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

Re: Of course nonavian dinosaurs could fly - duh

In a message dated 9/26/09 12:16:21 AM, tijawi@yahoo.com writes:

<< I have to disagree this statement.  The results of cladistic analysis do 
not mandate a "ground-up" origin of flight.  They never have.  >>

It is true that cladistics does not automatically reject a dinosaur 
arboreal origin of avian flight, but most cladistics have presumed it does do 
Why? In part because if birds evolved flight from the ground up then only 
running bipedal theropods could be their ancestors, not those quadrupedal 
arboreal thecodonts climbing about in the trees. Meanwhile birds could not be 
dinosaurs if they evolved from quadrupedal arboreal archosaurs as they 
anti-dinosaur folk think. It has been a simplistic argument of convenience on 

The authors of the Anchiornis paper are correct that animals with such 
extensive foot feathers are unlikely to have been well adapted for running 
on the ground.