the
> paper on the pectoral girdle. However, it is generally accepeted (from
what
> I know), that the verts are something new (and are what I refer to as
> _Protoavis_). However, due to the chimerical nature of the rest of the
> specimen, this is usualy looked over.
> Other note on early birds...apparently there are bird tracks in the L.
> Jurassic Kayenta Formation...
> Peace,
> Rob
>
> Student of Geology
> Northern Arizona University
> P.O. Box 20840
> Flagstaff, Az. 86011
> AIM: TarryAGoat
> "A _Coelophysis_ with feathers?"
>

Does Chatterjee still maintain that Protoavis is a bird?
> As of 1997 his 'Rise of Birds' book relies completely on Protoavis for its
BCF hypothesis

Last year when I talked to him about it, YES!!!

Tracy L. Ford
P. O. Box 1171
Poway Ca  92074