[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Subject Index][Author Index]
RE: THE JANUARY 2001 DINO LAND DINOSAUR GAZETTE NEWSLETTER
> From: email@example.com [mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org]On Behalf Of
> David Marjanovic
> > MESOZOIC BIRD FOUND IN CHINA
> [lots of snippage]
> > But, other scientists do
> > not believe in his findings. One paleontologist, Alan Feduccia of the
> > University of North Carolina, thinks that these imprints seen on
> > Protopteryx do not represent feathers at all.
> > ``(Protopteryx was covered with) what they call dino-fuzz, which really
> > could have nothing to do with the origin of feathers," he said.
> If I have got it right (I still haven't read the paper -- Science takes up
> to a month to get to the libraries here B-( ), then *Protopteryx* is an
> unquestionable bird, found by the authors to be an
> enantiornithine and by HP
> Mickey Mortimer to still be closer to Ornithothoraces than (to)
> Confuciusornithidae, so how can Feduccia say such a thing??? He's the one
> who equates birds with feathers...
> What is going on here? ~:-S
In interviews regarding _Protopteryx_, Feduccia claims that some of the
*long* ornamental feathers of the beastie are morphologically intermediate
between _Longisquama_ longscales and bird feathers. Of course in the same
interviews he implies that the describers of _Protopteryx_ do not accept the
dinosaurian origin of birds, despite the fact that their cladogram (in the
Supplementary Data) uses dromaeosaurs as the outgroup!!
Thomas R. Holtz, Jr.
Department of Geology Director, Earth, Life & Time Program
University of Maryland College Park Scholars
College Park, MD 20742
Phone: 301-405-4084 Email: email@example.com
Fax (Geol): 301-314-9661 Fax (CPS-ELT): 301-405-0796