[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Subject Index][Author Index]
--Original Message-- From: Dinogeorge@aol.com To: email@example.com :
Wednesday, February 24, 1999 05:01 PM
>In a message dated 2/24/99 10:22:52 AM EST, firstname.lastname@example.org writes:
><< Say what? All this does is retain the same question using different
> Seeing as how it really screws around with the common term "bird", I don't
> see any advantage to this definition at all. >>
>Frankly, Scarlett, I don't give a damn what they're called. Birds,
>Maybe schmurds is better; comes with no prior historical baggage. So:
>dinosaurs are flightless schmurds, birds are flying schmurds, and so on.
True, it's better to find the shape of the tree than to name its branches.
One day though, the pioneers of the future will rediscover the old truth:
"Has(/d) flight feathers - equals bird".