From: "T. Mike Keesey" <tmk@dinosauricon.com>
Reply-To: tmk@dinosauricon.com
To: <Dinogeorge@aol.com>
CC: <dinosaur@usc.edu>
Subject: Re: T-J Extinction event article (more media errors?)
Date: Sat, 12 May 2001 15:53:48 -0400 (EDT)
On Sat, 12 May 2001 Dinogeorge@aol.com wrote:
> In a message dated 5/12/01 5:40:27 AM EST, david.marjanovic@gmx.at
writes:
>
> << > But as far as cladistically restricting Mammalia to the crown
group
>
> I don't advocate that, for the reasons you mention. >>
>
> It seems to me that the most reasonable clade that could be given the
name
> Mammalia would be the clade of all amniotes more closely related to
extant
> crown-group mammals than to the next closest (i.e., the other) amniote
> crown-group, which would be "reptilia+aves."
Don't hold your breath for people to call _Dimetrodon_ a mammal.
Why is this more reasonable than limiting it to the crown clade? I don't
understand that point.
_____________________________________________________________________________
T. MICHAEL KEESEY
Home Page <http://dinosauricon.com/keesey>
The Dinosauricon <http://dinosauricon.com>
personal <keesey@bigfoot.com> --> <tmk@dinosauricon.com>
Dinosauricon-related <dinosaur@dinosauricon.com>
AOL Instant Messenger <Ric Blayze>
ICQ <77314901>
Yahoo! Messenger <Mighty Odinn>