[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Subject Index][Author Index]
Re: Fw: Audobon bird/dino article
Stanley Friesen writes;
>Still, they do not match the criterion used by the article's author to
>determine which forms were still aquatic fliers, as they lack a long tail.
>(This is, of course, not a fatal blow to the hypothesis, and it probably
>worth further study).
>What is the wing loading in loons and grebes? Do they have less wing
>surface for their size than standard flying birds?
To take the debate even further, does the feather structure appear to be the
type that would keep water out, or would Archy's feathers end up acting like a
sponge? In looking at this university's copy of the Berlin specimin (a copy of
a copy of a copy), it appears that the latter idea works best. If so, would
this put the "aquatic Archy" theory in jeopardy?
Orphan Vertebrate Paleontologist
The most exciting phrase to hear in science, the one that heralds new
discoveries, is not "Eureka!" (I found it!) but "That's funny ..."
-- Isaac Asimov