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

Re: really big question

Cliff Green wrote:

Saying that
with all the other animals at the site having this amazing amount of
preservation, and Pelicanimimis's feathers not showing up because of bad
preservation is at best,  miraculous.

All I can say is: Allelulah _Archaeopteryx_!

The individual _Archaeopteryx_ specimens vary greatly with regards to how well the plumage is preserved. I don't think anybody truly believes that this reflects the condition in life. Rather, the differences are undoubtedly taphonomic.

Also, there is no trace of integument in _Compsognathus_, found in the same lagerstatten as _Archaeopteryx_ - not feathers, not scales, not osteoderms, nuttin'. The fact that Chinese compsognathids show integumentary structures might lead us to believe that _Compsognathus_ had some sort of down-like body covering too, but this for some reason was not preserved.

Pelecanimimis's feathers didn't show up anywhere on it because it didn't
have any. This is a best guess estimate based on Occham's Razor, not on a
theory that states it has to have feathers because so and so's cladiogram
says it does.

I'm glad this doesn't apply to mammals.


Express yourself instantly with MSN Messenger! Download today - it's FREE! http://messenger.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200471ave/direct/01/