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

123=234



I`ve read through (...again) Feduccias counterarguement that the frame shift theory is just "accommodating the cladogram", and am surprised to find that he dosen`t bring up the fact that frameshift dosen`t seem to account for the anterior necrotic zone (the ANZ) that Hinchliffe uses as an arguement for the existance of a digit that failed to develop due to cell death in this anterior region.
(I find this necrotic zone intriguing, because it might indicate a previously existing "pteroid bone" which would reinforce my idea that the avian line actually split off from a pterosaurian condition...By the way,...also thereby preserving the 1,2,3 digit identity!) Aside from this Feduccia paper ("1,2,3=2,3,4: Accomodationg the cladogram"), I haven`t heard any other counterarguement from the "birds are not from dinos"camp on this issue. Of course, they weren`t at the recent SVP gathering either.So,...what`s the status here? Ay new papers in the works??? Have they capitulated? (I somehow doubt it!).