[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Subject Index][Author Index]
Re: New feathered dino
Fabian Abu-Nasser (firstname.lastname@example.org) wrote:
<Just saw the reuters news item on feathers in a non-avian dinosaur. Does
this mean that the original archeopteryx specimen could be from a dinosaur
rather than a bird? If so does it render the name archaeopteryx
The name *Archaeopteryx* applies not matter _what_ the animal is. If
it's a true bird or something that is not exactly bird, but close enough
(fully formed wings, mechanical features of the wrist and shoulder,
feathers, tail, and so forth) that the name Aves is defined to include
The news article in questions staes that *Archaeopteryx* is a dinosaur,
not that it is not a bird. In this manner, the article says that birds
(Yeah, I know, a subject hard to swallow for a few people who read this
Jaime A. Headden
Little steps are often the hardest to take. We are too used to making leaps
in the face of adversity, that a simple skip is so hard to do. We should all
learn to walk soft, walk small, see the world around us rather than zoom by it.
Do You Yahoo!?
Try FREE Yahoo! Mail - the world's greatest free email!
- [no subject]
- From: "fabian Abu-Nasser" <email@example.com>