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

Re: ARCHAEOPTERYX



>>>Anyway, regarding your statement that the anatomy of _Archaeopteryx_
was
"un-controversial"; whoa!  That is a BIG understatement.  Contrast any
Ostrom and Martin paper and you'll see the differences between
opinions.<<<

Actually, it was sarcasm.  With such a strong dichotomy of opinions on
Archaeopteryx morphology (and such disperate phylogenetic inferences made
from those studies) I thought it redundant to put a ;-) at the end.
Sorry.

Scott Hartman