[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Subject Index][Author Index]
In a message dated 9/26/99 10:07:34 AM Pacific Daylight Time,
> I have encountered no hypotheses of the origins of bipedality in archosaurs
> except those that simply take it for granted that it was an improvement
> quadrupedality. The phrase "improved stance" and the like occur all too
> frequently in these works with no justification.
"Improved stance" doesn't refer to bipedality; it refers to erect carriage.
So it's a function of erect-gaited chauvinism, rather than bipedal chauvinism