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

Re: Archaeopteryx paper in Naturwissenschaften online



Aspidel wrote:
> 
> Okay, but there's no (or very few) evidence of trees in the Solnhofen
> limestone IIRC.

Maybe one of the reasons why archaes were fossilised DEAD in marine
limestone is that, away from stands of trees, they weren't capable of
long flights across open water (and were poor swimmers). Not that we'd
expect to find something fossilised ALIVE (except perhaps nano-scale
cell-seeds - did anyone see that documentary with Larry Martin looking
for sabre-tooth bones for cloning?)

To be fossilised in a certain area, you need to die there first. Just
because something turns up dead somewhere doesn't mean that it also
lived there. The reason it died where it did may be because it found
itself in a situation where it was at a distinct disadvantage. You could
argue the same for stomach contents - you can never rule out the
possibility that the last meal an animal ate is what killed it, rather
than representing their normal diet. 

Yes, my tongue is ever-so-slightly in cheek - but there's also a kind of
logic in my jests, no?

-- 
________________________________________________________________

Dann Pigdon                   Australian Dinosaurs:
GIS / Archaeologist         http://www.geocities.com/dannsdinosaurs
Melbourne, Australia        http://www.alphalink.com.au/~dannj/
________________________________________________________________