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

Re: Quo vadis, T. rex? [long]

On Fri, 9 Feb 1996 Dinogeorge@aol.com wrote:

> In a message dated 96-02-09 01:23:32 EST, pharrinj@PLU.edu (Nicholas J.
> Pharris) writes:
> >I repeat:  It makes no sense and is of no use to classify _Deinonychus_, 
> >_Triceratops_, and _Apatosaurus_ in one group and exclude the birds, when 
> >_Deinonychus_ is far more like any given bird than it is like 
> >_Apatosaurus_ or _Triceratops_.
> It may be of no use to you, but it is often quite useful to others, such as
> ornithologists.

Why would this be of any more use to ornithologists than anyone else?  It 
would not be productive for primatologists to go around saying that 
primates are different enough from other mammals to deserve their own 
coordinate taxon.

If ornithologists really just wanted to concentrate on modern birds, what 
should they care how that taxon as a whole is classified?

In fact, ornithologists probably benefit the *most* from a nested 
classification, because it allows them to see easily how and when the 
particular attributes of birds first evolved.

Nick Pharris
Pacific Lutheran University
Tacoma, WA 98447

"If you can't convince them, confuse them." -- Harry S. Truman