[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Subject Index][Author Index]
RE: SCIENCE AND CLASSIFICATION
> Even among the vast majority, who now agree that birds
> are dinosaur
> descendants, there have already been endless debates over whether
> mononykines are birds, or if Rahonavis is a bird, or Caudipteryx,
> Protarchaeopteryx, Bambiraptor, Unenlagia ("half-bird"), Microraptor,
> oviraptors, and so on (and then there's the Protoavis mess which
> is a story unto itself).
Isn't the fundamental point of this debate not whether these animals are
birds or not, but whether or not they are in clade Aves (*more derived than
Archaeopteryx*)? The fact that some people apply the vernacular "bird" to
clade Aves is irrelevant. Moving Aves up or down the tree does nothing to
resolve any of the REAL issues. The phylogeny will be just as muddled
wherever you place that particular four-letter word.