[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Subject Index][Author Index]
RE: Perching, climbing, roosting was Re: 11th specimen of Archaeopteryx
> Date: Wed, 9 Nov 2011 06:58:37 +0100
> From: firstname.lastname@example.org
> To: email@example.com
> Subject: Re: Perching, climbing, roosting was Re: 11th specimen of
> > You know what the debate over how dangerous trees are for protobirds
> > reminds me of? Back when I was learning about whale evolution, I
> > used to think "but wouldn't water be really dangerous for those early
> > stages of amphibious proto-cetacean life?" (there's crocs, sharks,
> > hungry fish, etc)
> Not "etc.". There were crocs, there were sharks, but I don't know of any
> other big marine predators from the Paleo- or early Eocene.
You don't need a dozen separate families of creatures to eat protowhales* -
the fact that they were there and eating any protowhales they caught, makes
them a good analogy to your statement that the trees were too dangerous for
protobirds, because of all the predators up there ready to pick a protobird off
a branch and eat it.
(and the crocs and sharks were also eating the same food as the protowhales, so
it should have been eaven tougher yet)
* = though they didn't all need to be fully marine or big - monitor lizards
come to mind, as do pythons.