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

Re: begging behaviour among theropods



From: StephanPickering@cs.com

Can you define "birds" without "dinosaur"? I don't think so.

Can you define "dinosaur" without "archosaur"? Can you define "archosaur" without "diapsid"? Can you define "diapsid" without "amniote"? Can you define "amniote" without "tetrapod"?

Your point is moot.  I trust my excercise was also self-explanatory.

Jordan Mallon

Undergraduate Student, Carleton University
Vertebrate Paleontology & Paleoecology

Website: http://www.geocities.com/paleoportfolio/
AIM: jslice mallon

"Bird" is a
vernacular word, and, however popular throughout the centuries, its
scientific definition is inseparable from Theropoda within Dinosauria, a case
proven well over a decade ago. I still delight in Tom Holtz's description of
them being "stump-tailed swell-brained flying theropods"...and, when you say
"birds", your word remains nebulous (everyone may think they know what a
"bird" is, but trying sitting down with a piece of paper and pen and defining
the word). For me, extant theropods = Avifilopluma Avialae Carinatae
Ornithurae Aves, i.e., living stumped-tailed swell-brained, flying and
secondarily flightless, theropod dinosaurs. I trust this little exercise is
self-explanatory!

_________________________________________________________________
Add photos to your e-mail with MSN 8. Get 2 months FREE*. http://join.msn.com/?page=features/featuredemail