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

Re: bat/ptero wing fingers




Please see: Peters 2000 and Peters 2002,

Peters??? Who is this fellow??!! :-)

both published before the discovery of the posterior of Longisquama.

We've discovered _Longisquama_'s buttocks?? But seriously, when you mention the "discovery" of the posterior half of _Longisquama_, are you referring to your Photoshop technique for elucidating unseen structures in the specimen? I have to say - and I'm sure you would agree - this technique has been received with some skepticism.


Peters 2000 includes a cladistic analysis that included all pertinent prior cladistic analyses.

Your analysis cannot have included the recent discovery of well-preserved pterosaur ankles, which appear to align pterosaurs with the Ornithodira. I'm not saying that ankle characters should trump all other characters that you claim link pterosaurs to protorosaurs; but the suite of characters present in the pterosaur ankle must be relevant to working out the origins of this group.


Reference:

Kellner, A.W. (2004). The ankle structure of two pterodactyloid pterosaurs from the Santana Formation (Lower Cretaceous), Brazil. Bulletin AMNH 285: 25-35.

Peters 2002 is the account of the advent of the wing in pterosaurs. Neither has been argued or trashed using cladistics or photographic evidence, both of which remain "the only games in town."

Without knowing what incipiently flighted pterosaurs actually looked like, an "account of the advent of the wing in pterosaurs" is pure speculation. We have no _Archaeopteryx_ for pterosaurs - unless you are casting _Longisquama_ or _Sharovipteryx_ in this role, which in either case is a huge stretch.




Tim