Re: snake evolution

["Mickey Mortimer" <Mickey_Mortimer111@msn.com>]

Phil Hore wrote-

> The article is all about how they have done DNA tests on all lizard
species and then compared them to snakes to find out which group they are
related to. The article goes on and on about how they were thought to be
mosasaurs, and that the tests show snakes are not closely related to
mosasaurs (or at least their close relatives, the monitors).
I have no problem with this as such, as I'm on the fence when it comes to
snake ancestory, Ive read or heard nothing that swings me either way. My
problem is they never mention what they are closely related too. They just
say they haven't worked that out yet. But then how can they know that
monitors aern't the closest relative? I mean if they found even one species
of lizard that is closer, why didn't they say it?

The point was not that they found another lizard was closer to snakes, but
rather that other lizards were closer to varanids than snakes are.  Anguids,
helodermatids and xenosaurids all grouped with varanids to the exclusion of
snakes with high confidence levels.

Mickey Mortimer