[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Subject Index][Author Index]
Re: Jurassic Park
AND YET... If we knew of elephants from fossil evidence only, and found
impressions indicating "wooliness" on mammoths, we would doubtless assume
that "modern" elephants (and rhinos for that matter) had "wool" too and
would restore them that way. Which would be wrong. So you may claim that
you "should" draw dromaeosaurids with feathers because creatures far more
distantly related to them than the elephants I mention are to each other,
had them. So you "could" be wrong if you did.
> From: Dinogeorge@aol.com
> To: DINOBOY@worldnet.att.net; email@example.com; firstname.lastname@example.org
> Subject: Re: Jurassic Park
> Date: Sunday, September 27, 1998 4:40 PM
> In a message dated 98-09-27 13:01:01 EDT, DINOBOY@worldnet.att.net
> << Prove they had feathers and
> I'll draw them that way .Last time I looked ,
> Dromaeosaurids were still considered non-avian theropods , not birds. >>
> You must demonstrate that dromaeosaurids did>not< have feathers, since
> fall into a phylogenetic bracket between feathered theropods and birds.
> can't, then you should draw them with feathers.