[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Subject Index][Author Index]
Re: Sinosauropteryx filament melanosomes challenged
I think the word 'reptile' (or 'Reptilia', etc.) should just be dropped from
any phylogenetic system; it just confuses the public to make Reptilia include
birds. "Reptile" is a perfectly good word for "ectothermic amniote"; it doesn't
need to be crammed into designating a clade, any more than 'fish'
(="non-tetrapod vertebrates"?) does. Clades are not the only useful categories.
So (IMO) crocodiles should be 'reptiles'; dinosaurs should not.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Sim Koning" <email@example.com>
To: "David Marjanovic" <firstname.lastname@example.org>, email@example.com
Sent: Monday, December 6, 2010 11:37:22 AM GMT -06:00 US/Canada Central
Subject: RE: Sinosauropteryx filament melanosomes challenged
Let me guess...they call us BADies? Is it alright if I call myself a WAASCORE?
(Why are archosaurs still considered reptiles?!)
> Date: Mon, 6 Dec 2010 11:30:47 +0100
> From: firstname.lastname@example.org
> To: email@example.com
> Subject: Re: Sinosauropteryx filament melanosomes challenged
> > They are also sometimes known as the BAND camp (flutes optional).
> In all fairness, Storrs "BAND leader" Olson invented this. At the SAPE*
> meeting in Beijing in 1996, he and some or all of the other BANDits ran
> around wearing buttons saying "Birds Are NOT Dinosaurs!".
> * Society for Avian Paleontology & Evolution.