[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Subject Index][Author Index]
Re: Limb Evolution - "Old" genes
On 5/25/07, Richard W. Travsky <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
On Thu, 24 May 2007, John Conway wrote:
> Colin McHenry wrote:
>> Has anyone got a definition of Living Fossil that they think works?
> How about a kronophylognetic definition:
> "Any species that is more closely related to a fossil organism more than 30
> million years old than it is to any other living species."
> Howzat? Completely arbitrary but it seems to work if you ignore the species
30 million years? Would it not suffice to say "related to an extinct
organism"? Course, that would cover, say dodos...
A possibility would be "an organism only known from fossils"; would
exclude dodos, Steller's sea cow, and anything else known from
observations of the live animal.
Why can't you be a non-conformist just like everybody else?