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

RE: Feathered dinos

> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-dinosaur@usc.edu [mailto:owner-dinosaur@usc.edu]On Behalf Of
> Dinogeorge@aol.com
> << I don't know if I should be the first to mention it, but it
> was suggested
>  numerous times at SVP that Archaeoraptor is itself a chimaera.
> Specifically,
>  the head looks (to me) dromaeosaurid or troodontid, the torso
> like that of a
>  bird, and the feet like a tiny avimimid or mononykine.  The tail
> looks like
> a
>  rather unnatural long, stiff rod. >>
> Why is it that any fossil that doesn't fit the cladogram/theory
> of the day is
> called a chimera? Not to say Archaeoraptor is or isn't one, just
> that this
> particular excuse is getting a little overworked (Protoavis, Avimimus,
> Rahonavis, etc.).

In the case of _Archaeoraptor_, there are some serious significant problems
of provenance.  On the other hand, I do not think that the specimen is
chimerical to the degree mentioned above: I suspect that only two organisms
at most contributed.  However, there are OTHER problems with the specimen...

                Thomas R. Holtz, Jr.
                Vertebrate Paleontologist
Department of Geology           Director, Earth, Life & Time Program
University of Maryland          College Park Scholars
                College Park, MD  20742
Phone:  301-405-4084    Email:  tholtz@geol.umd.edu
Fax (Geol):  301-314-9661       Fax (CPS-ELT): 301-405-0796