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

'bird' definitions



George wrote:

> << Who cares whether the groups are extant or not?  There are a
great many
>  known fossil taxa (_Triceratops_, _Gastonia_, _Dicraeosaurus_,
etc.) that
>  are "manifestly not birds", yet fall inside your definition of
birds.>>
>... You might
> find it interesting and insightful to think of them as large, very
primitive,
> heavy-bodied, quadrupedal birds.

Primitive?  If Triceratops is descended from a small volant reptile,
it is a lot more derived than Archaeopteryx, or even modern birds.

I think I'll avoid the question of whether any human beings I know are
manifestly not bats.

Bill
_________________________________________________________
DO YOU YAHOO!?
Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com