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

Re: Sinosauropteryx

Having taken a look at the illustrations, this thing does not look "bald" to me at all. There are some fairly nice patches of proto-feathers along the tail and near the hand which are conveniently dismissed by Lingham-Soliar et al. as "collagen fibres" (which really isn't surprising at all). If they are going to dismiss all fibres in these fossils as collagen fibres, why is it that we do not see such structures in specimens of taxa that are not as close to birds? I also like how they try to dismiss the structures as forming some sort of a Petersian "frill" running down the creature's back and forming some kind of fin on the thing's tail. By these criteria, the structures near the manus would form a sort of flipper. Are we now back to that absurd-looking aquatic compsognathid again?

Mike Hanson
Email: mhanson54@comcast.net
Website (The Pterosauria): http://www.archosauria.org/pterosauria/
Dinosauricon Art Gallery: http://dino.lm.com/artists/display.php?name=mike