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

Not Quite So Lost...

    Hi everybody! (hi doctor nick...)
        Anyhoo, I did what a few of you suggested and borrowed that 
monstrocity of a book, _The Dinosauria_, form the college library. I 
haven't started in on the text yet (I may need someone to explain IT 
to me in layman's terms), I now sorta' understand what this is about 
after looking at the pretty pictures. Man, was I out of it!


        I was thinking about how strange-sounding a term this is and 
came to this conclusion... "Non-avian dinosaurs" would imply that 
"avian dinosaurs" are the standard (like how the Klingon word for 
truth actually translates to "not lying":-)). Yes I realize that this 
is a semantical argument, but a possible extension of this could be a 
description of dinosaurs, or theropods at least, that states:

               "... an often-times large type of
                flightless, derived bird..."
        This could again imply that Dinosauria is not valid and 
that they are, in truth, a "sub-something" of Aves...

        Not that I believe any of this mind you, I'm just thinking 
out loud.

Later days...
Cory Gross
Alberta Palaeontological Society
MRC Earth Sciences Society

        And for the record, I'm on of those holdouts who think that 
Dinos probably weren't feathered or endothermic in any recognizable 
way (in general, of course:-)).