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

Re: Oviraptorosauria (and Abelisauroidea)

--On Tue, Apr 6, 1999 12:26 PM -0600 "Jonathan R. Wagner"
<znc14@TTACS.TTU.EDU> wrote: 

> "CARNOSAURS sharing a more
> recent common ancestor with X than with Y" was a good idea and did
> worthwhile. Anyone care to elaborate? Sounds like an idea which is very
> *against* the principles of PT (i.e. recognizing real groups, no matter
> where they may be in the phylogeny). Anyone care to comment.

In reality, why would you want to say, "carnosaurs closer to x than y"
anyway?  You could say "all animals" or even "all life closer to [for
example] _Ornithomimus_ than to Neornithes."  This definition would ALWAYS
be valid even if it turned out that _Ornithomimus_ were some weird
convergent salamander!  The clade would still exist!