[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Subject Index][Author Index]
Re: [Re: Feathered/scaly theropods: trying to make the point.]
> It should also be noted that these bunch of "feathered" dinos all came
> the exact same location; which is more than just a little suspicion if you
Of course. This is because only there (among known places) is preservation
perfect enough. You don't find haired fossil mammals outside of Messel.
"The exact same location" -- well, this is _half a Chinese province_, bigger
than many small US states.
> > The most parsimonious explanation, based on these data and the most
> > commonly accepted phylogenies, is that feathery integument was present
> all members of Clade(_Sinosauropteryx_ + _Passer_*), and possibly
> > originated earlier, as far back as basal _Tetanurae_ (Clade(_Passer_ <--
> > _Ceratosaurus_)).
> But if it originated earlier, then how does one explain the scale
> of tyrannosaurs?
Either the association with tyrannosaurs is incorrect, or tyrannosaur scales
are a secondary affair:
> > It is also possible that feathery integument extends even further than
> > _Neotheropoda_ (Clade(_Ceratosaurus_ + _Passer_)), and the >
> aforementioned carnotaurines are secondarily featherless. At the other >
> of the range of possibilities, it may be that feathery integument > is
> restricted to Clade (_Sinosauropteryx_ + _Passer_), and that certain >
> of that clade may have been secondarily featherless, either > during
> or all of their lives.
> The only evidence I have seen for the former would be Zhou & Niswander's
> scutes = feathers discovery. And since no one has done any follow up work
> it (AFAIK), this seems to be the extent of any evidence for BCF type
> Why noone has tried making fuzzy crocodiles, I'll never know :)
Lack of time and money? Try it! :-)
> Jura - who believes all dinosaurs are scaly, until proven otherwise.
It _is_ proven otherwise (not a mathematical proof, but a juridical proof).