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


Tracy Ford wrote:
<<First, Stegosaurs and Ankylosaurs are not related, not even closely. Thanks
to the missbelief of this and cladistics it keeps getting perpetuated (I'm
just say'n in this case :) ).>>

I am confused by this Tracy.  Are you saying that stegosaurs were created seperately from all other organisms?  That they had some special origin outside of all other life on Earth?  Last time I checked, stegosaurs and ankylosaurs were pretty clearly dinosaurs, were pretty clearly ornithischians, and were pretty clearly outside of Cerapoda.  Perhaps Thyreophora is not exclusively monophyletic, BUT saying that "they're not related, not even closely" is just not right...

<<Scelidosaurus is an ankylosauroid (or ankylosaur) and NOT at the junction of
thyrophean, which doesn't exist. Norman is working on this and should have
the paper out soon.>>

I look forward to reading it.

<<Jim Kirkland also believes this (pers. comm..).>>

Although I respect Dr Kirkland, and yourself very much, I don't see how saying "so and so says so" lends any support to your case as you've not really provided any character evidence in support of a paraphyletic Thyreophora.  It's an argument from authority.

Again, I am really curious about the alternate topology and the character evidence that supports it.  I am perfectly willing to let objectivity take over on this one, and if the characters say Thyreophora is paraphyletic, then I will too.  There's a problem though... I haven't heard or seen any character evidence to the contrary, and in fact have seen a lot of evidence support thyreophoran monophyly, and it's not just "presence of armour."

Pete Buchholz