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

Re: Doesn't George have a point?

What I'm asking is really simple.  Is it in line with
prevailing standards of scientific analysis of
prehistoric life to hypothesize that birds are
dinosaur descendants when the dinosaurs the birds are
said to have descended from come after the first birds
in the known fossil record

OK, two things here:

(1) Who said dromaeosaurids were avian _ancestors_? Last I understood, they were considered the _sister_group_, but not actual ancestors. Thus, the common ancestor of both birds and dromaeosaurids must have been present prior to _Archaeopteryx_; _not_ necessarily that dromaeosaurids go back that far (although this brings up when one would call something stemming off from that ancestor a "dromaeosaurid"...)

(2) Read more literature. Chris Brochu and Mark Norell penned a great article on this very issue, which _was_ discussed on this list, and showed that there really _isn't_ a gap:

Brochu, C.A. and Norell, M.A. 2000. Temporal congruence and the origin of birds. _Journal of Vertebrate Paleontology_ 20(1): 197-200.

Jerry D. Harris

AS OF JULY 1, 2000:

Dept of Earth & Environmental Science
University of Pennsylvania
240 S 33rd St
Philadelphia PA  19104-6316

Phone: (215) 898-5630
Fax: (215) 898-0964

E-mail: jdharris@sas.upenn.edu
and     dinogami@hotmail.com

Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com