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

Re: Archie a non-flyer? (was:Re: origin of bats/reply 2 to TMK)

Jaime A. Headden writes:

John Hunt (john.bass@ntlworld.com) wrote:

<But WTF did Archie do with its wings if not fly?>

There are a host of potential properties: prey capture, running very agilely, with great banking capabilities, controlled parachuting, Ebel's swimming or running on water (I joke), display, nest protection, creating chaotic thunderstorms in Gondwana....

Of course, in modern birds most of these are secondary adaptations. Then again, archie wasn't a modern bird.

It should be kept in mind though that archie apparently lived on islands, and there are really only two ways to get on and off islands (only one of them involves getting wet). In fact, the ability to fly to and from small islands would have been useful for many reasons (predator-free nesting sights come to mind).


Dann Pigdon
GIS / Archaeologist              http://geo_cities.com/dannsdinosaurs
Melbourne, Australia             http://heretichides.soffiles.com