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

*Archaeopteryx*/birds (was Re: Dubious tyrannosaurs and "Kinman-ian" classifications)



----- Original Message -----
From: "Tim Williams" <twilliams_alpha@hotmail.com>
To: <dinosaur@usc.edu>
Sent: Wednesday, August 29, 2001 12:47 AM
Subject: Dubious tyrannosaurs and "Kinman-ian" classifications


> [...]
> Finally, David Marjanovic wrote:
>
> >Oho! Someone's putting old Archie closer to Dromaeosauridae than to
birds,
> >and >nobody protests? :-)
>
> Well, this taxpayer prefers to regard Archie as the sister taxon to the
> clade that includes all other birds.

Ah. Still some stability in science :-)
May I open the debate about why you think so, unless people say "oh, not
that again"?

> >Are people now generally accepting Paul 1988 and :-> :-> Marjanovic 2000
> >who >said that Archie doesn't share more with Pygostylia than with
> >dromaeosaurids?

Sorry for forgetting Thulborn 1984, the 2000 analysis by HP Mickey Mortimer
on which the new cladogram was probably based ("supports... due drum roll...
secondary flightlessness in dromaeosaurids", now disputed by himself) and
probably some others.