[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Subject Index][Author Index]

Re: Archosaur Origins...was:MESENOSAURUS ERRATA.

To: dinosaur@usc.edu
Subject: Re: Archosaur Origins...was:MESENOSAURUS ERRATA.
From: Dinogeorge@aol.com
Date: Fri, 31 Aug 2001 01:10:40 EDT
Reply-to: Dinogeorge@aol.com
Sender: owner-dinosaur@usc.edu

In a message dated 8/30/01 11:36:22 PM EST, qilongia@yahoo.com writes:

<< This does not seem to be a matter of "educating the public" but rather a 
matter of establishing all stems based on only the living members, which 
contradicts the fossil inclusion.... It is doubtful anyone would use the 
redefinitions in such a manner. >>

I see nothing contradictory in the system I outlined. What could be simpler? 
If it's more closely related to modern birds than to any other animals, why 
not call it a bird (or, if you like, bird sensu lato)?

Follow-Ups:
- Re: Archosaur Origins...was:MESENOSAURUS ERRATA.
  - From: "Jaime A. Headden" <qilongia@yahoo.com>
- birds and avians again
  - From: "T. Mike Keesey" <tmk@dinosauricon.com>

Prev by Date: RE: Continental predators, etc.
Next by Date: New evidence of pterosaur hair and other news
Previous by thread: Re: Archosaur Origins...was:MESENOSAURUS ERRATA.
Next by thread: Re: Archosaur Origins...was:MESENOSAURUS ERRATA.
Indexes: