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

Re: Dinosaurs and birds



Might as well jump into this thread with this small unresolved issue
about Archie in Wikipedia:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Archaeopteryx

Paragraph of contention:
"Given that it is now well established that several lineages of
theropods evolved feathers and flight independently, the question of
how precisely the ancestors of Archaeopteryx became able to fly has
lost dramatically in importance for the time being. Since it is quite
likely that this species belongs to a lineage of birds unrelated to
the Neornithes (the Jurassic ancestor of which remains unknown), how
exactly flying ability was gained in Archaeopteryx may be a moot
point, having little bearing on how this happened in the ancestors of
modern birds".

While I agree that Archie most likely isn't the direct ancestor of
modern birds, I do ask where is the customary parsimony of phylogeny
in the above paragraph?
I'd also like to know who has proposed this model so I can reference
it appropriately.

Many thanks in advance,
--
Renato Santos
http://www.geocities.com/rfvs1983